you can toggle it on and off
Gauntlet03
the supreme commander system would greatly spice things up
Ron if you were reading my posts a little more carefuly you'd see that I'm well aware that they prevent a bypass. In fact as of now that is their Only purpose. I'm complaining about how they have stripped away a valid tactic and allot of depth, especially in scouting. Complaints that it hurts the AI to have the trapping version are frankly invalid considering that it forces the AI to stand and fight rather than retreating. Which as we all know is the AIs greatest flaw. Also the AI was
you can have any pseudo science you like, it won't change the fact that the way it is now, or the way you suggest (2 phase Inhibs block a lane between them) makes them far far less valuable, and tactically much less important, as the border systems where the battle will occur is not going to benefit from the inhibitor. Great they can't bypass the system, but who cares? They wipe it out, take the planet, and then move on anyways. At least if it punished retreaters it would have a tactica
it would actually fix the gauss turret if it could be moved, all be it very slowly, and obviously not outside of the orbit ring.
Awesome Idea, you could justify a 1-1 ratio of tactical to fleet, because the structure would cost you something.
Like I said before, I would be happy with an increased cost in time or anti-matter for retreating fleets. Frankly trapping the AI is not what I'm worried about, I'm mostly thinking of the fact that right now defenses are not terribly powerful. Especially as someone pointed out, the enemy can probe my systems with no consequences. They now know the location of all of my defenses. Frankly its very easy to bypass them, destroy the civilian structures and ships, and then destroy the defense
I like the TEC designs as pirate ships more than regular military... the pirates simply use outdated and jurry rigged designs, such as the current flak frigate and the Kodiak space tank of stupid. The TEC ships should be very similar but more intelligent, the Flak frigate should be changed to reflect this its just too boat like now. Notably the Kodiak should really have that big top turret move... it could be the only tracking turret and I'd forgive it all of its ugliness.
but it doesn't make any scientific sense, and way more importantly it discourages scouting and takes away the possibility of using the 'stranding' as a tactic. Thus de-complicating tactics.
The Z axis in HW was important because their were important things both up and down from your position, in Sins currently there is not. There is no true open field, where below me a wonderful resources is located and above and to the left is a small enemy encampment, everything is directly ahead behind, to the right or left. They would need to change the galactic plain to be say at least 3 layers of height, and put systems up and down, affecting the Z axis of phase entrances. This would add allo
I don't think the game alienates people, I've been showing it to gamers and its been getting a few doubts, but when they see the graphics they say ooooh, when they see the scale they say ahhhh, when they play it they have fun. I think your being overly critical, firstly I think it has a solid grasp of RTS, its missing other factions and a competent AI thats it. As to 4X it only has the scale. So you could argue its not living up to that, but I think allot of things are not impl
mmm the penalty/bonus should be immune to said bombardment.
I like the idea of negative effects having been found via exploration, but they should be rarer than the good effects, and it should be randomized of course. With this implemented you could reasonable have more discoveries pop up and make the exploration cheaper as your empire will not gain quite so much in the end.
You mention, small but very strong fleets... I kinda wish I'd see an advanced race that went with numerous, and easy to produce in large quantities, but not terribly strong. Just the occasional advanced race that like the strategem of overwhelming numbers, rather than limiting themselves to just ten reallly strong ships which are undoubtedly less flexible.
I had this happen to me once, I was zooming in, and it was an excessively large fleet, even for me lol. 100+ ships against about 75-50 enemy ships engaged in a star system, they were retreating.
good call~ didn't see this at first~ so I posted something similar elsewhere regarding this.
Thats a good idea, I like it, but the translation shouldn't be 1 to 1. Maybe 1.5 or 2 to 1. That way we don't suddenly double fleet sizes due to the fact that we don't defend 70% of the empire. Completely unrelated, but I like the idea of a 'focus point' a ammount of free tactical/fleet points, or cost which you can focus. IE focus on Defense gives you extra tactical points or reduces the cost of building defenses by 10%. A focus on fleets decreases cost, or increases anti-matt
You know what I'm gonna expand on that some more... we already have your standard good waypoint system, But we are missing the much nicer aspect of Sup-Com's. Lets say I want to go around the edge of a system, I make 3 points making a rudimentary curve... the ships go to one point, slow down, change direction, and begin again, then repeat until they get there, sometimes making a 180 turn while not moving to change course. Instead, the 3 waypoints should 'merge' (have a key like
It makes sense to a certain degree, that the TEC ships don't have a universal style, the TEC being for the past 1000 years merely peacefully coexisting but utterly seperate human societies. The robot cruiser is just an example of a design used by one society that never got allot of distribution to other companies etc. Also, it could be a brand new design, much like the KOL, thus it looks more advanced than typical TEC ships because... it is! That being said, its a smal
I actually feel there should be less 3D not more. Since I don't they will implement a good and true 3D and even they did I think its overall impact is low, since its a 2d solar system, that they should just cut it out entirely. The only strategems I see possible are mostly abuses that the AI won't handle well. Take out the ~ key and bingo things work fine. If you can't do 3D right, scrap it. I would love 3D I would, but right now I feel that since most games evolve into a process of one
I agree the total anhilation, or rather Every option for viewing economic factors and the movement command system of Supreme Commander, should be implemented.
Your point of view may be getting so much disagreement because of your insistence of a supposed 'downgrade' complaining about certain aspects of the game is by no means a bad thing. But you see those are coming back, they took it off to work on. You just seem to be ignoring the warning that pops up every time you play telling you that the beta is not neccessarily fun. Not to mention that there are 2 more betas to go through.
I think a never ending chain of techs lacks character, and if your concerned about techs becoming vanilla and everyone having them, then you need to be forced to make a choice, IE you cant have it all. Thus you want the techs to be more expensive not less. Or I suppose you could put a final limit on how many total techs your allowed. Say if the game has 30 techs, you can only buy 20. Thus each player may have a different set of techs.
That would make sense, as it would represent the fact that for allies and non-combatants you shut off the Inhibitor so that they can jump.
Make it less rare... Pllllleeeeasssseee