Sins of a Solar Empire - Trinity/Diplomacy - v1.2 BETA Changelog

Yarlen

Join Date 01/2005

+369

Sins of a Solar Empire - Trinity/Diplomacy - v1.2 BETA Changelog

The v1.2 BETA for Sins of a Solar Empire: Trinity/Diplomacy players is now available! This update makes some changes to the game's engine and other core systems, so we're opting to release it as a beta before making it final.

IF YOU ARE NOT COMFORTABLE WITH USING UN-FINISHED UPDATES, DO NOT INSTALL THE BETA.

Since this is a beta, it may be buggy and do unforeseen things. If you're not able/willing to help test this out and risk strange things happening, please wait until we release the final version.

WARNING: THE BETA WILL INVALIDATE YOUR EXISTING SAVE GAMES!

BETA 4 HOTFIX CHANGE LOG

Novalith should no longer cause infinite stacking debuffs on targets.
Research screens should now properly show fleet supply numbers based on game options.
Fixed a bug where autocast would not work for many abilities.
Fixed a data error where the Destra Cruiser had the wrong fleet cost.

BETA 4 CHANGE LOG

[ GAMEPLAY ]

Advent
- Destra Crusader heavy cruiser now costs the correct number of fleet points.
- Communal Labor will now passively decrease module build time with a buff that stacks on the orbit body with every constructor ship. (Buff will disappear if the constructor ship(s) are destroyed.)
Pirates
- Pirate raid level escalation has been slowed down slightly for better overall progression.
Diplomacy
- AI players will now place bounty on one another based on many factors including diplomatic relationship level, overall threat level and simply avoiding the raid in general (like most human players). This makes Diplomacy much more dynamic in general as you can really play factions off one another.
- Missions that target or are issued by players who are defeated during the mission timer are now automatically cleared with no penalty for non-completion to the other player.
General
- Detect Mines range for all scouts has been increased to 6,000 from 5,000. This should make it easier to clear out mine fields, assuming your ship doesn't jump in right on top of one.
- Added a new AIUseTargetCondition for AntimatterExceedsAmount. This is being used on ships that steal antimatter to prevent them from autocasting on targets that are out of antimatter. If there are other abilities that could use better or new AIUseTargetConditions, let us know
- Some fixes to make AIUseTargetConditions more effective based on feedback.
- More mesh file fixes based on community feedback (thanks to all).
- Various other minor tweaks.

We expect this to be the last beta update for v1.2 of Sins of a Solar Empire: Trinity/Diplomacy. Please let us know of any major issues asap. Beta 4 will be released later today (Thursday - 3/10)

BETA 3 CHANGE LOG

[ GAMEPLAY ]

TEC
- Strikecraft destroyed by the Dunov's Magnetize ability now give XP as intended.
Vasari
- Jarrasul capital ship's colonize ability adjusted to avoid crash issue. Thanks to ZombieRus5 on this.
- Disruptor Nanites ability now stacks correctly off missile defense platforms.
Advent
- Defense Vessel fleet cost reduced back to 4 points from 5, as intended. Thanks to in-the-sun on this.
Pirates
- After the fifth pirate raid, pirates will be able to purchase two upgrade levels per raid if they have sufficient credits. (This is a work in progress to adjust scaling of Pirate strength.)
- Pirate planet's base population has been boosted slightly (for increased income).
- Fixed a memory access error in the Pirate mission system.
General
- Tips that weren't being properly loaded should now appear.
- Various fixes for old crash bugs (thanks to the community on these).
- Various fixes to mesh files (thanks to the community on these).

BETA 2 CHANGE LOG

[ GAMEPLAY ]

TEC
- The Marza's Incendiary Shells ability will now correctly refresh itself with each shot and stack up to 3 times, as intended.
Vasari
- Orkulus Phase Gate upgrade will now work at stars.
- The construction boost passive of the Jarrasul colony capital ship now spawns extra construction ships over time, as opposed to all at once, to try and avoid crashes in the physics system.
General
- Starbases with trade upgrades will now work properly at stars.
- Resolved a case where ships set to auto-explore would attempt to travel to other stars without phase jumping. We'll need more info on this one if there are other instances where players see this happen.
Pirates
- Fixed mission timer bug where the timer wasn't properly syncing up to reality (i.e., the timer said a player couldn't place another mission when they could.)
- Pirates will now notify the player if they successfully complete a mission.
- Fixed a problem with pirate raid defs that could cause odd behavior for high level raids.
Misc
- Fixed some misspellings in various data files.

