And the flare thing, thank you so much.
It was an oversight not to have that in the first place, thanks for bringing it to my attention!
Looks pretty solid! Too bad no fighter wing changes happened, especially in terms of ship system usage or AI...
Well, these aren't the full notes. I expect to at least look at the fighter AI - improvements aside, there seems to be at least one legitimate bug with it.
Umm... any change you know exactly what else is going to be added? Economy? Don't gotta answer if you don't know!
I wouldn't expect anything earth-shaking or major for 0.6.2a, though. It's mostly a cleanup effort.
So ships no longer have a maximum amount of supplies they can use to repair per day? Does that mean that if I had a solo ship with a maxed out logistics capacity and maxed emergency repairs stat, that I could almost instantly repair a ship from near destruction to max hull/armor?
yes, In practice though, about the best you could do is fully fix up a wrecked destroyer in a day or so, according to the blog post
Right. If you've got, say, a lone Onslaught, and maxed out logistics and emergency repairs, then you're probably looking at about 8 days (and more supplies than it can reasonably carry alone) to repair it from 0 to full. And if you've got more supplies, then being over-capacity eats into the repair rate. So, in this case, it's a good deal faster than it used to be, but it's still not *that* fast.
It's one of those things where it seems to, at first glance, produce unreasonable results, but almost entirely doesn't. I'm sure it will in a *few* cases, but even then it's still marginally believable and more than worth the drastic reduction in needless complexity.
- Frigates: "peak active time" will continue to count down while any enemy ship is within visual range of the frigate
Oops, that shouldn't be there. Was obviated by the line-of-sight change.
- Frigates: "peak active time" will continue to count down while any enemy ship is within visual range of the frigate
- Reduced peak active time for frigates (generally by about a minute, less/more at the low/high ends of the spectrum)
- Halved deployment cost and CR recovery rate (i.e. supply cost and recovery time remain the same, more deployments are possible)
Not too fond of these changes, especially with the current supply system.
Edit: To clarify, I feel as if there is too much reliance on a single resource to do everything, and everything you do affect it. Instead of having crewmembers use a seperate resource called "provisions" or something, they also consume supplies.
I think you forgot the most important/interesting part:
why do you think that?
As Gothars said, though, a more in-depth discussion probably belongs in the suggestions forum (or in general, depending).
•Engine malfunctions: now do not cause a flameout by themselves; need at least some of the engines to have been taken out by combat damage, unless the last active engine malfunctions
Does this mean that replacement fighters at low CR will not flameout spontaneously shortly after leaving the carrier? Currently, once CR gets low enough, engine malfunctions makes fighters useless.
Oh, forgot to mention: malfunctions don't affect fighters anymore. They're only affected by the CR-related stats changes.
"CR: Does not modify rate of fire, modifies damage dealt instead"
This shouldn't be the case for projectile weapons. A bullet is a bullet regardless of how maintained is the gun, CR affecting their rate of fire makes more sense, like how you can push a well oiled machinegun harder without worrying about it's getting jammed. Less-well-maintained energy weapons doing less damage makes more sense though.
However, making it different for each case is too much abstraction to make sense. Rate of fire penalty, less-efficient shields, and less-efficient flux vents was already making a low CR ship do less damage, what's the reason for the change?
I think you might be looking at it too literally. There's no such thing as "too much abstraction to make sense", the more abstraction there is, the easier it is for it to make sense!
Case in point: the damage bonus could be due to, say, a better-maintained targeting system. Or, the damage bonus could simply represent different things for different weapon: a rate of fire for ballistics, better calibration for beams, etc.
Before you say that the rate-of-fire is already represented in game - yes, it is, but the rate of fire of the weapons doesn't directly translate to their in-fiction rate of fire. For example, something like the Vulcan fires 20 times per second in the game. Lore-wise, that number is probably closer to several thousand rounds per second, but that's highly impractical to try to represent, and also to model something that improves the Vulcan's RoF as an actual RoF increase.
So, everything you see is already highly abstracted, including relative ship/weapon scales, weapon stats, etc.
Mechanics-wise, the idea here is that CR should affect very core ship stats, such that it has an impact on everything. Changing the damage/dealt taken is about as core as it gets. (Also: it doesn't actually affect the flux dissipation rate.)[/list]