Print

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

[TaLaR]

Strike Commander has a similar issue like shield and phase skills, since it does nothing to non-carriers.

Difference is that it doesn't do much for carriers either , unlike phase and shield which are staple. Not that I wouldn't take it on carrier officers, but 0.95 makes carrier officers as whole a dubious investment.

[KDR_11k]

In part I'm not sure the split of the skill trees even matches player roles so of course you get a lot of cases of "I don't want that skill!" on the way to another skill. Okay, Combat buffs your piloted ship and Leadership buffs your whole fleet but Tech and Industry feel rather muddled. Industry covers all kinds of things, be it loot, repairs, supplies, colonies, d-mods or even some combat stuff. That's useful but not so much a playstyle as it is just improvements for every purpose. Similar with Tech, lots of strange bonuses to all kinds of different things. Tech feels less gimmicky now than before, that's good but both tech and industry feel too scattered in their approach making both of them more a matter of "do I want this specific skill" than supporting any specific playstyle.

Also feels a bit odd that colonies are just end-of-tree things rather than something you can spec into without a bunch of unrelated skills.

Sometimes it feels strange to put skills into combat since it affects a single ship of your fleet (in ways any random officer can also do) when you could be getting fleet-wide bonuses but then again I don't want to be completely useless in combat since just watching is boring. So combat skills almost feel like a tax on having fun in battles. I guess the player's advantage is that you can turn all your skills elite so you're a bit better than an officer with the same skills (but not an AI). But it does feel bad knowing that I could drop my combat skills to get two more officers who would give almost the same boost to two ships instead of the one I'm piloting but I don't want to do it so I have something I can do while the combat happens.

[Thaago]

Strike Commander has a similar issue like shield and phase skills, since it does nothing to non-carriers.

Difference is that it doesn't do much for carriers either , unlike phase and shield which are staple. Not that I wouldn't take it on carrier officers, but 0.95 makes carrier officers as whole a dubious investment.

Its quite good - the equivalent of other skills in strength I'd say. 20% damage increase to destroyers and up is good for any fighter, and +50% ordinance hitpoints makes bombers hit more. Its impossible to really say how much a total damage increase the last gives because its dependent on enemy PD. Its also only a T1 skill.

[wei270]

yes i like the new skill system too for a first ver, i am force to make hard choices when picking a skill which is a good thing.

[evzhel]

I can imagine a fully passive skill system for Starsector without skill points, where the player just plays the game in any way, gets experience for actions and unlocks corresponding skills as result.

Carrier skills are unlocked when you get a carrier in your fleet. To activate carrier skills, player needs to get a certain amount of XP in battles using carriers.

Cloak skills are unlocked when you get a cloak ship in your fleet. To activate cloak skills, player needs to get a certain amount of XP in battles using cloak ships.

Engineering skills are unlocked once your fleet grows to certain number of points. To get fuel saving, you need to reach certain amount of fuel usage per light year and travel a certain number of light years. To get supply saving, same (for supply usage).

You play the game, get to certain milestones, get a certain amount of experience and get corresponding skills.

I wonder if it's possible to implement another skill system with current java files, provided with the game installation.

[Maethendias]

I can imagine a fully passive skill system for Starsector without skill points, where the player just plays the game in any way, gets experience for actions and unlocks corresponding skills as result.

Carrier skills are unlocked when you get a carrier in your fleet. To activate carrier skills, player needs to get a certain amount of XP in battles using carriers.

Cloak skills are unlocked when you get a cloak ship in your fleet. To activate cloak skills, player needs to get a certain amount of XP in battles using cloak ships.

Engineering skills are unlocked once your fleet grows to certain number of points. To get fuel saving, you need to reach certain amount of fuel usage per light year and travel a certain number of light years. To get supply saving, same (for supply usage).

You play the game, get to certain milestones, get a certain amount of experience and get corresponding skills.

