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 2 3 [4] 5 6 ... 71

Author Topic: Starsector 0.6a (Released) Patch Notes  (Read 553423 times)

JT

  • Commander
  • ***
  • Posts: 129
    • View Profile
Re: Starsector 0.6a (In Development) Patch Notes
« Reply #45 on: March 14, 2013, 09:04:20 AM »

Changes as of March 13, 2013

Ships traveling over their top speed (due to zero-flux coasting, for example) will automatically engage maneuvering thrusters to slow down

Boooo!  >:c  I can't be the only one who actually liked zero-flux coasting.  You even made the AI do it too.

To be honest, I kept kicking myself for forgetting about the zero-flux drift, so this change actually doesn't affect me at all, other than cementing the gameplay mechanic I always followed through sheer ignorance.  For me, holding down W means "mustgofaster,mustgofaster", whereas letting go of W means "okay, time to change strategy" -- so intuitively I would hold down W while in pursuit of an enemy ship, and of course once I began firing, my 0% flux boost would disappear.  So I would need to stop firing and vent flux in order to catch up again -- making a pursuit a deadly game of cat and mouse.

After the battle, I then reflected and thought, "Shoot! [minced from original oath] I could've just drifted and kept firing without slowing down!"

Now, I can hold down W as normal, gaining 0% flux boost, and fire as normal, losing the 0% flux boost, per what I intuitively felt and which strikes me as far more interesting conceptually, even if it does mean that people will need to unlearn some things.


Since the combat in the campaign is getting reworked, is it possible to make AI battles last a few days instead of getting immediately resolved? Like Mount&Blade, you can then come and assist in battles and so on. You could have a small window above showing how the battle is going. Would make the world feel more alive, right now all we see is small coloured circles go *poof* when they fly into eachother.

This actually makes more sense now with the new combat mechanics :)

Interesting.  The problem I see here is that campaign time is galactic -- watch how quickly the days count down on the upper left -- whereas combat time is local -- when was the last time a battle for you lasted for more than 10 minutes?

Also, to be honest, Mount & Blade's battles actually struck me as weird in a quantum sense.  When enemy forces met on the field, it usually degenerated into a quick American football "pile on!", whereas when I met enemy forces on the battlefield, I could use luring tactics to split two enemy forces far enough that they don't reinforce one another, and could then defeat both of them one by one -- and the other force would not have repositioned while I was busy eliminating the other.  In other words, the enemy "fleets" didn't play by the same rules that I did, and I was at an inherent advantage.  It didn't matter how long I took in battle since my battles were instantaneous, but I could always assist my allies in battle because theirs weren't, until/unless I intervened.

That said, from pure look and feel alone, I think Mount & Blade's system is still far more interesting and might be worthwhile to implement even in spite of its realism problems.  Plus, since Alex has control over the engine, who's to say that campaign-level repositioning can't take place *in real time* while a battle is going on, such that allies or enemies can actually be determined to catch up to a battle in progress and then reinforce as necessary?  (The only major problem, of course, is the emphasis on Side A versus Side B, since if Side C is hostile to both or allied to both, it creates a logical inconsistency on who to support and who to attack.  The simple and intelligent solution is simply not to get involved and then to pick at the scraps later, but that's not necessarily very realistic either.)


Quote
Quote from: Alex on March 13, 2013, 07:52:34 PM
Extra CR cost for using missile weapons in combat, based on ammo remaining
Reduced missile ammo at below 30%, missile weapons at 0 ammo at 10%

Anything to counterbalance this? Missiles are not exactly overpowered at the moment, why would I want to choose them after this nerf?

You just destroyed the Valkyrians, their main weapon is missiles.. :'(

Don't be silly. =)

All that needs to be done is to ensure that the Valkyrians have a much better supply chain in campaign mode to maintain their missile loadouts in a realistic manner, and to ramp up the base readiness pool of those ships, which as Alex seems to suggest is definitely configurable on a ship-by-ship basis.
Logged

Jonlissla

  • Captain
  • ****
  • Posts: 258
    • View Profile
Re: Starsector 0.6a (In Development) Patch Notes
« Reply #46 on: March 14, 2013, 09:41:27 AM »

I'm just concern about enemy ships. AI is well known to be trigger happy with missiles. I hope this wont affect him much.

I find it the opposite. Pilum and Salamander missiles are obvious, but I don't see the AI waste Harpoon or Sabot missiles all that often.

