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: Simulator Enhancements (03/13/24)

Pages: 1 ... 56 57 [58] 59 60 ... 72

Author Topic: Starsector 0.95.1a (Released) Patch Notes  (Read 249039 times)

Vanshilar

  • Admiral
  • *****
  • Posts: 585
    • View Profile
Re: Starsector 0.95.1a (Released) Patch Notes
« Reply #855 on: December 20, 2021, 06:44:13 PM »

HSA is absurdly overpowered on phase ships, and slightly less so on ships with mobility systems who at least usually take fire on approach.

Spoiler
You can solo endgame fleets with the Ziggy, HSA, and Tachyon Beams. You're not literally unstoppable, but you might as well be. Granted, that's an extreme edge case.
[close]

Can you give an example of a ship loadout with HSA that's better for its role than a non-HSA loadout? I'm not sure why HSA needs to be nerfed when I can't find a reason to use it over non-HSA builds. The closest I've come is using a Scarab with 2 rift lances and (bear with me here...) 3 PD lasers, using the Point Defense skill to give the PD lasers some extra range, yet keep it within its flux budget, compared with using IR pulse lasers. But it costs more OP.

The problem with using spoilery as an example is that it can solo fleets with a great assortment of weapons, I don't see how HSA is what makes or breaks its ability to solo fleets.

My phase (flag)ship is the Doom, outfitted with 6 antimatter SRM missiles for massive alpha and 2 cryoblasters for mop-up. If HSA is overpowered on phase ships, how do you make a HSA loadout that's better than that for a Doom?
Logged

Amoebka

  • Admiral
  • *****
  • Posts: 1318
    • View Profile
Re: Starsector 0.95.1a (Released) Patch Notes
« Reply #856 on: December 20, 2021, 06:46:31 PM »

So, basically, all the new playstyles immediately got nerfed into being irrelevant.  :( I sure don't love HSA being completely unusable because it was "too good" with specifically phase lances on destroyers and nothing else. Why even add unconventional stuff into the game if you are going to remove it if it ever becomes competitive with the "intended" strategies?

The Xyphos nerf makes me a sad boy as well. Can we have a new non-roaming support fighter now that both of them suck? It's either 0 dp for a mining pod, or 18 for a xyphos. Would be nice to have something at around 9.

At least officer XP gains are somewhat better.
Logged

Timid

  • Admiral
  • *****
  • Posts: 640
  • Personal Text
    • View Profile
Re: Starsector 0.95.1a (Released) Patch Notes
« Reply #857 on: December 20, 2021, 06:48:47 PM »

I'm surprised at Shield Shunt nerf. It could've at least been 25% or 75/125/175/250 depending on the lesser value.

High Scatter Amplifier could've been easier to resolve as applying half hard flux, half soft flux... but oh well.

Alex

  • Administrator
  • Admiral
  • *****
  • Posts: 23988
    • View Profile
Re: Starsector 0.95.1a (Released) Patch Notes
« Reply #858 on: December 20, 2021, 06:56:32 PM »

Why even add unconventional stuff into the game if you are going to remove it if it ever becomes competitive with the "intended" strategies?

There's "competitive" and there's "makes the normal stuff bad". HSA was squarely in the latter category with some weapons - most notably phase lances, yes, though I'd imagine it would also make trouble with some modded weapons, too. The problem isn't the HSA was "competitive", it's the (at least) the Heavy Blaster just about stopped being competitive, and I'd expect some other weapons got stepped on some, too. So: with the previous HSA, we had fewer useful weapons in the pool than we do after the change.
Logged

IonDragonX

  • Admiral
  • *****
  • Posts: 816
    • View Profile
Re: Starsector 0.95.1a (Released) Patch Notes
« Reply #859 on: December 20, 2021, 06:57:20 PM »

seconding the shield shunt question in particular - it wasn't particularly good at 25% (although i get why building in was blocked), why nerf it to 15%?
Mainly because it had the possibility of being too good, and the problem with something like this - which cuts a lot of gameplay out of the game by making a ship which is fairly one-dimensional to pilot - is if it's too strong, it really damages the game. I'll keep an eye on it, though.
And, yeah, the "can't s-mod it" change is because the main reason you'd want to is so you can remove makeshift shield generator afterwards and keep it. It's otherwise too cheap to want to s-mod it in so it shouldn't have much of an effect otherwise.
It seems to me that the "can't s-mod it" was very forceful, very heavy-handed to fix it. You already have a precedent of mutually exclusive hullmods. AO & HSA are now mutually exclusive. ITU & DTC always were. Technically, Phase Field(the hullmod) & CH always were. Assault Package & Support Package were.
So why not make Shield Shunt & MSG mutually exclusive instead of banning one of them from S-mods?
Logged

