Fractal Softworks Forum

Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
Advanced search  

News:

Starsector 0.97a is out! (02/02/24); New blog post: Planet Search Overhaul (07/13/24)

Pages: 1 ... 5 6 [7] 8 9 ... 72

Author Topic: Starsector 0.95.1a (Released) Patch Notes  (Read 261343 times)

Wyvern

  • Admiral
  • *****
  • Posts: 3808
    • View Profile
Re: Starsector 0.95.1a (In Development) Patch Notes
« Reply #90 on: November 06, 2021, 02:55:57 PM »

My commentary on recently-discussed omega weaponry:

The Reality Disruptor is actually pretty good! It's not main armament, so you don't want it on a Sunder, Gryphon, or in the large energy slots of an Odyssey or Apogee, and it's not capable of off-bore fire which makes it awkward to use in the large-missile-capable slots of the Apogee, Odyssey, or Conquest, but installing one (and only one) is a pretty decent choice for anything else that can mount large energy or large missile weapons.

As for the Rift Cascade Emitter... Mechanically, I don't have any issues with it - it pairs well with the Tachyon Lance, adding extra short-range punch and a touch of hard-flux at extreme ranges, while the TL contributes EMP and superior armor penetration. Sure, if you look exclusively at "how does this perform at extreme range" or "how does this perform at point-blank range", then it's not an optimal choice... but the fact that it's decent in both of those niches is definitely worth something.
Visually, though, I'd be happier if installing two of them would have the rifts arc in opposite directions around the target, rather than both going in the same direction.

No, the only other Omega weapon that I think needs a buff is the Rift Beam - there are some setups where you can get it to actually perform its job as a point-defense weapon... but there aren't very many of them, it doesn't fill any roles other than point-defense, and even as point-defense you're probably better off with a regular Heavy Burst Laser. At a minimum I'd suggest increasing its range to somewhere around 600-800; make it capable of doing its job without needing to be in a turret slot right at the very front edge of the ship it's mounted on.
« Last Edit: November 06, 2021, 03:03:36 PM by Wyvern »
Logged
Wyvern is 100% correct about the math.

JUDGE! slowpersun

  • Admiral
  • *****
  • Posts: 614
    • View Profile
Re: Starsector 0.95.1a (In Development) Patch Notes
« Reply #91 on: November 06, 2021, 02:58:46 PM »

Quote
Carrier skills, there aren't that many interesting ships to pilot - Astral, Legion, Heron.
To me this feels like confirmation that Converted Hangers is in need of a buff, TBH. I'd like to use it, but I've yet to find a ship where the OP cost is worth the investment.

Maybe not a buff, but perhaps instead a companion hull-mod that reduces Converted Hanger penalties but wastes taxes OP.  Like maybe reduces size of fighter wing but also reduces penalties and/or OP cost of fighter wing.  Actually, having a hull mod in general that reduces OP cost of fighters would be a very interesting addition to carriers in general, although likely would need some sort of tax/debuff for balance...

Just can't make any changes too good, otherwise players will just stick Converted Hangers onto everything!  Although I basically never use it, I actually maybe should try it out a little more now that Xyphos has 0 range... but I agree, it mostly seems like an OP sink for OP that could better be used for anything else, unless player has no choice but to field a cargo ship with Converted Hangars for some reason (masochism?).
Logged
I wasn't always a Judge...

AcaMetis

  • Captain
  • ****
  • Posts: 485
    • View Profile
Re: Starsector 0.95.1a (In Development) Patch Notes
« Reply #92 on: November 06, 2021, 03:19:58 PM »

Maybe not a buff, but perhaps instead a companion hull-mod that reduces Converted Hanger penalties but wastes taxes OP.  Like maybe reduces size of fighter wing but also reduces penalties and/or OP cost of fighter wing.  Actually, having a hull mod in general that reduces OP cost of fighters would be a very interesting addition to carriers in general, although likely would need some sort of tax/debuff for balance...