BETA 1 CHANGE LOG

[ Engine ]

The game engine has been updated in order to free up more texture memory. Players should generally use no more than 1.3 GB of RAM on Huge maps with all races represented now. We're very interested to see what everyone's experiences are with this, so please post back and let us know. You can find the total by alt-tabbing out of the game and hitting Ctrl+Shift+Escape, select the Processes tab and look for Sins of a Solar Empire Diplomacy.exe.

[ Gameplay ]

Pirates
- The Pirates system has been completely overhauled with this update. Rather than relying on random upgrades which could result in a huge power curve, the Pirates will now scale gradually in abilities, fleet size and power as a game progresses.
- The size of the Pirate fleet is now based off of the current raid level (Low, Guarded, Elevated, High, Highest) and there are now preset fleet compositions for each.
- Pirates now take into consideration the total amount of bounty on offer before sending out their fleets (at High and Highest raid levels). If there isn't enough booty on the table, the Pirates will send out a smaller fleet. This is to prevent 250 credit cheese scenarios that could spawn a massive Pirate incursion.
- Pirates have the opportunity to purchase upgrades after every launched raid. There are 20 levels of upgrades available to them which include bonuses to Armor, HP, Weapon Strength, Weapon Range; plus special abilities including Intercept, Quick Jump Calculation, Timed Explosives, Heavy Fallout, Embargo Planet and Sabotage Reactor. Basically if you let the Pirates live in a really long game, they will become very nasty indeed!
- The Pirate mission system via diplomacy has been updated. Players must now pay a pre-set credit amount to generate a raid (same fleet composition as for bounty-spawned raids). This eliminates the guesswork of paying too much/little and not quite knowing what you'll get (and makes issuing raids generally quicker).
- The Pirate base's population upgrade will now properly increase population growth rate.
TEC Balance
- Kol:
  - Gauss Blast: Reduced AM cost from 75 to 50/55/60; increased damage from 325/650/975 to 400/725/1050.
  - Flak Burst: Range changed from 2400/3000/3600 to 3000/3300/3600.
  - Finest Hour: AM regen reduced from 5 to 3; HP regen increased from 10 to 15.
- Dunov:
  - EMP: Range increased from 4500 to 4500/5000/5500; AM cost changed from 100/90/80 to 90/90/90; cooldown reduced from 50/45/40 to 40/35/30.
  - Magnetize: Max affected strikecraft increased from 8/12/16 to 12/20/28.
- Marza:
  - Incendiary Shells: Stacking limit increased from 1 to 3.
  - Missile Barrage: Range reduced from 10,000 to 8,000.
- Hoshiko:
  - Demolition Bots: Changed needsToFaceTarget TRUE to FALSE.
- Novalith Cannon:
  - Cannon shots now cause a planet to suffer 100% reduced trade income. This effect will no longer stack.
Advent Balance
- Radiance:
  - Animosity: Increased max targets from 8/16/32 to 12/24/36; effect now channels every second over 20 seconds instead of being an instant action so new targets entering the AoE are hit; auto-cast will only activate if 3 or more enemy ships are in range.
  - Absorptive Armor: Increased armor bonus from 1/2/3 to 2/4/6.
- Rapture:
  - Vertigo: Increased range from 4500 to 4500/5000/5500.
- Revelation:
  - Guidance: Now a triggered, caster-based area of effect that affects friendly capital ships, frigates and structures. AM cost is now 90/100/110; range is 8000/8000/8000, cooldown is 50/50/50; buff applied grants 25%/25%/25% boost to ability cooldown rate, duration 20/30/40.
  - Clairvoyance: Duration increased from 90/120/150 to 90/150/210.
- Communal Labor: Allows constructor ships to buff the rate of whatever a structure does (i.e., ship building) by flying within range of it. (NOTE: Sorry, this didn't make it into BETA 1.)
Vasari Balance
- Jarrasul:
  - Colonize: Now grants additional constructor frigates instead of a structure build rate bonus. Gives 1/2/3 constructor frigates for 360/480/600 seconds.
- Skirantra:
  - Scramble Bombers: Reduced expiry time from 120 to 75; reduced cooldown time from 35 to 30.
- Antorak:
  - Distort Gravity: Reduced cooldown from 45 to 40.
- Vulkoras:
  - Phase Missile Swarm: Increased range from 5000 to 6500; increased max targets from 3/5/7 to 4/8/12.
  - Assault Specialization: Increased bonus damage from 60/120/180 to 90/180/270.
- Stilakus Subverter:
  - Shield Disruption: Reduced Phase Missile Block reduction from 25% to 20%; reduced Shield Mitigation Reduction from 10% to 8%.
  - Distortion Field: Reduced radius from 2000 to 1600.
- Kostura Cannon:
  - Will no longer damage and stun enemy ships.
- Orkulus:
  - Debris Vortex will now only activate when debris is in range of the effect.
  - Debris Vortex's second level will now unlock correctly.
- Raider Xenophobia: Tech moved to level 5; reduced from 2 upgrade levels to 1; will now reduce the Pirate fleet size sent against the player by 1 level (i.e., an Elevated level fleet size becomes a Guarded level fleet).
- Pinpoint Bombardment: Increased range bonus from 0.1333 per level to 0.6667 per level.
Diplomacy System
- The Aggressiveness Rating for all players has been changed to be a random value between -1.5 to +2 (from -2 to +2).
- The calculation for Military Presence has been updated to look at the ratio of the players' used fleet points instead of just overall fleet points. This should make the overall diplomatic rating more balanced overall, especially at higher difficulty levels. We'll be looking for feedback on this.
- Added a new Trade Bonus modifier for diplomatic relations. Players who have a Trade Alliance will slowly gain a positive diplomatic relations bonus with one another as trade ships reach foreign ports up to a maximum of +2. If the Trade Alliance is ended, this bonus will decrease gradually back to 0.