JUDGE! slowpersun

  • Admiral
  • *****
  • Posts: 614
    • View Profile
Re: Starsector 0.95.1a (Released) Patch Notes
« Reply #860 on: December 20, 2021, 07:18:39 PM »

It seems to me that the "can't s-mod it" was very forceful, very heavy-handed to fix it. You already have a precedent of mutually exclusive hullmods. AO & HSA are now mutually exclusive. ITU & DTC always were. Technically, Phase Field(the hullmod) & CH always were. Assault Package & Support Package were.
So why not make Shield Shunt & MSG mutually exclusive instead of banning one of them from S-mods?

Agreed, this seems reasonable on its face (put another way, I didn't feel like thinking about it too much).  Adding more illogical kludge fixes instead of addressing the underlying problem is just another paved road to hell.  Don't get me wrong, it's easier than fixing the underlying problem... it's just also subject to compounding said problem/issue in the long run.  Only downside is that there prolly isn't necessarily a simple and easy solution to fix said underlying problem.  Either allow s-modding for every hull mod and adjust benefits for hull mods to balance system (tedious), or ditch system entirely and live with your wasted life (prolly shoulda thought this one through slightly more!).
Logged
I wasn't always a Judge...

Alex

  • Administrator
  • Admiral
  • *****
  • Posts: 23988
    • View Profile
Re: Starsector 0.95.1a (Released) Patch Notes
« Reply #861 on: December 20, 2021, 07:37:15 PM »

Can we have a new non-roaming support fighter now that both of them suck? It's either 0 dp for a mining pod, or 18 for a xyphos. Would be nice to have something at around 9.

Hmm, yeah, that could be fun, actually. I remember trying for a Vulcan PD platform type fighter at some point, but I forget what about it didn't work out - something didn't, though. I still like that concept, though; might be worth revisiting!

It seems to me that the "can't s-mod it" was very forceful, very heavy-handed to fix it. You already have a precedent of mutually exclusive hullmods. AO & HSA are now mutually exclusive. ITU & DTC always were. Technically, Phase Field(the hullmod) & CH always were. Assault Package & Support Package were.
So why not make Shield Shunt & MSG mutually exclusive instead of banning one of them from S-mods?

Agreed, this seems reasonable on its face (put another way, I didn't feel like thinking about it too much).  Adding more illogical kludge fixes instead of addressing the underlying problem is just another paved road to hell.  Don't get me wrong, it's easier than fixing the underlying problem... it's just also subject to compounding said problem/issue in the long run.  Only downside is that there prolly isn't necessarily a simple and easy solution to fix said underlying problem.  Either allow s-modding for every hull mod and adjust benefits for hull mods to balance system (tedious), or ditch system entirely and live with your wasted life (prolly shoulda thought this one through slightly more!).

This is an extremely simple, limited fix that has no real downside. And in general, "some hullmods can't be s-modded" is also a clean way to handle certain things. The idea that the system ought to be ditched because the base "rules" need some exceptions - at best, that's an extremely unrealistic way to look at things. But going beyond that, oftentimes, the exceptions are what makes systems more interesting.

That said, I don't have anything against the "make MSG and Shield Shunt mutually exclusive" approach, either; the only downside I can see is that it wouldn't handle modded versions of MSG (with perhaps different stats etc) out-of-the-box. But it's not a big concern and I'm not sure those types of modded hullmods even exist. I just feel like calling the "can't build it in" approach "heavy handed" is making a mountain out of a a molehill - like... it's not something you were going to do anyway, except to accomplish the thing the change is explicitly meant to prevent.
Logged

intrinsic_parity

  • Admiral
  • *****
  • Posts: 3071
    • View Profile
Re: Starsector 0.95.1a (Released) Patch Notes
« Reply #862 on: December 20, 2021, 07:39:57 PM »

Why even add unconventional stuff into the game if you are going to remove it if it ever becomes competitive with the "intended" strategies?

