|
Post by contributor on Jun 13, 2019 7:49:23 GMT -5
I've used this talent twice now and both times in the mission summary it tells me cleary that it added $0 to the mission payment. The first time I thought it was a fluke, twice in a row seems like a bug. Which sucks because this talent is literally the only reason I hired a wing commando installed a hangar and bought a shuttle.
Android 9, STF 2.5.47
|
|
|
Post by contributor on Jun 12, 2019 3:52:56 GMT -5
You know that story where the lovable criminal takes that job from the big scary boss-man that he never should have taken? Of course he messes up the job and then he spends the rest of the movie/story trying to redeem himself so the boss-man doesn't feed him to his pigs. Normally he ends up having to do something even harder than the original job to pay back his debt, maybe while simultaneously dodging his patron's goons. We need that in STF.
It would make a good story vignette, but I was thinking about ways to make it happen spontaneously with different mechanics. The main thing I was thinking about was contact traits. It also made me realize that the penalties for failing missions or completing them overdue are pretty tame. Maybe they just need to be bumped up? It could also be that certain important missions specify a punishment for failure ahead of time. So it could be mission based. Anyways some traits that could be tweaked to make this sort of thing occur more naturally would be.
Vindictive: Larger personal rep loss for failing missions or completing them late. Bounty Hunters: May send bounty hunters after the failure of the mission. Greedy: Requires reimbursement for failed missions before offering any more (this is a whole new mechanic, but it could be interesting). Professional: Large personal rep loss for failing missions or completing them late. Impatient: Large personal rep loss for completing missions late.
There could be a lot more. Basically I want to be punished more for not getting things perfect.
Well I'm off to see my therapist...
|
|
|
Post by contributor on Jun 8, 2019 17:16:53 GMT -5
To be honest this is something of a flavor rumor idea and not one that would significantly alter game dynamics. It is a Wild Zone rumor, potentially one of relatively short duration. It would madly increase Edible Plants rewards in that zone. It could also increase Luxury Rations and Biomass as well, perhaps according to the reward levels of the planet. It could also increase scavenger cards and decrease pirates because they're not interested in low value harvestables and don't like all the activity. The one place that this could be a real boon would be in quads that supply certain RTGs. Pruvia Blooms, Kongon Locusts and maybe Kaffage Royal Jelly come to mind, perhaps Bexian Spice Tea too. If the rumor happens in a quad that supplies them then it would greatly increase chances of those goods being uncovered (if richness is above 7?) but perhaps also increase pirates and maybe even orbital encounters.
So the other idea I had which is probably too much work to implement, but I'll throw it out there anyways, is a Decay mechanism for certain goods. Edible Plants came to mind first, but even Biowaste, Luxury rations, Raw Crystals, Medicines and maybe some ores and RTGs could also have this dynamic. Basically the goods would be on a timer, after which they would spoil and either be lost, or possibly transformed into something else (Plants -> Biowaste -> Fertilizer? in declining quantity). This would probably necessitate raising the value of some or all of these goods, but it could make for interesting dynamics. They could have faster and slower spoil rates and maybe it would would be an increasing percentage chance to spoil on a given a turn so it would be random, but with increasing possibility over time. I thought of that when I thought of the possibility of building huge stashes of edible plants from the Seasonal Abundance rumor. It would be interesting to build up a huge stash and then have to sell it quickly. Or come back in a year and find that it's all turned to biowaste and then 5 years later to find it's all turned to fertilizer.
|
|
|
Post by contributor on Jun 7, 2019 7:51:00 GMT -5
So I learned an important lesson the hard way today. My June Community Challenge captain met a xeno. I was flying a fully upgraded Palace Interceptor and wrecking all human opponents. Still I wasn't planning on messing with any xeno. I should have skipped as soon as possible. I looked at the ship comparison though and I outclassed the xeno in everything but range change. He was below my level too, so I thought, "If the comparison says I'm better than him in pretty much every sense, I might as well fight him." Well turn one, I buffed my defense (because it's always good to have a nice margin). He didn't even buff his accuracy but then proceeded to hit me with 3 torpedoes. That was pretty much the beginning of a slow death. 18 turns later my captain bit it. I found I had to have about +75% defense for him not to hit me at all and then hitting him was also pretty challenging. So long-story-short the ship comparison tool failed me pretty hard.