[ AI ]

The AI will no longer max out all of its gravity wells with mines. Mine building is now based on AI type. This should help reduce memory use and improve performance.
Fixed bug where the AI would form a Pact, break it, and then immediately reform it if the players' relationship value dropped to a certain level repeatedly.
The AI will no longer send Envoys to non-aligned gravity wells where the player controls a resource (i.e., if you controlled a neutral extractor at an asteroid belt).
AI players will no longer "spam" the player with mission requests after a mission has been rejected. Each rejection will cause the AI to wait four minutes before offering another mission (culmulative up to 10 times for each consecutive rejection).

[ Interface ]

The far planet icons that show up when far stars are visible are now turned off by default. Hovering your mouse over the far star icon will now show the far planet icons (if visible). Alternatively, holding down ALT will now show all visible far planet icons.

[ Misc. ]

Fixed a couple errors in the entity files that would cause the game to crash.
Ability PhaseOutHull will now play the proper sound effect.
Adjusted max dot for graphics to 0.95 from 1. This should largely eliminate the strange white lines that would appear for some players on the edges of ships/structures. Special thanks to Aractain and Kitkun for this info!
Missions can now be rejected so long as there's at least half the original mission time remaining.

To update to the BETA, run the Impulse client and once you're logged in, click the blue button in the upper-left corner. Check "Show pre-release versions" and that will display the beta update. Update the game via the Update or My Games tab and that's it.

How to provide feedback

For gameplay related feedback, please post it in a new thread on these forums. One issue per thread, please - that'll make it easier to keep track of things.

If you encounter a crash or a multiplayer desync we will need you to send in some information to sinssupport@stardock.com.

For crashes: Send us your PC's dxdiag report, the Sins mini-dump file, and your latest save game. Please also provide us with any information or details you can about what was going on before the game crashed and if the issue is reproducible.

For desyncs: We will need the last saves for all the players involved and as detailed a description of what was going on at the time the desync occured. Also, please indicate if the desync is reproducible from your last save point.

Locked Post

Advanced Search

Watch this post

Do not email me updates for this post Email me updates for this post

Successfully updated karma reason!

Yeah, 512 of RAM just isn't enough for Sins.

That isn't enough for a current operating system.

Successfully updated karma reason!

I am waiting for the devs to use the communities hard work and add TSOP into a patch ! Its not like I can't play the game, just had some virtual memory limit problems for the first time ever after having played a long match at Agamemnon's Bounty. This is just one of the laundry list of reasons why I need my own computer instead of this older one. Well, I don't want one of the new operating systems quite yet, I will take XP over them any day, because it is a lot easier to do things on XP.

Successfully updated karma reason!

