|
Yeah, it's a little stupid that mothballing ships increases your logistics score, along with causing a host of other problems. I understand from a realism standpoint (you're towing the deactivated ship behind you) but not from a balance or gameplay standpoint. Unless I'm confused and that's totally not how it works 
|
#
¿
Sep 24, 2013 01:26
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ May 14, 2024 11:39 |
|
|
Triarii posted:What I would like is some kind of repair/manufacturing ship that makes frigates replaceable like fighters, so they can get destroyed during combat but they'll stick around in your fleet and can be repaired back up for some supplies. Maybe make it cruiser-sized, and then have a battleship-sized one that can repair destroyers too. Yikes. That's not even remotely balanced. Fighters' ability to be replaced is balanced out by their generally lower power. Frigates, on the other hand, can tear poo poo up something fierce but aren't meant to be the focal points in combat. More frigates should be available on the market though, since the game pushes you pretty heavily towards a frigate-based fleet makeup. Also, it's no substitute for Black Rock, but Shadowyards has a dev version up for the new patch.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 24, 2014 18:57
|
|
|
Does the bottom skill tree actually do anything, or is it a placeholder?
|
|
#
¿
Oct 24, 2014 21:55
|
|
|
Unreal_One posted:I much prefer the SS+ skill tree, though I'm not so sure about some of the other changes they're making. And you can get some improved burns by level 6 or 7 if you focus on only one tree, especially leadership. Yeah, this system is a lot better since the burn bonus made science pretty much mandatory. I still go for it anyways because I am a firm believer in feature creep. Oh, and they expressly mention the requirements for using star gravity wells in a skill. The vanilla game doesn't tell you that for some reason. 
|
|
#
¿
Nov 10, 2014 23:46
|
|
|
The Monitor makes a perfect flagship frigate for horrible pilots like me. I can trundle in and tank damage/apply pressure in pretty much any fight. The only two times I've had trouble were when surrounded by three destroyers with my fleet halfway across the map (still survived) and when facing down an Onslaught (not so much). Oddly enough, I'm still using the Tactical Lasers that it came with since they work so well with the built-in flak cannons. So yeah, if you're finding yourself getting all your Wolves blown up, try one of these fat boys out. Edit: As for the Luddites, they basically print money whether you're killing them or loading up freighters on their homeworld to chase food shortages. Kraven Moorhed fucked around with this message at 23:39 on Nov 18, 2014 |
|
#
¿
Nov 18, 2014 23:37
|
|
|
Gobblecoque posted:If you dig the slow heavily defensive Monitor then you might like the Brawler. It's basically a frigate with destroyer-level power supply and armor. Put a High Velocity Driver and a Heavy Mauler on it and destroy everything. Brainbread posted:As long as you can fit +Mobility and Resistant Flux Conduits into it too. As awesome as the ship is, it gets completely wrecked by anything that can get behind it. And Salamander's put it into a useless tailspin pretty quick too.
|
|
#
¿
Nov 19, 2014 02:22
|
|
|
In SS+ I can't seem to make any sort of living going pure bounty hunter. It really seems as if the prices on ships were balanced towards the assumption that even as a pair of frigates you're going to be constantly chasing shortages in markets. I don't mind doing that when I'm loving around as a privateer or a trader, but sometimes I just wanna jump pirates and live by my bounties. vv I mean, I don't just jettison the cargo. But that's a good point about being in economically screwed over systems, since I wasn't making much off the cargo I was getting. Guess I need to follow the market.
Kraven Moorhed fucked around with this message at 00:57 on Mar 12, 2015 |
|
#
¿
Mar 12, 2015 00:40
|
|
|
Well, I hopped back in and tried jumping things that looked juicy, but I'm still not quite making it. I don't know if I'm just unlucky or if this is by design but I have yet to find any supplies that sell for under $800 in SS+. This is after combing every planet in four systems including Corvus, which means entering combat with a single frigate costs a Hermes, and that's if I find a good deal. When combat is this expensive and the loot swings so wildly, it really doesn't seem profitable to play this as anything other than a trade simulator until you have enough to build a small fleet. Maybe I should just go back to vanilla (ugh, the skills), or see if I can wrestle with the configs to scale the pricing back. This really isn't enjoyable for me and I'm usually all over challenging stuff. I just wanna blow up some ships, yo. 
