ARROGANCE, NERDRAGE, TL;DR POSTS, ETC & occasional helpfulness!

Well the game is rather.. messed up now.
This whole people accidently telling the enemy your plans because /a doesn't stick.
The lack of colors, you can't tell if someone said something to everyone or just you. While what you say will go "To allies: yada yada" everyone else just gets your name and text, so you have no idea if they accidently told that to the enemy or not, you have to ask if they ally chatted that.
Then there is the bad imbalance between races now from the new black market. The only time people play Vasari now is because they purposefully want to gimp themselves and know they'll win anyways, or because they haven't seen how much worse they are(which then the game starts and 20-30 minutes into it they say "my god vasari is horrible now..")

Are we going to have to wait until 1.04 to get these things fixed?.. 1.04 is supposed to have lots of new features and extras as I understand it, and thus it's not coming out next week or anything. Probly late next month, right? But can we wait and undure the game being so messed up until then in online play?..

I'm going to keep this simple without to many explainations so that it's not tl;dr:

Firstly.. Please bring back random amounts of extractors per planet like in the "Random Resources" setting in 1.02!

Black Market

  • How the Black Market works now is much better, but the prices are not. This whole tec and vasari imbalance is coming from cheap buy prices and even worse sell prices. The solution to this is simple.. adjust the Black Maret so buy pries tend to go higher and stay high, and sell prices be much higher too.
  • The 3:2 ratio was better than the one now
  • sellPrice 1.6(up from 0.8) buyPrice 2.4 would be good, IMO, and have booms happen twice as easy and the price go down slower after booms.

LRMS

TEC Jav LRM
  • 1.03 cost. 275/45/25
  • Supply increased to 6.(up from 4)
  • Reduce range (it's at.. 11000.. now.. With Akkan it's 13000 or so. It should be getting 11000 WITH akkan, so start at 9250 or so)so that it doesn't outrange Gaurdian's Repel skill and so many other abilities without having Akkan(that'd be buffing akkan if using it made javs outrange some abilities. Tactics, and such).

Advent Illum

  • 1.02 cost. 360/50/40 I believe it was
  • Supply increased to 7.(up from 6)
Vasari Assailant.
  • 1.02 cost. 360/55/35
  • Supply increased to 8.(up from 6)
All LRMS
  • Medium Damage Vs. Very Heavy increased to 100%(up from 75%, this is what heavy cruisers and buildings have now.
  • Building armor changed to a new "Building" armor type. Medium damage vs. buildings 50%(down from 75% it had on Very Heavy) All other damage types vs. this building would be the same as Very Heavy's.
  • Medium Damage Vs. Cap armor to 50%.(down from 75%) At starting at 11/13 DPS, half that is still good dps against a cap ship. Illums have anti-cap damage, so they'd do the same, but each beam of theirs is only 5.2DPS against caps versus the current 9.75 of assailants. 50% would bring assailants down to 6.5 for caps, much better.
  • In short, LRMS damage increased vs HC's, lowered against buildings and caps.
Light Frigates
Vasari Skirmisher
  • Hull Regen increased to 1.5(up from 1.0)
  • Damage increased to 13 DPS(up from 10.5)
  • Range increased to 4250(up from 3500)
  • Increase hull to 800(up from 700). Reduce shields to 340(Down from 440). [More effect from hull upgrades, more effect from healing abilities when hull is gotten to sooner. It's self repair would happen sooner with hull getting attacked sooner.)
  • OR reduce its supply to 6, increase DPS to 11, reduce cost to 360/60/0(down from 400/70/0).

Siege Frigates

  • 1.02 Cost or 30% increased DPS. (currently a siege cap costs LESS than 4 siege frigs, and the siege cap is as good as 6-8 siege frigs at bombarding planets, while obviously the siege cap is obviously much better at fighting too.)
  • 1.03 Survivability

Carriers.

Currently well.. http://dstuff.l2wh.com/images/soase.png This shows well what I mean. Fighters are ONLY better against LRM's and bombers. Besides killing LRM's, you use bombers. This is rather.. or very odd to me. It would also make sense to me that if you had enough bombers you could overwhelm flaks (heavy armor) but this isn't the case. You need something like 7 carriers with bombers for every flak to overwhelm them. So as long as someone has just one flak which costs 1/2 as much for every 5 carriers, your heavy cruisers are safe.
This wouldn't be too much of an issue, but HC+Flak is a very strong combination. Bombers are their only really counter, but you only need 1 flak per 5 bomber squads to stop them. You can't use light frigs to kill their flaks because their HC's eat them.

Increase bomber HP 50% higher.