Besides, I doubt this change is going to make them useless or something.
Logged

hadesian

  • Admiral
  • *****
  • Posts: 2058
  • It's been one of those days...
    • View Profile
Re: Starsector 0.6a (In Development) Patch Notes
« Reply #47 on: March 14, 2013, 09:44:16 AM »

Still unhappy about the CR nerf to the frigates, with it, I'm not entirely sure what the point is of a Tempest or Hyperion is anymore - fast cap of an objective? Why give the tempests such gorgeous weapon capabilities if they'll just randomly derp half way through a battle? The Hyperion? Same, but both worse and better - it kinda makes sense since it's an experimental frigate and balances out the 15FP and teleporter, but the Tempest nerf I cannot understand... of course, I'd shut up if the price tags of the frigates really represented this.

I guess the saddest thing will be for me, personally, is this kills in one fell swoop any hope of ever creating Wanderer in a mod. And that pretty much reflects a lot of the other frigates I've seen in mods, Antediluvians  will suffer horrifically from this and that's the fastest example I can muster.

But everything else? I like. I like CR as a concept, I really do. It ties this nice little link between having a percentage value of dead hull and seeing the effects of that dead hull, but this I cannot explain. Think of the Hound, that certainly looks like the kind of ship you'd spend an age flying around in and kiting and it'd do it's job all the same while you do it. Now? Nada. Can't be done.
Your choice Alex, and I may not necessarily agree with part of it, but that doesn't mean you'll change it because one person says 'I don't like it.' The most I can do is let you see where I stand on this. I repeat my old argument, CR in relation to frigates (and now destroyers) favours an aggressive, no holds bared frigates and destroyers to cap cruisers versus cruisers versus capital ships versus capital ships versus fighters versus fighters (mouthful!) action. And that's something I never thought I'd see Starf-sector do. It sounds, in principle, like it'll make combat much more arcadey. I played defensive, it's how I play these games. I use fast frigates to move my lines around rapidly and keep people moving. Now, I can't. I'm going to have to save for a cruiser immediately. I'll never be able to build a frigate fleet. I'll never be able to build a destroyer fleet. I'll have to adapt, and that's something I feel I simply should not have to do.
Logged
Changes as of May 24, 2013
  • Reinvented Starsector.
  • That is all.

FloW

  • Captain
  • ****
  • Posts: 282
    • View Profile
Re: Starsector 0.6a (In Development) Patch Notes
« Reply #48 on: March 14, 2013, 09:52:57 AM »

Still unhappy about the CR nerf to the frigates, with it, I'm not entirely sure what the point is of a Tempest or Hyperion is anymore - fast cap of an objective? Why give the tempests such gorgeous weapon capabilities if they'll just randomly derp half way through a battle? The Hyperion? Same, but both worse and better - it kinda makes sense since it's an experimental frigate and balances out the 15FP and teleporter, but the Tempest nerf I cannot understand... of course, I'd shut up if the price tags of the frigates really represented this.

I guess the saddest thing will be for me, personally, is this kills in one fell swoop any hope of ever creating Wanderer in a mod. And that pretty much reflects a lot of the other frigates I've seen in mods, Antediluvians  will suffer horrifically from this and that's the fastest example I can muster.

But everything else? I like. I like CR as a concept, I really do. It ties this nice little link between having a percentage value of dead hull and seeing the effects of that dead hull, but this I cannot explain. Think of the Hound, that certainly looks like the kind of ship you'd spend an age flying around in and kiting and it'd do it's job all the same while you do it. Now? Nada. Can't be done.
Your choice Alex, and I may not necessarily agree with part of it, but that doesn't mean you'll change it because one person says 'I don't like it.' The most I can do is let you see where I stand on this. I repeat my old argument, CR in relation to frigates (and now destroyers) favours an aggressive, no holds bared frigates and destroyers to cap cruisers versus cruisers versus capital ships versus capital ships versus fighters versus fighters (mouthful!) action. And that's something I never thought I'd see Starf-sector do. It sounds, in principle, like it'll make combat much more arcadey. I played defensive, it's how I play these games. I use fast frigates to move my lines around rapidly and keep people moving. Now, I can't. I'm going to have to save for a cruiser immediately. I'll never be able to build a frigate fleet. I'll never be able to build a destroyer fleet. I'll have to adapt, and that's something I feel I simply should not have to do.

