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 ... 10 11 [12] 13 14 ... 54

Author Topic: Starsector 0.65.2a (Released) Patch Notes  (Read 325190 times)

Alex

  • Administrator
  • Admiral
  • *****
  • Posts: 23986
    • View Profile
Re: Starsector 0.65.2a (In Development) Patch Notes
« Reply #165 on: December 07, 2014, 02:14:20 PM »

(And a lore note: We've already got ships with auto factories that can build unlimited ammo - see any carrier with its fighters - so it's just a question of which launchers have the right hook-ups to allow reloading in combat.

Right, conceptually new Salamanders aren't being manufactured mid-fight, it's just that the weapon mount allows for in-combat reload from pre-manufactured missile stocks.

...Speaking of which, why is there only one drone system that can regenerate drones in combat?)

Why not? :)


on another note does the fast missile racks affect the salamander reload? and have you thought about applying the missile changes to swarmers?

They do. I did, but it wasn't good - it really wasn't good for the decision making process for firing them. It went from "should I use the missiles now or save for later?" to "just fire 'em every time the cooldown is up". One might argue with some success that there's a similar dynamic in play for ballistics, but as the ammo limit is much higher, it's to a much lesser extent.


>beam fade out time and beam damage
So... What? They reach something like 1100 but the last 100 units have decreased damage?

No no, this just means that the beam itself fades in and out much faster.

And a question! Are you happy with present set of ships? ;) (obvious fishing info 'bout more ships is obvious)

Fairly, but more ships are always a possibility :)
Logged

Velox

  • Lieutenant
  • **
  • Posts: 72
    • View Profile
Re: Starsector 0.65.2a (In Development) Patch Notes
« Reply #166 on: December 07, 2014, 05:05:03 PM »

(And a lore note: We've already got ships with auto factories that can build unlimited ammo - see any carrier with its fighters - so it's just a question of which launchers have the right hook-ups to allow reloading in combat.

I know you're removing ammunition in the next update but wish you wouldn't - it's a nice "Combat Readiness that is actually under player control" factor.  It sounds to me like a lot of the conceptual struggle going on lately has to do with combat readiness, and it seems like the single mechanic is gaining a lot of (potential) conditionals like - are ships nearby?  are my shields up?  how big is the enemy fleet?  is it Wednesday?  Maybe putting that all on one stat is a bit much, and as far as I can tell missile and ballistic ammo are the only buddies that have CR's back at the moment.  

You've noted that ammunition is serving ONLY as a sort of "ballistic weapon ships can't fight long fights" law-of-unintended-consequences limit and so is irrelevant and ought to go.  My response has been similar to others' in that I feel like - yeah, you're kind of right about the effects and it could just go.  But I LIKE it.  It makes the weapons feel different, and by god when someone overloads on my second-to-last round of railgun fire that is AWESOME.  And when I am out of ammo and running for the retreat point and spamming my burn drive so maybe just maybe I get out before those missiles land, that is AWESOME.  And when there is some Big Awful Ship and all those ships I've named and outfitted so carefully are going up like firecrackers or drifting around without engines and my fighter wings are down to one bomber that keeps cycling through reloads and somehow only barely living and then the Big Awful Guns go silent?  That is ESPECIALLY AWESOME.  Because then someone is going to die, and it's not my own beloved TTS Last Resort.

So it seems like nobody can give you a solid explanation of why it's a useful mechanic and should stay, but they are giving you a reason that it's a GOOD mechanic and should stay - because fun!

<edit: snipped because dumb and off-topic>

So yeah, sorry - too much enthusiasm and too much weekend time, obviously.  Thanks again for the great game!

« Last Edit: December 08, 2014, 12:57:49 PM by Velox »
Logged

Alex

  • Administrator
  • Admiral
  • *****
  • Posts: 23986
    • View Profile
Re: Starsector 0.65.2a (In Development) Patch Notes
« Reply #167 on: December 07, 2014, 05:51:47 PM »

@Velox: First off, hi!

Re: why not - mostly feel reasons.

I get what you're saying about ammo giving feel; definitely still thinking about yours and a couple of other comments about this in this thread.

About the other stuff - autofactory on ships and all - would you mind moving it out to another thread? It gets unmanageable to discuss too many things in the same thread; and this one is really for comments on the patch notes and not radical suggestions :)
Logged

Steven Shi

  • Commander
  • ***
  • Posts: 223
    • View Profile
Re: Starsector 0.65.2a (In Development) Patch Notes
« Reply #168 on: December 07, 2014, 07:49:51 PM »

Has there been any complaints by players to warrant another look at the combat mechanic?