Just can't make any changes too good, otherwise players will just stick Converted Hangers onto everything!  Although I basically never use it, I actually maybe should try it out a little more now that Xyphos has 0 range... but I agree, it mostly seems like an OP sink for OP that could better be used for anything else, unless player has no choice but to field a cargo ship with Converted Hangars for some reason (masochism?).
I think a hullmod that only modifies another hullmod might be a bit too niche. I can get behind more carrier options than Expanded Deck crew, though.

I'm not too worried about CH going from "can't find a use case" to "current meta", that'd be a really big swing. Especially with dedicated carriers being in the position that they're in.
Logged

Wyvern

  • Admiral
  • *****
  • Posts: 3808
    • View Profile
Re: Starsector 0.95.1a (In Development) Patch Notes
« Reply #93 on: November 06, 2021, 03:22:28 PM »

...Oh, right, there was a discussion on skills having effects for carried fighters, too.

Personally, I feel like worrying about such skills 'double-dipping' is silly. Fighters - as currently implemented - are weapons. Giving them some benefit from the skills of the carrier's captain makes as much sense as having a single "Field Modulation" skill that provides benefits to both shields and phase cloaks - if your fighters aren't improved by your per-ship skills at all, then you're just going to not pilot carriers.

Now, if fighters were separate entities that didn't occupy ordnance points on the carriers? Then there might be a concern to be made. Or if there were powerful fleet-wide skills that actually boosted fighter offense or defense - again, sure, then you might have a reasonable concern for not stacking that with benefits from per-ship skills. (Except, oh wait, there already are such skills for non-fighter weapons, in the form of things like Weapon Drills or Flux Regulation, and that's not an issue.)
Logged
Wyvern is 100% correct about the math.

Megas

  • Admiral
  • *****
  • Posts: 12243
    • View Profile
Re: Starsector 0.95.1a (In Development) Patch Notes
« Reply #94 on: November 06, 2021, 03:36:12 PM »

My commentary on recently-discussed omega weaponry:

The Reality Disruptor is actually pretty good! It's not main armament, so you don't want it on a Sunder, Gryphon, or in the large energy slots of an Odyssey or Apogee, and it's not capable of off-bore fire which makes it awkward to use in the large-missile-capable slots of the Apogee, Odyssey, or Conquest, but installing one (and only one) is a pretty decent choice for anything else that can mount large energy or large missile weapons.

As for the Rift Cascade Emitter... Mechanically, I don't have any issues with it - it pairs well with the Tachyon Lance, adding extra short-range punch and a touch of hard-flux at extreme ranges, while the TL contributes EMP and superior armor penetration. Sure, if you look exclusively at "how does this perform at extreme range" or "how does this perform at point-blank range", then it's not an optimal choice... but the fact that it's decent in both of those niches is definitely worth something.
Visually, though, I'd be happier if installing two of them would have the rifts arc in opposite directions around the target, rather than both going in the same direction.
I ought to try Reality Disruptor.  It did not drop in the game I played, so I have no idea of its effectiveness.

As for RCE, I would not mind it being not as good as lance or plasma IF it was not such an OP and flux hog.  At 30 OP, I expected something overpowered or best-of-the-best performance like plasma cannon, but instead got a weapon on par with a 22 OP weapon.

@ intrinsic_parity:  Agreed on Hyperion.  I think it is already a pain to use today without SO and proper skills.
Logged

Caymon Joestar

  • Commander
  • ***
  • Posts: 134
    • View Profile
Re: Starsector 0.95.1a (In Development) Patch Notes
« Reply #95 on: November 06, 2021, 04:28:31 PM »


Anyways, to go back on the discussion of the packages, Alex, what was your idea behind them/the skill? The problem with them was the fact that you set the cap for the skill too low, meaning only one frigate size ship could effectively benefit from it’s full effect. Was the goal for it to allow the player to have like a fleet of civilian ships combat ready? Or was it only for ships that were technically combat ready but could use a boost to make them more on par with military standard ships like the venture or the Prom/Atlas mk2s? If it was a matter of not enough ships to really justify it, could it not have been merged into a different skill? Or making some new pirate convertions of say the fuel tankers like the Dram/Phaeton? You could have also retroactively apply it to other ships like the Mule or the Buffalo Mk2s or the Colossus Mk2/3s.

