Sins of a Solar Empire : Real-Time Strategy. Unrivalled Scale.
© 2003-2016 Ironclad Games Corporation Vancouver, BC. All rights reserved.
© 2006-2016 Stardock Entertainment

VL and Strip to the Core still ridiculous...

By on July 12, 2012 8:17:15 AM from Sins of a Solar Empire Forums Sins of a Solar Empire Forums

Seleuceia

Join Date 01/2008
+238

So here's the problem:  Strip to the Core

The issue is not that it is too easy to get....the issue isn't even really the amount of resources that you get...the problem is that once planets are double stripped to asteroid belts, everyone else is hosed...

Multiple games now I have seen a VL player able to drag games on forever even when massively outnumbered and out done in economy...so long as they have enough fleet to deal with a fully upgraded SB (which is not that hard), all they have to do is jump to a world, eat it, and move on before they get caught...eat it again, and no one can ever colonize it....

Last night I played a 5v5 where 3 of our players got wiped...yet the game still continued for about 6 hours because one of our two players was VL...even with wormholes and 5 fleets in 5 different locations, the other team struggled trying to catch the VL fleet...even with no kostura, the VL can just keep moving moving moving, eating planets and avoiding fleets like none other...

The concept of this strategy is actually quite cool....it is unique, and I think it should stay...the problem is that 2 players can take on 5 will relative ease...

The VL eats planets while the other player just survives...since the VL can be anywhere rather quickly, it is exceptionally hard to wipe the 2nd player...even if 3 or 4 players team up on them, they'll be facing an entrenched player with titan + SB and the VL's orky...oh, and the VL can jump back at any time to assist...if the 5 man team doesn't try to break the entrenched player, they'll just waste time chasing the VL fleet of doom that can be anywhwere, anytime...

Having been on both sides of the issue (facing VL pulling this crap and being allied to VL doing this), I find that it is extremely difficult to counter, especially if players drop....more to the point, any other factions (so not Vasari) stuck in a 2v5 would never come even close to being as succesful as the VL planet eating strategy...when you are the only faction that can handle a 2v5, I think it is fair to say you are OP...and heavne forbid if 2 VLs tagged teamed and stripped the galaxy...

So, how does this get fixed?  I think the solution is actually quite simple: Stripped to the core does not remove the ability to colonize...

I suggest that when a planet is stripped (Terran, desert, ice, volcanic, moon), it becomes an asteroid (not dead)...if an asteroid, dead asteroid, or pirate base are stripped, the entity simply stays the same....this is extremely easy to implement and requires no engine changes, just entity file changes...if you remove the effect and give no resources, "Stripping" an asteroid, dead asteroid, or pirate base basically is just like normal disbanding (only difference is a string saying you are stripping)...

How does this solve the problem?  Well, the players still have asteroids to colonize, and therefore still can stay in the game just fine...since the VL won't be able to guard each and every asteroid, the attrition strategy doesn't work out when seriously outnumbered...when the teams are equal, Stripping is still an effective strategy...if slighlty outnumbered, stripping can really wittle the enemy down via attrition and pull an underdog victory...but if the game keeps dragging on, the VL can eventually be brought down since the enemy will always be able to have something to colonize and build structures on...

As a last comment, I think it is crucial planets strip to asteroid instead of dead asteroid...right now the dead asteroid is basically almost as bad as asteroid belts (though it still makes it hard to actually wipe a player) and furthermore, it seriously biases the late game against Advent...TEC have development mandate and can build units via SBs, but Advent can't do anything....

Locked Post 95 Replies
Search this post
Subscription Options


Reason for Karma (Optional)
Successfully updated karma reason!
July 14, 2012 10:46:19 PM from Sins of a Solar Empire Forums Sins of a Solar Empire Forums

I actually really like the idea of it being on the Matter Processor and frankly, I think STTC gives too few resources, though I am however in favor of removing all credits gained from it.  As a result, I believe that pulling it off would be harder, though very powerful if you manage to do so.

Reason for Karma (Optional)
Successfully updated karma reason!
July 15, 2012 3:21:34 AM from Sins of a Solar Empire Forums Sins of a Solar Empire Forums

Quoting CoronalFire,
No not around tier 3, more like 7-8. And a researchable upgrade would be minor, like 3-10%, if and only if, SttC is too weak endgame. Additionally it could have another prerequisite in addition to SttC, something like have a Titan research, thus harder to use with a small fleet (or a fleet research prereq if that is possible...).

