C&C has been dead for years, and frankly I've stopped caring about the crap they're churning out. The last good C&C game was Red Alert 2. Generals completely lost the spirit of C&C and was nothing more than a generic run-of-the-mill RTS, and they've been forgettable shadows of their predecessors ever since.
There are two problems. First and foremost, when you look at what damage and health you get for the cost you've paid, the lrf is better than the lf for [i]every[/i] faction. Even before we consider what counters what, the lrf is simply gets you better bang for your buck. The fact that one of these units counters the other seals the deal. Light frigates end up only being useful for their special abilities. As combat units, they're simply outclassed by ever
Again, I've seen this behavior as well. They [i]do[/i] jump as soon as I leave the well without defenders, so I think this is actually intended behavior. They're setting up for their attack, but decide at the last minute that they don't have enough forces.
This isn't a bug; the AI wants to attack, but it realizes you have too many defenses so it cancels its phase jump and moves out of position. If you removed your fleet from the gravity well it was defending, the AI probably would attack. Combine with a PJI and you can easily slaughter it this way.
Admittedly, most people here have zero background in military tactics. Our experience is with games alone, so a "2-3 default pattern" doesn't make sense to us. You'll have to explain what you mean. That said, I do know there is a stark difference between real-life military tactics and military tactics in a game. A chessmaster doesn't have the training or experience to become a military officer, just as a military officer might not know the first thing about chess.&nb
The basic Vasari early game strategy is quite simple: nanos and assailants. This combo makes one of the most devastating early capital ship killers in the game. Vasari will need to pressure enemy capitals to win a battle, since TEC will usually have the stronger economy (and therefor bigger fleet) and Advent has some jaw-dropping units at its disposal. You'll want to use your scouts in order to capture neutrals and be aggressive about it. A Vasari player who lets his e
[quote] but when I set Ressurection to autocast[/quote] Resurrection autocast is broken; use this ability manually. It's very strategic anyways, you don't use it in the middle of a battle. [quote]My question is what does the tactical AI handle well, and what does it handle poorly?[/quote] Typically early game you should turn all capital ship abilities off autocast, and just time their abilities yourself. Antimatter is a precious s
In vanilla, I never thought of the 2-lab trade port as a huge advantage. By the time you could seriously afford trade, one extra lab swing isn't a big deal when comparing TEC and Advent, and two extra labs is only a minor disadvantage for Vasari. With quickstart, that has definitely changed.
Sins Forums
[quote]As in - assault cruisers are obsolete.[/quote] Not at all, but their primary role isn't to destroy Vasari starbases (though they can clean up TEC and Advent ones quite nicely). Rather, it's to clean up enemy worlds of structures. I primarily use them to get rid of repair bays, hangers, and logistical structures quickly before the enemy fleet can react, or so my fleet can move on to the next gravity well while they clean up. They're wonderful and functional uni
[quote]well to show how much quick start helps advent early game i timed some games i was advent and vasari[/quote] I'd agree that quick-start was favourable to Advent and unfavourable to Vasari, and that needs to be addressed. Doesn't mean quick-start should be rolled back. You don't need to convince me that illuminators (and any tier 3 unit) greatly benefitted from quick start, as I can plainly see that. [quote]I like your idea Darvin about increasing the c
In multiplayer starbases aren't a big deal. Most people end up with huge bomber fleets late game anyways, and you need one hell of a starbase to actually survive that, even with fighter backup. It's the AI that has trouble with starbases. As I said, if the AI knew to keep its distance, bypass, and ignore starbases, it wouldn't be a problem.
Losing three or four civic structures to Ogrovs is also very pricy. It's all about how you use 'em. Unlike siege frigates, they're actually tough enough to take some beating and get out alive, which is why they're useful.