Fighters do 1/4th the damage as bombers against everything but LRM's and scouts, basically. But with how low hp/shields/armor scouts are you might as well use bombers for those too as 8.22 vs 19.50 is good enough against them. This shows rather well how you should only use fighters vs. bombers and lrms. On the other dozen of the units, in any situation, use bombers.
NAME........DPS.....vs v-light...vs light...vs med...vs heavy...vs v-heavy...vs cap...vs bomber
FIGHTER.....9.75..........9.75......19.50.....2.44.......2.44.........2.44.....2.44........14.63
BOMBER......16.44.........8.22.......8.22.....8.22.......8.22........16.44....12.33.........1.64
  • I'd give fighters a new damage type to make them just as good against medium armor and heavy without buffing scouts.(even if fighters did 9dps vs. heavy armor, flaks kill them twice as fast, so it's effectively half. This new damage type should do 100% to medium, 100% heavy, over the 25% it does now, but the rest the same as AntiLight)
  • 100% chance (up from 75%) to hit Bombers with this new damage type, this balances out the HP increase for Bombers with fighters attacking them. (effectively 33% increased damage against them vs. their 50% hp increase should work fine)
Numbers if Fighters got a new damage type that was same as AntiLight but 100% vs medium and heavy.
NAME........DPS.....vs v-light...vs light...vs med...vs heavy...vs v-heavy...vs cap...vs bomber
FIGHTER.....9.75..........9.75......19.50.....9.75.......9.75.........2.44.....2.44........14.63
BOMBER......16.44.........8.22.......8.22.....8.22.......8.22........16.44....12.33.........1.64
HOWEVER you must take into acount while they'd do SLIGHTLY more than the 8.22dps bombers do vs these, that the flaks will kill fighters about twice as fast as bombers especially with bombers getting a bigger HP increase to better survive flak, so bombers are better in situations against flak always, vs heavy and medium it depends on whether there is flak or not.
Also since abilities do damage vs. fighter typically(cap abilities) fighters are more suceptable to these, more to take into account with their balance.

Support Cruisers
Vasari Subverter
  • Increase supply cost to 9-11(up from 5)
  • Increase cost to 450/130/110(up from 400/80/80)
  • Increase cooldown on it's aoe disable to 70(up from 60)
  • Decrease duration on it's aoe disable to 25(down from 30)
  • If that isn't enough maybe it needs AOE range reduced aswell..
Vasari Overseer
  • Have it's health buff no longer require facing the target or greatly increase turn rate.

Buildings
Refineries

  • Increase their effectiveness, I'm not exactly sure how much.
  • Reduce cost to 1500/75/100(down from 1500/125/175) for vasari/tec's of course.. advent shares it with trade port.

Capital Ships

  • Remove the XP sharing so that two caps doesn't make you get half xp.  Both caps should get the maximum xp.   There is nothing overpowerd at ALL about rushing a 2nd cap, or using more than 2 caps, so why penalize they're xp rate?  2 caps might become viable with this change and the lrm nerf.

Mostly just simple entity editing except the black market and text thing. :3

Edited to include something about AntiMedium damage type, and Vasari skirmisher as no one uses them, they are highly regarded as far to expensive/not good enough.

Edited in suggestion to buff Refineries


Comments (Page 7)
8 PagesFirst 5 6 7 8 
on Mar 21, 2008
PLEASE bring back the 'no pirates' random maps... i.e. NO pirates, not just 'inactive' pirates.
on Mar 21, 2008
No what we have now is client-server, with the game host (the one creating a mp game) being the server. P2P networking has no host, ever had a game stop in starcraft when the game creator crashed ? Or in any other RTS. This issue also makes many games stop before they're over, if for whatever reason the host quits. Sins is the first game with this issue, it needs to be adressed asap.

P2P means there's no privileged node on the network. Now there have been 2 ways to implement that, either every node has a full rapresentation of the world (vulnerable to maphacks, like early starcraft) or you send only user actions over the network (like modern starcraft, but with a more difficult synchronization code).

Sins right now is client-server, the fact that there is a (rather poorly implemented) way to find a new server once a old one drops, doesn't mean it's p2p. Now you can change and flip the definition of p2p like you want as you did with the 4x one, still this game isn't p2p by the most accepted definition of it.
on Mar 21, 2008
Bring back random resources. Even better would be random resources with the OPTION to have fixed resources.

Seriously, I suggested this in the last official thread of suggestions before 1.03 - whenever possible please add SWITCHES so things can be toggled on and off. You will keep most people happy this way as they can tune their match to their heart's content.


Make AI react when it gets attacked on the way to its target! It turns into a turkey shoot if you intercept an enemy fleet as it phase jumps on the way to whereever it is going.


For Multiplayer have an option to allow players to choose their start locations. Better still make it a host option so it is toggled before the game starts.


Please for the love of God let me have some way to have my saved games, recordings and auto saves in MY DOCUMENTS! Even better if I could save them in my game install folder!

p.s. add an ingame calculator for the Sins of a Spreadsheet Empire players (I jest!)
on Mar 21, 2008
i dont' think a fixed start locations will come in 1.04..
on Mar 22, 2008
I added at the bottom about cap ships.

