Hold on now - all these arguments are premature.
First, the comments regarding the beta phase: I realize that this beta is for system compatability, and I'm happy to report that everything runs smoothly and I've had no sound problems. If I encounter them during play, I'll be right here reporting it. In the meantime, I and other interested people can test other things, like this possible exploit.
A minor point - this isn't something everyone needs to be testing. This is one of many special abilities, and special abilities are one of many features of the whole game. Tests regarding the use of such an exploit are best left to those interested in finding out about it - I fully encourage other testers to look into other facets of the game... that trade money bug was a fine example.
And now, points for everyone on why these arguments are too early:
1. We haven't even confirmed that there's a problem at all. The notion of perma-invinciblity is, at this time, purely theoretical based on one person looking at special ability refresh rates. As of this post, we have ONE attempt at perma-invinciblity from a different thread, and that failed. We cannot proceed until someone can set up and maintain an invincible status, and then make the exact method for doing so known here on this thread so that others can repeat and confirm those results. Then - and only then, can we move to step 2:
2. If and when we confirm that you can attain perma-invincibility against the AI... we wait. The faction we're playing now is incomplete, and we're pitting ourselves aganst the AI - and AI is easy to fool with simple tricks. Anyone ever build sandbags in the original Command and Conquer? The AI wouldn't attack walls - you could sandbag your way into the enemy base and keep yourself completely safe. So if we attain perma-invincibility against the AI, then we wait for multiplayer and we try it against a human with at least one 'complete' faction. Then, and only then, can we speak up and proclaim it is definitely a problem of some sort. The actions taken in step 3 depend wholly on test results.
3. If we can become invincible against any human or AI opponent with any given faction, then we can say the ability is broken and needs to be changed. If we can beat the AI but not humans, then the AI needs to be improved. If we can't beat anyone but it still is somehow massively unbalancing for the cost of use, then we can examine it from that standpoint, and then all these lovely arguments can ensue.
Right now all we are in a position to do is test a theory against the AI. So let us test and see what results we get. If someone discovers perma-invincibility, that gives us a method we can take right into a multiplayer game when we have the opportunity. If nobody manages it, then the fear of the ability being broken should be somewhat lessened.
This thread reads like an odd mix of do's and dont's in beta testings. I don't claim to have all the answers, but here's my mindset:
1. The devs can't test everything, nor can they forsee the potential results of every special ability or combination thereof. With a massive force of players, exploits and ways to 'munchkinize' as system are often discovered and used. It is never too early for beta testers to discover and note such an exploit.
2. It is often premature for an early beta to call any given ability an exploit without a nearly complete version of the game to test it against - and other humans to help with the test.
Think of this thread as marking something to watch. If someone manages permanent invincibility against the AI, we can mark 'Armistice' as something that needs further examination and probing. We'll roll it out again when a faction is fully complete or the multiplayer beta begins. If it consistently allows permanent invinciblity in all cases, then we can figure out how to fix it.
I can see that the developers have made a good game, and I believe that Sins of a Solar Empire is going to be a blast to play. Each decision they have made regarding the game has had much more consideration than any of us are likely to give it. And yet the nails get bent here and there, and an unforseen use of an ability may be more powerful than the designer imagined. We should not have faith that the developers have 'planned for all contingencies', but we should trust that the developers will listen to us when we have discovered a real problem, and must be patient to be sure that we have indeed discovered a problem before we bring it to them.