Ryat

Join Date 06/2006

+429

I find Win7 to be very good. Even if it does eat up about a Gig of mem.

Successfully updated karma reason!

Buffing fighters will fix bombers and lrf.Think back to carrier days and it was mostly fighters.Even fighters could kill caps in large numbers.One of the better things that could be done for caps late game is to increase their hp gains as they level.

I also think pm are fine.So is the kostura.You can only keep nerfing vasari so much.If subs have been nerfed so that tec can survive mine attacks then tec vs vas is probably pretty good.My main problem as tec vs vas is their insta fleet destroying abilities.

Make the advent sub healing ability actually work good and advent vs vas will be alot better.Especially with the addition to fighters being more dominant.These 2 fix are critical imo.Less cap killing ships in the field means a better vas vs advent match.

IMO the small tweak to fighters will fix a ton of our imba woes.

With flak getting nerfed to fighters they need some other damage buffed or get a hp buff to make them more tankish.Otherwise it will be the end of them.

Successfully updated karma reason!

Just played 10 player multi star ME v 3 unfair v 3 unfair v 3 unfair

I was tec and must say no problems detected. Once i got attacked by 3 unfair with full fleet at the same time lag became intolealble and i had to quit. That was after 2 h of game or so..... Fleets were maxed up and i had to spamm carriers to survive. At least in this game AI was quite smart. Those 3 that were attacking me they were allies and they were coordinating their attacks so they attacked me always 2 or 3 at the same time.

Just one question was vasari SB HP boosted a bit??? Becouse they were all vasari and orkul had just over 27000 HP. Damage was higher than I remember as well 320 on first weapon.... Perhaps its just me ..... that ai had 2 artifacts that i know of ....

Successfully updated karma reason!

Quoting MindsEye,

reply 554

Are you talking about AI spamming siege frigates? or multiplayer? I think the idea is to get siege frigates more useful in multiplayer. yes they are cheaper than capitals, but they also dont add to your fleets' offense. its more cost effective to just get a capital. At least to me, siege frigates aren't pulling their weight.

Quoting MindsEye,

reply 554

That's something we want to avoid. bombers should be useful, just not overpowered like they are now. fighters should be useful as well, just not overpowered like they were back then (yes, fighters weren't overpowered against as many things as bombers are now). I agree with the capital hp, but doubt it will happen.

Quoting MindsEye,

reply 554

okay, so when vasari researches pm tech, what do you think TEC and Advent should do to even the score?

Quoting MindsEye,

reply 554

I guess I can see this perspective, but the domina doesnt come out until pretty late. I think we wouldnt know how it might play out until we get a fixed domina in the patch.

Quoting MindsEye,

reply 554

IMO the small tweak to fighters will fix a ton of our imba woes.

With flak getting nerfed to fighters they need some other damage buffed or get a hp buff to make them more tankish.Otherwise it will be the end of them.

Actually, I think flak merely need to swap a bit of effectiveness vs fighters to vs bombers. Then, i think effectively, flak+fighters+capital abilities would combine to create a perimeter free of bombers. If your missing any of these, they will get through. And then, that becomes the goal: take one of these down, while keeping your bombers docked.

Successfully updated karma reason!

Only way to make capships viable past midgame is reducing LRF damage against caps, even to 25% (75% atm).

Fighters/Bombers/Flaks triangle need a lot of tweaking (mainly bombers survivability nerf and fighter survivability vs flak buff), but main reason of Capships baing not usable at lategame are LRF - extremely long range, spammable, versatile units should not be capital hardcounters as well, 75% damage to caps is overkill...

Successfully updated karma reason!

ZombiesRus5

Join Date 02/2009

+340

Just played 10 player multi star ME v 3 unfair v 3 unfair v 3 unfair

I was tec and must say no problems detected. Once i got attacked by 3 unfair with full fleet at the same time lag became intolealble and i had to quit. That was after 2 h of game or so..... Fleets were maxed up and i had to spamm carriers to survive. At least in this game AI was quite smart. Those 3 that were attacking me they were allies and they were coordinating their attacks so they attacked me always 2 or 3 at the same time.

I setup a similar game of me with a 3v3v3 unfair ais.

I took out the neighbors on both sides of me and never really got attacked after that... But I don't know if I would call it lag or not, but the game consistently studderd towards 2 hours. It hadn't reached unplayable yet. I may load up the save and engage with the large fleet neerby and see if the studdering continued or became unplayable.