Now I just have no idea what you are suggesting...SttC already is a tier 8 tech and it requires three techs in order to research...what are you suggesting that is any different?  That it is tier 7/8, but has no prereqs?  That only makes SttC more OP...again, I don't think you realize how typical team games work and how long eco players go without fleeting up (and therefore having no taxation)...eco players only get one fleet upgrade when they build their titan (if they have 2 fleet upgrades either it's because their frontliners are doing poorly or they are ecoing wrong)...

Quoting CoronalFire,
Yes the first strip(s) are going to give a big bang. But it is risky, since after that bang you have to fleet up to do anything, thus nerfing further strips.

Not really...first two strips, if you are eco then you have no fleet supply so no maintenance...then, you get a kostura and a titan...all you need is the titan, your space egg, and maybe another capital ship to go hit a HW, eat it, and jump back...sure, later you'll need big fleet and have maintenance but you are already better off than anyone else by now so who cares....operation requires hardly any fleet supply, so you are at maybe 15% maintenance for your 3rd SttC (and 0% for your first 2)...no huge risk at all, VL do it all the time early game and now you are making it easier to do...

Quoting CoronalFire,
For one, you said yourself it would be better to keep planets if you could...in which the VL aren't fully mobile

Here's my statement, in discussing late game VL:

Quoting Seleuceia,
you still get a nice feed of resources, but with only half as many, it's still a good idea to have a regular economy

So basically, it's still nice to hold onto your original HW (and maybe some core planets) instead of just stripping it after it gets rushed by your enemies...both taxation and simply halving the base income give you more incentive to fortify and try to hold onto your original HW and core worlds...VL still can go mobile if they don't think they can hold their HW (or they are better off stripping), it's just not the obvious, de facto choice...

Quoting CoronalFire,
As for your own suggestion, someone earlier pointed out the VL could plop 3x trade ports on a regular asteroid after already obtaining the strip bonus.

Again, I'll reiterate that the income is half of what it is now...and from experience, I can tell you that in long games, most planets that VL players strip are enemy worlds that aren't going to be held (because enemy forces are desparately chasing you)...that the planet remains an asteroid will benefit defending players far more than it will help the Vasari...sure, early game if you strip some planets you get an asteroid you can now put trade on, but you now have to clear the militia (something you didn't have to do before) to even be able to do that, which requires more time and more resouces than you'd otherwise have to implement early game...and again, you are getting half the resources for these planets even if you strip them early game (taxation would not do that)...

Quoting CoronalFire,
I do however see one issue. A VL eco player could strip his and his allies planets and feed his allies the resources gained from the SttC.

Takes too long for one, couldn't be done in a pinch very easily...also, non VL can't afford to lose planets cause they need them for labs (VL do not)...I really don't see this being an issue...

Reason for Karma (Optional)
Successfully updated karma reason!
July 15, 2012 5:05:13 AM from Sins of a Solar Empire Forums Sins of a Solar Empire Forums

Quoting Volt_Cruelerz,
I actually really like the idea of it being on the Matter Processor and frankly, I think STTC gives too few resources, though I am however in favor of removing all credits gained from it. As a result, I believe that pulling it off would be harder, though very powerful if you manage to do so.

If it were on the Matter Processor, it would be more easily counter-attacked. Giving only crystal and metal seems like a pretty good idea.

 

Reason for Karma (Optional)
Successfully updated karma reason!
July 15, 2012 6:02:04 AM from Sins of a Solar Empire Forums Sins of a Solar Empire Forums

Quoting Seleuceia,

VL players strip are enemy worlds that aren't going to be held (because enemy forces are desparately chasing you)

Still, if you simply reduce the amount of SttC income this does not reduce the mobility of the VL. And even if he doesn't get any resources out of a planet when stripping it, rendering it useless for the enemy without having to fear to lose your fleet in the process is still the obvious choice for the VL. Why should he care that he doesn't get the enemy's resources as long as the enemy doesn't get them, too.

I think the problem you describe is that an eco-VL is too mobile too soon. I honestly think that even without using SttC these problems would arise, simply due to the VL's mobility if only a tad later. The quickest way to reduce this problem would be increasing scuttle time so you can't just waltz in and out of everyone's systems with impunity.