[quote] It is almost sad, all the advancements in technology and thats the best we can do... [/quote] Ironclad had two very severe budget limitations for developing that AI. The first was monetary; Sins is their first game, and at a certain point they had to say that the AI was "good enough". The second budget, and arguably the more restrictive, is the performance budget. The system requires for Sins are low (something done on purpose), and in order for that to
Sins Forums
Talking about Ogrovs and Starfish against the Vasari starbase is kinda pointless. I just got out of a starbase heavy game, and everyone was spamming bombers. There were a few starfish floating around from early on, but otherwise there were only two things killing starbases: bombers and my evacuator (nanos can solo a starbase if it doesn't have more than one defense upgrade). In practice, everyone deals with starbases with bombers.
[quote]However, that doesn't mean that it isn't a great game. [/quote] Course not, but I wouldn't advise playing on unlocked teams, whether single or multiplayer. The game's diplomacy system simply isn't working currently.
[quote]at least one military lab? Nooooooo, that wasn't me. Ever. Ok...maybe I Illum rushed occaaaaasionally, but my start was almost always determined by what was around me[/quote] Sorry, I should have said at least one lab. [i]Most[/i] of the time you at least needed to have repair bays available, and if you weren't going military chances are you'd want to grab volcanic or ice planets early. [quote]It wasn't broken, so why'd they fix it?[/quote] Frankly, I foun
[quote]The devs seem to have a problem with the starbases either being pushovers for online players.....or indestructable when the ai goes up against them.[/quote] The AI [i]needs[/i] to learn the following behaviors: 1) keeping its distance: it shouldn't enter weapons range of a starbase unless it has a decisive advantage, otherwise staying out of range and using bombers and/or anti-structure frigates. 2) bypassing: the AI needs to know when it's worth its time
While I agree with your gripes regarding quick start, I do think it's a step in the right direction. The problems you're talking about can be fixed without reverting back to having ten or fifteen minutes where everyone is dirt poor. I'd rather see some tweaking to the cost balance between labs, units, and upgrades rather than reverting to the days when everyone spent their starting cash exactly the same way: putting up extractors, a capital shipyard, and at least one military lab.
I'd say bide your time until the expansion is out. The AI's behavior in unlocked teams is just annoying adn there's no way around it, and in multiplayer people just form 3v1 scenarios because there only needs to be one loser in unlocked teams.
Nope. The setting file that records which achievements you have is unencrypted, so you can open it up in notepad and "unlock" the achievements that way :-P
[quote]40 lf will take care of a running carrier fleet[/quote] As I said, this isn't a carrier massing strategy; I still have plenty of assailants of my own so it's not just a matter of the enemy swapping to another unit type. Strangely enough, I've yet to see someone actually follow the LF route against me. I've seen people who just spam more flaks and people who bring out carriers of their own (prevents me from bringing out the bombers), and those who try bringing out th
[quote]The problem I see here is that we don't always get to dictate the terms of a battle. If someone else forces a battle at a place you MUST defend or risk losing the game, you will not have the luxury to whittle at vulnerable ships. You will have to destroy their main damage dealers or lose the game.[/quote] That's one of the big reasons I bring out the Vulkoras. The only capital ship (barring level 6 abilities) which can match it for bombarding planets is the Ma
Sins Forums
The thing about comparing Orkulus to the Ogrov is utility. An Orkulus can attack enemy fleets and after killing the enemy starbase remains a potent defensive fortification around the planet. An Ogrov is largely useless in a straight fleet battle and consumes copious amounts of command points. They're better than siege frigates (not nearly as fragile, thankfully) but just as much of a dead weight to your fleet overall. Vasari IMO is actually the best race for taking d
The AI's a joke right now, that's for sure. The fact is that once an AI encounters a starbase strong enough to kill its fleet, the game is over, because it will suicide its fleet trying to kill the starbase, and then will repeatedly suicide with weaker fleets over and over again.
After a recent game where I decided to get carriers as Vasari, I started to work on the concept for a carrier-based strategy to counter the usual lrf/flak spam we see online. After a bit of experimentation, I think I've got a good premise, but I haven't tested it against enough players to say whether it's solid or not. So, I'm going to post my ideas here and see what opinions I get from others. First and foremost, this isn't a carrier massing strategy.