Print

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

[Gothars]

Now we will have ways to get easier and cheaper through the Sector, which is great. But there's also a downside to it, which is this:
Having a fuel efficient, small fleet will be less of an advantage. Likely even fuel guzzling armadas will now be able to travel to the farthest stars, provided the currents are favorable. Which, in my, opinion, is a shame. I love running lean fleets, and even before this change it was rarely worth it for long.

So, here's an idea. There could be certain areas in space where fuel consumption is dramatically increased and fleets are somewhat slowed. These areas would be located at the most remote regions of the sector and surround some star systems filled with high-value loot. In effect, these systems are "farther away" and can only be reached by efficient fleets. Visually, I think it could just be another type of nebula, maybe with some warning beacons on the edges.

(It might also be interesting to be able to generate temporary slow fields around enemy systems to decrease accessibility, but that's a whole other suggestion.)

[Grievous69]

Alex: *implements a new feature to make hyperspace travel less tedious and boring*
Gothars: "I'm gonna stop you right there..."

No offense but high valued loot is already protected by, you know. Getting to the edge of the map is already such a hassle, why would you make that even more miserable. Besides I don't get the argument that efficient fleets are not rewarded. There's a huge difference between having to go back for supplies and fuel after exploring for 15 minutes, and an hour.

There's a recurring theme in suggestions where people think their playstyle is not popular enough so they try it to enforce on everyone. Fleet requirements are just not fun in this game, take a look at the phase fleet fight, if you're not prepared, you die horribly. Likewise I wouldn't want exploration trips to transform into space resource management.

[SafariJohn]

If there was an area where fuel consumption was increased, I would 100% avoid it always. Slowdown is bad enough on its own.

[JAL28]

I mean, considering what Grievous said, good loot is protected by the [REDACTED]. So, you know Alpha Site right? Tri-Tach black sites or whatever? It would be interesting if more of these existed but were in the aforementioned slow fields, possibly giving cool new tech and/or the omega stuff with the shielded caches, or other really secret faction outposts and stuff that aren’t supposed to be seen by random spacefarers.

[SonnaBanana]

I mean, considering what Grievous said, good loot is protected by the [REDACTED]. So, you know Alpha Site right? Tri-Tach black sites or whatever? It would be interesting if more of these existed but were in the aforementioned slow fields, possibly giving cool new tech and/or the omega stuff with the shielded caches, or other really secret faction outposts and stuff that aren’t supposed to be seen by random spacefarers.

Agreed.

[Hiruma Kai]

Now we will have ways to get easier and cheaper through the Sector, which is great. But there's also a downside to it, which is this:
Having a fuel efficient, small fleet will be less of an advantage. Likely even fuel guzzling armadas will now be able to travel to the farthest stars, provided the currents are favorable. Which, in my, opinion, is a shame. I love running lean fleets, and even before this change it was rarely worth it for long.

I'll point out if currents are not favorable, they push the fleet in the wrong direction when you cross them or go against them. 

Do these just boost the speed if the fleet is moving in the right direction, or do they actively push the fleet (like pulsar beams do)?

They carry the fleet along, so it's more like pulsar beams, though you have a bit more control, and particularly when near the edges. But, for example, if you try to cross one going perpendicular to it, unless you e-burn, you'll likely get carried along for a light-year or two before you get to the other side. If you do e-burn, you'll still get carried some ways downstream, just not as much. And of course this depends on how fast the stream is at that point, too.

So if we're generous and assume any stream going in the the direction in a 90 degree cone is favorable, then there's only a 25% chance any given stream is going to save you time or fuel.  There's a 50% chance any stream you encounter is perpendicular to your direction of travel which is likely going to increase your trip by 1 to 2 light years trying to cross it, or you e-burn, which is going to cost fuel and CR.  Then there's a 25% chance it's heading in the wrong direction, and you have to run parallel to it but outside it's reach for a  good portion, which may or may not force you through deep hyperspace or prevent you taking the shortest route.

So, if you need to do something out of season, or are literally just going there and back in 30 days, my guess this system is probably more likely to make it worse for fuel guzzling armadas, as then you're moving against the flows.  It's still an RNG system at it's heart so it is definitely not going to be beneficial 100% of the time.  Of course, you can always plan 120 timeout missions with this in mind and do them around the 6 or 12 month mark, or story line missions which never expire, but that's certainly not the majority of the game.  In any case, the current story line reward is much better for getting large fleets around efficiently and quickly, and those travel nodes don't disappear on you.  For now anyways.

I'm going to need to play the final version of slipstreams first, to get a feel for how much the travel dynamics change before suggesting this will make travel easier or harder on average.  I feel like any move to make travel harder at this point is premature as it is unclear, at least to me, that the new slipstream system is easier.  On the other hand, the system clearly spices up hyperspace, which is good.

[Alex]

Just posted a gif of what crossing a slipstream looks like:
https://twitter.com/amosolov/status/1442168729479962625

Hopefully that gives an idea for how the movement dynamics feel in-game.


I think calling it "slow fields" is a disservice to the idea. It's fundamentally more about the higher fuel cost to break through whatever barrier is surrounding something of interest, isn't it. And that *could* be very interesting; it's a decision you make with a cost-benefit analysis, the main cost is fuel and not player-time. So it's really "farther away, but without the 'takes forever to get there'". Hmm.

