Print

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

[BigBrainEnergy]

While I have made this suggestion in the replies of another thread, I've been thinking about it and realized this fits even better than I realized at the time. While the industry tree does have some combat potential, it's also the only tree there for players who want to roleplay a merchant or explorer instead of a mercenary type of character. It does have some combat bonuses between the piloted ship skills and top tier skills, but that's not the focus of the tree. This is why I think hull restoration giving CR clashes a little bit with other aspects of the tree, because the bonus is almost exclusively useful for combat.

Ultimately starsector's strongest selling point is its combat, and even if you aren't focused on combat it is going to be part of your playthrough one way or another. It's fair to say that hull restoration is working fine as is, and it doesn't *need* to be changed, but consider if instead of CR it gave you a 3rd s-mod. This is still very useful for combat focused players, but is also useful for a non-combat approach due to s-mods letting you go over the normal limit for logistics hullmods. At first glance it seems like a great idea! It's thematically fitting for the industry tree and is flexible enough to be useful for both combat focused and non-combat focused playstyles.

Also, I believe part of the intention with the current design is that industry is meant to allow you to field a "wider" fleet that can afford to take more losses. With derelict operations this is obvious, and with hull restoration it's a bit less obvious, but you'll notice the CR bonus does not have a dp cap the way crew training does. This allows you to have ships over the normal 240 dp limit with full CR, and the expectation is that you're going to lose some ships but that's okay because you have replacements you can send and the d-mods will be repaired for free anyways. I understand this, but my issue is that derelict ops is already appealing for the "quantity" mindset, whereas hull restoration cleaning up your hulls appeals to a more "quality" oriented mindset.

This does leave an open question about what to do with botb, but if I get started on that it will devolve into rambling about reworking the whole skill tree and I'd rather keep this suggestion concise.

[Vanshilar]

Yeah I mentioned this last year about skill changes, and the reasoning is pretty much the same:

I would say, have BotB give the deployment bonus and the +5% CR per s-mod, while Hull Restoration gives the 3rd s-mod instead of +5% CR per s-mod. That conceptually fits better with what each skill tree is supposed to be about, and splits up the "overly convenient" benefits of deploying more ships and an additional s-mod into different capstones.

BotB is already very useful for the beginning deployment bonus, although I think it by itself is somewhat too light for a capstone. So the "other" effect could be more minor. I figured 5% CR per s-mod would make it interesting since min-maxers would still have to take both BotB and HR to actually get 100% CR without getting Combat Endurance and Crew Training. Thematically leadership giving more crew performance fits with what CR represents, while a third s-mod is more of a production thing that would fit the Industry tree better.

[Bungee_man]

In keeping with an earlier suggestion I made for Support Doctrine to let the player deploy a small handful of un-officered ships for free, Best of the Best could instead give the player a discount on deploying the flagship, or something else that provides its benefits when the player's ship is deployed to support a large fleet rather than as its own element (a buff to the nearest friendly ship of the same size class, with a range cap?). That way, each tree has a clear choice of playstyles for the capstone.

Red: "The player is useful because he knows which targets to burst down; Pegasus flagship" versus "The player is useful because he can position himself well and make the best use of movement abilities; Odyssey flagship"

Blue: "I like the blue tree because it opens up new mechanics" versus "I like the blue tree because it provides broad, versatile buffs that support the rest of my build"

Yellow: "I want to be able to take losses occasionally and recover from them" versus "I want to be able to build my fleet out of things I've just finished blowing up"

and now, Green: "I want to play the game like an RTS, and could use a few extra 'hands' to manipulate the battlefield with" versus "I want a strong anvil that can take care of itself while I serve as the hammer, and want it to be relatively low-maintenance so that I can focus on my part of the fight."

[BigBrainEnergy]

BotB is already very useful for the beginning deployment bonus, although I think it by itself is somewhat too light for a capstone. So the "other" effect could be more minor. I figured 5% CR per s-mod would make it interesting since min-maxers would still have to take both BotB and HR to actually get 100% CR without getting Combat Endurance and Crew Training. Thematically leadership giving more crew performance fits with what CR represents, while a third s-mod is more of a production thing that would fit the Industry tree better.

I think that if we're going to have a fleetwide CR bonus besides crew training, then it really shouldn't be in the leadership tree because it would feel like it has too much of a monopoly on the mechanic. We have combat endurance in red, crew training in green, and then one of the other two trees should get the last bonus. Cybernetic augmentation for example could donate it's current +/- damage bonus to BOTB (thematically fitting but a bit weird in a tree with no combat skills, although that could be spun as a positive) and instead it could give 15% cr to ships with officers.

[Lawrence Master-blaster]

I like it thematically, but real talk: Would you really waste 3-4 skillpoints in the Industry tree just to get 3rd S-mod on your ships?

Or would this quickly turn into "welp, I guess my ships only have 2 S-mods now"

[BigBrainEnergy]

If I pick up ordnance expertise and polarized armor along the way, yeah I would! Not every time, but that's kind of the point: you almost make it sound like grabbing a 3rd s-mod should be something automatic, but it should be build dependent. Some s-mod bonuses are really good, and the difference between stacking 2 of them and 3 of them can be surprisingly impactful. I can get CR from other places, but that 3rd s-mod I can only get from one place.

[SCC]

The issue with BotB giving bonuses for flagship skills is that Leadership itself has no flagship skills and it doesn't have many skills that are useful for your flagship specifically (unlike Phase Coil Tuning or Neural Link). It might not matter much because of how powerful officers are for majority of playstyles, but it would suck to lose the one strong non-phase ship flagship playstyle we have now.

