Fractal Softworks Forum

Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
Advanced search  

News:

Starsector 0.95.1a is out! (12/10/21); Blog post: Uniquifying the Factions, Part 2 (04/30/22)

Pages: 1 ... 32 33 [34] 35 36 ... 71

Author Topic: Starsector 0.95.1a (Released) Patch Notes  (Read 152766 times)

THEASD

  • Ensign
  • *
  • Posts: 24
  • *Confused Cat Noise*
    • MSN Messenger - anyidelse@qq.com
    • View Profile
Re: Starsector 0.95.1a (In Development) Patch Notes
« Reply #495 on: December 03, 2021, 11:42:16 PM »

Fighter Uplink/Carrier Group: increased by 1.5x if the carrier has an officer in command

increased by 1.5x?
meanwhile...250% effect?
Logged
Also known as AnyIDElse.

SonnaBanana

  • Admiral
  • *****
  • Posts: 760
    • View Profile
Re: Starsector 0.95.1a (In Development) Patch Notes
« Reply #496 on: December 04, 2021, 12:13:59 AM »

Anyway Alex, add another bonus to Cybernetic Augmentation please? Doesn't have to a major bonus.
Logged
I'm not going to check but you should feel bad :( - Alex

Grievous69

  • Admiral
  • *****
  • Posts: 1652
    • View Profile
Re: Starsector 0.95.1a (In Development) Patch Notes
« Reply #497 on: December 04, 2021, 12:18:42 AM »

Me: Hey I think Mora doesn't have enough OP for its armaments
Alex 24 hours later in patch notes: "Mora OP increased haha"
You never cease to amaze me damn, but also glad that Wayfarer got a nice nudge.

Really excited about all the missile changes, looks like you really listened to the feedback about which were underperforming. I assume one reason for double variants, except that no one used singles, is that some tend to leave small missile mounts empty in the campaign in favour of more hullmods or flux stats. But now we have some nice lucrative options to fill in. And not going to lie, out of all these listed things, I can't wait to see all those updated sprites  ;D
Logged
Please don't take me too seriously.

SCC

  • Admiral
  • *****
  • Posts: 3509
    • View Profile
Re: Starsector 0.95.1a (In Development) Patch Notes
« Reply #498 on: December 04, 2021, 01:04:14 AM »

Pilums are salamanders now. Nice.

pairedeciseaux

  • Captain
  • ****
  • Posts: 333
    • View Profile
Re: Starsector 0.95.1a (In Development) Patch Notes
« Reply #499 on: December 04, 2021, 01:39:32 AM »

Updated older sprites for several ships
(...)
Updated older sprites for some weapons

Valkyrie, Vigilance, Buffalo, Mule, Hermes, Wolf, Shrike, Revenant, and some weapon slots on others (Falcon, Eagle, Apogee).

Some weapons got touch-ups too; Autopulse, HIL, ... etc? And added a new Pilum stage, of course.

Yay!

Hyperion:
  • Phase Teleporter cooldown increased to 10 seconds
  • Changed deployment/base maintenance cost back to 15

Finally, the mobility nerf. Hard decision.   ;D

Squall MRLS: increased ammo to 160 (was: 100)

Haha! I can see squall pressure from those large pirate fleets and remnants stations getting harder to deal with.

  • Atropos (Single): reduced OP cost to 1 (was: 2)
  • Atropos Rack: reduced OP cost to 3 (was: 4)
  • Harpoon (Single), Sabot (Single):
    • Changed to (Double)
    • Ammo increased to 2, with a 10 second reload delay
    • OP cost increased to 2
    • Longbow Bomber retains the single-shot version

So now there are small missiles options at 1, 2, 3, 4, 5 OP, right?

I suspect the Atropos (Single) at 1 OP and the new Harpoon/Sabot (Double) at 2 OP are going to be my most-used missiles on frigates. Also nice options on larger ships for OP-padding.

Pilum LRM:

Curious to play with that.

Perdition Bomber:
  • Increased wing size to 3 (was: 2)
  • Increased OP cost to 20 (was: 15)

My initial reaction was: unpractical, cost too much! Then i realised that 2 new Perdition wings for 40 OP gives the same firepower as the old Perdition wings for 45 OP. So, on Mora/Heron, just put 2 of those new wings, and mix with 1 cheaper option. Though comparison with Dagger wings is inevitable.