Kraven Moorhed fucked around with this message at 09:38 on Mar 12, 2015 |
|
#
¿
Mar 12, 2015 09:29
|
|
|
Yeah, there must be something fishy going on, 'cus Maxios worked just like it was suggested so now I actually own another frigate. My mod loadout is: SS+ 2.6.6+ Blackcock Jivenards 0.7.3 Hiigaran Descendants 1.1.0 Interstellar Imperium 1.7.2 Scy 0.8.9 Shadowyards 0.5.2.3 Common Radar 1.1(weird zero thing with a line through it) Console Commands 2.3 Lazy 2.0b, Twig 0.6.5p, Shader 1.05 One or more might be out of date, though, as I just booted up an install from a few weeks back.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 12, 2015 16:38
|
|
|
Cathair posted:-Quills are arguably a bit underpowered compared to annihilators, even SS+ ones, but in contrast to shard weapons I actually like the versatility of damage types here. Accuracy is also a plus, but they're often too slow to make good use of it, maybe increasing the projectile speed would make them a bit more attractive? I actually think Quills are at a good place as far as damage and travel time. I run a pair on a Hammerhead (thanks, ship upgrade, for sticking me in a 4/2 destroyer as a bounty hunter  ) and they pull their weight admirably. If anything I might like it if there were just one or two missiles per barrage even if the damage was spread out further--more missiles would mean you could fan them more densely to hit juking frigates without it becoming an area saturation weapon. This would also buff up something I found unintentionally: Quills can actually be used to shoot down other missiles in a pinch, and they're not too bad at it as is.
Kraven Moorhed fucked around with this message at 11:48 on Mar 15, 2015 |
|
#
¿
Mar 15, 2015 11:46
|
|
|
"Sorry Timmy, we sold all your Space Lunchables to the scary armada." "Can I have some lobster?" "Silly Timmy, you can't eat that! Now we get to starve until someone exploits our crippling lack of infrastructure/foresight."
|
|
#
¿
Mar 20, 2015 21:33
|
|
|
The Wolf+Brawler can be a solid option for a starting player, actually. The key? Give the Wolf to the AI and take the Brawler. Your Fortress Shield gives you leeway to learn your limits and acclimate yourself to the flow of battle, while having the AI in the Wolf gives you a wingman that can back you up at a moment's notice. Pursuit actions are a great place to learn the Wolf's maneuvering quirks, too, so you can always switch in for those to get some relatively risk-free engagements under your belt (plus you avoid the dogshit pursuit AI).
Kraven Moorhed fucked around with this message at 06:14 on Mar 23, 2015 |
|
#
¿
Mar 23, 2015 06:11
|
|
|
Tarezax posted:The boarding hull mod may be a SS+ thing. I haven't touched vanilla since the last version. Escape? Always hard dock.  https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aMvs0Qq7YWU
|
|
#
¿
Mar 24, 2015 16:33
|
|
|
dis astranagant posted:They can still escape from hard docks unless you're using the SS+ easy boarding option and relevant perks.  I thought it just made self-destructs less likely, but ah well.On the plus side, it has allowed me to survive my initially questionable tactic of befriending the Templar--who are now cooperative along with Shadowyards, Neutrino and SCY--and to start amassing a respectable Omnifactory setup. The local Neutrinos ran out of Criticality chassis pretty quickly, so now I just produce a few at a time and slap three Burst Repeater Beams on 'em with an upgraded Front Shield Generator. Cheap point defense vessels that also work in pursuits? Sign me the hell up. Doesn't hurt that they're a blast to pilot, and they go well with my "Burgandy" Morningstars (which are perfect for Rhons thanks to their generous flux dissipation rate). Edit for protip: Mars is the best song for space war. Kraven Moorhed fucked around with this message at 23:10 on Mar 25, 2015 |
|
#
¿
Mar 24, 2015 22:18
|
|
|
Maybe it's confirmation bias talking, but I feel like self-destructs happen more often when you're dealing with a faction that hates you. It'd make sense, though.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 8, 2015 03:25
|
|
|