There's "competitive" and there's "makes the normal stuff bad". HSA was squarely in the latter category with some weapons - most notably phase lances, yes, though I'd imagine it would also make trouble with some modded weapons, too. The problem isn't the HSA was "competitive", it's the (at least) the Heavy Blaster just about stopped being competitive, and I'd expect some other weapons got stepped on some, too. So: with the previous HSA, we had fewer useful weapons in the pool than we do after the change.
Really? I don't agree with this assessment? HB still has double the DPS, and phase lances 1.2 efficiency isn't even very good against shields. Plus Phase lance + HSA costs a ton of OP and is pretty hard to fit on a lot of ships at all. I really didn't feel that I was restricted in that way.
Logged

Alex

  • Administrator
  • Admiral
  • *****
  • Posts: 23988
    • View Profile
Re: Starsector 0.95.1a (Released) Patch Notes
« Reply #863 on: December 20, 2021, 08:02:32 PM »

Hmm - I mean, fair enough! But it did feel that way to me. Heavy Blaster DPS is just paper DPS most of the time, right - most ships can't support it, which isn't the case for the PL. And then the PL is considerably better DPS-wise in short engagements than the raw numbers seem because it does front-loaded burst damage - e.g. the DPS is almost double if you hang around just long enough for two bursts. And since the flux cost is so much lower, you don't need quite as much in the way of vents/caps, which offsets the cost of HSA, etc. I'm not saying I'm 100% right on this, but just that, yeah, it felt too strong to me. It's much easier to make a flux-light loadout on a hit-and-run high-tech ship with basically all the benefits of having a Heavy Blaster.
Logged

Sly

  • Commander
  • ***
  • Posts: 109
  • Afflicionado
    • View Profile
Re: Starsector 0.95.1a (Released) Patch Notes
« Reply #864 on: December 20, 2021, 08:13:03 PM »

My phase (flag)ship is the Doom, outfitted with 6 antimatter SRM missiles for massive alpha and 2 cryoblasters for mop-up. If HSA is overpowered on phase ships, how do you make a HSA loadout that's better than that for a Doom?

Equip your Doom with a Phase Anchor, HSA, 2x Phase Lances and 4x Rift Lances. If the enemy is clustered, you will destroy them far more quickly. It's clearly dependent on the situation, but the advantage here is that you don't need to wait for the SRMs to reload. Not nearly as safe, though.

"Absurdly overpowered" is something I regret saying, now. Instead, I'd say that it's extremely convenient to have a bursty, pin-point accurate weapon, that deals hard flux damage, instantaneously.
Logged

IonDragonX

  • Admiral
  • *****
  • Posts: 816
    • View Profile
Re: Starsector 0.95.1a (Released) Patch Notes
« Reply #865 on: December 20, 2021, 08:13:17 PM »

I just feel like calling the "can't build it in" approach "heavy handed" is making a mountain out of a a molehill - like... it's not something you were going to do anyway, except to accomplish the thing the change is explicitly meant to prevent.
I get that. I was just expressing my feeling too. The other guy who was replying to my post doesn't represent the way I feel so I'd rather have debate about it without being combined to him, please.
Banning SO from S-mods is the precedent, sure. However, that was for the general purposes of "its to strong to be allowed". Banning Shield Shunt from S-mods is not about the strength of the choice, its about blocking an exploit. Thwarting the Spiffing Brit as it were.
I'd prefer the mutually exclusive route because I can see it in context of the game world.
Spoiler
Player Character: "I want you to put a MSG into that Hound"
Chief Engineer: "Sure boss."
PC: "And then rip it off to slap Shield Shunt on it."
CE: "Howhat now? But why?"
PC: "For the extra armor."
CE: "Why didn't you ask for Heavy Armor in the first place?"
PC: "Not Heavy Armor, the Shield Shunt armor. Like what you did with the Enforcer."
CE: "No, Boss... you're getting it twisted. The Enforcer's shield has external emitter nodes that are replaced with reinforced plating so you don't leave vulnerabilities to Target Analysis. The Hound doesn't have external emitter nodes. The MSG is basically a crude emitter node that we weld on the top of the thing."
PC: "Right. So we slap on the MSG to pull it back off and add the reinforced plating!"
CE: "That's Heavy Armor, Boss..."
[close]
« Last Edit: December 20, 2021, 08:16:15 PM by IonDragonX »
Logged

Alex

  • Administrator
  • Admiral
  • *****
  • Posts: 23988
    • View Profile
Re: Starsector 0.95.1a (Released) Patch Notes
« Reply #866 on: December 20, 2021, 08:20:27 PM »

I get that. I was just expressing my feeling too. The other guy who was replying to my post doesn't represent the way I feel so I'd rather have debate about it without being combined to him, please.