Any theories as to when this will be released?

Hmm, looks like finishing touches to me! So, should be close.
Logged

Sozzer

  • Ensign
  • *
  • Posts: 39
    • View Profile
Re: Starsector 0.95.1a (In Development) Patch Notes
« Reply #500 on: December 04, 2021, 04:52:12 AM »

I'll admit that I'm pretty curious what the reasoning was for the Pilum gaining a second stage for the final sprint compared to making it a bit faster in general - and even more curious why the change from HE. It seems less like an adjustment to the pilum, and more like a missile with a completely different role and use case sharing only name and a generally supportive role.
Which isn't necessarily a complaint, but it seems like it'd have been about as effective to just make this as a separate missile entirely, so I guess I'm asking why not do that?


(And while I'm here, question we were discussing over on discord - is the temporal shell understood to be related to phase technology, or is the description of the scarab merely using phase as a different example of TT pushing the boundaries?)
Logged

bobucles

  • Admiral
  • *****
  • Posts: 532
    • View Profile
Re: Starsector 0.95.1a (In Development) Patch Notes
« Reply #501 on: December 04, 2021, 05:09:27 AM »

The pilum suffers from severe snowball syndrome. It's nearly useless in small numbers, but once it overwhelms enemy defenses it starts breaking things. Part of this is due to the extreme range (every ship on the map can focus the same target), low health(easy to stop, until you can't), and high damage(OW).

Looks like the intent is to flatten that curve. Make the pilum more useful in small numbers, but less useful as a map sweeping weapon. The weapon appears a lot more defensive now, being able to annoy ships rather than outright kill them, which is fine. The damage change may be worrisome(frag damage has half the value of other types due to it being 25/25/100), but it seems good enough to start testing it and see what really happens.
« Last Edit: December 04, 2021, 05:13:10 AM by bobucles »
Logged

Megas

  • Admiral
  • *****
  • Posts: 10528
    • View Profile
Re: Starsector 0.95.1a (In Development) Patch Notes
« Reply #502 on: December 04, 2021, 06:42:41 AM »

Salamanders used to do 500 damage, until they became unlimited (upgraded from three rack), then ships with unlimited Fast Missile Racks could kill everything from beyond fog-of-war firing them blind.  Also, thirty to forty frigates each armed with Salamanders caused havoc.  Even after Salamanders were weakened to 100 damage, ships with unlimited Fast Missile Racks could still kill enemies with them, and then Fast Missile Racks gained charges.
« Last Edit: December 04, 2021, 06:44:24 AM by Megas »
Logged

RustyCabbage

  • Captain
  • ****
  • Posts: 308
    • View Profile
Re: Starsector 0.95.1a (In Development) Patch Notes
« Reply #503 on: December 04, 2021, 09:52:18 AM »

Dang, solid changes across the board! Hoping patch notes part two means we're going to get a release soon.  :)

Alex

  • Administrator
  • Admiral
  • *****
  • Posts: 20457
    • View Profile
Re: Starsector 0.95.1a (In Development) Patch Notes
« Reply #504 on: December 04, 2021, 01:02:04 PM »

Fighter Uplink/Carrier Group: increased by 1.5x if the carrier has an officer in command

increased by 1.5x?
meanwhile...250% effect?

Hmm - 1.5x means "a factor of 1.5", so "increased by a factor of 1.5" seems both appropriate and reasonably unambiguous - plus, it's consistent with other usage of <number>x in the game.


Me: Hey I think Mora doesn't have enough OP for its armaments
Alex 24 hours later in patch notes: "Mora OP increased haha"
You never cease to amaze me damn, but also glad that Wayfarer got a nice nudge.

Haha, well your thread/comment had a little something to do with this! I meant to pop in that thread and say thank you to everyone for the feedback/thoughts, and to you for getting it started.

It also didn't hurt that I was trying to make the Mora work for me in the campaign and it just, well, wasn't. Despite being a putative brick, it was getting taken down frequently without even making bad decisions - just, too slow and short ranged, but still trying to fight. I should really have another look to see how much this change helps. And maybe using the new Ballistic Rangefinder on it might be a good idea, hmm!

