eviator

If I happen to be one of the founders with access to the VIP build, you can bet I'll be giving it a go.

Whew, lots of stuff in this thread. As for me, I'm excited about the progress of the game so far, the progress to come before release, release (5 weeks away!), and post release development. Keep up the good work!

What's to stop your opponent from doing the exact same thing to you? 1. The early game engineer node capture is not an exploit, it is a design decision. That the AI doesn't currently employ that tactic is a matter of AI coding, not balance. Your human opponent can do the same, but didn't. 2. I think an incursion might stop that pretty handily. Even a single smarty might be able to handle that. 3. Neutral anti-air is probably the wrong solution. That would m

Yeah, it's an appropriate amount of micro.

You got it right. This is called the "reinforcement" system. It's a really great idea, enabling you to specialize army compositions very easily on the fly. Unfortunately due to the "any random factory" issue, units taking the shortest path from the factory possibly through enemy territory, as well as bugs where some new units have a mind of their own despite being part of the army, it's not ready for prime-time. I hope Stardock will keep working on it though, even if it means do

Okay, lets say it's not a strategic choice whether you go for them...you must. There is strategic choice that exists by their presence, though: win by VP or win by annihilation? Intentionally lose the fight for one VP, so the other player effectively overcommits while you flank and take out their Nexus, a good chunk of their economy, or other Turinium nodes. You say it's pure math, but Sun Tzu would argue with that. You might be able to win 10 out of 10 games using your optimal s

For what it's worth, I only came around to this realization (Startdock games take years to mature) recently. I followed GalCiv 3 since beta 1 and was completely dismayed at the state of the game at release. Now at 1.5 it is showing signs of maturity, but they are a long way from it. In 12 months, 20 months after release, I think GalCiv 3 will finally be close to the game I was hoping for. I was impatient at first, antagonistic at times, but now that I have this model of their development

Tough crowd. I liked FA. While I loved the complexity, it was too complex and click-intensive for my buddies to get into, so we didn't play it much. I also like Ashes. I think my buddies would enjoy it more because it's easier to understand the game state, accomplish your goals, and establish objectives. Seeing as how the lifecycle of this game is supposed to be at least 3 to 5 years, my guess is most of you all will be able to come back to this game at some point and find more of wha

There's nothing wrong with annihilation, but I am open to other objectives, including TP. I question the motives of anyone willing to outright discount TP as an objective and victory condition, but as long as you have a logical argument that's fine for discussion purposes. I produced logical arguments supporting them. Arguments against them are normally paraphrased to be "they feel dumb". I'd like to know why they are objectively bad, if that argument can be made. Even so you don&

Yeah, I don't see TP that way. To me, Turinium nodes are THE primary objective of this game, even more-so than destroying the enemy base. Players should be fighting for control over them above all else. Not only are they the primary victory condition, each one you own gives you an econ boost. If folks start considering them objectives and not just gimmicks, the genre can finally progress beyond the SupCom era.

I used an Orbital Strike to blow away the remaining structures around an enemy's nexus. The graphics were underwhelming, but the result was pretty powerful. I was able to march right up,because only the nexus was left. I am in agreement with much of what Ticktoc said. I'm not sure they'd be able to deal with much of that before release, which would be a shame because I think some of those things will negatively impact reviews. Still holding out hope though.

Did this happen prior to the beta? I ask because the most recent update gave aircraft the ability to hit ground targets, and extractors are particularly vulnerable. So I'm wondering if the enemy was doing that, but you didn't catch them in the act (they move fast).

Okay, have had a chance to play it. A little, not much. Performance is way up. Like 30% up, so great job! Substrate feel different enough for those of us that have played a while. But I think some new folks are not going to "feel" the differences in their first impressions. And first impressions are pretty important. The new orbitals, the air to ground harassment, and to a lesser degree the dreadnought veterancy upgrades definitely open up the tactical and strategic de

Yes!!! Gonna play it ASAP!

Usually the thing I want to measure is the distance from my nearest planet/ star base to a colonizable or invadable planet. I want to know the range my ships would need to have on them to reach it, allowing to minimize build cost or maximize other enhancements. Sucks to build a colony ship only to find the prospective planet is 1 tile outside of its range.

Well to my recollection you promised us one extra key and we got that, so in my mind we're square.

The core reason they are not interested is that their primary genres are FPS and MOBA games. It's nothing against Ashes, it's just not their genre.

Devs, despite my attempts I could not entice any of my friends with this game. If I can determine that my extra key has not been used, would you be okay with me giving it to another founder So they can distribute it? I'm thinking it would be better to have another beta tester than to have the key go unused.

It's looking good, ready for a beta quality game with two months of development to go. Visuals look good, especially on your system which is clearly on higher settings than I can pull off. The gameplay seems rich, with a variety of approaches to the middle and late game. I still think there is some balancing between units and structures as well as quanta costs that should be done. And we know the AI is going to get some love. There are two things I noticed in this walk through tha

I'm assuming you aren't looking for bug report videos in this thread, because I have a few of those :P

I've recently learned that holding on to the "old" way of doing things is not productive. Leaders must set the vision, but embrace the new ways younger folks make it happen. If we make the vision clear enough, and focus on results, we get what we want. If our vision is murky, we don't. When you compare two products and can clearly see one is good and one is not, the difference isn't usually budget, it's leadership. My $0.02.

Gotcha, now I understand.

[quote quoting="post"] AI One thing that really bugs me is that the AI often sends raiding groups straight through my main defense lines to attack control points behind it. They literally just drive through, most of them get killed but often enough a few make it through and kill quite a lot of production. I get the general idea of these raids but rushing through a defensive line? Really? [/quote] Does this really fall under

[quote who="ASADDF" reply="4" id="3615320"] Putting the same Units into 1 Icon with a number next to it, I think it will be awesome because you can have a maximum of 12 different Icons per Group or region, and that will save a lot of space in the Empire Tree. [/quote] You've convinced me. Sort-of. A number is quick, but physical size comparisons are quicker. If the empire tree grew the size of the unit icon depending upon the number of units, it could also display

I just got Sins: Rebellion on Steam and now I can understand why Ashes has an Empire tree. To make the Ashes empire tree usable requires significant improvements from its current state in 0.71. I don't want to diminish this terrific effort by ASADDF , so I'm just going to talk about why I think the Empire tree in Sins works well, and how it can work better in Ashes. 1. Icons in the tree match the icons on the map.