Reason for Karma (Optional)
Successfully updated karma reason!
July 15, 2012 6:35:56 AM from Sins of a Solar Empire Forums Sins of a Solar Empire Forums

If Ironclad won't solve the problems with STTC, jumping starbases, and Wail of the Sacrificed, then we might need a "Competition Mod" to fix it

Reason for Karma (Optional)
Successfully updated karma reason!
July 15, 2012 10:06:53 AM from Sins of a Solar Empire Forums Sins of a Solar Empire Forums

Guess one option for Wail would be to make it extended damage - say 125% of the current output delivered over 2 minutes?  Of course, you'd need to do something about dual Red Button SBs while you were at it.

Reason for Karma (Optional)
Successfully updated karma reason!
July 15, 2012 10:18:46 AM from Sins of a Solar Empire Forums Sins of a Solar Empire Forums

Without bothering to read the thread, i understand the issues you have with stripped. But If you're an eco player, and you get stripped.. once you've stripped, fleeted and then researched you only just catch up to some of the other players, stripping doesn't always secure victory, you have to have a fleet that genuinely won't die.. otherwise you're outta luck, you can shut yourself down by making a wrong turn. It's not sustainable, that's what i'm saying.

Played a game with DT, obviously Ussr and a lot of other "pro" players and bother teams went for stripped, honestly it brought the player that went for stripped back into the game to do something useful, but the game had already been at a tipping point without that persons fleet, so i wonder would it not be better to fleet? Stripped imo should be a late game option that gives you a burst of res to feed to someone quickly or to use as you see fit, though rushing stripped will work if your allys are making headway. Though, would it really be required at that point?

 

Dunno if anyone can really see it my way.. but whatever

Reason for Karma (Optional)
Successfully updated karma reason!
July 15, 2012 11:48:58 AM from Sins of a Solar Empire Forums Sins of a Solar Empire Forums

Quoting SemazRalan,
To bad Stripped to the Core wasn't set like Drain Planet.  Colony Cap triggers chain reaction, gains 8000 c/m/cr over whatever duration, then particle kicks in and mesh swaps.  7DS is going to have a time with this one since we've resized planets... doh.

I don't think the game has the coding to have either the scuttle value affected by taxation.  Drain planet isn't affected by

 

Agreed. Stripped to the Core should have been Vorastras´s ability. 

Reason for Karma (Optional)
Successfully updated karma reason!
July 15, 2012 12:58:16 PM from Sins of a Solar Empire Forums Sins of a Solar Empire Forums

Wail is broken by design no amount of number changes will fix it. But lets deal with the Vasari first. Then work on the Advent.

 

Reason for Karma (Optional)
Successfully updated karma reason!
July 15, 2012 1:05:55 PM from Sins of a Solar Empire Forums Sins of a Solar Empire Forums

Quoting DirtySanchezz,
If Ironclad won't solve the problems with STTC, jumping starbases, and Wail of the Sacrificed, then we might need a "Competition Mod" to fix it

If this becomes the case, I don't there'd be a shortage of us willing to contribute.

Reason for Karma (Optional)
Successfully updated karma reason!
July 15, 2012 1:21:06 PM from Sins of a Solar Empire Forums Sins of a Solar Empire Forums

Let's hope there won't be any need for such a thing. 

Meanwhile, Seleucia, can you see why I think there's more of a problem to the VL's mobility than his income? Whether or not the VL gets additional spoils for running a scorched earth tactic, for everyone else there's still only scorched earth. 

The SttC boost only enables this much earlier and adds insult to injury. 

Reason for Karma (Optional)
Successfully updated karma reason!
July 15, 2012 2:36:02 PM from Sins of a Solar Empire Forums Sins of a Solar Empire Forums

Quoting vyolin,
Still, if you simply reduce the amount of SttC income this does not reduce the mobility of the VL. And even if he doesn't get any resources out of a planet when stripping it, rendering it useless for the enemy without having to fear to lose your fleet in the process is still the obvious choice for the VL. Why should he care that he doesn't get the enemy's resources as long as the enemy doesn't get them, too.

Again, this is why I advocate having nothing strip below an asteroid....the defending player is still left with an asteroid that has tax income and can support logistic structures...it isn't great (nor should it be) but it is a lot better than the dead steroids and asteroid belts that we have...