If, as Alex puts it, most of the changes wouldn't affect the current game play much (like the flux and ammo count) then why are we tweaking them at all? Current combat mechanic is already one of the best out there. Heck, Starsector can just spin the combat engine out as a $8.99 game on its own as it stands.

I was hoping for more updates on the currently bland economic/trade/exploration side of things.

 

 

 
Logged

Jazwana

  • Commander
  • ***
  • Posts: 108
    • View Profile
Re: Starsector 0.65.2a (In Development) Patch Notes
« Reply #169 on: December 07, 2014, 07:53:05 PM »

IIRC Alex stated in the 6.5.1 thread that his goal was to take a pass at balance/combat in 6.5.2 and then focus on further new features for the next patch after this.

My overall thoughts:  I'm willing to wait and see how it plays.

Quote
    Removed energy weapon bonus damage from high flux level
    Increased damage values for non-beam energy weapons by roughly 25% to compensate
Sad to see a skill-cap / player technique cap mechanic disappear.  I understand the AI did not use the mechanic effectively.  Neither do brand new players.  As the player is supposed to become godly with leveling up bonuses, why would the player also not become godly with hours spent understanding the mechanics of the game?  Is the problem that either a) game is balanced for the player's choice of ships and thus AI high tech ships were underwhelming because not using weapons effectively, or b) game is balanced for AI ships and thus high tech ships are overwhelming for the player?  As for players "abusing" the mechanic by firing at nothing to keep their flux high remember they are also keeping their ship speed low, their defensive capabilities low, their total damage/ROF low, etc.  It's a skill decision for perhaps optimal play, not necessarily abuse.


Quote
    Beam weapons:
        Standardized range to 1000 for most non-PD, from Tactical Laser to HIL
        Increased range for PD Laser and LR PD Laser
        Slightly reduced OP cost for all beam weapons
        Tactical Laser, Graviton Beam, and Phase Beam are no longer interrupted by missiles
        Greatly reduced fade in/out time for most beams
I'm sad beams won't pass through (over/under) friendly ships but I'll get over it.  In my experience running large fleets with mostly beams in SS+ mod the longer range and standardized range really helps the AI roam as a pack and focus fire ships with beams. Mixed ranges means ships get in the way of one another's firing arcs as short range ships close to engage.   This probably needs a second balancing pass on damage, because now HIL is really underwhelming for a large mount vs 4 tac lasers.   If tac laser is used with PDAI, will it engage missiles or hold fire if a friendly ship is further downrange?


Quote

   Missiles:
        Salamander: both versions have unlimited ammo and require 20 seconds to reload
        Hurricane MIRV: regenerates 1 ammo every 20 seconds
        Pilum LRM: regenerates 1 ammo every 10 seconds
Still not sure why other missiles/rockets wouldn't regenerate even with ridiculously long timers if this is the way you're going.  (1 min, 4 min, etc).  With salamander, why can't the AI just treat it as a short range weapon such as Sabots even if range is medium (special rule)?  Tried it and it still doesn't work?


Quote

   Ballistic weapons:
        Now have unlimited ammo, except for Bomb Bay
        Reduced OP cost of Light Dual MG
I tend to agree with previous comments on implementing some form of magazine reloading.  Another option might be a steep sliding curve of ammo loaded (like missiles loaded/not loaded) vs CR, so that at high CR there is plenty of ammo, medium CR there is roughly equivalent to current ammo levels, and low CR not much at all.  It links into CR, uses the same mechanic as missiles loaded, and differentiates ballistic vs energy by CR...hm, not great but a low tech 'you need your crew to fight' solution?  Maybe energy mounts are more likely to malfunction at low CR/EMP to balance?


