eviator

[quote quoting="post"] My personal Vault section. http://theengenieer.weebly.com/ [/quote] Clicking on your map download links does nothing.

[quote who="ASADDF" reply="39" id="3602798"] here is an updated map using different builds Build Quality 1 Erosion 500. >206 MB >> http://www.filedropper.com/aotstwilightflamemap Build Quality 2</str

Frogboy posted a thread on the Ashes steam forums that everyone should go visit called "The strategic depth thread". He is asking for ideas to deepen the strategic aspects of the game. If you are like me and thought the official forums were the place to offer game design feedback, think again and please go visit this thread! http://steamcommunity.com/app/228880/discussions/1/492379159715801383/ <

Well I agree with you. Also I don't think there should be diminishing returns on engineers building buildings. If you do need them, make them weaker than N^0.5. If I need to set up a bunch of defensive structures fast, let me build them fast!

Turinium nodes des also grant the possessor a 10% Eco boost, so factor that in. Air units, currently unused by the AI, offer the potential to strike strategic targets like factories And engineers. [quote] I feel the frigates are lacking in depth as well. They all are very similar in abilities. I’d like to see the units be specialized to the point that your choices in fleet composition make an actual difference. If the units are all doing close t

Right now any factory could fulfill that order. A bad thing if you want your units to arrive safe and fast. So while the videos above demonstrate the bugs with the system, it is logical that we should also get more features, including choosing the sponsoring factories and somehow choosing the rally path.

A lot to agree with here. Yes, please let's settle the terminology of armies/meta units/battle groups. The pacing of the game really has to wait until a teleport capability is added to the game. If you can teleport that new Dreadnaught to the front line, unit speed is less of a factor. I wonder if the pseudo-unit exists to reduce the overhead of pathing. Four units that have to take the same path is less expensive than four units that can take different paths. Your

Follow these steps exactly Step 1: create a T2 or T3 unit Step 2: click on the T2 or T3 unit Step 3: a the bottom of the screen there is the build UI where you can queue units. You may think this is the factory UI, but it's not. It is the reinforcement UI. Click some units to order them as reinforcements. That is literally all you have to do. Do it in a test game first and observe what happens after you follow the above steps. Lightbulb! Factories w

We need a Mods section of the forums. So we care share stuff more easily.

Nvidia Shadowplay. A little finicky, but I FRAPS files are too big and I can't get OBS to record with consistent quality.

You can't, but I want that ability badly. In my videos I only had one factory.

Yep, known bug. It's not just Dreadnaughts. Current work-around is to wait until it is built, then queue units.

When the Zeus orders reinforcements, the factory fills the orders and the new units that come out become part of the battle group (well, except for the bugs in the video). Part of the AI for battle groups is the units get into formation around the lead unit. So it's not really a rally point for the factory, it's the formations aspect of battle group AI that is causing them to catch up to the Zeus. A very nifty feature, once the devs fix it to work reliably (plus a couple things like f

I wouldn't say this video necessarily demonstrates bugs. But it does demonstrate easily reproducible behavior oddities that are frequently encountered, counter-intuitive, and counter-productive. Many comments and concerns about the battle group "responsiveness" are tied to what you see in this video. I hope the devs can figure out some way to address this. [video]https://youtu.be/dtM-x4eRf8o[/video] Bonus video: [video]https://youtu.be/lAIw25oMbYY[/video]

[quote who="tatsujb" reply="1" id="3604306"] Great vid! Yes! these things have been driving me up the wall. but it's not only that. it's the unwillingness to break formation when there isn't enough room to maneuver and to prefer going off a cliff also that drives me up the wall. [/quote] I actually encountered this issue when prepping for this video, so I'm hoping to be able to reproduce and record it.

[quote who="MnMShow" reply="7" id="3604228"] I find it easier to beat multiple AI opponents at higher difficulty than a single one. For example I can't win a one-on-one against a challenging AI since the last two game builds, however I have won against 3, 4, and 5 challenging AI opponents. Maybe my long game is better than my short game, or maybe the AI long game is weaker than it's short game. [/quote] I encountered this too. I think in the long game we

The following video demonstrates several easily reproducible bugs with the reinforcement system and battle group logic in general. The issues described seem rather minor, but when you scale these up to a large empire with many fronts and many large armies, the bugs can really cause a headache. If you can address these bugs, that will go a long way to making the reinforcement system much more useable, and you might just knock out some battle group AI bugs in the process, which will make everyo

What is a long time? Once in one of these states I waited 10 minutes before Alt-F4-ing. Other times it loads in 10 seconds.

All build orders use QWERTY. If there are multiple "kinds" or "tiers", you can use Tab to go between them. So I hit 'Q' 3 times. I bet I could speed it faster by hitting F2 (idle factory) then Q 3 times. Defenders would slow down the AI too, yes. But I'm not sure if the AI handles the game differently with defenders off. For example with defenders on the AI builds a factory first and sends out brutes to take other points. With them off, maybe it just sends out scouts? None

About 30 to 50% of the time when starting the game it stays in an "Initializing..." state, never getting to the intro video. I can Alt-F4 to close the game, and most of the time it loads fine when I try again. What can I do to help you guys find and fix this bug?

Here is how I go about beating Deneb on normal. This was an abnormally good start for me, never really got behind. Still works in 0.64. I have changed my build slightly since this video, though. [video]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nrD3mOqy6PE[/video]

I'm pretty sure the amplifier takes 120 seconds to build. Also, it occurs to me that in cases where it seemed like it took longer, there's a good chance I was at 0 metal and/or reactives, which means it would therefore take longer to build. I will keep an eye out for this going forward.

The cost of taking a point held by a neutral dreadnaught will take many minutes to recoup, so on many maps people just wont go for it. Furthermore, the first person to cap it incurs a penalty as the second person will likely be able to take it at a fraction of the cost. The idea is too flawed. Explosion art is in progress. They are making progress on the art every patch. The music is great, in my opinion. There is a way to decrease the music volume to 0. Your posts com

Man when then AI starts using air, its going to change everything. Ticktoc if you find a way to reproduce some of the bugs it would really help the devs pin these down. The top 2 are particularly frustrating when they happen, but I don't know that the devs really know about them because they are infrequent.

Good post. I'm sure my methodology has its downsides, but it works well enough. Each control group has a particular role. For example, 1 might control the north sector and 2 the south. 3 might push into enemy territory. I tend to have 3-5 different land armies by the late middle game, and if I am going with a Hades (bomber) strategy, I'll reserve 7 for that. I expect as the gameplay changes I'll have new and interesting roles. My various armies grow in size and cha