I totally agree on this Warcraft 2 example. That's what I had in mind also.

Yay! Nuclear weapons in the Gigaton area that only kills the ruling class and the military... NOT!



So the TEC learned trading and stuff from the Vasari? Oh, yeah, the other way around. Oh just let's make all races similar since they all clearly learned from each other everything so they would fight and play the same...



They have differences, yes. But they are still very similar. TEC got scout, Vasari got scout. TEC got light all round frigate, Vasari got light all round frigate. TEC got missile frigate, Vasari got Torpedo frigate, etc. etc.

Yes, they're different, but not different enough. Especially the building part is just too similar. Vasari trading? OMG.

The differences between the Vasari and the TEC (and that is what is bugging me) are in the abilities and the stats, but no fundamental differences. Basically the Vasari are the TEC with some stat changes and most abilities changed (and 2 new buildings). That's just not enough in my opinion. That makes a trader race and a military armada on an exodus just not different enough.

Perfecting the enemy technology and deploying it into the whole military in 10 years...? I know the research in-game is way accelerated for fun factor, conceivably allowing TEC to annul the Vasari advantage of supposedly hyperadvanced tech fairly quickly, but come on. Then why don't the two races have the same research tree, as they have just the same thoughts on warfare?


I don't see that happening. I see nukes, not assassin strike teams or assault infantry to eliminate the occupying planetary military. I see the population drop to zero from said nukes. I see the infrastructure start at zero when I create a colony where there used to be one, which I have blown to smithereens with said nukes.

You might want to consider what is happening in the game before ruling out my concerns.

I gather that most of the AI work for beta4 was done on getting the Vasari to work on a basic level. I'm afraid that this means there will be no major changes possible for them, as it would require much of that work to be completely redone. There is certainly a greater need for improving the AI overall efficiency in the little remaining time, so on these grounds I do not recommend redoing the Vasari. But I think I will not be alone in being disappointed with the lack of variety.

yes thats what its all about and i sincerely hope the devs will consider it



I dunno if that would be possible without changing too much in the game, but if it could be done and have a nice balance, im all into that

a lot of that stuff is similar, but comparing it to wc2 isnt correct. all those techs and abilities do make an impact and a large one at that. I'm with you, these similarities need to be broken up a bit, its disappointing that they share all the base concepts. many games have shown how you can distinguish them at very basic lvls, some even have race wide traits/ abilities that apply to every unit or building (self healing zerg anyone? protoss shields). something like that would be cool.

that said, there are already numerous discussions on the vasari, but since this is the general gameplay thread I would like to note a few other things.

I really like the grav well ring in that you can determine where you get out. I wonder though if defenses need a change now, because gauss walls are essentially useless, as you can avoid them from the very beginning. I need to put some thought into how best to defend planets now, probably the encircle planet way will work best, but it takes ages until a planet is even halfway secure from a cleverly maneuvering attacker. but also as someone else said, we need to see the ring and not just the outer boundary. make it a differnt shade of blue and we will be good.

I also really like the new planet upgrade system and the negative tax rate you get from undeveloped planets. the aim was to have players put more though whether they really need that planet now, how much they need it or if they should rather put their resources into developing what they already have. I think that goal was achieved, in particular since undeveloped planets also give so damn few fleet points. lovely. also the splitting of pop growth and planet resistance is interesting, I think I like that too.

as stated elsewhere the new kol rocks.

alright, back to the vasari discussion.

The Vasari Units, are very similar ROLE WISE, but that is usually the most important difference in how a fleet/army will function. So their fleets act the same way as the TEC, IE I am still building lots of Light Frigates, Missile Frigates, and not bothering with the Flak Frigates too often.

What makes the Vasari different is there overall tech, their econ disadvantage, and their Supreme Mobility. As well as convenient repair systems. Overall I'm happy. I'm also agreeing with Schod here that I like the fact that they are NOT the Protoss, they rely less on brute strength and numbers, and more on mobility and sensors/speed.

I just think the Phase Gate is so critical to this it should be a level 5 tech.

In addition to this, the texturing on some units is pretty bland, particularly the Vasari Carrier. While some units are very nicely done, I like the insectile/aquatic invertebrate look they have going for them.

I think the biggest problem is that their basic infrastructure is exactly the same. Why would the Vasari build mines? They are people on the go! They should be building mobile refineries that mine the asteroids, and they shouldn't have the regular refinery at all. This overall shouldn't work as well as the TEC until fully upgraded, but has the advantage of being able to run away or harvest areas without colonization.

Thats one example of a more mobile/nomadic system, another: Take the colony ship... the Vasari don't really want to live on worlds, so instead of sending down colonists, the Ship itself is the colony, it just needs a world for resources, so why not have the Colony ships be one way and redeployable... basically, they attach to the planet in orbit, and sit there the populace grows on board (slowly) but they gain a bonus if attached to a planet. Thus the Vasari in retreat can detach their colonies, (at a price in say 25-50% of the population left behind. Immediately sacrificing the colony, but allowing you to keep your population 'floating'.

Basically I think people are reacting to how little structural and economic uniqueness there is to the Vasari versus the TEC. I think their military and tactics are similar, but have allot of room for difference when you achieve the later techs.

Why do the Vasari even have culture? Its not like rampant capitalism among the humans, who really finds slavery to the evil aliens appealing? now granted they perhaps have good propaganda, but they just don't seem like the type to bother with it.

The Culture isn't really a problem - it already is propaganda. Basically, massive campaigns promoting "Surrender and you will be spared! Resist and you will be erradicated!". That's a good "evil" analogy to TEC culture.
I like the mobile refinery and mobile colony idea.

I *think* the nano disassembler gets a longer duration when upgrading. I believe I used it on a cobalt on level 1, not entirely killing it, then killing a kodiak later without any further firing on level 3. Your point remains though, and I second it: More information about what the next level gives is necessary.

Please Schem. Calm down and then read again what The Wicked Flea wrote.

He didn't wrote anything about them being "underpowered". He just wrote that what they're now doesn't fit the role they have in the lore and that they're too similar to the TEC.

They do change, but the description doesn't show it. (Which is the same for lots of TEC abilities btw.)



The above means that armor will get reduced by 2 points at lvl 1, 4 at lvl 2 etc. and that it lasts for 20 seconds at lvl 1, 30 s at lvl 2 etc.

Yep, totally agree.

Btw. after a second look at that skill, isn't it a bit overpowered?

At lvl 3 it does 40 s * 30 dmg/s = 1200 guaranteed hull damage. Which basically means that it is a guaranteed killer against a capital ship which has under 1000 hp left (repair would need to be extremely fast to survive that).

So even if a capital ship could flee it would be dead then. Just wondering.

Schod doesn't grasp that we the people who are going to play this game have every right to have an opinion based on the information we were presented by the devs about the various races.

I personally do not want to have the Vasari act as some espionage, hit-n-run, micro-manage the crap out of the ships & abilities, etc. type race.

They should be vastly superior tech-wise to the Trader forces. They're on the run and only have about 100 years in each destination before they have to pack up and move to flee the unknown enemy.

So they should likely have some sort of penalty system where they don't reap the full benefits of mining/income because they really don't have the time to significantly develop those infrastructures.

But they should have technology that is superior to the Traders, but a significant cost increase and fleet cap limitations (via higher fleet cap costs perhaps) because they represent an "exodus" fleet and do not represent the full might of their once great Empire. They are just a ragtag group running blind.