Really excited about all the missile changes, looks like you really listened to the feedback about which were underperforming. I assume one reason for double variants, except that no one used singles, is that some tend to leave small missile mounts empty in the campaign in favour of more hullmods or flux stats. But now we have some nice lucrative options to fill in. And not going to lie, out of all these listed things, I can't wait to see all those updated sprites  ;D

:D Yeah - I mean, that's part of the reason for the (double) variants. It just overall feels like it spreads the missiles out more nicely - the single Atropos can cost 1 OP and not feel way overpriced at 2, also. I think it's fine if it's viable to leave missile mounts empty for some builds. Generally, the (double) versions I think would be most useful on ships that already would not always want to make this tradeoff - i.e. ships with plenty of small missile slots, where they can still get a nice salvo off by firing one missile from each of them.


Pilums are salamanders now. Nice.

I suppose I can see how one might look at "fragmentation and EMP damage plus unlimited ammo" and think that, but it ignores some pretty key differences. They don't feel anywhere near the same either in using or facing them.



So now there are small missiles options at 1, 2, 3, 4, 5 OP, right?

Yep!

I suspect the Atropos (Single) at 1 OP and the new Harpoon/Sabot (Double) at 2 OP are going to be my most-used missiles on frigates. Also nice options on larger ships for OP-padding.

Hmm, maybe. The single Atropos seems like worthwhile filler if you didn't care that much about missiles anyway and were going to leave the slots empty otherwise. But for something like the Wolf/Lasher? I think that's a harder decision. A triple Harpoon rack gives you enough punch to "punch up"; launching a sad pair of Harpoons isn't really going to do that - it'd be a nice finisher against frigate-sized opponents, or perhaps if massed. Double Sabots might be more competitive in that same situation, though, since a pair would be very useful already. And of course if you've got Expanded Missile Racks and/or Missile Spec on the officer, that changes the value comparison, too.

My initial reaction was: unpractical, cost too much! Then i realised that 2 new Perdition wings for 40 OP gives the same firepower as the old Perdition wings for 45 OP. So, on Mora/Heron, just put 2 of those new wings, and mix with 1 cheaper option. Though comparison with Dagger wings is inevitable.

*thumbs up* I'm just hoping they're not going to be overpowered again, but it's a different fighter landscape than last time they were at three per wing.


I'll admit that I'm pretty curious what the reasoning was for the Pilum gaining a second stage for the final sprint compared to making it a bit faster in general - and even more curious why the change from HE. It seems less like an adjustment to the pilum, and more like a missile with a completely different role and use case sharing only name and a generally supportive role.
Which isn't necessarily a complaint, but it seems like it'd have been about as effective to just make this as a separate missile entirely, so I guess I'm asking why not do that?

First up: it's definitely a different missile. But, as you noted, what it retains is the general idea of the Pilum, which is a long-range support missile. (Plus, for fun, it functions more like its ancient namesake now, what with punching holes in shields and all.)

A support missile generally means it's not going to be synched up well with whatever its supporting, so unlimited ammo is a desired quality. But this means that you have to be careful that it doesn't out-compete non-support missiles in their roles. For example, even a modest speed boost lets the old Pilum function pretty well as an unlimited-ammo medium range finisher missile, and that really steps on the Harpoon. The fast second stage is a way to let it have reasonable anti-PD performance while ... bascially not suppressing venting in an overly-large area simply by existing. Plus, this second stage means that there's less accomulation of Pilums from multiple salvoes following a target around - they'll get used up (by getting close enough and engaging the second stage) at about the rate they're fired.

The idea is to let it support another ship, and shield-piercing EMP damage should accomplish that. With HE damage, it's easier to get into trouble with it being too good as a short-range finisher instead of support, hence frag damage.

As for why not make it another missile - I don't think the original Pilum concept worked out, ultimately, and I was just done trying to salvage it in anything like its original form.


(And while I'm here, question we were discussing over on discord - is the temporal shell understood to be related to phase technology, or is the description of the scarab merely using phase as a different example of TT pushing the boundaries?)

I'd say it's probably related, though to what degree is extremely fluid.


The pilum suffers from severe snowball syndrome. It's nearly useless in small numbers, but once it overwhelms enemy defenses it starts breaking things. Part of this is due to the extreme range (every ship on the map can focus the same target), low health(easy to stop, until you can't), and high damage(OW).

