Seleuceia

Reply to Community Balance Patch: Diplomacy/Pacts in Strategy Sins Forums

[quote]iirc, in another thread you slightly increased the fighter vs bomber modifier[/quote] I have not done that...it was a suggestion I considered to weaken bombers but it is not incorporated anywhere that I know of... To my knowledge, the only released version of anything is the mod that changes capital ship abilities and GoaFan's change to damage multipliers with respect to armor type... [quote]if the initial bomber wave is defeated, the strike craft still respawn,

Reply to Community Balance Patch: Counters and Damage Modifiers in Strategy Sins Forums

[quote]Heavy vs LRF isn't nearly as bad as you make it out to be. Really the only heavy that has problems is the Vasari Enforcer; the TEC and Advent varieties will defeat LRF.[/quote] I sympathize with this, though HCs are also easy to counter (bombers, which everyone builds in mass) and bombers can't be easily countered themselves...I believe the most prudent action would be to leave LRFs vs Very Heavy armor alone and see if speed and reduced effectiveness against heavy armor solve

Reply to Community Balance Patch: Diplomacy/Pacts in Strategy Sins Forums

I've had similar experiences with this....when I play 2v2s with my friends, we now have a house rule of no supply pacts...we used to use them, but unless you could wipe out the other team early on, it was impossible to win once they had supply pacts... The issue with pacts and envoys is that they will also be impossible to balance...a missile pact is worthless to an Advent player but ridiculously overpowered when given to a Vasari player...the anima pact the Advent have is wo

Reply to Balance Patch: Non-capital ship Abilities in Strategy Sins Forums

Alright...so far we have faster AM regen on hangars and Phasic trap has a max target count of 50...may not be perfect but it's a good start...so, as for other abilities... For starters, I think the domina's abilities need some help... Suppression has a cooldown of 30s and an AM cost of 75...perseverance is 150 AM and a cooldown of 60s....I think the cooldowns should be reduced to 10s and 20s while the AM costs are reduced to something like 50 and 100...that way, the penalty fo

Reply to Community Balance Patch: Diplomacy/Pacts in Strategy Sins Forums

Culture does need help, I agree...it's not a bad idea, that is almost a 50% increase in the rate of change... My only concern with that change is that Vasari are going to get the least buffing/most nerfing in any balance patch...Advent (at least early game) are only going to get stronger, and Advent already have arguable the most powerful SBs and defenses...I'd be wary of boosting the Advent's late game potential, and since they are the only faction that can project culture,

Reply to Community Balance Patch: Counters and Damage Modifiers in Strategy Sins Forums

[quote]Anti-mediums effectiveness against very heavy armor (HCs) changed from .75 to .55....effectiveness against heavy armor (carrier/flak/support) changed from .75 to .60...[/quote] I've suggested similar numbers to your own, though I have them flip flopped...the reason I did this was that flak has anti-light weaponry, so it is rather damaging to LRFs... HCs only get 1.25 against LFs...I don't think that number should be lowered...if there is a problem with LFs still being t

Reply to Community Balance Patch: Counters and Damage Modifiers in Strategy Sins Forums

I agree... Reducing LRF effectiveness against heavy and very heavy armor I think will do this...LFs are great against flak/support/carriers and are very fast...LRFs are good against LFs and also good at shooting capital ships...flak are good against LRFs and also can shoot SC...HCs are good against all 3 and caps but they aren't the best against any one thing and are the most vulnerable to bombers...I'm not certain it is the best route, but it's the best I can come u

Reply to Community Balance Patch: Diplomacy/Pacts in Strategy Sins Forums

Eh, 800 Fleet supply is going to be really hard to balance against... It's not uncommon in a game that goes into the late stages for one or multiple players to go up to the sixth fleet supply upgrade (which is 1360 fleet supply)...at that level, you lose 56% of resources to maintenance, which means you make 44% of what you would otherwise... With a supply pact, you could have the same fleet supply but only need the third fleet supply upgrade (which is 550, so 1350 total with s

Reply to Community Balance Patch: Counters and Damage Modifiers in Strategy Sins Forums

Yes it will, I won't deny that...but it also empowers carriers and it makes your fleet composition a crap shoot...if I waltz into your planet with carriers and a ton of LRF, what are you going to do? If you have LFs, my carriers hold ground...if you have LRFs, my carriers kite...either way, you lose...if you build a nice balanced fleet composition of flak, LRF, and LF, all I have to do is engage your fleet, and since LRF still dominant, again, you will likely lose...the only way you can

Reply to Community Balance Patch: Counters and Damage Modifiers in Strategy Sins Forums

[quote]The reason I like it so much is that your ability to quickly take down capital ships is unchanged if they sit still, preventing something like a double-Vulkoras rush from simply clearing your homeworld with impunity,[/quote] This is important, I agree...but if LRFs are less effective against heavy and very heavy armor, you still have cap killers (LRFs and bombers)...the thing is, you have to be much more careful about balancing your fleet with HCs and LFs...I think both diverse

Reply to Community Balance Patch: Counters and Damage Modifiers in Strategy Sins Forums

I don't think move speed is a wrong answer (regardless of what else is done, LRF speed should probably be reduced)...the problem is, the units are still going to be just as damaging...if you actually want to fight your enemy (which you'll eventually have to do) you will have to face LRFs...even if their speed is decreased, it is not the only issue with LRFs...they are still too powerful, and reducing their effectiveness against heavy and very heavy armor is going to help... Y

Reply to Community Balance Patch: Diplomacy/Pacts in Strategy Sins Forums

Problem is, I don't think it can be implemented... As Zombie has said, allegiance is not an entity modifier but a research modifier... I don't think there is a new buff we can give this ability that isn't already done by other envoys and that fits the culture theme... Not certain which way to go on this, but I do think a reduced cooldown to make this bonus more constant will definitely help...

