Print

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

[Megas]

That skill already exists, it's called "Containment Procedures". You can find it in Tier 3 of Industry tree

Yes, and, even bundled with a bunch of other small logistics buffs, it doesn't ever really get taken.

For me, I do not take it because I want Industrial Planning more to keep up with human admins.  (IP should be tier 1 or a quest/crisis reward.)  Though it stinks being forced to take a non-combat skill to get an Industry capstone.

If Industrial Planning was not there, and I still needed a non-combat pre-req for Hull Restoration/Derelict Ops., I would take Containment Procedures over Makeshift Supplies.  I like easier e-burn and the extra fuel range.  For tier 3 Industry, #1 is Industrial Planning, #2 Containment Procedures, #3 is Makeshift Supplies.  But all of them are kind of lame.  Some should be axed (as normal skills) and replaced with real combat skills like in Technology, and any survivors moved to tier 1 where Bulk Transport and Field Repairs are.

[Bungee_man]

Yes, I think it would be interesting if there were a little more overlap between campaign layer things and combat things, the way insulated engines increases engine health. As it is, there's little reason not to have spec out of any industry skills later on, unless you have no interest in piloting a ship manually. If they came bundled with something that served a purpose in combat - even if not as direct a role as the red or blue trees - they'd be more interesting to consider, rather than a binary choice of "I'm not interested in the red tree, so I'll take the yellow tree, I guess" or "The yellow tree is the least useful in battle, so I'll ignore it in favor of the other three".

Ditto for some logistics hullmods - I've thought for a while that militarized subsystems should do more to make a ship into an ad-hoc warship than just making it a little faster and lower-profile on the campaign layer in exchange for a massive OP cost (which, ironically, means that civilian ships used in combat are better off without it).

[Killer of Fate]

It'd be funny if we reduced the amount of crew available on planets to a number low enough for players to actually have trouble getting enough people to man their ships if they are too haphazard with human casualties.

Something to consider when making the economy harder I suppose. After all this could make getting Capital Ships too difficult.

[Twilight Sentinel]

I don't really think that, "This logistics bonus is useless for the player, therefore any ship that includes it is pointless to add to the game.' is a good argument against adding a new ship.  The game already has lots of ships that are basically worthless for the player, however they still add variety to enemy fleets (see pirate frigates and a lot of the derelicts).  Plus even if the hull mod isn't that valuable, it still adds flavor and the ship itself could be useful even if the built-in hull mod is not.

[Candesce]

Yes, and, even bundled with a bunch of other small logistics buffs, it doesn't ever really get taken.

I take it whenever I take an Industrial capstone.

... Which isn't that often, admittedly.

Bumping the production on personally-held planets is just cash, in the end. And there's plenty of ways to get THAT.

[Phenir]

It'd be funny if we reduced the amount of crew available on planets to a number low enough for players to actually have trouble getting enough people to man their ships if they are too haphazard with human casualties.

Something to consider when making the economy harder I suppose. After all this could make getting Capital Ships too difficult.

Good way to nerf low tech.

[Killer of Fate]

It'd be funny if we reduced the amount of crew available on planets to a number low enough for players to actually have trouble getting enough people to man their ships if they are too haphazard with human casualties.

Something to consider when making the economy harder I suppose. After all this could make getting Capital Ships too difficult.

Good way to nerf low tech.

Yeah, that's why it's a bad idea.
Invictus is already bad enough for being the same DP cost as the Paragon and yet being so restricted in many ways. Adding the pain of having to go around the entire Persean Sector to get enough crew to power it would be a nightmare...

Generally, I have already stated this a few times, so you might have already hear me say it. If I were to ever nerf the economy and make having crew punishing, I would halve the crew requirements and max crew amount for Invictus, on top of adding buffs that would help it out compete against other older capital ships in the game.
Mostly restoring it to pre-nerf flux stats.
I would also restore Pegasus to its original 50 movement speed... Etc. etc.

So, yeah... Highly experimental changes that will most likely never find themselves in vanilla Starsector.

ps. Hmmmmmph... I need to find time to replay vanilla Starsector, and see if I'm actually right about Invictus being as bad as I remember it was. It definitely feels like it in NPC hands.

[Farya]

Actually it might be interesting to have a hullmod similar to Expanded Deck Crews but for Invictus solely - you can run it with smaller skeleton crew, or you can have lots of additional people here and there to improve it's stats. Though it could also be interesting for some other ships that have lots of extra crew capacity like Apogee or Venture.