Looks like the intent is to flatten that curve. Make the pilum more useful in small numbers, but less useful as a map sweeping weapon. The weapon appears a lot more defensive now, being able to annoy ships rather than outright kill them, which is fine. The damage change may be worrisome(frag damage has half the value of other types due to it being 25/25/100), but it seems good enough to start testing it and see what really happens.

(Yep! I'd say "support" instead of "defensive", but still that's all quite accurate.)


Dang, solid changes across the board! Hoping patch notes part two means we're going to get a release soon.  :)

:-X
Logged

Sly

  • Ensign
  • *
  • Posts: 46
    • View Profile
Re: Starsector 0.95.1a (In Development) Patch Notes
« Reply #505 on: December 04, 2021, 05:02:29 PM »

  • Defective Manufactory, Converted Hangar:
    • Fighter damage taken penalty reduced to 25% (was: 50%)
    • Fighter speed penalty reduced to 25% (was: 33%)

This was something I've wanted to suggest for a year or so, but never thought it would pick up any traction! Very cool, I like Converted Hanger and experiment with it all the time. It was simply laughably bad (in a funny, facepalming way) at times with how easily strikecraft were wiped out.

I look forward to trying this out in the future and seeing if Converted Hanger is in a good spot now.
Logged

Kragh

  • Ensign
  • *
  • Posts: 7
    • View Profile
    • Email
Re: Starsector 0.95.1a (In Development) Patch Notes
« Reply #506 on: December 04, 2021, 09:43:19 PM »

The changes to converted hangar are really going to impact the AI. They already use them a lot so I wonder how much stronger they're going to be (and that's a good thing in my opinion).
Logged

Baqar79

  • Captain
  • ****
  • Posts: 340
    • View Profile
Re: Starsector 0.95.1a (In Development) Patch Notes
« Reply #507 on: December 05, 2021, 12:29:24 AM »

The converted hangar buff is something I was pretty happy to see on the new patch notes.  I don't use them much any more, but I still love equipping them on my Apogee's (I've since downgraded from Xyphos wings to Wasp's).  Of questionable benefit alone, they seem to survive a bit longer when fielding 4 or so Apogee's in my end game exploration fleet, so they should be even better now.

I noticed that the art on the fighter wings look broken down when using a converted hangar (well they aren't a proper hangar I guess).  I don't think I noticed it much on wasps, but the Xyphos looked pretty derelict and ready for the scrap yard...is that still the case with the new update? (wasn't a fan of that, but I guess it was used to distinguish them between normal hangars; maybe they could look a little less beat up with the buff?).

Imgur isn't working right now so I attached a comparison between a converted hangar (left) and normal hangar (right)
« Last Edit: December 05, 2021, 12:30:55 AM by Baqar79 »
Logged

Strict

  • Ensign
  • *
  • Posts: 26
    • View Profile
    • Email
Re: Starsector 0.95.1a (In Development) Patch Notes
« Reply #508 on: December 05, 2021, 01:10:45 AM »

My suggestion is to remove EMP damage from sabots, it's a good weapon in its role (burst KE damage, nobody uses it for EMP),  so it won't ovelap with salamander and new pilum. It will help gameplay too, armor tanking sabots (correct play from player and AI) now will not result in punishmet from EMP disabling weapons (punishment for correct play), so now everyone will need to time their attacks better to overload ships.
Logged

Grievous69

  • Admiral
  • *****
  • Posts: 1652
    • View Profile
Re: Starsector 0.95.1a (In Development) Patch Notes
« Reply #509 on: December 05, 2021, 01:15:26 AM »

My suggestion is to remove EMP damage from sabots, it's a good weapon in its role (burst KE damage, nobody uses it for EMP),  so it won't ovelap with salamander and new pilum. It will help gameplay too, armor tanking sabots (correct play from player and AI) now will not result in punishmet from EMP disabling weapons (punishment for correct play), so now everyone will need to time their attacks better to overload ships.
Well now you've just made it useless. I know Sabots are hated but come on you can't expect a kinetic missile like this to do literally nothing if you drop shields. AI would never do anything with it, ever. It's not the fact that people use it for EMP, it's to have some effect if you tank it on armour.
Logged
Please don't take me too seriously.
Pages: 1 ... 32 33 [34] 35 36 ... 71