[quote] Yo Limz, How do you know I never played Starcraft. Did I say that. Because I sure remember quite a few games of Starcraft getting through the regular campaign and the expansion. So yes I do know the origins of the term Zerging. Anways TEC LRMs still are in my opinion a bit unbalanced. It takes me longer as advent to start making arai drones and fighter squadrons etc. They cost alot more in metal. It pretty much seems like TEC is turning into th
Limz!
Hence, against any LRM massing player the real answer is using Flak Frigates/Defense Frigates/Whatevers simply because LRMs can't kite them and secondly the Flak Frigates take virtually no damage from the said things. Toss up bubble as Advent + Shield Regen to tank for a bit before your units get into position. You did bring five of them with you right ? At the very least?
HuntingX, There is a problem with your scenario, we really don't know what Stardock intends by having competitive multiplayer. In a matter of fact, if anything else this game seems more oriented to FFAs.
[quote] To the OP .. Play larger maps! You're unbeatable strategy goes all to hell when you play larger maps! Even if you play FFA and 10 players the game dynamic is completely different. I agree that LRM's are like light (or maybe better) Cruisers early, and cheap ones at that, but position is really, really important on larger maps. Tactics are important, micro, micro, micro!! I make tons of three and four ship fleets and micro them to focus fire on ANY ship that is giving me prob
Advent will probably be using this the most , that is the Z-Axis and that's specifically for Illuminator micro. That and probably Kol users if they want to utilize their broadside autocannons in conjunction with frontal ones.
Well, there is still a point to Illuminators, you need to pay attention and micro them properly but positioning them so that their arcs of fire can hit multiple targets. That probably involves using the Z Axis and coming from an angle - either way, Illuminators will require top notch micro to maximize but relying on disciples is sheer madness. That being said, the biggest problem all of you are truly facing is that Stardock/ICO refuses to set a standard for the game - without a STANDAR
Whitewolf, post a replay of your idiocy please to enable better critique as to what the hell you did wrong (probably a lot). Also, do yourself a favor like I did and read the damage charts and figure out exactly what goes where and how. Then after punching a wall or perhaps hugging a carebear go and review the replay of your own game to see where you could have improved and what the enemies were doing the entire time. I beg you to pay attention to the resource management of you
MOO2 styled defenses would be cooler or something similar for planetary purposes: Emergency shelters install planetary defenses (gauss/beam/missile/whatever) each with say 1,500 HP and does an average 20 capital damage. You can have perhaps 4-8 of them and they absorb 60-70% of the bombardment damage while the planet absorbs the rest. Once they die , the planet soaks in all the damage. Anyways just an idea but it would make planetary defenses a lot better and not so much of a joke.
[quote] 1) siege frigates kill planets too quickly, even in small groups they can annihilate a 3000 health planet before a fleet of ships 2 or 3 jumps away can react. even with the health decrease they can do too much damage too quickly. [/quote] They're already non-factor late game unlike every other unit in the game, furthermore, they eat up a huge fleet supply and cost a lot of resources. I think redefining them might be a bit better by increasing cost, changing armor type an
Clutters the UI too much, but a table would've been nice along with other information say in a manual or listed on a website somewhere.
Defense/Flak , Mass Fighter , Illuminators every now and then but basically mass back flak ships to counter LRMS since they're a lot beefier in every respect and with fighter/bomber dominance you should be able to push them back.
[quote] The difference between a "top" and an "average" player is just too big for the argument to make sense. The reason I use Starcraft as an example is because it has been around for so long that most of the things that can be talked about it is already established as "fact". Each race in Starcraft has their own distinct strategy that you can not use one tactic for another race and expect a similar result, provided you're playing against someone at the same tier. And no, I, or anyone who
In a small map go for military right off the bat for defense frigates / drone hosts / purge vessels (probably not) since the chances of you having a prolonged fight is fairly small - in other words you're probably better off rushing. In a larger map, I would rather go econ thus triple harmonies and then triple hostilities, you'll want the econ as soon as possible so you can afford the things in the larger picture (as well as jumping to other systems) , the tier one units will carry you
The real question here is: Vasari = TEC = Advent. The answer is no. Any other comparison falls out of the OP's intent. [quote] Sins DOES NOT have such STRONG distinction between its races. [/quote] Subjective, I find it as much fluff ridden as Dawn of War. As for the Waagh resource model, it's a cheap knock off of having to research your unit caps. I think what really matters most if we go off topic is whether or not the diversity affects real game play a
HQ leveling = Logistics upgrade for the planet =P I feel thus far that the RTS play is just as much as in any RTS environment simply because there is a best way to get the fastest econ up and there is the best way to conduct warfare i.e. unlocking all the units so you can have diversity or forcing your opponent into adapting to your unit spam so you can counter with an even greater different unit spam that overwhelms them. I feel that the execution is the same though the spir
SamF7, Yeah, mass fighters is the best way + flak frigates, you'll want both regardless. =p
EMH, You are 100% correct. Shield mitigation is scaled by the percentage of your shielding left, thus against Advent when you're down to 600 some odd shielding you get an absurd amount of mitigation. You actually want to focus fire at that point because spread fire would do very little. While against TEC it is viable to spread fire, but in general you will have units focus firing on other units which have a weakness to it but never a general focus fire. However, you want to k
[quote] Rofl at Flak Frigates shredding up LRMS and Light Frigates. [/quote] I meant LRMs and fighters =( I swear.
Rofl at Flak Frigates shredding up LRMS and Light Frigates. Seems like the way to go for Advent using Frigates is Defense + Illuminators ! Thanks for the information! =D
I think the devs have stated the integers are just for display purposes to give you a rough idea of what it is actually doing.
[quote] I completely agree with the OP (original poster.) It’s my belief that the majority of strategy gamers have been weaned into playing in a certain fashion, turtle or rush, those strategies have been catered for by game dynamics and those they play against. But not Sins, I’m glad to see that Sins opens an entire host of different tactics for us to employ, so the limitations of the two play styles is no longer there, it’s just a matter of people changing their strategy viewpoint
Alchenar, [quote] Also, what Limz! said. Relic have managed to get themselves a reputation of *almost* balancing their games perfectly and then releasing an expansion that ruins balance completely. The other case in point being CoH. We had an almost perfect balance between Allies and Wher, and then OF got released. Only now are we getting even close to balance again (and Wher players have had to completely change their game in a maximise cheese kind of way to counter Brits). [/
[quote]See...? I was right, Droolers. People comparing this to a full paced RTS game... tsk tsk I actually prefer a 4x Games. *eyes my Space Empires V Icon*[/quote] Actually, Sins is a very viable fast paced RTS game - play on Grindstone and you see the exact same methods employed in all RTS. You will immediately scout, colonize, harass and counter then build accordingly while trying to suffocate the player. You also have just as many options, hence why people have said this ga
Bensam, [quote] When was the last time you played DoW? [/quote] Less than a week ago on ladder. In a matter of fact I only play that game to ladder. [quote] Arrogance has nothing to do with skipping over quote wars posts. When people forgoe discussing the issue in a general sense and only wish to shoot down bits and pieces of someone elses posts, they aren't actually after discussing the issue and when all is said and done, even if you prevail, they don'
So basically: 1. Scout. 2. Counter/Harass 3. Rinse and repeat 4. Victory Same as any RTS really until you hit FFAs.