[Megas]

CR either needs to be either in Technology or Industry... or maybe Combat since it is only one guy vs. the whole fleet, but Crew Training and Hull Restoration gives 100% CR to non-officer ships.  Hmmm...

I like it thematically, but real talk: Would you really waste 3-4 skillpoints in the Industry tree just to get 3rd S-mod on your ships?

If it makes Industry more useful for endgame, yes.

After the nerf the Ordnance Expertise, taking Industry feels bad at endgame.  Hull Restoration is nice (I like its QoL features) but taking a non-combat skill between that and tier 2 feels awful (even if I like Industrial Planning for no AI core runs), and Hull Restoration does not give enough combat power to be worth eating a non-combat skill in tier 3 in endgame.

If Industrial Planning stays, I like to see a better player-only bonus for taking it, ideally a combat power.  +50% production is maybe useful once or twice in a given game at best before endgame.  I would love to see the 3rd s-mod in Industrial Planning but that would make it too easy to get (and player would probably just go get Derelict Ops for capstone).

[FooF]

I was going to suggest +1 S-mod goes in Industrial Planning. The thing is, if you do get it early, who cares? What are you going to do: dump 3 s-mods into a Destroyer? It also makes Industrial Planning worthwhile on a few levels and not just for Colonies. For a T3 skill, I think it’s fair.

That still leaves BotB without a capstone perk. I posted this elsewhere but let the buff be +10% effectiveness of all player/officer base skills (not Elite perks). Doesn’t seem like a lot at an individual level but added up over 8-10 officers times 5-6 skills (+flagship), that amounts to a lot of fleetwide bonuses. I think it also reinforces that your officers are better than equivalent level ones with the same skills.

[Megas]

I was going to suggest +1 S-mod goes in Industrial Planning. The thing is, if you do get it early, who cares? What are you going to do: dump 3 s-mods into a Destroyer? It also makes Industrial Planning worthwhile on a few levels and not just for Colonies. For a T3 skill, I think it’s fair.

It is not so much early as the ease it can be taken.  Almost every build will have Industry 3 for that third s-mod if Industrial Planning gets it, which is less points spent than for a capstone.

If Industrial Planning got the third s-mod, then maybe it could become a capstone and demote Hull Restoration to tier 3 (without the CR), but Hull Restoration probably has too much of an economic impact pre-endgame to be worth less than a capstone.  Containment Procedures was nerfed, after all.

Is third s-mod alone too powerful for anything less than capstone?  (It alone is not good enough for a skill because it requires story point spent like old tier 3 Cybernetics.)  Then again, if three s-mod enemies become more common, maybe third s-mod could be more accessible, or just have the default be three s-mods and replace that +1 s-mod with another for BotB or whatever skill gets it.

[FooF]

I wouldn’t call it “ease” necessarily because you’re putting 3 points into Industry instead of 3 points elsewhere. Granted, I often spring for Ordinance Expertise so Industrial Planning is only 1 skill away but unless I’m actually going down the Industry tree, I avoid it if I can. 

An extra S-mod is powerful but divorced from BotB and Leadership, it’s a totally different animal to me.

[Vanshilar]

I think that if we're going to have a fleetwide CR bonus besides crew training, then it really shouldn't be in the leadership tree because it would feel like it has too much of a monopoly on the mechanic. We have combat endurance in red, crew training in green, and then one of the other two trees should get the last bonus. Cybernetic augmentation for example could donate it's current +/- damage bonus to BOTB (thematically fitting but a bit weird in a tree with no combat skills, although that could be spun as a positive) and instead it could give 15% cr to ships with officers.

Yeah all good points. Seems like there are quite a few players who are on board with putting the 3rd s-mod onto Hull Restoration (or some other Industry capstone, or the Industry tree in general), which makes sense to me. Then it's a matter of what to put for the leadership capstone (alongside the extra deployment) and then for the tech capstone, to adjust things to be "about as strong".

[BigBrainEnergy]

As is I'm pretty happy with the other top tier skills, both the tech skills in particular feel like solid choices. Yes people hype up cybernetic augmentation but I suspect that's largely "new toy" syndrome. I personally use it a lot because I like going into the tech tree but prefer human ships to AI ships, so it's the natural choice. In terms of power there's a lot you can squeeze out of automated ships that puts it on a reasonably close level even if the balance isn't perfect. Some of the bonuses could be shuffled around but I don't feel too strongly about any of that besides the 3rd s-mod skill (which should absolutely be part of a capstone, I think it's just too impactful to be any lower than that).

The only other capstone I would look at is support doctrine, but I honestly need to test it more before making any strong statements.

As a side note, you could change the name "hull restoration" to "hull customization" or something along those lines, but neither one feels like it would quite cover the scope of what the skill does if this change goes through. "Hull mastery" would be accurate but kind of odd. Actually, it kind of reminds me of this tv show where they would take someone's old beat up car and totally revamp it... not simply restoring the damage, but adding a lot of custom work to turn it into a really impressive vehicle. I think it was called "pimp my ride" or something like that. That's the kind of expertise that the name would have to imply, not only restoring or customizing, but an expert in both.

[Lawrence Master-blaster]

If I pick up ordnance expertise and polarized armor along the way, yeah I would! Not every time, but that's kind of the point: you almost make it sound like grabbing a 3rd s-mod should be something automatic, but it should be build dependent.

Yeah, but any build that uses Industry skill line is automatically bad. Moving 3rd S-mod to Hull Restoration won't change that.