Basically in what way did they not work out?

The idea was that you could have a very limited set of civ-grade ships boosted to a high level. The cap was deliberately low so that you couldn't, say, get the full effect on an Atlas Mk.II or a Venture, but the effect was high enough that it would have, hopefully, made some actually-civilian-ships (say, the Tarsus) more combat-capable, since they'd get the full bonus.

But that didn't really work out, and instead it was functionally *only* a buff to the already-combat-capable conversions, which in turn made those trickier to buff directly. If you'll note, the Prometheus Mk.II and the Atlas Mk.II have both received significant improvements, which I felt freer to make now that I didn't have to worry about how those might combine with the package mods.

Basically, the goal was to see some more true-civilian ships in battle, and that didn't work out at all.


In that case, yeah it was kinda flawed from the start, the true civilian ships like the tarsus even taking into account smodding in hullmods to save op just don't have good weapon layout or the op to really take advantage or consider using themselves in place of actual combat ships or even the more combatable ones like the venture and stuff. You would have to had to redesign them to have more weapon slots/OP for the packages to have been considered which prob would have been more work than it was prob worth so I can see why you didn't want to keep it around.

Though I dont think Prom/AtlasMk2 benefitting from the packages was as big as a worry as you thought. The benefits they got wasn't really that much that it would break them with the buffs you gave them if the skill wasnt going away in 0.9.5.1.

Also on the topic of Omega Weapons: is there any plans for more ballistics focused ones?

 
Logged

LookItsRain

  • Ensign
  • *
  • Posts: 3
    • View Profile
Re: Starsector 0.95.1a (In Development) Patch Notes
« Reply #96 on: November 06, 2021, 04:44:14 PM »

I agree with most others, I think the mauler changes go away from the weapons current synergy with HVD and HAC and a good way of buffing it is just increasing its overall accuracy a bit.

I also have to agree with AHandyDandyHotDog, story points in its current form is too easy to earn compared to its immense benefits, the only time i find myself getting low on them is during colony/system construction, otherwise they just seem to be a nearly free key press to avoid consequences or add extra benefits. I think the best way to solve this would be to remove the bonus XP from usage entirely.

Maybe im off base here but i have strong opinions on this:
On the Hull Restoration skill and similar effects: To me, this just seems way too stacked in terms of usefulness, it basically nullifies ship losses, removes d mods on obtained ships and even gives you a significant CR boost. With how easy it is to also scoop up salvageable ships thanks to story points, overall i feel like its too easy and cheap to obtain and repair ships compared to 0.91 which was the polar opposite.

Overall IMO, combat not in your favor is nearly free to avoid with a single story point with some CR loss, actual combat loses outside of supplies/crew are negligible, d mods dont really exist because you would just fly around a bit and passively repair, while your CR on most ships with the combination of skills(officers) and Hull restoration will be 100%.

And to comment on modded playthroughs, these problems are exacerbated significantly with mods like NEX, where saving up half a dozen story points or so and going to a system with heavy combat can quite literally net you a significant fleet with near zero effort, while avoiding any intercepting fleets with movement or a singular story point if you do get caught
Logged

Histidine

  • Admiral
  • *****
  • Posts: 4782
    • View Profile
    • GitHub profile
Re: Starsector 0.95.1a (In Development) Patch Notes
« Reply #97 on: November 06, 2021, 06:23:08 PM »

(comments I consider less important spoilered)
Spoiler
I recently found it's pretty easy to burn all your SP in the wrong circumstances, although those were largely due to bugs or mod features.
(Specifically, I once had to special recover four ships in a single battle (when most of them should have been free recoveries), and had to invest SP mentoring/eliting new officers a few times after existing ones died)

Recovering SP is mostly a matter of finding a suitable big fight (preferably one that's easier than the XP bonus calculation thinks). Big fights are abundant (if nothing else, you can find a high-population system and pick a fight with some patrols), though not always accessible for a roleplayer (i.e. if you're non-hostile to everyone).