Think of the change as a challenge. To be a good commander you have to adapt to your surroundings. Also we have yet to try the final implementation of CR. Frigates will be units you just cannot spam anymore. Instead of fielding all 12 frigates of a frigate fleet you will have to fight with 4 at a time, isolate your enemies and rip them apart.
Logged
"The point is, you see, that there is no point in driving yourself mad trying to stop yourself going mad. You might just as well give in and save your sanity for later.''
- Ford Prefect, creator of the giraffe; a very long time ago

Uomoz

  • Admiral
  • *****
  • Posts: 2663
  • 'womo'dz
    • View Profile
Re: Starsector 0.6a (In Development) Patch Notes
« Reply #49 on: March 14, 2013, 10:14:36 AM »

Xareh, even playing defensively, you won't reach the frigate dead point: it's just for the kite strategies.
Logged

Wyvern

  • Admiral
  • *****
  • Posts: 3786
    • View Profile
Re: Starsector 0.6a (In Development) Patch Notes
« Reply #50 on: March 14, 2013, 10:23:31 AM »

Still working on map generation, probably in about the same locations though. Basically, somewhat random but not to a point where the objective placement is going to win or lose the battle for you.

Objective placement rarely does... but nebula placement already can!  Drop a random nebula on your spawn point, and suddenly it's vastly more difficult to get to nodes, deploy new ships, etc.  And vice versa.  May be less of an issue with being able to deploy more stuff up front, but, at least in the current missions, (most notably "the last hurrah"), the random nebula placement can easily swing the battle in either direction.
Logged
Wyvern is 100% correct about the math.

sirboomalot

  • Admiral
  • *****
  • Posts: 596
  • Boom
    • View Profile
Re: Starsector 0.6a (In Development) Patch Notes
« Reply #51 on: March 14, 2013, 10:27:07 AM »

Still unhappy about the CR nerf to the frigates, with it, I'm not entirely sure what the point is of a Tempest or Hyperion is anymore - fast cap of an objective? Why give the tempests such gorgeous weapon capabilities if they'll just randomly derp half way through a battle? The Hyperion? Same, but both worse and better - it kinda makes sense since it's an experimental frigate and balances out the 15FP and teleporter, but the Tempest nerf I cannot understand... of course, I'd shut up if the price tags of the frigates really represented this.

I guess the saddest thing will be for me, personally, is this kills in one fell swoop any hope of ever creating Wanderer in a mod. And that pretty much reflects a lot of the other frigates I've seen in mods, Antediluvians  will suffer horrifically from this and that's the fastest example I can muster.

But everything else? I like. I like CR as a concept, I really do. It ties this nice little link between having a percentage value of dead hull and seeing the effects of that dead hull, but this I cannot explain. Think of the Hound, that certainly looks like the kind of ship you'd spend an age flying around in and kiting and it'd do it's job all the same while you do it. Now? Nada. Can't be done.
Your choice Alex, and I may not necessarily agree with part of it, but that doesn't mean you'll change it because one person says 'I don't like it.' The most I can do is let you see where I stand on this. I repeat my old argument, CR in relation to frigates (and now destroyers) favours an aggressive, no holds bared frigates and destroyers to cap cruisers versus cruisers versus capital ships versus capital ships versus fighters versus fighters (mouthful!) action. And that's something I never thought I'd see Starf-sector do. It sounds, in principle, like it'll make combat much more arcadey. I played defensive, it's how I play these games. I use fast frigates to move my lines around rapidly and keep people moving. Now, I can't. I'm going to have to save for a cruiser immediately. I'll never be able to build a frigate fleet. I'll never be able to build a destroyer fleet. I'll have to adapt, and that's something I feel I simply should not have to do.

Think of the change as a challenge. To be a good commander you have to adapt to your surroundings. Also we have yet to try the final implementation of CR. Frigates will be units you just cannot spam anymore. Instead of fielding all 12 frigates of a frigate fleet you will have to fight with 4 at a time, isolate your enemies and rip them apart.