Quote
   Ships
        Destroyers and cruisers now have a peak effectiveness timer like frigates
            Roughly 5-7 minutes for destroyers and 7-9 for cruisers
            High-tech/faster ships have shorter timers
        Sunder: increased top speed, acceleration, and flux capacity. Reduced shield efficiency.
        Brawler/Shepherd: increased burn level by 1 (to 6)
        Condor: reduced supplies/day by 1 (to 4)
Ok with balancing pass, not convinced on timers but probably will be a non-issue.  I'd probably prefer the CR degrades slowly when in combat but less/no drop just to deploy.  Why do frigates need to be so fast now if nearly everything is on a timer?
Logged

harrumph

  • Commander
  • ***
  • Posts: 140
    • View Profile
Re: Starsector 0.65.2a (In Development) Patch Notes
« Reply #170 on: December 07, 2014, 08:02:34 PM »

  • Flux bonus removed—good change, it was always fiddly and favored (experienced, slightly OCD) players over the AI.
  • Extra damage to compensate—good, probably levels the human-AI playing field a little. Makes AM blasters even scarier though!
  • Longer range and lower OP cost for beams—good, although I do wonder whether tactical lasers (with PDAI and the faster-tracking hullmod) won’t become the energy PD par excellence. Guess we’ll just have to wait and see!
  • Missile changes—cool, again a nice boost for the AI.
  • Peak effectiveness for destroyers/cruisers—like others have said, I don’t expect this will actually have much impact. I do wonder if it isn't sort of missing the mark—the problem with combat right now (as I see it) isn’t that destroyers and cruisers can kite too long, it’s that the optimal approach to combat is always to take a single ship at a time. After the patch, you'll still be able to have three Falcons in your fleet and just switch from one to the next as CR drops. I like xenoargh’s solution to this—take reinforcements out of the equation (unless, perhaps, total fleet size is really, really big). You pick the ships with which you think you can win, and you’re stuck with them.

Which leaves ballistic weapons. I actually agree that this change will barely be noticeable—I ran out of HVD ammo every once in a while, but I don’t think I’ve ever run out of ammo for the heavy mauler, my favorite early-/mid-game iron. However, though I think the change is okay, I do wonder if it’s not a missed opportunity. Ammo for ballistics didn’t just differentiate them from energy weapons, it was also (as I think somebody mentioned) a potential lever for balance. You can have two weapons with similar OP costs—gun A has enough ammo to deal twice as much damage, over the course of a long fight, as gun B, but gun B has three times the single-shot damage as gun A. Adds some interesting nuance to weapon design—I guess modders will still have access to that, of course.

However! As a twist on what Cosmitz suggested early in the thread, what about using freighters(and/or tankers and/or those supply ships we saw art for that got cut in an earlier build) to actually resupply ships in combat? A freighter comes in from the bottom of the map, flies straight to the ship that called for resupply, and both ships have to sit still (maybe with shields down?) for 5/10/20/40 seconds (depending on hull size) as ballistic (and maybe missile) weapons are refilled. AI ships will make a beeline for your resupply operations, so you need to send some escorts to run interference, etc. etc. It’s a dramatic change, maybe beyond the scope of this thread (in which case I’d be happy to drag it over to Suggestions), but it could kill a few birds with one stone—keep ammo in the game, get civilian ships into harm’s way, and encourage players to use more one warship at a time.

Also—Alex, you have the patience of a saint when it comes to all our griping. But hey, even if some reactions have been a little over the top, it’s great to see so many people so obsessed with Starsector that a dozen lines of patch notes can generate a dozen pages of heated debate. And probably a dozen more to come!
Logged

Midnight Kitsune

  • Admiral
  • *****
  • Posts: 2846
  • Your Friendly Forum Friend
    • View Profile
Re: Starsector 0.65.2a (In Development) Patch Notes
« Reply #171 on: December 07, 2014, 08:13:07 PM »

I just remembered something:  Weren't frigates' top speed and recovery boosted from 0.54 to 0.6 because they were the only ships with CR decay at the time (when 0.6 came out)?  One reason I use frigates, aside from high burn speed, is they recover quickly.  Big ships (and fighters) take forever to recover CR.
Hey Alex, I don't think you ever addressed this and I too would like to know if recovery speed is gonna be boosted
Logged
Help out MesoTroniK, a modder in need

2021 is 2020 won
2022 is 2020 too

Alex

  • Administrator
  • Admiral
  • *****
  • Posts: 23986
    • View Profile
Re: Starsector 0.65.2a (In Development) Patch Notes
« Reply #172 on: December 07, 2014, 08:30:44 PM »

@SQW: Being a .2 release, it's a good time to try some things and clean some things up. A lot of this flowed out of the missile changes (which I think turned out very well), and a lot out of player feedback.

I'm sad beams won't pass through (over/under) friendly ships but I'll get over it.

Tried that; really wasn't good for ship feel. Stuff starts feeling really not solid.

If tac laser is used with PDAI, will it engage missiles or hold fire if a friendly ship is further downrange?

It's aware of whether a beam can pierce the target or not.

