[quote] Spherical moons would require new art assets. I'm afraid that's not possible at this point. [/quote] what about just bigger version of the asteroids we have now? essentially the main asteroid of an asteroid planet in orbit of say an ice world?
what I said in the "raid" thread. finite just seems better and resources currently just seem to plenty. if you build a halfway good ecnomy you dont really have to decide anymore what to do, because you can do it all and the only limitation is really fleet points.
[quote] infinite resources makes the resources you destroyed practically not matter if the advantage in resource drop is taken advantage of immediately. There is no possible way to cripple and economy with infinite resources unless it is extremely pervasive and rapid. The new economic system has effectively curtailed any real way of 'wearing the enemy out' over a period of time. Quoted for emphasis. Really, th
I agree, in bigger games the standard tree gets just too cluttered and takes too much time scrolling through to get the info you want. I will probably see what I can do with the selection based empire tree next game.
the whole purpose was to differentiate between planet types so that a terran gives vastly different benefits than an ice world does. I like it that way. what you could is reduce the price of extractors and increase the number of roids so that income rates stay constant. so with 10 asteroids in total you can differentiate more than with just 3. say, ice worlds have 8 - 10 with about 70% to 80% crystal, whereas asteroids have 6 - 8, but 90% of them metal and then desert ones could only have 2 - 3
well, there are large moons, like europa or titan, but few of them are so similar in size as our moon is to earth. only other example I can think of is pluto and charon.
acutally a cool idea. and if thats too complicated, just vary the size of the asteroids. considerably.
depends on what type of "campaign" the devs are going to implement. the capships are already lvling like wc3 heroes, maybe you get personalisation here with little transmitting images of the ships' captains (think of freespace) and try to keep those same units throughout the campaign. its really something for the single player I'd say, but charakters with images and faces normally contribute to the dramatic feel of a story.
[quote] I am curious as to why the advent aren't going to be implemented until full release. If they are in fact going to be a playable race than why aren't we beta testing them to make sure we have 3 balanced races for optimal game play experience for full release? [/quote] I asked the same question. the reply was that they have internal testers balancing that (*mean*we saw how well that worked with vasari */mean*) and we are just an additional
yup. no pink ponies. this is serious stuff about getting better players, discussion strategies and above all kick all other clans' asses. hail Emperor Paradoxnt. We live only to serve your greater glory!
[quote] I'm pretty sure that tech will be modified, since it makes it possible to go way past the fleet cap How so? At least for me (with them on auto), nothing spawns if you're already past your limit when it casts. The most it did was get to -6 for me by spawning a bit bigger group than I had supply left for. [/quote] well, truth be told, I didnt even know how all those ships got here, before I read the
I think you are getting this wrong. sins will not feature billions of planets. in fact you can mod it for as much as you like, but you will not find any computer on this planet that will be able to do it. maybe with all computers' calculating power put together it might work, but I doubt it. besides that as you correctly point out you wouldnt be able to manage it. just to give you a scope of this game. medium gaves have about 30 planets in a single star system, the largest maps now have
[quote] is there a benefit to having more than 1 per system? Returning Armada spamming. [/quote] was that intentional? would seem stupid if it leads to ppl stuffing their hinterland systems with phase gates just for that tech.
Sins Forums
well, charging for gate jumps or limiting the number of ships to pass through sounds too complicated, but a seperate tech line that enhances the number of gates could work well. after all, the value of any network rises exponentially to the number of members in it i.e. just two of them are good, but by no means as poweful as one for each world.
[quote] But it's still not going to make it into release, since it'd be a brand new thing and they said they don't have time for it, so [/quote] there's always room for one more . and who knows? [quote] btw d
[quote] Wait, I thought the supergate was kind of a joke, not a serious suggestion [/quote] well, it wasnt all that unserious (i.e. I didnt make a joke here), but it will need a lot work to make it not OP. if you have it take so many tac slots that you can barely build anything else there, it becomes a risky thing and a bit ha
[quote] sorry, I dont get your point. could you please elaborate, make an example or sth? What most people want is the protoss approach to power: strength in individual units, capable of taking down multiple opponents. What Schod and I are seeing in the Vasari is power in mobility and (for lack of a better way to phrase it) "interference". Vasarin power doesn't come from their ability to take down several enemy ships while goi
[quote] I do not feel the Vasari are alien they feel PLENTY alien, just not what you were expecting. if you think the way they collected resources is a form of diversification, or the way they construct buildings, or even the ratio of resources to money is "more alien" ... haven't I said this before? [/quote] would it hurt so much? btw those resource balances matter very well, in that it would change the importance of pla
guess you were right about their intentions schod. something slightly different though. everyone has said that phase gates are very powerful and they are, they effectively tilt the balance of the game. thats maybe a bit too much influence for one tech. maybe, while bringing it down in tech level, you could also reduce its effectiveness, say by making phase travels a bit longer. then you still have the effect, but its not quite that strong and the difference between having them and not h
[quote] I think you're the only one who thinks that the Vasari should be strong without going tit for tat with the TEC, im not sure what is meant with the "tit for tat" but i do agree the Vasari needs to be alot stronger, and the TEC need more units. I also think the Vasari should be able to win any 1vs1 capship battle against the TEC, but to make it fair the TEC will have more ships. [/quote] not
[quote] exactly. not mutually exclusive imo. Except... it is mutually exclusive. Being powerful without being strong precludes the "Protoss" approach of strength in individuals ! [/quote] sorry, I dont get your point. could you please elaborate, make an example or sth? [quote] then why have we been arguing for s
[quote] blair said directly that they were planning on making capships more divergant, even more than just abilities. [/quote] irc or do we have a post for this? in any case *jump* promising.
[quote] you mean "while you can make each vasari ship stronge ..."? hm, I feel a bit confused here, don't you contradict yourself? the point is that the ships become prohibitively expensive, so you may have a few powerful ships, but hte TEC will overwhelm you suppose a single vasari capship can take down one kol and seriously damage another in a 2 vs 1 combat. thats overpowered. suppose that same vasari capship cost
[quote] hence why you can make each Vasari ship stronger, but you can never EVER EVER EVER make the Vasari stronger than the TEC in head to head combat, ergo what you guys want can never be done (big battles of numerous small ships against big ships etc. etc. the vaz arent meant to be played that way) [/quote] you mean "while you can make each vasari ship stronge ..."? hm, I feel a bit confused here, don't you contradict yourself? no,
yup thats your problem. if you continue to have that mindset on those ships you will get pounded very quickly. just a quick summary. scout: yeah, they get destroyed, so build more, they're cheap anyway. almost the most imporant thing in strategy games is information. knowing that your enemy has a huge fleet waiting just next to you is about as valuable as a small fleet. siege: try them. seriously. wait until most of the major fight is over, then bring them in. or inlcude them i