I have to say, four frigates for a frigate fleet simply is not acceptable. We do not have the control required for that to work, and the enemy AI is too smart to get isolated that easy. As somebody who prefers frigate swarms over any other type of fleet, I very much share xareh's concerns. I do however believe that Alex knows what he is doing and will be able to find a better solution than to eliminate a way of playing.
Logged

Alex

  • Administrator
  • Admiral
  • *****
  • Posts: 23988
    • View Profile
Re: Starsector 0.6a (In Development) Patch Notes
« Reply #52 on: March 14, 2013, 10:45:49 AM »

@Pentakill: Right; what others have said. I'll just add that I'm very much aware of the dangers of tinkering, and this is most assuredly not that. I appreciate your candor and concern, though.

Soooooooo, with this update, what will mod ships from the previous versions have their CR set to? Is it an individual rating for each for each ship in the .csv, or it it determined by ship class/tech level? Will non-updated mods still work?

They're individual ratings per-ship, but there are some reasonablish derived defaults if those columns are missing.


Since the combat in the campaign is getting reworked, is it possible to make AI battles last a few days instead of getting immediately resolved? Like Mount&Blade, you can then come and assist in battles and so on. You could have a small window above showing how the battle is going. Would make the world feel more alive, right now all we see are small coloured circles going *poof* when they fly into eachother.

I'll just reply to this (instead of quoting lots of other posts on the same subject). I'm definitely not going to do this now, but might take another look at it later. One of the reasons is that it's decidedly non-trivial in many aspects, both UI and mechanics-wise. So, not something I want to devote that much time to now, until the rest of the campaign takes shape.

edit: Oh, and Alex NOW is right time to give us that 0.6a version to test it for you  ;D  We gonna find bugs... and stuff... scout honor!  ::)   It's more of us then you, we will test it faster  ;D

Nice try :)


Also i think it would be better to remove battle objectives completely.

agree
+1 I guess.

I like what they do for making battles a little more strategic and spread out, rather than one giant furball.


I'm sick in bed at the moment and this made me feel much better :)

I've got questions, though!

I've got answers! :)

Maybe it is because of my condition, but I don't really get it. How can there be several head-on engagements? The "After a head on engagement"-options only seem to allow for an escape scenario next (assuming that "harry" is a pure text scenario).

After you pick one of those options, the fleets are back in stand-off range, and can choose to engage or disengage. But yes, generally there'd only be one head-on engagement because, unless the enemy is suicidal, if they retreated from the field once, they're not likely to want to reengage.


Is it correct that ship deployment will no longer be staggered? Is there anything preventing us from deploying the whole fleet at once (aside from CR considerations vs. inferior opponents)?

Isn't that a huge blow to the usefulness of fast, small ships?

Correct. You can deploy everything (provided it's still within the battle size - 200 total for both sides by default).

A lot of fleet (er, "deployment") point values have been adjusted - some frigates are a little cheaper, some larger ships more expensive. I don't think it's a huge blow - capturing objectives is still important, and small ships have much more important role in escape scenarios.


Anything to counterbalance this? Missiles are not exactly overpowered at the moment, why would I want to choose them after this nerf?

Here's how it works: say you have 10 OP worth of missile weapons on a 50 OP ship, and that ship has a base deployment cost of 25% CR. If you fired all the missiles in an engagement, you'd get an extra 10/50 * 25% = 5% CR loss.

So, not a game-changer for anything but dedicated missile boats. And those could have a reduced base deployment cost to counterbalance this. It's not inherently a nerf. If missile-heavy ships get a reduced deployment CR cost as a result, it would actually be a bonus.


@Xareh: Right. Two points (one of which I think I brought up in the CR thread...)

It's too early to make these kinds of conclusions about how it plays out. All in all, the higher CR regeneration rate could make frigates more powerful in the grand scheme of things, even accounting for the in-combat drain (which takes a while to kick in).

I'll have to adapt, and that's something I feel I simply should not have to do.

I strongly disagree. The game's still in development, and things change. Not everyone is going to like all of the changes, and I have to be ok with that. So; my apologies if you don't like something, but I have to do what I think is best long-term. Still open to feedback, of course, and did read what you said carefully.

As somebody who prefers frigate swarms over any other type of fleet, I very much share xareh's concerns. I do however believe that Alex knows what he is doing and will be able to find a better solution than to eliminate a way of playing.

FWIW, I suspect a frigate swarm would still be viable. Although it might run into issues with sustainable logistics, due to limited cargo space - frigates are, after all, not intended for lengthy tours of duty without some support.