I did check the memory before I shutdown and it was less than 900 megs.

Successfully updated karma reason!

ust played 10 player multi star ME v 3 unfair v 3 unfair v 3 unfair

I was tec and must say no problems detected. Once i got attacked by 3 unfair with full fleet at the same time lag became intolealble and i had to quit. That was after 2 h of game or so..... Fleets were maxed up and i had to spamm carriers to survive. At least in this game AI was quite smart. Those 3 that were attacking me they were allies and they were coordinating their attacks so they attacked me always 2 or 3 at the same time.

I setup a similar game of me with a 3v3v3 unfair ais.

I did check the memory before I shutdown and it was less than 900 megs.

My game wasnt studering so much (just a bit). But once that battle comeced it took a ship to phase jump from 1 well to other one about 5 min or so. In older version Couldn't play past 1 h before lag became unbearable. In my game at least, all fleets were maxed up. CCA 2000 fleet points each.

Successfully updated karma reason!

TobiWahn_Kenobi

Join Date 08/2008

+83

@ZombiesRus5 and Greg30007

What PC configuration are you using?

Successfully updated karma reason!

ZombiesRus5

Join Date 02/2009

+340

Quoting TobiWahn_Kenobi,

reply 560

@ZombiesRus5 and Greg30007

What PC configuration are you using?

I have an i7 860 (not overclocked right now), 8GB (1600) ram, Win7 64. I was also running on High/Medium/Low for effects with trade ships turned off and everything above and including skybox turned off. I don't remember the studdering in the previous version so may need to try recreating there to confirm if it's better or worse.

Successfully updated karma reason!

For the whole flak balance vs fighters/bombers this came up to me as an idea on the bus. Historicaly flak has never been a cleart eh skies of enemy planes solution/weapon. To me it has always been a make the planes job attaking you so difficult that they lose efficiency. Flak never decimated hords of planes, planes decimate planes, has always and always will.

Now for sins fighter survivabilaty VS flak needs to be increased. Bombers survivabilaty need to be decreased. Now what you need to do is simulate ingame what i just mention above of making flak make SC lose efficiency. Best and simple solution to this would be to make bombers recive a damage penalty for 30-60s after reciving damage. That way they still remain usefull but your would be able to WTF pwnd enemy caps and will give a chnace to suport cruisers to keep that cap alive.

Esentialy the flak doesn't need to killt he target to be effective it needs only to tag it. The clearing of the air of SC shoudl be done by your own fighters or by your LFs killing the carriers them selves.

Solution seems so simple baffle me I didn't think of it sonner.

Successfully updated karma reason!

Sinperium

Join Date 02/2010

+219

I've played all setting on max quality for the beta with 10 player solo games running over 4 hours in length. No stuttering at all with the exception of a split second pause now and then when autosaved.

The current beta also loads and shuts down at least 20% faster for me as a rough calculation.

Windows 7, dual core Athlon here with an average 1gig ddr5 single PCIe graphics card.

Successfully updated karma reason!

I got i7 2.7 Mhz 6 GB DDR3 1333 (i think its right num lol) ram 2x GTX285 SLI ...... Win 7 home premium 64 bit

I played on default settings.....

Successfully updated karma reason!

Quoting EadTaes,

reply 562

or you could simulate what you meantioned by having the flak be very effective vs a full squadron and ineffective vs a lone strikecraft. then you have the fighters be very effective vs a lone strikecraft and ineffective vs a full squadron. if it ends up making half squadrons the norm, i dont think we're in too bad of shape as bombers would be doing half damage. it actually makes sense too. flak are shooting in all these directions at once and while the chances of them hitting any one ship in a squadron are small, the chances of hitting at least one are pretty good. similar with fighters against a lone ship, its an easy target, but against a full squadron, they've got back up (a star wars squadron tactic was to constantly rotate the lead ship, thereby bringing in fresh shields. I know strikecraft in sins dont have shields, but you can see the idea here)

The question is how to do this? i would try making flak very acurate vs all strikecraft, but then have squadrons grant dodge bonuses that increase as ships are lost. fighters would be tricky and would require something like a damage boost vs empty squadrons, but it'd have to be carefully done so as to only affect squadrons and not ships. it might work with just the dodge bonus, who knows?