I want to like Exigency, but some of the weapons need another pass for balancing as they're bizarrely overpriced. For instance, the Cigen Autocannon touts itself as some hot poo poo in its description and costs a whopping 16 OP, but it does about the same damage as a Quill Rocket Launcher from BRDY (a small mount that costs 5 OP). And the Quill has seen some criticism in this thread for being underwhelming in its own size category! Maybe I'm missing something, but it seems like a colossal waste of space. Really, with a few exceptions (like the Flail and its kin) I tend to avoid Exigency weapons. And they don't work with the Nexerelin Omnifactory, either, which is a bit annoying. I do love the Mx missiles, though.  Overwhelming a fleet with exploding fleas never gets old.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 14, 2015 19:15
|
|
|
MesoTroniK posted:Shield piercing weapons are a very dangerous edge case to get right in a balance pass. If they are strong then they just murderize high tech ships, I find it is best for them to be somewhat on the weak side as you don't use them as your primary attack but instead chip damage your foes with a slow death via unblockable damage. Or alternatively you basically turn them off to conserve your flux and you use normal kinetic weapons to get through the shields, punch the armor with HE, then use the CIGEN weapons as a nasty finisher. In the end think of them as more of a tactical option that can be situationally very powerful, the only exception is the Cannon built into the Pergon which actually hits hard enough to destroy armor plate but the shell is slow so it can be dodged and has a regen for the ammo that makes it more effective in the beginning of the engagement especially combined with the alternate fire mode. Okay, using kinetic damage makes sense if you're trying to make it more of a finisher, and the OP cost means you can't just smack six of them on the same ship without overspecializing. That's really cool! You may want to take another look at the description, then: though it mentions piercing shields, maybe "bypassing" would get to the point more directly, or something like "pierces shields to damage the hull beneath?" A lot of weapon descriptions (even in the base game) contain a lot of specific physical descriptions, like "tear apart" or "overwhelm," that don't reflect actual weapon behavior. Piercing certainly gets the point across coming from the design perspective, but considering this is a unique mechanic you might want to make it more overt--like how Shaolin included the Shard proc data in his description. The weapon descriptions are the only documentation we have as users so communicating this stuff clearly is pretty important. And I appreciate you telling me how to disable the Omnifactory omission. Maybe including those directions in your OP could be a good compromise (or including them in a readme with your next patch) between your own position and user control? It makes sense for balance purposes with Knights Templar, but Exigency weapons don't feel like they should be restricted in the same way, so it ends up seeming kinda petty if you're not up front about it. Maybe the end user should make that decision for themselves.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 15, 2015 03:32
|
|
|
Gobblecoque posted:here it is: s3.amazonaws.com/fractalsoftworks/starsector/starsector_install-0.7a.exe These Wolf changes are pretty 
|
|
#
¿
Oct 20, 2015 00:58
|
|
|
Scy just updated! 
|
|
#
¿
Dec 6, 2015 01:53
|
|
|
Sperglord Firecock posted:Oh boy, found a better starter ship, though I need to actually win a single fight with a guy in order to afford it. The Wolf (I)'s hybrid medium slot is pretty nice, but if the normal Wolf gave you trouble, it might be worth it to look elsewhere. It's more of the same with a slight bump in stats (that third energy slot is on the normal Wolf). Speaking of the Imperium, I have a rock hard spaceboner for a Praetorian with a flak and a Heavy AC (or any other rapid-fire kinetic weapon), in the front, Vulcan in the back, and Sledges filling out the rest of the small hybrid slots. Change missiles to taste--I run Annihilators for pressure, but I might switch to auto-fire Micros from Diable. The Praetorian is ponderous enough that it really benefits from the range and pressure afforded by the Sledges (which are really drat good at taking out fighters, oddly enough), since ships will keep taking hits as they back off. Just let the AC get them close to overload, then hit the Ammo Feeder. Fun stuff.
|
|
#
¿
Dec 6, 2015 16:55
|
|
|
I wonder how much it would change the game if command points weren't a thing. They feel like an oddly arbitrary limitation.