Anyway, it needs more playtesting. I obviously don't want to make frigates useless, so let's all work from that as a base assumption :)

Objective placement rarely does... but nebula placement already can!  Drop a random nebula on your spawn point, and suddenly it's vastly more difficult to get to nodes, deploy new ships, etc.  And vice versa.  May be less of an issue with being able to deploy more stuff up front, but, at least in the current missions, (most notably "the last hurrah"), the random nebula placement can easily swing the battle in either direction.

Right, fair point.

(What I meant was IF objective placement was completely random, it would also occasionally decide battles - not that it already does.)
Logged

hadesian

  • Admiral
  • *****
  • Posts: 2058
  • It's been one of those days...
    • View Profile
Re: Starsector 0.6a (In Development) Patch Notes
« Reply #53 on: March 14, 2013, 11:40:10 AM »

@Xareh: Right. Two points (one of which I think I brought up in the CR thread...)

It's too early to make these kinds of conclusions about how it plays out. All in all, the higher CR regeneration rate could make frigates more powerful in the grand scheme of things, even accounting for the in-combat drain (which takes a while to kick in).

I'll have to adapt, and that's something I feel I simply should not have to do.

I strongly disagree. The game's still in development, and things change. Not everyone is going to like all of the changes, and I have to be ok with that. So; my apologies if you don't like something, but I have to do what I think is best long-term. Still open to feedback, of course, and did read what you said carefully.
It certainly is too early to make these kinds of conclusions, though I was not conclusively concluding, I was asking a question. Numerous questions. Most of which were, designed and phrased, even if not neccesarily marked with correct punctuation, to be treated and answered as if they were a question. 
And what I said about adapting is not at all that my current playstyle revolves around say a gimmick, exploit or inherent feature of the game, but the broadness of defending and modifying my defence with frigates. The broadness of defending. That is all.
Logged
Changes as of May 24, 2013
  • Reinvented Starsector.
  • That is all.

Gothars

  • Global Moderator
  • Admiral
  • *****
  • Posts: 4403
  • Eschewing obfuscatory verbosity.
    • View Profile
Re: Starsector 0.6a (In Development) Patch Notes
« Reply #54 on: March 14, 2013, 12:12:30 PM »

It's not inherently a nerf. If missile-heavy ships get a reduced deployment CR cost as a result, it would actually be a bonus.

Mh, I see. Still, if I am low on OP for a (non missile-boat) build missiles are among the first things I drop, this will encourage it further. Maybe there could be additional missiles if the CR is at a very high level to provide some symmetry?

Correct. You can deploy everything

I guess I'll have to wait and see how this plays out, but it sounds as if two of the currently most important tactical elements are dropped, struggle for (initial) FP dominance and deployment order. Is there, well, anything new instead? I don't see any important tactical decisions at the beginning of a battle now...


Extra CR cost for suffering a flameout of weapons being disabled by damage

"or" maybe?
Anyway, does this include EMP damage? If yes, that might almost make it feasible to wear down a superior enemy low-tech fleet with Ion cannons over time :)
Logged
The game was completed 8 years ago and we get a free expansion every year.

Arranging holidays in an embrace with the Starsector is priceless.

sdmike1

  • Admiral
  • *****
  • Posts: 820
  • Dyslexics of the world, untie!
    • View Profile
Re: Starsector 0.6a (In Development) Patch Notes
« Reply #55 on: March 14, 2013, 12:20:54 PM »

It's not inherently a nerf. If missile-heavy ships get a reduced deployment CR cost as a result, it would actually be a bonus.

Mh, I see. Still, if I am low on OP for a (non missile-boat) build missiles are among the first things I drop, this will encourage it further. Maybe there could be additional missiles if the CR is at a very high level to provide some symmetry?

This is a very solid idea, another interesting idea would be missiles getting a bouns to there lowest stat (proper maintenance we can call it :)) if the CR is very high

Alex

  • Administrator
  • Admiral
  • *****
  • Posts: 23988
    • View Profile
Re: Starsector 0.6a (In Development) Patch Notes
« Reply #56 on: March 14, 2013, 12:26:12 PM »

It's not inherently a nerf. If missile-heavy ships get a reduced deployment CR cost as a result, it would actually be a bonus.

Mh, I see. Still, if I am low on OP for a (non missile-boat) build missiles are among the first things I drop, this will encourage it further. Maybe there could be additional missiles if the CR is at a very high level to provide some symmetry?