Reply to Testing changes made to Capital Ships in Strategy Sins Forums

I agree...carriers are the baseline, everything else the same or faster...

Reply to Community Balance Patch: Diplomacy/Pacts in Strategy Sins Forums

In general, I agree with your observations...but I think more than just the supply pact needs to be nerfed...I think the Vasari envoy bonus Mutual Threat is ridiculously overpowered...I've played 2v2 games against a team with a Vasari ally and that envoy bonus alone made it extremely difficult... Let's look at some numbers here for envoy bonuses.... Arbitrate tariff gives +50% trade for 60s out of 180...or about 16.7% constant trade bonus...pretty powerful...and proba

Reply to Testing changes made to Capital Ships in Strategy Sins Forums

[quote]may i suggust increasing the battle ship speed to 550... and decreasing the carrier speed to 500? minimal changes... but I think it will help with carrier kiting, and lack-o-battleships.[/quote] I agree that the capital ship speeds need to be re-evaluated...but I think this may be taking place in GoaFan's thread ...

Reply to Community Balance Patch: Counters and Damage Modifiers in Strategy Sins Forums

Carriers, Flak, and Support all have the same armor type...you can't reduce the effectiveness of LRFs vs just one unless you changed the armor type of carriers (which would affect a lot of things)... We're having a bit of a problem here because there is virtually no agreement... The problem with LRFs is that they are damn good at killing just about everything... Something has to give... LFs are what is supposed to be used to counter flak, support, and

Reply to [MOD] Project Equilibrium in Sins Modding Sins Forums

As far as I know it should work in entrenchment...the only issue is that the entity manifest file and string file will contain things from diplomacy...I don't know if that will cause any problems...

Reply to Community Balance Patch: Counters and Damage Modifiers in Strategy Sins Forums

[quote]but on the upside it also means you can't guard them with LRF (or if you are, you're being slowed down by them anyways, and enemy LRF can catch up).[/quote] Okay that is a good point... But, slower LRFs are only going to help LFs...now, that is a good thing and something we probably want...but it doesn't do capital ships much good...if anything, it makes kiting even more effective and more important...caps can run away easier but they can't really stick it in a

Reply to Community Balance Patch: Counters and Damage Modifiers in Strategy Sins Forums

If carriers are 525 (and I really don't think anyone wants to see that number go up), then I vouch for colonizers and siege being the same (no more)... I also think support should stay at 525...they have powerful abilities, a fair amount of SC...I'm not sure they need to be faster than carriers... However, I do think 600 is a good speed for battleships...and the faster turning rate is not bad either... I really think all caps should have the same speed with th

Reply to Balance Patch: Non-capital ship Abilities in Strategy Sins Forums

Well, I think I did find away around it...and I don't think it will matter... There is a entity bool modifier ActivelyBeingConstructed...and there just happens to be a constraint NotActivelyBeingConstructed... So, if we need a work around, I think we got one... In the game I was testing this, I had 5 Hangar bays (so a potential to freeze 250 SC) and an Advent fleet with over 350 SC attacked me...I tested it with the work around and without...in both cases, it seemed to

Reply to Community Balance Patch: Counters and Damage Modifiers in Strategy Sins Forums

[quote]Is it worth changing or not?[/quote] I'd say no and here is why...conceptually, yes I think it should be one but all the abilities are balanced with this current armor value...everyone's frame of reference is dependent on this value...if we were to make this game from scratch I'd definitely make it 1.0 but I'm afraid changing that number may mean other abilities will have to be looked at again...good catch though...

Reply to Balance Patch: Non-capital ship Abilities in Strategy Sins Forums

[quote]As in, just the phasic traps change, or some of the others discussed?[/quote] Phasic trap is now an instant action with a max target count of 50... In addition, TEC/Vasari Hangar antimatter regen has been increased from .25 to.45 and Advent Hangar antimatter regen increased from .35 to .65... [quote]This could be a problem... I think this could be the case.[/quote] I'm going to see if there is some constaint that can be used to prevent this but I'm not h

Reply to Balance Patch: Non-capital ship Abilities in Strategy Sins Forums

Here is a downloadable file with the above changes... I tested this on Point blank against a Vicious Advent AI... Since SC entering the AoE after the ability is cast are no longer affected, it requires much better micromanagement...I decided to increase the target count that trips the autocast from 5 to 15... The AI player had plenty of SC...one potential problem is that I'm

Reply to Community Balance Patch: Counters and Damage Modifiers in Strategy Sins Forums

Are the numbers perfect? Who knows...but its a great starting point! I like the changes, and will look forward to testing them :-)

Reply to [MOD] Project Equilibrium in Sins Modding Sins Forums

I have nothing against the optimization project...I certainly think it should help, but versions with and without it would be released... By the way, as time progresses, downloads will be converted to all binary files for efficiency...