The end result is you can park flak in your fleet and take 75%-60% regular damage from bombers(due to having 25%-40% less actual bombers), depending on how many you have. after that, you need fighters. But if theres alot of bombers, you will need alot of fighters to really make a dent in the percentage (because they arent good at full squadrons and wont be able to do much). if you dont have enough fighters or flak, the bombers will simply be replaced at the same rate you kill them, locking the damage percentage (because if there are more, flak does better and brings the number back down. if there are less, the flak does worse and brings the number back up). if you do have enough, the fighters mop up and wipe out the remaining bombers, letting the flak be retasked to help dps and making your fleet completely immune to strikecraft

this might cause more switching of command points. if your bombers are taking a beating vs fighters, should you divert some points to fighters to help thin them out? it could turn the tide if theres less bombers for them to target, essentially nullifing them. on the other hand, you might say that your bombers arent worth the damage, and swap em all for fighters to augment your flak and defend your ships vs their bombers

Successfully updated karma reason!

That's also a good idea. But from what I know of the games current code it would require creatign new scripts for it to work in it complexity. The idea behind my sinple damage reduction to damage when bombers are hit would not requier any new code. They would simply copy paste the code they place on carrier when they take dmg and replace build penalty with damage penalty. Would take 5 minutes to put in.

Successfully updated karma reason!

Sinperium

Join Date 02/2010

+219

Perhaps what's needed is a flak platform. It could have an ability that gives a de-buff to enemy strikecraft in the gravity well (a greater one to bombers). Make each flak platfrom's effect cumulative (stackable) and you could still use traditional flak ships and abilities but also reduce the effects of invading strikecraft.

This is similar to my suggestion for siege frigates to have cumulative buffs for one another within a certain distance.

I'm sure their is a pre-slotted alocation for facilities so maybe giving the flak ability to an existing one would be a remedy that could actually be implemented now. Perhaps adding to the tech tree for guass guns and the like that gives them the flak effect once researched.

I'm thinking more along the lines of how can it be added if the beta doesn't provide it.

Successfully updated karma reason!

Pre-Order check.

I'd buy the expansion just for the Titan-Class vessels.

Anybody else have issues with trade ships not moving? I played a game the other day where each trade port would spawn trade ships and they woud just sit there. They stayed like that for about two hours until suddenly I noticed they had started moving.

Successfully updated karma reason!

Sinperium

Join Date 02/2010

+219

Nope--every game mine have--was there only a single trade base? they park until one they can connect to exists.

Successfully updated karma reason!

TobiWahn_Kenobi

Join Date 08/2008

+83

@ZombiesRus5 and Greg30007

Me, I have an MacPro 6-Core Westmere xeon CPU, 8 GB of ddr3-1333 and a RadeonHD5870. Everything is fine for me for now, but I haven't played a huge game in a while. I played a (huge) MP game with a friend however (for about 7 hours, not finished), and the only time my computer stutters is when it is waiting for his PC to keep up. This was with Entrenchment though (he does not have Diplomacy yet). I need to verify this with Diplomacy, I don't think my xeon is that much better than your regular high end CPU's

Successfully updated karma reason!

@ZombiesRus5 and Greg30007

Maybe it has to do something with OS as well. Since microsoft released that boundle update I had a lot of Visual C runtime errors ending my game, Not clasic MD so I cannot submit dump file because it wasn't generated. I know my OS is screaming to be reinstalled. Just need to decide if i wanna buy SSD and put OS on it.

Another thing is that game doesn't use multicore or multithreading (not sure about last) and in this case CPU acts as single core 2.67Mhz at least in my case. That means that game utilizes equvivalent to single core CPU vith 2.67Mhz. As those Mhz become most important it becomes quite weak procesor.

I usualy don't lag and game is quite bearable on single star map. That game was actually run with intention to test lag on multi star maps compared to before and there is a lot of improvement

Successfully updated karma reason!

I am talking mp.Siege can be used effectively in their current state.Are they a staple unit of fleets?No.I am ok with that.I personally dont want my worlds sniped by hard to kill frigs but rather I want them to be sieged which should be a difficult thing for the sieger.

siege-

the act or process of surrounding and attacking a fortified place in such a way as to isolate it from help and supplies, for the purpose of lessening the resistance of the defenders and thereby making capture possible.

any prolonged or persistent effort to overcome resistance.

a series of illnesses, troubles, or annoyances besetting a person or group: a siege of head colds.

a prolonged period of trouble or annoyance.