Rather than giving the TBs more tears to fill their cups though, I want to be pragmatic and figure out what happened here. So what is the ship comparison screen actually comparing when it comes to Accuracy and Defense? Obviously those can change significantly based on ranges, so how do we get those nice simple phrases "Our defense outclasses the enemy ships accuracy." My big question is whether it's taking dice from weapon accuracy into account. The pools that are the most static are standard dice pools so it would be easy to compare those, but they would give pretty skewed results especially if the enemy is packing high accuracy weapons. Is it somehow making an average composite score for all weapons ranges? If so that would be helpful to know, because that would mean that they could still hit regularly at certain ranges, but would be significantly handicapped at the other ranges. In my case the xeno still hit decently at range 3 compared to range 4 and 5. Anyways, insight into how those numbers get produced would be very helpful.
|
|
|
Post by contributor on Jun 6, 2019 18:47:42 GMT -5
Ok, so I've got a captain doing well on Impossible now. He's through those rough early stages and proved his prowess by dispatching Aerlus Char. One question though. Do Xeno kill missions count as a legitimate winning mission? I'm not up to max rank/edict yet, but I'm still having a hard time getting missions for 200k.
|
|
|
Post by contributor on Jun 3, 2019 16:39:06 GMT -5
So, I was just wondering about how all the mission price boosting talents work. Do they get factored into the price displayed when we are taking the mission or added in later? Does the mission have to display 500k or hit it with bonuses after the fact? Also if there is split pay for the mission like Capture and Deposit I guess it's just up to us to track the reward at each step? I'm not even sure if capture missions work that way. Maybe they only pay once at the end.
I'd be curious to know how all those payout boosting talents/traits interact. I know some may stack, but other times it seems like only one fires.
|
|
|
Post by contributor on Jun 3, 2019 11:40:41 GMT -5
Is the hotfix 2.5.39? I just got that on Android.
|
|
|
Post by contributor on Jun 2, 2019 16:16:59 GMT -5
Weird when you pay your crew and it causes one of them to mutate Battle Scarred. Did they get in a knife fight with a bunch of gravs in the spice hall or something? If your QM is a Brute they gather everyone in the Spice Hall and then just throw the whole ship's wages up into the air and a battle royale ensues as everyone tries to collect their cut.
|
|
|
Post by contributor on Jun 2, 2019 15:46:18 GMT -5
I'm in. Impossible difficulty.
|
|
|
Post by contributor on Jun 2, 2019 8:39:12 GMT -5
On the one hand, crew dogs are pretty much available anywhere so it's easily and immediately fixable. On the other hand, this does significantly impact new players who won't know what they're missing till they've been able to get their head around crew and saving talents a bit. There is an opportunity for a teachable moment here...or for enhanced tear collection.
|
|
|
Post by contributor on Jun 1, 2019 15:10:46 GMT -5
Ok, I'm not going to be nearly as detailed as everyone else on here. Components that I think would be cool are armors that protect against certain kinds of debuffs. They would provide lower armor value but remove or reduce the chance of weapon caused debuffs. 2-3 different classes for long (medium) and short range. So for long range, the armor would protect against Void Contortions, Electrical Fire and Secondary Explosions etc. Short range armor would protect against System Blackout, Radiation Wash, Venting Hull and Ruptured Bulkheads. These armors would offer the player the chance to choose to further focus their defense strategy, but offer real tradeoffs.
|
|
|
Post by contributor on Jun 1, 2019 4:16:39 GMT -5
So I got the story again. I noticed that when you get the dialogue choices where you can decide what to do with him, option D (where you can request cash instead of cached goods) makes reference to Power Generators rather than the Ore Extractors he is offering.
Secondly, I was wondering what controls the faction of the blockading ships that you will potentially face in combat? In this last playthrough, the Trade Blockade was over a DV planet in a DV quad. The blockading ships were Mok. DV was in no conflict with Mok and despite knowing 4 contacts in the zone, not a single one of them has a Mok contact that opposes them. I was thinking that maybe if they had a Mok enemy, the blockade was started by them and thus the ships were Mok. This is more of question of curiosity and to correct what I wrote on the wiki. Possibly it's a bug, if they were supposed to be from the quad owning faction, which is what I had assumed before.
|
|
|
Post by contributor on May 31, 2019 14:41:20 GMT -5
I also recently got a deep space travel crash on Android. I think it was the first like that and it was after the latest update. I have 4gb ram. I wondered if it didn't have something to do with a bugged deep space test. When I loaded it up and flew the same route I didn't have any problem.
Android 9.0 Nokia 6.1
|
|
|
Post by contributor on May 31, 2019 4:10:23 GMT -5
Just for the record, I am much better looking than drspendlove. I don't know how you could have gotten us confused.
|
|
|
Post by contributor on May 30, 2019 17:18:40 GMT -5
Thanks all, will fix. contributor you were the OP to suggest it by the way, +1 Are you sure? I DO love getting credit for any good ideas out there, but in this case I'm not sure it was me. I did think it, but I don't remember sharing it anywhere.
|
|