I wonder if it's possible to implement another skill system with current java files, provided with the game installation.

now THIS

THIS is what id want to see

[arthas1250]

what is the reason for skills to get worse the more you progress in the game? this is silly, if you want to make people use certain fleet composition then make the skill itself give bonuses if you meet certain requierements, not just make it be worse because you have more ships than this random tresshold says before the skill becomes bad, the first skill in the leadership tree goes from 10% extra damage to 3% when you have a fleet of capitals, so i guess is only supposed to be useful early game because of reasons?... same with the bulk transport skill, great early game, completely crap later on, oh but the salvaging skill you can get instead of it remains useful (maybe a bit too much) all the way until you stop playing, so why is there such a big difference between these skills, not only am i forced to pick dreadful skills to get the skills that i actually want but most skills are just bad and get worse when your fleet gets stronger? i very much prefer the old skill system aswell

and i don't even want to talk about automated ships, god what a big dissapointment they are, that skills and everything related to them need to be completely reworked in order to make them remotely useful or worth going for at all

[SCC]

It doesn't become worse the more you progress in the game, it remains the same and doesn't scale into infinity. It's best visible with bulk transport skill: after you reach the cap, it's always +1000 cargo, +1000 fuel, +2500 crew for 1 skill point, whether you have 1000 base cargo capacity or 10000000.

[AtlasMKx]

Hello, first post here.  I've played Starsector just since the last big update from last year and gave the new update a good 15 or so hours and I just don't like it at all.  I love the feeling of teching up through ship tiers and acquiring new weapons until I've got a kitted out capital ship.  I tend to not use frigates really at all later on.  This new skill tree has nothing whatsoever for a capital ship player and waaaay too much for buffing frigates.  Maybe the intention was to force payers to use frigates?  Without frigates I get slower ships, ECM'd like crazy (which is seriously screwing with how my own AI ships handle themselves) as well as less deployment points to start the battle with.  Maybe I'm missing something here but I see no way for a player to focus on building a capital fleet without severely gimping yourself.  I'd really like to see more choice on the skill tree that opens up play styles rather than limit you.

[SonnaBanana]

Posting from my other thread

Spoiler

[close]

Thoughts?

ECM'd like crazy (which is seriously screwing with how my own AI ships handle themselves)

This one, at least, will be fixed next build.

[TaLaR]

@SonnaBanana

While definitely more manageable than current tree, it kinda cements current optimal builds even further. Up to 6 Combat and Tech, up to 3 Leadership and Industry.

The weaker skills need buffs to have a role other than filling up tiers, if I am allowed to bypass them.

[SonnaBanana]

The weaker skill need buffs to have a role other than filling up tiers, if I am allowed to bypass them.

True, especially L1L at the moment.
Alternatively, give additional bonuses for completely purchasing tiers which has more than two skills/maxing an entire aptitude?*
*This would be applicable for other layouts such as 2-2-2-4. It's not about discouraging minmaxing as much as providing multiple viable ways of minmaxing.

[Megas]

Unless ships get more PPT across the board, I do not want frigates, yet I feel pushed into frigates by the new skill system, revised objectives, and lowered max map size.  (More DP from objectives means nothing if enemy gets them first and shuts you out with their superior forces.)  Also, carriers seem underpowered.  I have removed all of them from my fleet except for one Heron, and I am considering dumping that too.

Frigates and fighters feel like the 0.7.x releases all over again.  Fighters were no match for officers, and now frigates get super buffs or at least immunity to the skills that target destroyers and up.

[speeder]

Best idea I saw so far (ignoring my own of splitting into clear 8 "classes" with 2 of them grouped by type) is allow you to advance tiers based on total points spent...

So for example allow a player to get tier 5 if he spent 4 points already on that class, doesn't matter if his picks are industry T1a and T1b, skipped  tier 2, and picked both tier 3...  or if he picked one in each tier, etc...

[TaLaR]

One other thing I'd like to consider is separate skill pools:
- personal
- fleet-wide combat
- fleet-wide logistics
- colony (which may or may not be available to player character, cores and admins do good enough job there)
- free (may be put into any of available categories)

This way we won't have the officer-envy issue when player goes for 'optimal' (in some way) non-combat build and can't do anything in combat.