Hmm. I don't know, I already like missiles. Especially with the right skills, they're devastating - one of my favorite setups is an Enforcer with 4x Harpoon racks, Expanded Missile Racks, and maxed out Missile Specialization/Ordnance Expertise. You can knock out a large number of ships so quickly with that.

If missiles do turn out to be too weak after the change, that could be rectified by making them cost less OP or do more damage or have more skills improving them. There's lots in play here besides the CR mechanic, so there are lots of ways this could be adjusted.

Another option (that does involve CR mechanics directly) is to switch it around and give missile-using ships some CR back if they *didn't* fire the missiles.

Correct. You can deploy everything

I guess I'll have to wait and see how this plays out, but it sounds as if two of the currently most important tactical elements are dropped, struggle for (initial) FP dominance and deployment order. Is there, well, anything new instead? I don't see any important tactical decisions at the beginning of a battle now...

Well, the struggle for initial FP dominance - while interesting - also leads to a degenerate battle state where one side (usually the player's) has an overwhelming advantage that renders the rest of the battle moot. So, while I did like the mechanics leading into it, that downside also goes away.

The tactical decision now is just how much/what composition you want to deploy. You're basically betting what you think you can handle.


Extra CR cost for suffering a flameout of weapons being disabled by damage
"or" maybe?
Anyway, does this include EMP damage?

Only indirectly, because EMP tends to disable weapons/engines when it hits.
Logged

Thaago

  • Global Moderator
  • Admiral
  • *****
  • Posts: 7174
  • Harpoon Affectionado
    • View Profile
Re: Starsector 0.6a (In Development) Patch Notes
« Reply #57 on: March 14, 2013, 12:34:44 PM »

Looks good! Question: will the harry and CR mechanic replace the semi-random damage currently being applied to retreating ships?


My 2 cents on frigates: I think after this update they will be more useful because of the escape mechanic and their boosted speed. With enemies starting 50% of the way up the map, I think its going to be very important to engage them quickly and rob them of their +50 nf bonus, letting larger ships/bombers catch up to retreating enemies. Add to this that frigates are getting a speed boost, so will be extra survivable and deadly (while they last).

Tactics idea now that frigates are faster - keep a cluster of frigates in reserve to ambush enemies that try to cap one of your points.

I like the idea of missiles getting an ammo bonus at very high CR - that would give an incentive to have elite crew etc on missile support boats.
Logged

Alex

  • Administrator
  • Admiral
  • *****
  • Posts: 23988
    • View Profile
Re: Starsector 0.6a (In Development) Patch Notes
« Reply #58 on: March 14, 2013, 12:41:08 PM »

Looks good! Question: will the harry and CR mechanic replace the semi-random damage currently being applied to retreating ships?

Yes. Random post-battle damage is entirely gone now.

That's one of the things I like about CR - it allows a more fine-grained expression of "something bad happened to your ship" than bashing it with a space-hammer.


I like the idea of missiles getting an ammo bonus at very high CR - that would give an incentive to have elite crew etc on missile support boats.

Hmm, that's an interesting consequence to that idea. But - as the missile spec skill demonstrates - adding ammo to missiles is a little awkward due to such a high ammo count variance.
Logged

LazyWizard

  • Global Moderator
  • Admiral
  • *****
  • Posts: 1363
    • View Profile
    • GitHub Profile
Re: Starsector 0.6a (In Development) Patch Notes
« Reply #59 on: March 14, 2013, 12:45:22 PM »

Is it wrong that I looked at the Modding section of the patch notes first? :D

For BoundsAPI, if I'm reading this right the process to add to a bounds is to save the current list of segments, clear it, then rebuild using addSegment() with the new segments included? Or will the game still function correctly if you just add another polygon alongside the existing bounds?

Could you explain SpriteAPI? You mention custom UI panels, does that mean we will be able to create buttons/input boxes alongside these sprites, or is it display-only?

Extra CR cost for suffering a flameout of weapons being disabled by damage
"or" maybe?
Anyway, does this include EMP damage?

Only indirectly, because EMP tends to disable weapons/engines when it hits.

Will low CR improve capture chances (aside from the existing mechanic of undeployable ships being auto-captured/sabataged)? There have been suggestions on making EMP increase capture chance, and with the mechanic above it seems natural to include it. :)
Logged
Pages: 1 2 3 [4] 5 6 ... 71