Why do you want to reduce the Vasari's mobility?  That is the point of playing VL...and the more important mobility elements (kosturas, phase stabilizers) have been around since original sins...the VL mobility is only a problem because they can sustain it too long with the resource income earned by strip and they can actually wipe players by denying them colonizables...my suggestions reduce the income earned significantly and prevent the VL from being able to wipe entire sections of the galaxy...as I have said before, the VL cannot hold every single planet simultaneously, so the other players will be able to move in and recolonize the asteroids left in the wake of SttC....

Reason for Karma (Optional)
Successfully updated karma reason!
July 15, 2012 2:53:49 PM from Sins of a Solar Empire Forums Sins of a Solar Empire Forums

Well, if you want to incentivize going fully mobile, you could always make it so that the various VL mobile techs all increase the tax percentage, making setting down roots more and more futile.

Reason for Karma (Optional)
Successfully updated karma reason!
July 15, 2012 7:14:24 PM from Sins of a Solar Empire Forums Sins of a Solar Empire Forums

Quoting Volt_Cruelerz,
Well, if you want to incentivize going fully mobile, you could always make it so that the various VL mobile techs all increase the tax percentage, making setting down roots more and more futile.

 

Not sure I understood this. You saying having SttC taxed differentially to fleet supply, i.e. not the same rate, so a 75% penalty fleet only takes 50% of SttC, except with research that changes the tax instead of fleet supply?

Reason for Karma (Optional)
Successfully updated karma reason!
July 15, 2012 7:18:28 PM from Sins of a Solar Empire Forums Sins of a Solar Empire Forums

Quoting CoronalFire,

Quoting Volt_Cruelerz, reply 89Well, if you want to incentivize going fully mobile, you could always make it so that the various VL mobile techs all increase the tax percentage, making setting down roots more and more futile.

 

Not sure I understood this. You saying having SttC taxed differentially to fleet supply, i.e. not the same rate, so a 75% penalty fleet only takes 50% of SttC, except with research that changes the tax instead of fleet supply?

No, he's not saying SttC would be taxed at all- just all the VL techs could be made to make existing upkeep costs worse, making the vasari loyalists fully teched dependant on SttC as they have cripples their ability to have a conventional economy due to abnormally high upkeep costs.

Reason for Karma (Optional)
Successfully updated karma reason!
July 15, 2012 7:30:16 PM from Sins of a Solar Empire Forums Sins of a Solar Empire Forums

Quoting bilun,


No, he's not saying SttC would be taxed at all- just all the VL techs could be made to make existing upkeep costs worse, making the vasari loyalists fully teched dependant on SttC as they have cripples their ability to have a conventional economy due to abnormally high upkeep costs.

So that researching certain mobile techs increases planetary tax in order to force them to stay mobile once they have it. Interesting idea, but I think I dislike it. Not sure though. Still doesn't deal with VL OPness of course.

Reason for Karma (Optional)
Successfully updated karma reason!
July 21, 2012 5:22:53 PM from Sins of a Solar Empire Forums Sins of a Solar Empire Forums

So I've been on the giving end of this and the receiving end now. Strip to the core simply needs to be taxed at their current fleet supply. Having a 2300 supply fleet that can be instantly regenerated even after being wailed twice because they get instant untaxed feed just from stripping a few planets is unrealistic for game balance.

 

Reason for Karma (Optional)
Successfully updated karma reason!
September 19, 2014 2:46:08 PM from Sins of a Solar Empire Forums Sins of a Solar Empire Forums

Huh? It got nerfed like a long time ago.

Reason for Karma (Optional)
Successfully updated karma reason!
September 19, 2014 5:40:11 PM from Sins of a Solar Empire Forums Sins of a Solar Empire Forums

Quoting ProgFighter,

Huh? It got nerfed like a long time ago.

Plus karma for your necromancy Sinkillr/RoaringWarren/Mutabling/ProgFighter

Reason for Karma (Optional)
Successfully updated karma reason!
September 19, 2014 9:43:18 PM from Sins of a Solar Empire Forums Sins of a Solar Empire Forums

Do you know how long he must spend searching for these threads?  One search alone takes like 10 minutes just for the results to pop up...this guy is the epitome of dedication...

Reason for Karma (Optional)
Successfully updated karma reason!
Stardock Forums v1.0.0.0    #108432  walnut2   Server Load Time: 00:00:00.0000735   Page Render Time: