Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[ANGRYABOUTELVES]

The key to having 240 DP all the time is to have 2 officered phase frigates with elite phase mastery. Send them to capture the two objectives horizontally farthest from the center while you take the ones closest to your deployment side, and you'll hit 240 DP before any combat starts. Just deploy your slowest 144-ish (160 minus 2x8 DP phase frigates) DP first and the faster 80-ish DP slightly later. Using this tactic nets me 240 DP against even Remnant officer spam.

[hkmist]

The key to having 240 DP all the time is to have 2 officered phase frigates with elite phase mastery. Send them to capture the two objectives horizontally farthest from the center while you take the ones closest to your deployment side, and you'll hit 240 DP before any combat starts. Just deploy your slowest 144-ish (160 minus 2x8 DP phase frigates) DP first and the faster 80-ish DP slightly later. Using this tactic nets me 240 DP against even Remnant officer spam.

Yes you point out what is the problem, you are using the only right(and working) idea to win a DP race, cheese the new rule

The "large enemy fleet get more DP than you" rule is here for a long time, but it make sense and there are different way to work around
In the past, when you are confidence to fight in a small fleet, with high quality ship and player skill you win that fight, same at what working right now(a bit different is in the past you capture point for more ecm/speed, now you have to capture pt for DP)
But if you don't have the player skill or good ship, you can get a larger fleet and get a even DP split(or over do it with extra large fleet), and rotate ship during the fight or use clean disengage for reset a fight, than you get less profit

But in 0.95, under the new rule the choose for the later is greatly limited, not because the skill tree rework make large fleet lost skill advantage(I agree when your fleet is big enough you don't need that much skill advantage).
It is as Alex said in earlier post "Adding an extra 10 Paragons won't help much. 10 Paragons with officers vs 10 frigates with officers also doesn't make much of a difference.",
The RULE itself is changed so player can't use the most easy and make sense way to turn the table for themself, then you get player start finding way to cheese the new rule

And this is my question, WHY cut off one play style completely by making a new rule that only hurt some player which is not in the range of Alex's ideal play style AND this new rule don't do much good on player who are already playing like what Alex want? That is what I call unfair

I like the part of the new rule which when you have a smaller fleet you have way too win back the DP by capture point, but this don't contradict to "if you have a larger fleet you have more DP", why can't they both exist? Someone said earlier that you can't please everyone but on this case you can. Alex have do enough change in 0.95 to favor small fleet gameplay and most of them are reasonable, but this is the change I think is unfair and really not necessarily.

[hkmist]

I think the reason people are saying things about how to fight is that by fighting better, the fight becomes "fair". Because really, "fair" is subjective based on how good the player fleet is in the fight vs the enemy. As an extreme example: for an endgame player fleet with fully powered player and officers, is equal DP with pirates really a fair fight? Not even close, the player is going to absolutely stomp them. "Fair" might be giving pirates 300 DP to the player's 100 but lets be honest, even thats just going to resort in more pirate pinatas to pop.

Remnants are a lot tougher, but the same principle holds: is the fight be "fair" at 240:160 + reinforcements in battle, and 480 DP to 240 DP outside? The better the player fleet, and the more efficient they can be with DP, the more "fair" it is.

Yes "fair" is a subjective thing when everyone can have different point of view, and my view is everyone should fight in the same rule

In your example pirate will never get a fair fight on a same DP split battle, it is true. Pirate won't get the blueprint unstill player want them have a good ship for a fair fight(or exploits it to get free ship), on gameplay design they are the weak one for early fight, but when they are given the right thing(a forge and some blue print), they burn the world, everything is on the same rule.  And I suppose no player will think "that is unfair" when they are gang by multi pirate fleet early game, since the rule is the weaker lose. But the new DP rule is not same rule before.

Remnants is tough and tougher than they were before 0.95, with all the op officer they have now, i won't call this unfair, because they are the BOSS of this game and they are mean to be tough. But the new DP rule is not, the rule itself is what unfair.

When you can set the balance by giving better ship better officer better fleet composition, I don't thing a better rule favor the enemy is necessarily

If Alex want the point capturing be a part of the gameplay, why not split the DP to 160:160:80 which the 80 point is who capture the flag on the map, at least this look more fair to me(although there are alreally people show how to cheece the point capture rule, and I think that is more unhealthy than player try to use a bigger fleet)

[Histidine]

Well, under the old DP rules you'd still be stuck with a near-permanent 40% share against one of those oversized enemy fleets, with anything resembling a normal fleet.
The big difference is a 30 Paragon blob is in principle more accessible (and more permanent) than finding enough merc officers. (The other difference is that you could eventually gain more DP share after killing enough enemy ships).

TBH I think that basing DP share on both fleet size and officer count makes intuitive sense, but also 30 Paragon blob is such a transparent attempt to cheese the rules that it being gone makes me happy. Better to make enemy fleets not so oversized (old rules)/over-officered (new rules) that people need to cheese it to begin with.

[Chairman Suryasari]

Yes you point out what is the problem, you are using the only right(and working) idea to win a DP race, cheese the new rule

The "large enemy fleet get more DP than you" rule is here for a long time, but it make sense and there are different way to work around
In the past, when you are confidence to fight in a small fleet, with high quality ship and player skill you win that fight, same at what working right now(a bit different is in the past you capture point for more ecm/speed, now you have to capture pt for DP)
But if you don't have the player skill or good ship, you can get a larger fleet and get a even DP split(or over do it with extra large fleet), and rotate ship during the fight or use clean disengage for reset a fight, than you get less profit

But in 0.95, under the new rule the choose for the later is greatly limited, not because the skill tree rework make large fleet lost skill advantage(I agree when your fleet is big enough you don't need that much skill advantage).
It is as Alex said in earlier post "Adding an extra 10 Paragons won't help much. 10 Paragons with officers vs 10 frigates with officers also doesn't make much of a difference.",
The RULE itself is changed so player can't use the most easy and make sense way to turn the table for themself, then you get player start finding way to cheese the new rule

And this is my question, WHY cut off one play style completely by making a new rule that only hurt some player which is not in the range of Alex's ideal play style AND this new rule don't do much good on player who are already playing like what Alex want? That is what I call unfair

I like the part of the new rule which when you have a smaller fleet you have way too win back the DP by capture point, but this don't contradict to "if you have a larger fleet you have more DP", why can't they both exist? Someone said earlier that you can't please everyone but on this case you can. Alex have do enough change in 0.95 to favor small fleet gameplay and most of them are reasonable, but this is the change I think is unfair and really not necessarily.

Agree. The new game design makes the game feel like screaming at me "You play it wrong!" over and over again in a sandbox game.

[hkmist]

TBH I think that basing DP share on both fleet size and officer count makes intuitive sense, but also 30 Paragon blob is such a transparent attempt to cheese the rules that it being gone makes me happy. Better to make enemy fleets not so oversized (old rules)/over-officered (new rules) that people need to cheese it to begin with.

Yes it is just odd 0.95 have make a lot of change on making player don't want to use a large fleet but don't fix the reason why people want to use a bigger fleet, late game enemy fleet are just too large.
And the officer weigh on DP is clearly over done, I remember I first note I am getting minimal starting DP is in a fight with a mid-game pirate fleet, both fleet have around 200 fleet point and i have 8 5+lv officer, that was a real WTF moment I never have in Starsector.

[Megas]

If AI will spam officers, then the officer limit should be done away with and officers allowed to level up to 7 (or AI in human factions forced to honor the same restrictions as player, either eight level 6s or ten level 5s), and get rid of mercs since they are merely overpriced SP-sucking vampire officers.  (SP should be doing special things, not a tax to constantly feed stuff to.)  The player could achieve this already in theory, but that requires the player to loot level 7 officers and hire as many mercs as possible.

AI abusing (limit break) officers is no different than them flagrantly violating the fleet cap in 0.9a and earlier releases.  It feels bad when they cheat in an unsubtle way.  (Well, player could achieve officer spam, but it is either too hard or impractical.)

And their fleets appear no smaller than before.

P.S.  If bigger fleets are irrelevant for DP ratios, then max battle size needs to be much bigger to accommodate large fleets (because fleets appear to be just as big as the last release).  Otherwise, this is silly tournament dueling.

[ANGRYABOUTELVES]

Yes you point out what is the problem, you are using the only right(and working) idea to win a DP race, cheese the new rule

The "large enemy fleet get more DP than you" rule is here for a long time, but it make sense and there are different way to work around
In the past, when you are confidence to fight in a small fleet, with high quality ship and player skill you win that fight, same at what working right now(a bit different is in the past you capture point for more ecm/speed, now you have to capture pt for DP)
But if you don't have the player skill or good ship, you can get a larger fleet and get a even DP split(or over do it with extra large fleet), and rotate ship during the fight or use clean disengage for reset a fight, than you get less profit

But in 0.95, under the new rule the choose for the later is greatly limited, not because the skill tree rework make large fleet lost skill advantage(I agree when your fleet is big enough you don't need that much skill advantage).
It is as Alex said in earlier post "Adding an extra 10 Paragons won't help much. 10 Paragons with officers vs 10 frigates with officers also doesn't make much of a difference.",
The RULE itself is changed so player can't use the most easy and make sense way to turn the table for themself, then you get player start finding way to cheese the new rule

And this is my question, WHY cut off one play style completely by making a new rule that only hurt some player which is not in the range of Alex's ideal play style AND this new rule don't do much good on player who are already playing like what Alex want? That is what I call unfair

I like the part of the new rule which when you have a smaller fleet you have way too win back the DP by capture point, but this don't contradict to "if you have a larger fleet you have more DP", why can't they both exist? Someone said earlier that you can't please everyone but on this case you can. Alex have do enough change in 0.95 to favor small fleet gameplay and most of them are reasonable, but this is the change I think is unfair and really not necessarily.

It is way more accessible to get 2 phase frigates with phase spec officers than it was to get a fleet huge enough to have 60% DP split against Remnant Ordos in the previous version. It's incredibly cheap, actually; 100k for the 2 afflictors/shades, 4 story points to mentor the officers to have perfect skills and make Phase Mastery elite, and maybe 10k in weapons. Why can't you just build your lumbering expensive capital spam fleet but also bring along a couple of really cheap ships?

The amount of officers in lategame enemy fleets should be toned down, but also IMO capital-spam shouldn't be viable for either the player or the AI. It's not fun to fight, and it's not fun to play. If you don't have the player skill to do anything other than capital spam in the lategame, I'd suggest getting good.

[Megas]

If player is expected to fight evenly against the AI, then replacing ships (including those with perma-mods) should be cheap.  (Field Repairs can do this in theory, but it takes too long for more than one or two casualties with one d-mod each.)

Currently, I am only fighting fights I know I can win flawlessly at because replacing more than minor losses are too expensive.

AI has unlimited resources, player does not.  Thus, player is encouraged to avoid combat unless it is a one-sided fight in the player's favor.

[hkmist]

If you don't have the player skill to do anything other than capital spam in the late game, I'd suggest getting good.

It is really fun when taking about fleet size, people will assume those person are capital spam or 30Paragon(I get this one is a joke)

I don't think get a 300FP fleet(included non-combat ship) to a 300FP enemy fight is capital spam and need to "get good", and we know in 0.95 300FP is already over the limit and can't get both skill advantage and fair DP split at this point.
 
The problem of DP now is AI have a different rule on deploy, and this get haywire at late game

Let look at the setting file, this line is what are there in 0.9:

"maxOfficersInAIFleet":10, # should match what a max-skill player can get

Fair, isn't it?
And these line are add in 0.95

"officerAIMaxMercsMult":2, # maximum "over-the-limit" merc-type officers that can be added to an AI fleet, times doctrine officer setting
"officerAIMercsStartingFP":100, # start adding more "merc" officers at this threshold

I don't have the exact calculation, but in my understanding when AI fleet get bigger and bigger, they have more and more officer, AND these affect how DP is calculate

And because of that if player want a fair split of DP the only way to do is
A : use your lesser than normal DP to sent small ship to capture point(and use phase ship if afraid for losing ship, better with a few elite phase officer, but why should I waste my officer on those role? Because I want to watch those small ship playing somewhere away from the battlefield?)
B : Buy more merc, which is not profit-able and in gameplay wise, they were strong, but you are only needing them because you need those DP, not much different from putting those d-mod cap in the fleet to pump up fleet size for DP

I don't seem these two way are any fun or interesting in gameplay, why don't fix the late game balance rather than adding unfair rule?

[Sordid]

Field Repairs can do this in theory, but it takes too long for more than one or two casualties with one d-mod each.

It's mind-boggling to me that that skill is four ranks deep in the industry branch, only procs once every two months, and doesn't even work reliably. A "chance" to remove d-mods? What chance? 90%? 25%? 1%? As far as I'm concerned, it needs to be available at the start of the branch (much like transverse jump, thumbs up for making that easily accessible!) and read "remove a d-mod every week". That in and of itself would go a long way to mitigating the combat balance issues; to solve them completely, remove the word "almost" from skills that boost ship recovery chance. Tough fights where I lose half my fleet would be a lot more palatable if I could bounce back from them without having to run around half the sector visiting every planet to see if they happen to have the ships I need in stock.

[ANGRYABOUTELVES]

It is really fun when taking about fleet size, people will assume those person are capital spam or 30Paragon(I get this one is a joke)

I don't think get a 300FP fleet(included non-combat ship) to a 300FP enemy fight is capital spam and need to "get good", and we know in 0.95 300FP is already over the limit and can't get both skill advantage and fair DP split at this point.
 
The problem of DP now is AI have a different rule on deploy, and this get haywire at late game

Let look at the setting file, this line is what are there in 0.9:

"maxOfficersInAIFleet":10, # should match what a max-skill player can get

Fair, isn't it?
And these line are add in 0.95

"officerAIMaxMercsMult":2, # maximum "over-the-limit" merc-type officers that can be added to an AI fleet, times doctrine officer setting
"officerAIMercsStartingFP":100, # start adding more "merc" officers at this threshold

I don't have the exact calculation, but in my understanding when AI fleet get bigger and bigger, they have more and more officer, AND these affect how DP is calculate

And because of that if player want a fair split of DP the only way to do is
A : use your lesser than normal DP to sent small ship to capture point(and use phase ship if afraid for losing ship, better with a few elite phase officer, but why should I waste my officer on those role? Because I want to watch those small ship playing somewhere away from the battlefield?)
B : Buy more merc, which is not profit-able and in gameplay wise, they were strong, but you are only needing them because you need those DP, not much different from putting those d-mod cap in the fleet to pump up fleet size for DP

I don't seem these two way are any fun or interesting in gameplay, why don't fix the late game balance rather than adding unfair rule?

What gets haywire is the number of officers AI fleets get. The rule is fair; it acts the same on the player and the AI, the problem is the inflated number of officers that non-player fleets get. If that gets fixed, the problem goes away. It's actually more fair than before, because it's mostly dependent on officers and captured objectives; if you have a small fleet with officers fighting a fleet with a low number of officers but tons of ships, you can take the objectives and cap the enemy's DP limit at much lower than their total number of ships, and cut them up in small chunks at a time. That's more fair than before, where the larger fleet would always be able to deploy more ships than the smaller fleet and potentially crush you under sheer numbers. The problem is, again, simply that high-level AI fleets get a number of officers that would be insane for a player to collect and pay for.

You should put a couple of officers in phase frigates because they're really crazy strong. Two Afflictors will punch heavily above their weight, have a system that makes all your ships do more damage to the targeted ship, and, yes, are very fast and can cap objectives quickly at the start of the battle.

[Mordodrukow]

If AI will spam officers, then the officer limit should be done away with and officers allowed to level up to 7 (or AI in human factions forced to honor the same restrictions as player, either eight level 6s or ten level 5s), and get rid of mercs since they are merely overpriced SP-sucking vampire officers.  (SP should be doing special things, not a tax to constantly feed stuff to.)  The player could achieve this already in theory, but that requires the player to loot level 7 officers and hire as many mercs as possible.

Agree with that. Enemy officer and ECM spam is complete nonesense. New system itself is OK as an idea, but numbers should be toned down. Every dog in the sector has ECM better, than mine, and i cant put ECM module on my ships, because there is no OP for that unless i make some mods build-in, which, again, requires SP, which means, i will must use upgraded ship to the rest of my days or the SPs will be wasted. I cant spend them for the story-oriented stuff, i cant experiment with ships... And then they sayin: "Hey, you just need to hire some officers!" What a joke...

[hkmist]

I suppose you know we are taking about the same exact thing ANGRYABOUTELVES, late game enemy fleet have balance issue and as you have state inflated number of officer is the problem and i have point out what is causing the inflated number of officer is the growing enemy fleet size

You think the rule is ok because the calculation on both size is the same, but don't forget how player and AI get the officer is different
The rule is unfair, AI get extra officer when they grow to a bigger fleet size, and they grow to a fleet size double or triple to what player's ideal fleet size, with much more officer than player can normally have. Player normally have a 10 officer limit, more than that player need to spend Magic pt, which should be unnecessary since even you need to field 10+ ship you don't need every ship have officer, gameplay-wise. SO AI have a unfair advantage on all fleet size, officer number and DP calculation(yet our discussion haven't include how these will affect combat, but that is the "get good" thing so i wouldn't include it).

Half of the thread have change to discuss how to counteract this by making map effect more powerful(more powerful ecm effect and "you need to cap point" thing)
Or "we need more merc" so there are suggestion like "Why don't we buy a bunch of merc at the same time?"

And god damn it the problem is not how to live with the unnatural amount of officer but to deal with the problem causing it in the first place, and as you say problem will gone if the inflated number of officer, it is true,
but think about it, if both player and AI fleet get same number of officer(10+1~2 extra), both size have similar fleet point, what is the different of DP calculation between the 0.9 and 0.95?

Why in the Hell Alex add these two line

"officerAIMaxMercsMult":2, # maximum "over-the-limit" merc-type officers that can be added to an AI fleet, times doctrine officer setting
"officerAIMercsStartingFP":100, # start adding more "merc" officers at this threshold

when we know one of the problem is late game enemy fleet can grow too big than why tie the number of officer directly to the fleet size? why add officer number into DP calculation?
And Alex's 0.95 is about going small!

Maybe not a native english speaker and not good in writing is causing problem here but as my first post in the thread what I want to say is the whole DP problem and bounty low pay and late game balance issue are all in the same root. Don't know why I get in to this "fair" mess

And of course i know phase ship is op and that is why i say use phase ship to cap point is cheesing the rule, and using a op thing to solve a balance problem is never the right thing to do in the first place...

[Chairman Suryasari]

I understand that we sometimes love a game so much but come on, we need to acknowledge the problem with the game we love not only Starsector but also other game you play. By giving constructive criticism we will help the game improved, far more than having "Nothing is wrong with the game, the game is good, you're bad at playing it." attitude.

ps : I don' know why I so antagonistic today