|
|
#
¿
Dec 30, 2015 18:14
|
|
|
MesoTroniK posted:... ORI is not a good mod. Yeah, I made the mistake of trying it when it was one of the first few to update to the latest release. Kind of a poo poo-heap, that one.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 7, 2016 00:45
|
|
|
Galm posted:I dunno, ORI isn't by any means balanced or lore-fitting, but I don't think it's that bad.  If it had bad art, but good design and balance, I could maybe look past it. Hell, if it just had good design I could swing it, or maybe even just good art. ORI has none of these:
Kraven Moorhed fucked around with this message at 04:08 on Jan 7, 2016 |
|
#
¿
Jan 7, 2016 04:06
|
|
|
Now we just need Exigency. The ships look awful but I miss the Mx missiles.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 15, 2016 23:28
|
|
|
MesoTroniK posted:Well, not sure what about the sprites it is specifically that you dislike but... But the update I am working on contains revamped art of, well pretty much everything. My bad on not clarifying, and for being a bit hyperbolic considering how specific my qualms are. They're well-executed (I love the organic shading overlayed on tubing/circuitry - there's a copy of ARh+ right next to my computer, so it's right up my alley) but some aspects of the aesthetic just ruin the whole thing for me. I feel like the flanges, spikes and claws are going a bit overboard on some ships and end up unbalancing the otherwise great silhouettes.  The claws on the back of this one end up throwing off the overall shape - they're segmented, wide, and sharp on a ship that's otherwise rather sleek, and they're disproportionate to the rest of the ship even when compared to the rest of Exigency.  The front and back claws on this are great, because they follow the overall design structure and just make sense. But those side spikes? Those feel forced and kinda tacky. Same goes for the carrier/cruiser thing just above it in weight class. Then there's the cap ship:  This one hurts 'cus it's so small: the innermost pair of claws on the wings feel out of place for how long they are. If they were a bit shorter, they'd reflect the arch of the wing and lead into the engines for a neat profile, but as-is they jut out like crazy. These are pretty minor, and they're just my opinion, but the rest of the design feels consistent enough that they jump out at me.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 17, 2016 20:26
|
|
|
Platystemon posted:That’s a clever idea, but maybe Starsector shouldn’t allow gatecamping to happen. Why? There's already features in place that deal with this: fringe gates and going dark. Going through the front door with an active transponder when you're just starting out is asking for trouble, and the game will happily oblige if you decide to forego both brains and brawn. Your solution sounds plausible, but way too rubber-bandy on either end (imagine chasing a fleet through a gravity well only to lose it thanks to popping out on the other side). This game rewards pressing the advantage, and it punishes poor planning. I think it's functioning as intended. Kraven Moorhed fucked around with this message at 00:24 on Jan 23, 2016 |
|
#
¿
Jan 23, 2016 00:21
|
|
|
OwlFancier posted:I don't think I've ever seen a monitor but if I do those would be useful. They're stupid rare and it kills me inside. I love my dumb li'l hamster ball.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 26, 2017 23:23
|
|
|
MesoTroniK posted:Doing it in any other way would result in me turning off the mod heh. Yes, I find it done in a sort of outside context manner pretty gross. After all, vanilla mentions weapon manufacturers for some things too. And guess what? It is done almost exactly like that example I just posted from THI. Now imagine trying to shop there without any of the manufacturer's names. Wouldn't it be aggravating to then go rifle (heh) through a bunch of different storefronts looking for that one .40 sidearm that you liked, or a replacement part for it, but you couldn't remember the number string of? Yeah, because referents are A Good Thing. Considering we're discussing weapons/ships in the Starsector equivalent of what I linked up there, the best-practices are something to consider a little longer before you make the "my immersion" argument. Does that mean modders should change the naming conventions? No, of course not -- that's overkill since you're not working with much space there. But keep this in mind: the base game weapons are a universal constant -- there's no need for a descriptor for "this is base game" because they will always be there. And these factions have a lot of overlap with their weapons because they're cut from the same cloth. Mods? Not so much -- most mods add their own dozen+ weapons that fulfill many of the same roles with varying degrees of similarity. This makes them distinctive, sure, but when you have like 6+ installed, you start seeing the analogy with a real-life gun catalog become more and more accurate. Let's be clear: giving people a standardized, easy-to-parse way to know what they're looking at is in no conceivable way a bad thing to do. Sacrificing clarity for vanity doesn't make for good design.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 16, 2017 00:32