The idea was that you could have a very limited set of civ-grade ships boosted to a high level. The cap was deliberately low so that you couldn't, say, get the full effect on an Atlas Mk.II or a Venture, but the effect was high enough that it would have, hopefully, made some actually-civilian-ships (say, the Tarsus) more combat-capable, since they'd get the full bonus.

But that didn't really work out, and instead it was functionally *only* a buff to the already-combat-capable conversions, which in turn made those trickier to buff directly. If you'll note, the Prometheus Mk.II and the Atlas Mk.II have both received significant improvements, which I felt freer to make now that I didn't have to worry about how those might combine with the package mods.

Basically, the goal was to see some more true-civilian ships in battle, and that didn't work out at all.

In that case, yeah it was kinda flawed from the start, the true civilian ships like the tarsus even taking into account smodding in hullmods to save op just don't have good weapon layout or the op to really take advantage or consider using themselves in place of actual combat ships or even the more combatable ones like the venture and stuff. You would have to had to redesign them to have more weapon slots/OP for the packages to have been considered which prob would have been more work than it was prob worth so I can see why you didn't want to keep it around.
I think if you wanted to benefit true civilian ships more than things like Atlas2/Prom2, any bonuses the ship involved receives would have to be based on their cargo/fuel capacity. So the ship sacrifices some transport functionality for combat strength – in place of the hullmod costing OP, which it can't spare, it already has too little for vents/caps and guns as it is. Like how combat freighters are less efficient at freighting than civilian ones. Atlas Mk.II and Prometheus Mk.II wouldn't benefit as much from the conversion (but also need less of it) since they already lost most of their cargo/fuel capacity (though the Prom2 still can carry 800 fuel...)

But of course there's still no reason to do this to a Tarsus when you can just obtain and field a real combat ship, and never put the Tarsus in harm's way...

Also on the topic of Omega Weapons: is there any plans for more ballistics focused ones?
Yeah, I kinda find it odd that all the hybrid Omega weapons are basically "energy but fits in a ballistic slot". Including the ones that feel like they ought to be 'ballistic at heart', like Volatile Particle Driver (compare with Mjolnir Cannon).
[close]

I'm not a fan of bringing back carrier-only skills; the new skill system (for 0.95.1a) is a deliberate step away from skills locking the player into a too-small set of ships. Yeah, ballistic and energy masteries do that to some extent, but the range of interesting ships that these benefit is broad.

Carrier skills, there aren't that many interesting ships to pilot - Astral, Legion, Heron. Maybe the Odyssey. But combining carrier skill effects with non-carrier effects seems like it would still incentivize you to pilot a subset of these ships due to them benefitting from both the carrier and combat aspects of the hypothetical skill. So it seems like a tricky design problem. That would be less of an issue for officer skill picks - if you have a dedicated carrier officer, that's fine - but since those come from the same skill pool...

Overall, I'm happier with the skill system now that it doesn't have these (well, almost - Point Defense, still) and the carrier effects are fleetwides-only.
I think you're really overestimating things here.

Only the small minority of min-maxers would agonize over wasted bonuses. The non-carrier players (or at least those who don't personally pilot them) would simply ignore them either because it is irrelevant to their play-style or found that trying to squeeze fighters into non-carrier ships for the sake of utilizing those bonuses more trouble than it was worth.

Meanwhile, giving carrier/fighter exclusive bonuses to existing skills would help the Carriers get out of their current bad standing.

Besides, what options do you have? You have said that Carrier exclusive skills are not an option, and yet at the same time you consider adding carrier/fighter bonuses to existing skills as some kind of design sin that will ruin everything.

