Four months? Sounds suspiciously close to when they changed the file format of the maps, and caused a bunch of incompatibility havoc. Make sure you have patched to the most recent version of the game, and download the most recent version of galaxy forge, and give it another try.
1) The problem with more varieties of ships for the same purpose is simple: you end up using one to the exclusion of others. Already the siege frigate and light frigate have nearly been edged out of existance because capital ships and long range frigates (respectively) can fulfill their role well enough that they're not really necessary. Any new units should fill entirely new roles and not overlap existing units. Similarly, I feel more content for the existing capital ship
Sins Forums
[quote]. i agree, id also like the ability to turn off auto-fleet join.[/quote] Totally in agreement; auto-join makes maintaining my fleets an absolute nightmare.
Honestly, the zerg player's lack of persistance and creativity when it came to getting that expansion up was sad. All he'd have to do is sneak his second drone into the smoke and come out as soon as he lured the probe into his base.
When you select a planet, you can actually stipulate an owner who controls it at the start of the game (just be sure to give them the necessary number of population infrastructure upgrades as well). Unfortunately, this has some unwelcome side effects. Every planet starts with a frigate factory, and if quick-start is on also starts with two scouts and a capital ship factory. Since the AI doesn't scuttle, this is effectively a massive handicap to them. Although in past
[quote]Try to work towards one that has semi-serious orbital positions while keeping some sense of balance-- it's harder than it sounds.[/quote] I can attest! Remember that the angles at which a phase lane meets a planet is more important than the distances of the phase lanes towards balance. There's not a lot of difference between a 5 second and a 10 second warp, but there IS a lot of difference between an obtuse and acute angle between two phase lanes.
Sins Forums
Please remove me from "no change needed" on both carriers and missile barrage. I thought I was clear that I strongly felt a change was needed, but none of the changes you listed were appropriate. For light frigates, put me down for a yay on: increase damage increase shield/hp/armour tweak targetting AI nerf counter (LRF damage) I'd also recommend, as I suggested in another thread, that perhaps they could
I've had this discussion before on other forums. I think it's very premature to say that the RTS genre is dying. Most people are well aware of the "migration" towards consoles, but the RTS genre has been the glaring exception. I personally think that the kind of gamer who likes RTS is just a different beast from the kinds of gamers that are on the consoles. I think the console-gamer is epitomized by the Yahtzee Croshaw of Zero Punctuation fame; buy new games at
[quote]Additional Artifacts (3). [Ok, this is relatively obvious, but their functions are largely unknown].[/quote] This is new content, not a new feature or change to an old one. If the artifacts deserve to be listed, so do the new starbases and frigate types. [quote]Damage Multipliers were changed for various ship types?[/quote] I wasn't aware of this; if it did happen, it wasn't significant enough to be noticable.
The Vasari Starbase presents the highest threat. The Advent base is only a real threat once it has its meteor control upgrade. Without it, it's just a big fat sitting duck. The TEC base is [i]always[/i] a big fat sitting duck. So long as you don't give it the opportunity to use the big red button, it's the least threatening starbase by far. As has been mentioned, the Ogrov and a big fleet of bombers are your best course of action to take down a starbase.