My apologies; I should've split things out more properly.

Banning SO from S-mods is the precedent, sure. However, that was for the general purposes of "its to strong to be allowed". Banning Shield Shunt from S-mods is not about the strength of the choice, its about blocking an exploit. Thwarting the Spiffing Brit as it were.
I'd prefer the mutually exclusive route because I can see it in context of the game world.
Spoiler
Player Character: "I want you to put a MSG into that Hound"
Chief Engineer: "Sure boss."
PC: "And then rip it off to slap Shield Shunt on it."
CE: "Howhat now? But why?"
PC: "For the extra armor."
CE: "Why didn't you ask for Heavy Armor in the first place?"
PC: "Not Heavy Armor, the Shield Shunt armor. Like what you did with the Enforcer."
CE: "No, Boss... you're getting it twisted. The Enforcer's shield has external emitter nodes that are replaced with reinforced plating so you don't leave vulnerabilities to Target Analysis. The Hound doesn't have external emitter nodes. The MSG is basically a crude emitter node that we weld on the top of the thing."
PC: "Right. So we slap on the MSG to pull it back off and add the reinforced plating!"
CE: "That's Heavy Armor, Boss..."
[close]

Haha, I love it! That makes a lot of sense, yeah. I can see converting it over to that if I get a chance :)
Logged

IonDragonX

  • Admiral
  • *****
  • Posts: 816
    • View Profile
Re: Starsector 0.95.1a (Released) Patch Notes
« Reply #867 on: December 20, 2021, 08:27:37 PM »

My apologies; I should've split things out more properly.
Spoiler
Player Character: "I want you to put a MSG into that Hound"
Chief Engineer: "Sure boss."
PC: "And then rip it off to slap Shield Shunt on it."
CE: "Howhat now? But why?"
PC: "For the extra armor."
CE: "Why didn't you ask for Heavy Armor in the first place?"
PC: "Not Heavy Armor, the Shield Shunt armor. Like what you did with the Enforcer."
CE: "No, Boss... you're getting it twisted. The Enforcer's shield has external emitter nodes that are replaced with reinforced plating so you don't leave vulnerabilities to Target Analysis. The Hound doesn't have external emitter nodes. The MSG is basically a crude emitter node that we weld on the top of the thing."
PC: "Right. So we slap on the MSG to pull it back off and add the reinforced plating!"
CE: "That's Heavy Armor, Boss..."
[close]
Haha, I love it! That makes a lot of sense, yeah. I can see converting it over to that if I get a chance :)
Thank you for your consideration. It genuinely makes me feel better. :)
Logged

Alex

  • Administrator
  • Admiral
  • *****
  • Posts: 23988
    • View Profile
Re: Starsector 0.95.1a (Released) Patch Notes
« Reply #868 on: December 20, 2021, 08:28:57 PM »

Thank you for your consideration. It genuinely makes me feel better. :)

<3
Logged

Cyan Leader

  • Admiral
  • *****
  • Posts: 718
    • View Profile
Re: Starsector 0.95.1a (Released) Patch Notes
« Reply #869 on: December 20, 2021, 09:31:26 PM »

Hmm - I mean, fair enough! But it did feel that way to me. Heavy Blaster DPS is just paper DPS most of the time, right - most ships can't support it, which isn't the case for the PL. And then the PL is considerably better DPS-wise in short engagements than the raw numbers seem because it does front-loaded burst damage - e.g. the DPS is almost double if you hang around just long enough for two bursts. And since the flux cost is so much lower, you don't need quite as much in the way of vents/caps, which offsets the cost of HSA, etc. I'm not saying I'm 100% right on this, but just that, yeah, it felt too strong to me. It's much easier to make a flux-light loadout on a hit-and-run high-tech ship with basically all the benefits of having a Heavy Blaster.

Sound like a better nerf for HSA would be to increase the flux consumption of beam weapons, maybe by 100%?
Logged
Pages: 1 ... 56 57 [58] 59 60 ... 72