So besides leaving them in the rut, that leaves either designing a whole separate (sub)-system for the Carriers/Fighters (And if the debacle behind the Colony system is any indication, this is not your preference)... or removing them all together to prevent obviously inferior newbie trap options.
So, the post!

My complaint is about the value of having carriers vs. just getting more combat ships. They're already seen as underperforming right now, and officers not being worth putting on them means they'll fall off even harder than now. Also it makes carriers seem like they're just less important. Second-class. Filler. Those kind of adjectives.

I don't think more fighter-specific skills are really desirable, for the same reason that the phase and shield skills were merged. But it'd be nice if they got a partial benefit from the existing combat skills.

In the scenario where 'normal' combat skills also benefit fighters, I don't think the notion that players would feel compelled to use fleet or battle carriers checks out. Consider: when a skill gives bonuses for both ballistic and energy weapons, we don't say the player feels compelled to use midline ships. The carriers would be trading off combat ship traits (guns, but also things like making use of its personal armor, shields and speed) that benefit from skills, for fighters that benefit from the same skills.
Logged

FooF

  • Admiral
  • *****
  • Posts: 1414
    • View Profile
Re: Starsector 0.95.1a (In Development) Patch Notes
« Reply #98 on: November 06, 2021, 07:07:34 PM »

I tweaked the weapons file to try the Nu-Mauler out: it feels meatier than before. I will say that the reload times feel long, perhaps a bit too long, but it does pack a punch. The only thing I had to presume was perfect accuracy (like the HVD) but the rest of the stats are known. I really like the sound of the triple shot: it sounds like a true cannon. 

I tried out an Eagle with 3x Heavy Mauler and watched as an Enforcer burned drive in and had its armor striped by the first volley. Granted, that's a perfect scenario but Nu-Mauler is more of an opportunist than a pressure weapon now. Against a Dominator, its overall lack of DPS is apparent but Old Mauler really wasn't much better. Honestly, I don't think HE needs another pressure weapon, which is all the Mauler was when paired with HVD. Now, when it hits, it hits, which Medium HE is sorely lacking.

Personally, when I tweaked the reload to 3.9 (so overall 4.5), it felt way better. It's only half a second but 5 seconds is maddeningly long when ships are venting and you have a clear shot. It bumps the DPS/flux to 133/sec, which is on par with the old and if you raised the flux levels back, I wouldn't complain. The only buff really would be the perfect accuracy.
Logged

Megas

  • Admiral
  • *****
  • Posts: 12243
    • View Profile
Re: Starsector 0.95.1a (In Development) Patch Notes
« Reply #99 on: November 06, 2021, 07:21:48 PM »

Maybe im off base here but i have strong opinions on this:
On the Hull Restoration skill and similar effects: To me, this just seems way too stacked in terms of usefulness, it basically nullifies ship losses, removes d mods on obtained ships and even gives you a significant CR boost. With how easy it is to also scoop up salvageable ships thanks to story points, overall i feel like its too easy and cheap to obtain and repair ships compared to 0.91 which was the polar opposite.

Overall IMO, combat not in your favor is nearly free to avoid with a single story point with some CR loss, actual combat loses outside of supplies/crew are negligible, d mods dont really exist because you would just fly around a bit and passively repair, while your CR on most ships with the combination of skills(officers) and Hull restoration will be 100%.
The problem is not avoiding combat, but randomly losing ships in low-risk fights (due to AI stupidity) or taking on high-risk, high-reward fights, like boss fights (Ziggurat, Tesseracts), Ordos with Radiants, or even endgame bounties when player is just not quite strong enough to steamroll them (ten or more capitals and twenty or so cruisers is a lot to chew through)... without losing a single ship.

Rewards are generally balanced to assume flawless victory or very minor losses (like losing a common frigate or Shrike in a 300k+ multi-capital slugfest).  Lose a ship, and why did the player bother fighting?  He just lost too much money to replace the ship.  It is like fighting level draining undead and losing more than a level permanently.