Still not sure why other missiles/rockets wouldn't regenerate even with ridiculously long timers if this is the way you're going.  (1 min, 4 min, etc).

As I mentioned earlier in the thread (a couple of times, I think :)), it was very bad for missile feel. Besides, missiles in other roles don't *need* this to be effective. Long timers like that aren't a good idea besides, as it's either 1) too long to be practical due to peak effectiveness running out or 2) is encouraging the player to not engage and wait for a ridiculously long time, otherwise.

With salamander, why can't the AI just treat it as a short range weapon such as Sabots even if range is medium (special rule)?  Tried it and it still doesn't work?

It's just not how the missile works. It's not something you fire as part of a larger salvo or as a reaction to an enemy being high on flux/venting/overloaded/etc. You want to fire it at a medium range, and it takes a while to get around the enemy ship anyway. It's really a medium range support weapon, and making the AI use it as such wouldn't make the AI *good* with it. Besides, with this change, it's also a more appealing choice for the player.


Peak effectiveness for destroyers/cruisers—like others have said, I don’t expect this will actually have much impact. I do wonder if it isn't sort of missing the mark—the problem with combat right now (as I see it) isn’t that destroyers and cruisers can kite too long, it’s that the optimal approach to combat is always to take a single ship at a time. After the patch, you'll still be able to have three Falcons in your fleet and just switch from one to the next as CR drops. I like xenoargh’s solution to this—take reinforcements out of the equation (unless, perhaps, total fleet size is really, really big). You pick the ships with which you think you can win, and you’re stuck with them.

Well... there's another change I'm mulling over that'll take care of that, but :-X for now.

Which leaves ballistic weapons. I actually agree that this change will barely be noticeable—I ran out of HVD ammo every once in a while, but I don’t think I’ve ever run out of ammo for the heavy mauler, my favorite early-/mid-game iron. However, though I think the change is okay, I do wonder if it’s not a missed opportunity. Ammo for ballistics didn’t just differentiate them from energy weapons, it was also (as I think somebody mentioned) a potential lever for balance. You can have two weapons with similar OP costs—gun A has enough ammo to deal twice as much damage, over the course of a long fight, as gun B, but gun B has three times the single-shot damage as gun A. Adds some interesting nuance to weapon design—I guess modders will still have access to that, of course.

However! As a twist on what Cosmitz suggested early in the thread, what about using freighters(and/or tankers and/or those supply ships we saw art for that got cut in an earlier build) to actually resupply ships in combat? A freighter comes in from the bottom of the map, flies straight to the ship that called for resupply, and both ships have to sit still (maybe with shields down?) for 5/10/20/40 seconds (depending on hull size) as ballistic (and maybe missile) weapons are refilled. AI ships will make a beeline for your resupply operations, so you need to send some escorts to run interference, etc. etc. It’s a dramatic change, maybe beyond the scope of this thread (in which case I’d be happy to drag it over to Suggestions), but it could kill a few birds with one stone—keep ammo in the game, get civilian ships into harm’s way, and encourage players to use more one warship at a time.

Yeah, probably best in another thread. My main objection to this is same as before - just not seeing how it might be smooth gameplay-wise. It's either overwrought for something that doesn't matter much, or ammo is such an issue that the game is all about those resupply ships. Which might be ok if it didn't seem like it would be so very, very clunky. I mean, I could be totally wrong, but that's how I'm seeing it.


Also—Alex, you have the patience of a saint when it comes to all our griping. But hey, even if some reactions have been a little over the top, it’s great to see so many people so obsessed with Starsector that a dozen lines of patch notes can generate a dozen pages of heated debate. And probably a dozen more to come!

Hah, thank you :) That's a really good way to look at it, and I really do appreciate people chiming in with their thoughts.


I just remembered something:  Weren't frigates' top speed and recovery boosted from 0.54 to 0.6 because they were the only ships with CR decay at the time (when 0.6 came out)?  One reason I use frigates, aside from high burn speed, is they recover quickly.  Big ships (and fighters) take forever to recover CR.
Hey Alex, I don't think you ever addressed this and I too would like to know if recovery speed is gonna be boosted

Ah, I don't think I did.

It's not that firgates got higher speed to compensate for having a peak effectiveness timer. Rather, it was finally possible for them to be as fast as I'd wanted them to be, *due* to the peak effectiveness timer. It's one of several ways this mechanic opens up other design possibilities.