I agree but if perfect balance was unattainable then I would rather have fighters be more dominant then bombers and lrf.

okay, so when vasari researches pm tech, what do you think TEC and Advent should do to even the score?

If vas goes for pm then their econ will likely not be great.Tec will need to go eco and mass ships as is their playstyle.Tec vs vas is not a bad matchup until vas gets subs with mines or a bunch of kosturas killing your fleet in seconds.Tec can pretty much out spam vas and keep ahead of the pm problem with hoshi and ups.A possible tweak to their armor ups could be useful.Maybe uping them to even numbers(1-2-3,ect).Advent will have a late game domina to provide some buffer to getting their hulls ravaged.Vas is geared to soft counter advent like advent can soft counter tec.Advent can deal with mass ships better then vas.Again if fighters are more dominant there will be less lrf and bombers to kill caps.Advent need caps to play well.I could see a small buff to the ilum.This may be enuf for advent to compete.

I guess I can see this perspective, but the domina doesnt come out until pretty late. I think we wouldnt know how it might play out until we get a fixed domina in the patch.

Its true it needs to be tested.The goal is to make advent playable vs vasari not completely nullify them.Pm are a part of the game to be used most affective against advent.If domina gets fixed and we nerf pm how will vas survive against advent?Advent do not have to worry about losing shields and adding a ship that repairs like a hoshi at 25hp a sec(I suggest 30 which may be to much for tec to handle) would be a good start.Nerfing vas to much will just throw the game into another state of imba where games are all advent and tec(except maybe quar).

I agree the other route is make flak equally good vs both fighters and bombers or just a bit better vs bombers.

Successfully updated karma reason!

a somewhat minor detail that I dont remember being there before:

when mousing over a frigate or cruiser from a distance, it shows 2 health bars. At this same distance, with no mouse over, you cannot see any health bars (which is fine, im just trying to provide more information). You might have to zoom in to see what I'm talking about. theres a second health bar on the inside of the logo

Also, the Printscreen button is disabled somehow. I wasnt able to take screen shots, so I checked the bindings. it looked alright, but it wouldn't work, so i cleared it and tried to set it back to printscreen. It wasn't registering at all. I was able to get it to work off of scroll lock.

Successfully updated karma reason!

Ryat

Join Date 06/2006

+429

Quoting SithLordAJ,

reply 573

Glad I'm not the only one that had the issue. I had to reassign screen shots to another as well. I used Ctrl+P.

Successfully updated karma reason!

I agree but if perfect balance was unattainable then I would rather have fighters be more dominant then bombers and lrf.

This was the state of things when Entrenchment launched (I think it was 1.10 for Vanilla, but I don't remember exactly). I actually liked this balance version a lot because strikecraft kept LRM in check and then LF became viable against carrier cruisers (because there wasn't as much LRM to destroy them), and bombers could still do a ton of damage, but they suffered attrition to the strikecraft. But the majority of the community screamed bloody murder that strikecraft were too powerful.

Please do not buff siege frigs.I think they are fine.The more cap ships you try to get the better they get because caps cost alot more with numbers.Do we want to see large fleets of siege frigs mid game sniping planets?This happens occasionally now.

Are you talking about AI spamming siege frigates? or multiplayer? I think the idea is to get siege frigates more useful in multiplayer. yes they are cheaper than capitals, but they also dont add to your fleets' offense. its more cost effective to just get a capital. At least to me, siege frigates aren't pulling their weight.

I would have to agree with Mindseye that you don't want to buff Siege anymore. The current Siege balance lets you do two things...make one or two ships to mop up worlds your main fleet has pushed past or cut off without pulling one of your Capitals off the frontline, or making a world assassinating fleet to take out moderate to lightly defended worlds before the fleet gets destroyed. Unless your main fleet is around, it is already pretty hard to stop a fleet of siege frigates from mowing thru your worlds. Yeah, the siege frigates take losses, but the idea behind this strategy is that the attacker can replace his siege frigates while you are take big losses to your economy.

I've seen games where the person being attacked is actually winning with his main fleet, but he is losing all his worlds to the siege frigate fleet and he has two choices, 1) stop attacking and try to save his worlds, or 2) keep attacking but be unable to siege the enemies worlds as fast as he is losing his own to a dedicated siege force. If you make siege more powerful, you are going to see them become one of the prime "all in" gambits for victory.

Successfully updated karma reason!