And with s-mods, there is no cheap way to fix recovered s-modded ships aside from Field Repairs, which repairs too slowly to be practical for anything beyond a ship or two.

And people tend to value max combat power much more than campaign QoL (that mitigates losses).
Logged

SonnaBanana

  • Admiral
  • *****
  • Posts: 873
    • View Profile
Re: Starsector 0.95.1a (In Development) Patch Notes
« Reply #100 on: November 06, 2021, 07:32:30 PM »

Is there another skill which looks suitable enough to grant carrier/fighter bonuses, whether fleetwide or piloted? Ordnance Expertise? Field Repairs?
« Last Edit: November 06, 2021, 07:35:45 PM by SonnaBanana »
Logged
I'm not going to check but you should feel bad :( - Alex

SafariJohn

  • Admiral
  • *****
  • Posts: 3038
    • View Profile
Re: Starsector 0.95.1a (In Development) Patch Notes
« Reply #101 on: November 06, 2021, 07:55:18 PM »

Basically, the goal was to see some more true-civilian ships in battle, and that didn't work out at all.

You've designed yourself into a corner, there. Civilian ships simply don't have enough weapon slots to compete. The only role I have figured without redoing all the sprites is to let civ ships become bricks: can't really deal damage, but able to soak lots of damage to take pressure off of the real combat ships.

I suggest replacing Assault Package with 2 hullmods: one super-buffs flux capacity, the other super-buffs hull. In exchange they neuter all of the ship's logistics stats and have a high enough OP cost that most civilian ships can't fit both.

(Escort Package should be rebranded as a normal hullmod bc it is cool. Militarized Subsystems should not make a civilian ship count as a combat ship for skill buffs.)
Logged

Sarissofoi

  • Captain
  • ****
  • Posts: 405
    • View Profile
Re: Starsector 0.95.1a (In Development) Patch Notes
« Reply #102 on: November 06, 2021, 07:57:30 PM »

Question
Why Falcon (P) was nerfed so hard?
I mean it was pretty decent missile boat and quite tanky thanks to no flux from weapons but there is little reason to use it now.
It was budget choice for (P) themed fleets or nice flagship for them but I really don't see good reason to nerf it.

intrinsic_parity

  • Admiral
  • *****
  • Posts: 3080
    • View Profile
Re: Starsector 0.95.1a (In Development) Patch Notes
« Reply #103 on: November 06, 2021, 08:12:39 PM »

New Heavy Mauler seems extremely weak, it's too easy to shield flicker against and AI already can exploit this weakness somewhat decently when at high flux (but doesn't try to apply this tactic to conserve flux for offense, the way a player would).
I suspect that an Eagle with it will just get cornered and slaughtered in AI vs AI sim fight by almost same build, but using Heavy Mortars instead.
I feel similarly, I was surprised that people were worried about it being too good. My biggest issue with the current mauler was the low DPS and that got even worse. The AI also loves to fire HE into shields so I'm imagining a world where the AI just fires the mauler into shields constantly and the long cool down means it does even less armor/hull damage. I like the concept of making it more bursty, but the numbers seem pretty bad to me.
Logged

Megas

  • Admiral
  • *****
  • Posts: 12243
    • View Profile
Re: Starsector 0.95.1a (In Development) Patch Notes
« Reply #104 on: November 06, 2021, 08:23:41 PM »

I feel similarly, I was surprised that people were worried about it being too good. My biggest issue with the current mauler was the low DPS and that got even worse.
Not to mention recoil after sustained fire, so it cannot snipe well after a few shots, unlike HVD.

The main thing I am interested in "nu-mauler" is increased accuracy so it can snipe if it keeps its low DPS.

What is the flux cost on nu-mauler?  Last thing we need is another phase lance type weapon for sudden flux spikes AI cannot deal with.
Logged
Pages: 1 ... 5 6 [7] 8 9 ... 72