The XP being split between cap ships makes teamates working together and getting more than 1 cap nerf them. This is silly, it's not like caps are super amazing and super cost effective.
on Mar 22, 2008
Agreed with the refinery edit and partly with the cap edit.
If XP is shared then gerneal XP level should be lowered a little bit (or easier: XP required for a level raised a little, like 20% or so).
How much exactly do the refineries give right now? With a base value of 0.15 per resource in range (for 3-4 planets with an average of 8 resources) thats 1.2 resources per refinery which sounds reasonable, compared with the 2 credits per second of the much cheaper trade ports). Is the current base value much lower?
on Mar 22, 2008
Add a toggle option so that a player can continue playing so long as he has a minimum number of ships remaining, if he has an ally. What happens if someone has a big fleet but they lose their planets? Game over for him. He can't move his fleet anymore and can't stay to help his allies who might still have planets!
on Mar 22, 2008
Add a toggle option so that a player can continue playing so long as he has a minimum number of ships remaining, if he has an ally. What happens if someone has a big fleet but they lose their planets? Game over for him. He can't move his fleet anymore and can't stay to help his allies who might still have planets!


Sounds like someone used good strategy to wipe him out when he has a big fleet.. Sounds like the person got out-played.
on Mar 22, 2008
Well it's really irrelevent what happened but it would be nice to have a game mode to allow players to fight to the last few ships. Last Ship Standing perhaps? It would have to be a game mode and toggle because it could lead to griefing and run arounds if used on open games. It would be more for when you play with people you know so if it is a good match the ally can stay and still be involved some more.
on Mar 22, 2008
Hello. I think it would be great to have a lot more techs to develop. I would also like more planet management. I love this game and think that it has a lot of untouched potential. God bless all, my friends.  
on Mar 22, 2008
lol
on Mar 22, 2008
- Multiplayer is still bugged, (after a number of hours) if the game doesn't lock up totally, players game wil lock up and be forced to drop out to be replaced by the AI.
(it's also seems that if one player is dropped out, all players drop out)

- If playes get dropped, and replaced by an AI, the server should be able to choose the difficultly of each AI.

- Resource gathering is still slow (after playing this game with 6 players at a LAN, I agree) - even on the new settings maxxed out.

- Super weapons are meant to be super weapons!

- If a player decides to cancel a building placement before building it, the player can't just press the right mouse button like in other games to cancel the placement.

- Locked team games with AI: The locked Team AI should not take all of the colonizable objects (planets, asteroids etc).

- When camera is not in "twist" mode (Camerea: Enable Twist option), there should be an option to enable top down but be able to scroll in 3D. Simply because if you zoom in too close to a star/planet, sometimes it goes right through to the other side.

- Broadcast/Media Hub/etc needs work, it's too slow.

- The Black Market still needs work.

- More functions for us Modders (game types, extra stuff that can be useful for modders etc).

I'll probably add more later, if there is anything else that needs adding.
on Mar 22, 2008
I didn't create this topic but as far as I can tell it is for quick and easy balance fixes, not a "what whould be cool in the next patch" topic.
I think we all agree that a quick (hey, why hasn't it been done already?) balance change is needed. Adjusting the values in the data files like innociv suggested should take the devs like ... an hour max. Please hurry
All the other stuff can then be looked at later, it't not nearly as important as the quick and easy fixes to un-screw the balance.
on Mar 22, 2008
I didn't create this topic but as far as I can tell it is for quick and easy balance fixes, not a "what whould be cool in the next patch" topic.I think we all agree that a quick (hey, why hasn't it been done already?) balance change is needed. Adjusting the values in the data files like innociv suggested should take the devs like ... an hour max. Please hurry All the other stuff can then be looked at later, it't not nearly as important as the quick and easy fixes to un-screw the balance.


Well it be rather stupid to have multiple threads, it be hard for the developer to track through all of the suggestions - it should be the same in 1.03 thread and previous threads.

Making a mod just to balance out is rather silly, and it should be left to the developers so that the changes can be made universly.
on Mar 22, 2008
Most of what you suggested aren't issues..(multiplayer still bugged? How? You mean minidumps? What you described i havent' heard about, just minidumps. And resource rates are fine. Super weapons are fine. Hitting scuttle works fine for cancling buildings, though it should give more resources back when you cancel before it's built), or already suggested, (black market).

I can probly agree with Culture, but I haven't played enough to notice the changes. Is it still max allegance change rate of 0.5? It's not a big issue like some of the other things though.

More functions for modders.. hopefully 1.1, don't need for 1.04. We need somethig out quickly to fix the game..

They said 1.04 will be small so they can release it quicker, bigger changes will come for 1.1.
8 PagesFirst 5 6 7 8