|
|
|
MesoTroniK posted:As a modder myself, and the ones I speak to allows me to say this as a reasonable overall fact. Yes, most of us like to try to stick to vanilla style of doing things when applicable, and in universe friendly manners of presentation. That's not how this works. Your and others' prior modding chops are commendable, but that's not relevant to the point -- much like having a dozen Michelin star chefs give the Big Mac their seals of approval won't stop it from doing unthinkable and awful things to my digestive system. We're talking user experience, not implementation, and it's tough to get an objective idea of the former when you spend a lot of time doing the latter (and I speak as someone who's guilty of this kind of drift and uses feedback to stay on course). That's why critique and listening to your audience is essential to the creative process. The current method of figuring out a modded weapon's mod origin through the description (when that's even deemed worth writing/designing for) is far more inconsistent than determining anything else about a weapon -- DPS, mount, magazine size, range, etc. It would be a ton easier for users if there were a standard for it, whether that would happen through the description, weapon name, tag, or even an additional field if that were possible (might require API shenanigans? i don't know code for poo poo). If there were a severe implementation hurdle I could understand, but that really just doesn't seem to be the case here. I mean, it's obvious you've long since made up your mind about this. But like others are actually saying in this thread, there's very little downside to other modders just tossing some tag in there for us to reckon by. And if you're actually reflecting a consensus among the modders, I find it ironic that a modding community is unwilling to take a small step away from vanilla to make users' lives easier, requiring fixes like TheWetFish's find/replace. It's sort of missing the point, ya know? Kraven Moorhed fucked around with this message at 06:19 on Jun 16, 2017 |
|
#
¿
Jun 16, 2017 06:14
|
|
|
SHAOLIN FUCKFIEND posted:Have you heard about "modding"? you can "mod" your pokedex info into the game so that it isnt anyone elses problem, that way everyone is happy 
Kraven Moorhed fucked around with this message at 13:16 on Jun 16, 2017 |
|
#
¿
Jun 16, 2017 13:13
|
|
|
Dodoman posted:I was inspired by Garfu and edited the csv tables This is awesome. You are awesome. However, I will not be fully satisfied until all variables are replaced with [MODNAME]. The search continues.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 20, 2017 00:39
|
|
|
Psycho Landlord posted:Also congratulations to The Good Professor for getting that megachud to melt down over book references At least one of those idiots was rooting for the return of the space Nazi mod, too. No surprise there.
|
|
#
¿
Dec 16, 2018 23:53
|
|
|
I'm not sure I see how the Workshop would be less convenient for your everyday player in the slightest. Putting this game on Steam is going to introduce a lot of people who aren't actually familiar with modding. Take a step back and look at this from the perspective of your average consumer -- they aren't going to immediately trot off to the Starsector forums or the Nexus to see if this has mods. This is just another game to mess around with. Having the Workshop right in front of you, on the other hand, gives you an active prompt to look at the mods there. That's a lot more exposure than a separate website with a separate utility and manual downloads and manual updates and... yeah. Less complexity and barriers to entry = better on the customer side. Hands down. May not be the same case on the modder side, but the player experience is paramount in these kinds of decisions. Not everyone has the same level of interest that we do in the nitty-gritty. Edit: Autism Sneaks posted:No. In fact, you can stop posting indefinitely. Please. Kraven Moorhed fucked around with this message at 16:14 on May 5, 2019 |
|
#
¿
May 5, 2019 16:11
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ May 14, 2024 11:39 |
|
|
Edit: Never mind. Pretty sure another post won't actually move the needle if there's this big of a disconnect in perspectives -- not worth stirring things up.
Kraven Moorhed fucked around with this message at 03:13 on May 6, 2019 |
|
#
¿
May 6, 2019 03:00
|
|