I don't recall that frigate CR recovery was adjusted to be faster specifically due to peak effectiveness, and in any case, the larger ships have a longer effectiveness period, so I don't think there's much that requires tweaking here. It might, given more playtesting, though.
Logged

Lucian Greymark

  • Captain
  • ****
  • Posts: 274
    • View Profile
Re: Starsector 0.65.2a (In Development) Patch Notes
« Reply #173 on: December 07, 2014, 10:40:28 PM »

I think the only thing that bothers me about this update as it's limiting the amount of time I can spend in battles economically. For no other reason I wish the combat timers weren't going to be a thing.

Is that unreasonable?
Logged

Psycho Landlord

  • Ensign
  • *
  • Posts: 23
    • View Profile
Re: Starsector 0.65.2a (In Development) Patch Notes
« Reply #174 on: December 08, 2014, 01:30:35 AM »

I actually really like all the changes so far. Actually providing some nuance to how you plan deployments in combat is a welcome change of pace, and ammunition was never a factor for vanilla weaponry anyway. Besides, any fight that goes on longer than 5-10 minutes was already likely to be multi-engagement run anyway, and now there's a reason to set objectives for yourself in larger battles instead of simply throwing everything but your frigates straight at the enemy.
Logged

Midnight Kitsune

  • Admiral
  • *****
  • Posts: 2846
  • Your Friendly Forum Friend
    • View Profile
Re: Starsector 0.65.2a (In Development) Patch Notes
« Reply #175 on: December 08, 2014, 02:34:27 AM »

Peak effectiveness for destroyers/cruisers—like others have said, I don’t expect this will actually have much impact. I do wonder if it isn't sort of missing the mark—the problem with combat right now (as I see it) isn’t that destroyers and cruisers can kite too long, it’s that the optimal approach to combat is always to take a single ship at a time. After the patch, you'll still be able to have three Falcons in your fleet and just switch from one to the next as CR drops. I like xenoargh’s solution to this—take reinforcements out of the equation (unless, perhaps, total fleet size is really, really big). You pick the ships with which you think you can win, and you’re stuck with them.
Well... there's another change I'm mulling over that'll take care of that, but :-X for now.
Is this what you are taking about?
In the meantime, I ended up trying something simpler: "transfer command" now reduces the peak effectiveness time of the new flagship by the spent peak effectiveness of the old flagship, and further docks the new flagship for 10% CR. (Changing the command structure in battle is serious business!)
Logged
Help out MesoTroniK, a modder in need

2021 is 2020 won
2022 is 2020 too

Jazwana

  • Commander
  • ***
  • Posts: 108
    • View Profile
Re: Starsector 0.65.2a (In Development) Patch Notes
« Reply #176 on: December 08, 2014, 05:47:53 AM »

Thanks for the feedback as always :)
Logged

Linnis

  • Admiral
  • *****
  • Posts: 1009
    • View Profile
Re: Starsector 0.65.2a (In Development) Patch Notes
« Reply #177 on: December 08, 2014, 07:03:53 AM »

What about the blaster type weapons, do they still receive flux damage bonus?
What about swarmer, since they are tiny missiles should they also regenerate? Because most fighters easily refit them and spam them nonstop

Logged

Megas

  • Admiral
  • *****
  • Posts: 12117
    • View Profile
Re: Starsector 0.65.2a (In Development) Patch Notes
« Reply #178 on: December 08, 2014, 08:20:02 AM »

Quote
...and ammunition was never a factor for vanilla weaponry anyway. Besides, any fight that goes on longer than 5-10 minutes was already likely to be multi-engagement run anyway, and now there's a reason to set objectives for yourself in larger battles instead of simply throwing everything but your frigates straight at the enemy.
Not if you want to solo fleets with as few ships as possible, which happens much if you have no Leadership (and I do not put points at all in Leadership until level 38+, after both Combat and Technology are at 10.)  The smallest ship reliant on ammo that I can use to solo fleets is an Enforcer, and only if most of its weapons are Heavy Needlers.
Logged

Alex

  • Administrator
  • Admiral
  • *****
  • Posts: 23986
    • View Profile
Re: Starsector 0.65.2a (In Development) Patch Notes
« Reply #179 on: December 08, 2014, 11:34:37 AM »

@Midnight Kitsune: Don't want to talk about that here as it's nowhere near ready for that.

@Linnis: I might not have answered you directly, but I did answer that question several times in this thread :) Basically, no, they don't regenerate, because I tried it and it was terrible.
Logged
Pages: 1 ... 10 11 [12] 13 14 ... 54