1) Warcraft III: An awe-inspiring game, truly one of the greats of history and to date the best RTS game I've ever played. Its powerful map editor clinches its position as one of the greats in the history of the genre. I've played dozens of RTS games since its release, but only a handful even deserve to sit on the same shelf as WC3. 2) Sins of a Solar Empire: The [i]only[/i] title I've played over the past several years that can be compared to Warcraft III, Sin
[quote]In Galaxy Forge, is there an easy way to specify how many extractors a planet should get instead of its just being random?[/quote] There is no way of doing this. Nor can you control planetary militia in any way (the other big wild-card). There should be. Gaian Crescent is a nice map that's unfortunately ruined by randomness. If you get a heavily defended desert planet and your enemy does not, it leaves you with virtually no expansion opt
Yes, the AI is absolutely atrocious regarding starbases. One thing I noticed is that their normal retreat logic appears broken when the starbase is in a gravity well, and they will not retreat even against insurmountable force, leading to their complete annihilation. While I think they're trying to avoid the starbase phase penalty, this is much preferable to [i]death[/i]. The AI also needs separate retreat logic for their capital ships. Loses those things so frequently
Sins Forums
What? Nothing about light frigates up there? The forgotten and forsaken unit type, they seem to be. Ah well, a LRF nerf (seems the blood everyone is screaming for these days is LRF...) will certainly help them. As far as guardians go, I do think an AM cost increase is good, but I don't think it will fix the problem on its own. It goes deeper, down to the fundamental issue that a big compact fleet is an effective fleet, without exception.&nb
The unfair AI spams ships like crazy when it is located close to an enemy. This seems more like a bug than the usual AI idiocy. That said, I did see a hard AI suicide its cap and army against a relatively heavy militia force guarding a neutral terran planet, so I walked in and took its home planet unopposed. Seems this goes back to the AI's inability to properly evaluate the danger presented by an enemy force, and that it will not retreat a capital ship and instead allow it
Positioning your ships to maximize their firepower is definitely a very good strategy. Knowing where the weapon ports on your capital ships are is good knowledge to have. The important ones (for TEC) are Akkan, Marza, and Kol. You seem to know Kol well enough. Marza has the advantage of being entirely forward facing, so all its weapons can batter the same target at once. The Akkan has some on its port and some starboard, so trying to get it between enemies is a g
For TEC, I either get Akkan / Marza / Kol or Marza / Akkan / Kol. Sometimes I'll get a Sova or Dunov, but usually that team of three will be my primary caps throughout the game. For Advent, Progen / Halcyon / Radiance all the way. I might swap radiance and halcyon depending on my situation, but otherwise this is pretty straightforward. If it goes late game and I'm bomber spamming, I bring out a Rapture for concentration. For Vasari, the Evacuator goes without
[quote]and why I've been advocating that Mitigation % be linked directly to Incoming DPS.[/quote] The easiest way to do this would be to have shield mitigation fall at a faster rate when it's higher. I don't think there should be much additional overhead to this.
[quote]I fail to see the need for multiple nicknames.[/quote] Having shared my computer (and therefore games) with two brothers for many years, I can tell you having multiple nicknames is always nice when there are in fact multiple people using the account. My brothers rarely play Sins, but when they do they certainly don't want to be Darvin, nor do I want them to be.
[quote]I'm a major economist[/quote] Although it's tempting to research trade ports early on, avoid that temptation. Colonizing new planets costs less than establishing an fledgling trade system, and you'll earn a lot more money. As a rule of thumb, ensure you can build a trade port chain of at least length 3 (preferably 4) before you invest in these expensive structures. The longer your chain, the more money each trade port will bring in. [quote]I'm a TEC ex
I think it's pretty obvious you wouldn't try this against Vasari, so this is more in consideration to the vs TEC and Advent matches. I think the biggest issue you will have is getting this off the ground. Dunov is a poor first capital ship choice, and building lots of capital ships early on is a very expensive proposition. It seems that you'd be better of putting all that cash into getting five military labs and bringing out heavy cruisers. A lot more dangerous than th
[quote]The egg is powerful. Very Powerful. I'm sorry though. When you consider that the Mothership is why Advent economy early on doesn't suck, I have to hand the name of "best overall cap" to the mothership.[/quote] While I agree with you in the general case, I think this is matchup dependant. The egg is definitely at its best and the progen at its worst in the Advent vs Vasari matchup, so if we're speaking specifically about that situation then I have no problems saying that t
That might be an interesting way to do it. Personally, I've long thought the guardian and subjugator should swap positions in the tech tree, putting the guardian at tech level 5 (and repulsion at 7), with the subjugator at tech level 3
[quote]How about the kostura[/quote] In practice, you rarely see superweapons. In fact, I've [i]never[/i] seen superweapons used in a multiplayer game.
I'm not aware of anything that would stop you from having it installed on both computers simultaneously. I myself have Sins w/ Entrenchment installed on two computers, much for the same reasons you describe.