[Helldiver]

Alex: *implements a new feature to make hyperspace travel less tedious and boring*
Gothars: "I'm gonna stop you right there..."

No offense but high valued loot is already protected by, you know. Getting to the edge of the map is already such a hassle, why would you make that even more miserable.

How is getting to the edge of the map "such a hassle" though? The vanilla map is very small and it takes barely minutes to reach any edge even without speeding up time and even with dodging dangerous hyperspace fleets added by mods (so the upcoming added remnants won't do much).

Going to "the edge of known space" in Starsector currently takes about as much effort as walking to the gorcery store and the magic gate ability from the campaign story trivializes that even further. If slipstreams are going to further remove any difficulty something has to be added to counter that, else at this point one has to wonder how much of a joke "exploration" is and why everyone in the sector is too stupid to fly a bit in any direction to find untouched riches.

[Grievous69]

You're completely right, I had no idea what I was talking about. Must've been the third of playerbase saying travel is boring and they just speed up time while alt tabed. Who cares if it takes "mere" minutes if it occurs constantly. It gets tedious, we're not playing Euro truck simulator here. And having completed the whole story isn't much of an argument for this post. I don't expect players to speedrun story missions just so they don't have to suffer traveling around.

[intrinsic_parity]

I wouldn't mind specific 'hazards' like increased fuel/resource consumption or whatever, if they are associated with guaranteed/increased chance of loot (maybe with additional combat defenses). Something like a 'dense nebula' section of the map with increased resource drain rates and special enemies protecting better loot could be really cool. As long as there is no actual slowing of the fleet though, that's just tedious and un-fun IMO.

[Megas]

And having completed the whole story isn't much of an argument for this post. I don't expect players to speedrun story missions just so they don't have to suffer traveling around.

I do not speed run the Janus device quest.  I want to build up an endgame fleet to crush enemies that get in the way (I do not want to run from the infamous s-modded phase fleet again, and Ziggurat was a meat grinder when I first fought it) and to comfortably pay off bribes.

By the time I get Janus device, it is endgame already, or close to it.  (At that point, I either grind for alpha cores for sector colonization and conquest, or the game is practically over.)  I have colonies established too.

Main reason I delay the quest is because losses are punishing, and they love sending enemies that are endgame strength, or close to it.

P.S.  Even if I start the quest, the point when the player needs to wreck a gate permanently (when prevents colonization of a system) is a point of decision paralysis.  I want to explore the ENTIRE sector and find ALL of the gates before I think about which system I want to destroy for science.  Now, if there was a way for the gate to be fixed (even if it is a matter of waiting years), there would be no need to make a sadistic choice.

[Sly]

I'm going to need to experience the slipstreams before I say anything for certain. Based on the projected complete network and the potential to "herd" an amorphous monstrosity in a direction to create one from somewhere, they don't seem like more than an occasional convenience at best, which is fine.

If I can save time and money by traveling smart - like wiping out an enemy fleet with minimal deployment - then I welcome it.

[Vanshilar]

I don't think the game really needs slow fields, because 1) hyperspace is already a way to "slow the game down" in its own right, i.e. since you have to use it to go between systems (until you finish the main story line) and because 2) hyperspace already has deep hyperspace, which slows down the fleet. So it doesn't need to be any slower.

The slipstreams basically introduce a hyperspace meta-game where depending on your luck and understanding, you can use it to speed up travel, kind of like hyperspace storms. But that (like hyperspace storms) depend on a variety of factors. I suppose every player is different but I don't think hyperspace needs to be any "bigger" by creating slow areas; to me exploring the whole thing is tedious enough as it is.

[FooF]

Yeah I don’t like the term “slow fields” when speed isn’t affected. More like “high density” fields that force your fleets to push through them at the cost of fuel.

As far as the idea itself, we already sort of have it: a Research Station in the corona of a giant star or event horizon of a black hole. Instead of fuel, it’s supplies. Smaller fleets are punished far less than large fleets when trying to access these goodies.

However, let me be the first to say that in the burning of supplies to get a loot crate, if said loot crate was not “worth it,” I’m hitting F9 and reloading. If these fields of fuel use cause me to burn fuel for an underwhelming reward, it will be the same result. I don’t save scum all that much but losing 200 supplies or, with this, hundreds of fuel, needs to have commensurate reward because quite frankly, I’m not going run my fleet back and drop off the fuel hogs. My exploration and discovery is incidental to my going out to kill stuff.

Personally, if I were going to do something like this, I’d couch it in the language of challenge, not cost. You’re entering a challenge arena where the terrain prohibits ships larger than X or a fleet DP larger than X. The opposite challenge rules could also apply (small fleets/ships can’t get through). What lies behind the terrain feature would be a challenge for that particular size fleet. Maybe taking down capitals with frigates or a super station with an all-capital fleet. I think something like this would appeal to all play styles rather than catering to just one.

[Megas]

With the way historian works (and maybe flashy guy too), if I find a junk crate, I reload because I want to save that crate as a spawn point for their goodies.

I remember historian putting the Legion XIV blueprint in a junk wreck, I reload the game and went to that wreck but found nothing, which tells me that historian needs wrecks/flotsam (or ruins) to place his items.  Historian feels more like a final boss or dungeon master dropping (then hiding) items for his amusement instead of a historian discovering lost items.