oh, and blair, what I almost forgot. will this exaggeration of strengh relations include capships or limit itself to frigs and cruisers? if feasible and balanceable, I would like the former.
[quote] It's annoying to read people always defending Sins or destroyings people ideas. Good thing I come along to poke at Sins as much as support it. Like now: Culture is way overpowered. I ordered the construction of a culture center when the enemies culture line was less than halfway to my world; it wasn't even 50% complete when the planet flipped. That is way too fast. Edit: Also, in addition to the "
a multianna post: [quote] 6. Ship design is what got my attention on GalCiv I hope you guys reconsider adding that feature to the game. There will be more ways to customize your capital ships, but not there appearances. [/quote] more ways? where do you have that from? it sounds very interesting and reminds me of an idea we discussed some time ago.
[quote] You want the simple sliding scale of unit strength vs unit numbers, whereas he is enjoying the more dynamic and mature multidimensional scalar exemplified by the idea of being powerful without being strong via units that focus on mobility and (for lack of a better word) interference (screwing with the enemy's ability to do stuff). What you fail to realize is that you can have both . [/quote]
[quote] games? how about the classic we have been throwing around the whole time: starcraft. everything you list here is extremely shallow, building build visuals? why not play supcom (one of the less differentiated games out there) "unit characteristics" as in whether or not they heal, pff thats a small difference, the Vasari rely much more on shields than the TEC and theirs regen much faster, while the same holds vice versa for plating.
@blair: well, lets wait and see, those changes just might suffice to achieve what I would like to see. although at least one or two elements changed from the base formular would be nice.
[quote] but that just isnt enough. it has to scream differentiation with every aspect. name one game that does that bar earth at war. then why kill them with uber weapons only to settle them again? I would prefer if there were a certain percentage chance of surrender, so that not all of the infrastructure and population has to be eliminated. reduce bombardment dmg to balance it, but it would just feel more se
[quote] and come on. bombing then resettling is stupid enough for tec only, but for aliens? first bomb everything down, then resettle it, with humans even? plain stupid. and those bombardement weapons are wmd and they dont just kill the ruling class or the command infrastructure, the destroy everything on the planet and thats the simple truth. or are they using neutron bombs or some nanotech that just kills certain ppl. barely. Vasa
alright, enough of it, could we please stay on topic? the fact is that there is no uber defining trait that makes the vasari feel unique. they require a different play style, granted and good. but that just isnt enough. it has to scream differentiation with every aspect. f.e. giving a race no shields at all would be highly differentiating. thus, anti shield weapons would be useless and they have to find another way to deal with focused fire. also, I liked the idea of multi (?)
[quote] Overpriced, but tougher ships are the norm for vasari already, why are you guys arguing over nothing? [/quote] because its not all that noticeable. in general I'd say vasari ships are rougly 15% stronger than their TEC counterparts. some of the people here are talking about 100% i.e. twice as powerful. however much it is, it should be noticeable in production and combat.
bug or intentional: I could take over the pirate base with culture and start building stuff there. maybe I've been ignorant, but can it even be colonized? ad ai: a load of pirates were just sitting near a terran planet doing nothing for long parts of the game. possibly they killed off an enemy colony and then didn't know what else to do.
[quote] and "abilities are slightly different" excuse WHAT??? what exactly is the TEC parallel to phasegates huh? how about highly tuned sensors? how about returning armada, phasic barrier, gravity tolerance, planet sucking, PHASE GATE (ability), Antorak, Subverter What about the fact that the entire frigate selection (which is the meat and potatoes of the game for a very, very long time) is identical with a different dress. What abou
maybe we have a bit of a missunderstanding here. making the ships more powerful isnt the same as making the race per se more powerful. did you get that? the vasari are all about preservation, so it would make sense for them to build sturdier, stronger ships that they can more easily get out of harms way again. but that doesnt automatically make them superior in head on contest with an equal resource investment by the tec, so you still have to play differently and employ different strat
I like the new kol too. and as has been said, its okay if it looks different in style from the other tec ships. only ship in the armada that was originally built for combat, rest of them are converted from other uses, for those who still missed that info.
[quote] The Vasari would not be too strong if changes were made that accomodated stronger economy/production for the TEC while the Vasari were stronger in individual ships but could not afford to field fleets as large as the TEC (perhaps a penalty on maximum fleet size or just significantly higher fleep capacity costs per Vasari ship) I was really expecting to see a Vasari cap ship be able to take on 2-3 TEC capital ships on it's own. They should be absolute juggern
well, yes, the vasari were presented as vastly superior in technology, so I too expected their ships to be a lot stronger. if you keep the cost side balanced, it should be possible to make a distinction here AND keep all the phase space and manipulation stuff. protoss also had way more powerful units than zerg, but that didnt automatically make them dominant in a game, because the just had fewer of them. Schod, you're right, the high level techs are very powerful and the vasari will pro
I agree mostly with what annatar said before. though the vasari feel a lot like the TEC on the surface, their abilites will probably give them a different play style. but I personally still think they are too similar, most ships are essentially copies with each other with diferent abilities and a bit stronger. for capital ships the difference is even less, which I dislike. make them stronger, but more expensive, also the officer upgrades and give them less in total like only 12 compared to the T
like schod said, it makes focused fire more attractive. when I looked at capships under heavy fire, the shield points drop noticeably slower than the hull does afterwards, which is very likely this shield mitigation effect. now, if you have a weapon that can ignore part of this mitigating effect and stack damage directly on the hull it could potentially be very dangerous. whether it works is another issue, I haven't been able to try. does make for an interesting research positi
[quote] I think they should simply give the dead asteorids an development option, that doesnt add any population, but removes the costs. That way you could decide between lifetime rates or a one time bigger investment to solve the matter. If its a point heavily combated that you might loose you can pay the rates, but if its more back and you are probably going to keep it for a while the higher cost of the development might be the right route. [/quo
[quote] Dead asteroids have no tax income, yet when colonized they have the same -2.2 drain of all the other planets. This doesn't make a whole lot of sense, since dead asteroids have no population and there really isn't much 'development' to be done for them. [/quote] sense or not, I actually find this quite interesting strategically, as you really have to weigh whether or how much you need that planet for defensive position and whether it is wor
[quote] I was under the impression that there was a vasari ship capable of creating a temporary phaseline system to it... allowing for sneak attacks... also question: are phaselanes between phasegates open to all? or simply the people owning the phasegates? [/quote] I would need to check the description again, but I think its only a dial home device. would be rather kick ass powerful if they could just go anywhere they want. <br/
[quote] Gravity wells now have an inner and outer boundary that form a ring where both sub-light movement and phase jumps are valid. This change is very nice. But now we need a graphical representation of this (besides the one we get when pressing the Alt-key). I would propose tho shade the outer circle of the grav well in a lighter blue then the inner circle, to distinguish those two easily. It's imho information that should
[quote] Well Yarlen mentioned refineries in that line of the change notes. I'm guessing they'll just give you extra, much like trade ships give you extra credits in addition to planetary income. And by the sound of it, the pirates are just getting new graphics. [/quote] oh, missed those two words "and refineries". then its pretty clear.
short question: if the resource asteroids are infinite, what will happen to refineries? will they just give you extra amounts in addition to what you already have? will they be taken out of the game? will the still interlock with the extraction upgrades ( we discussed it before, in beta three researching those extraction upgrades would help when using refineries on depleted asteroids iirc)? does the item on the pirates mean they will be getting stronger again, or will they get different
sweeeet. *drools* and still a lot more sweet to come. yummy.
Sins Forums