Impressions of what should be improved

from Sins Forums
After playing Sins for about 6 hours, I was bewildered and irrated with a couple of things

Firstly, however, the things that are good already:

-The graphics look fantastic and don't cause a lot of lag. This is great.

-The defensive structures are pretty solid at the moment

-The simple upgrading of planets is good- any more would be too tedious

Things that must be changed:

Aesthetic:
-Is is a galaxy or a solar system? If it's a solar system, it might be cool if the planets orbited, it might become a strategic advantage if you drift closer to enemies or allies, etc.
-Also, when zoomed out the "Solar System" looks like a galaxy- it's awkward.

Ships- Not too many complaints because it is noted that more ships will be added. I assume there will be more variety and they will be more useful.
-Probes should be launched at a planet, not deployed- it would make Scouts far more useful
-The starting flagship should be optional- I don't want to be forced to use a Kol battleship whenever I play TEC.
-All games I have played the AI and I end with a staggering amount of ships- I think there should be a limiting mechanism. Perhaps something similar to Logistics in GalCiv II

Information:
-It seems like information warfare is useless, if it's not- I couldn't figure out how to make it do anything. It's an intriguing possibility

Micro-reduction suggestions:
Ability to choose all skills for Capital ships in advance.
The ability to have a list of things you want to attack in certain circumstances, a la FFXII (unless Ironclad wants SOME but not MUCH micro)



P.S. I enjoyed the chance to test and influence a game that I have had my eye on for a very long time now- I await the announcement of the next BETA
5,371 views 21 replies
Reply #1 from Sins Forums Top
Aesthetics

~I feel the game is too bright. Maybe that's me, maybe I should just turn down the brightness on my monitor. Or there could be a slider to arrange the brightness.

~I'd really really like radio chatter.

~Could fighter bullets be more visible, and maybe have them launch anti-fighter missiles.
Reply #2 from Sins Forums Top
-Is is a galaxy or a solar system? If it's a solar system, it might be cool if the planets orbited, it might become a strategic advantage if you drift closer to enemies or allies, etc.
-Also, when zoomed out the "Solar System" looks like a galaxy- it's awkward.


Solar system. I believe the IC guys already tried orbiting and other such realism-based designs and they just didn't work out gameplay-wise.

Solar systems looking like galaxies when zoomed out is just an aesthetic choice.

-Probes should be launched at a planet, not deployed- it would make Scouts far more useful


What exactly do you mean?

-The starting flagship should be optional- I don't want to be forced to use a Kol battleship whenever I play TEC.


There's an option to toggle flagships when you start a new game.


Curtains - Customize Windows with additional styles
Reply #3 from Sins Forums Top
"what do you mean"

I believe he wants to be able to shoot a probe into orbit around a planet and receive continuous telemetry data from it until it is destroyed and that the scout ship should be the delivery vehicle.

"There's an option to toggle flagships when you start a new game."

I also believe he means he wants the option to select the class of the flagship (I really do as well) and to not be stuck with a Kol every time he plays the TEC.
Reply #4 from Sins Forums Top

Solar system. I believe the IC guys already tried orbiting and other such realism-based designs and they just didn't work out gameplay-wise.

Solar systems looking like galaxies when zoomed out is just an aesthetic choice.


That makes sense. It's already disorienting enough when I accidentally rotate my system and have to get my bearings again, I can see how a fully functioning system would be confusing.

What exactly do you mean [about probes]?


I mean that I expected probes to be launched down a lane at a distant planet without my scout jumping there. I didn't expect my scout to jump to my target and plant the probe. However, I realize that this may be a balance issue.

There's an option to toggle flagships when you start a new game.


I realize they can be toggled on and off, but one should choose which flagship to start with. For example, a Carrier or Dreadnought instead of a Battleship

*Edit: fixed typo about probes*
Reply #5 from Sins Forums Top

Solar system. I believe the IC guys already tried orbiting and other such realism-based designs and they just didn't work out gameplay-wise.

Solar systems looking like galaxies when zoomed out is just an aesthetic choice.


That makes sense. It's already disorienting enough when I accidentally rotate my system and have to get my bearings again, I can see how a fully functioning system would be confusing.


Even with non-orbiting planets, which I agree would hinder gameplay, the systems don't convey the feeling of being solar systems.

The current systems appear too heavy (i.e. they have too many planets), lopsided (i.e. the planets appear to be on one side of the system), and lack other subtlities (e.g. gas clouds, moons, and etc). (I do agree with scattering specific planet types within the systems.)

Also, to me, the gravity wells make the local space around planets feel like systems because of the phase lanes. As a player, I thought the phase lanes would be between systems and galaxies and not between planets.
Reply #6 from Sins Forums Top
-All games I have played the AI and I end with a staggering amount of ships- I think there should be a limiting mechanism. Perhaps something similar to Logistics in GalCiv II

no way, too many people want no caps, so just launch at your enemy faster, or drop the resource ammounts.
the planets appear to be on one side of the system

yeah, this is an annoying aesthetic piece.
As a player, I thought the phase lanes would be between systems and galaxies and not between planets.

I've tried expanding the gravity wells (coincidently it took up about the space from my home planet to the nearest asteroid)
not a pretty picture...
Reply #7 from Sins Forums Top


the planets appear to be on one side of the system

yeah, this is an annoying aesthetic piece.


Ahh, so it's not just me running into wierd random solar systems. Why is that an aesthetic? I doesn't look right to me.




There's an option to toggle flagships when you start a new game.

I realize they can be toggled on and off, but one should choose which flagship to start with. For example, a Carrier or Dreadnought instead of a Battleship


Indeed, same here. Taking you pick is far better then always getting a Kol (or whatever for the other races)
Reply #8 from Sins Forums Top
I've tried expanding the gravity wells (coincidently it took up about the space from my home planet to the nearest asteroid)
not a pretty picture...


Yeah, I could see movement being a problem without jumping, but I think this is where short open jumps to any point within the system makes sense. Right now, the game is too predicticable with its fog-of-war. You easily know where to find planets and asteriods-- just follow the phase lanes. It would be more challenging to have to find things once entering a system.

For example, I jump into a system using one of its phase lanes. This lands me in a certain part of system. Using a probe or scanner, I get blips of the closest anomalies to investigate. Then, I simply perform a short phase jump to an area of interest. More scans from that point show the old blips (since I've already charted that area) plus the new closest ones and any signs of other ship activity.

(The idea of hunting was a task I enjoyed from Homeworld 2.)

Reply #9 from Sins Forums Top
@thedott - that is the type of mapping system I assumed this game would have prior to getting involved in the beta. I hope the devs will think long and hard about using such a system as I find it the best of both worlds; phased lanes between stars and free space within systems. I think it is a win/win solution for all concerned elements. This type of system allows for complex tactical and strategic development.
Reply #10 from Sins Forums Top
Spartan, I was expecting this too. I agree that it would definitely allow for more complex tactical and strategic situations if were "remodeled" slightly.
Reply #11 from Sins Forums Top
Let's imagine for a second they acutally implemented 1Spartan's (and others) suggestion(s). How will you keep track of EVERY ship? I've noticed with some of my "grouped" fleets, that ships still go after the more appropriate target, thus end up in random parts of the grav well. If you were to setup a game with the max AIs (and/or humans), planets, resources, etc...I can envision entire galaxies with thousdands of ships ending up everywhere on the map. They'll look like a bunch of rainbow, sprinkled donut holes! I suspect this is why the game is the way it is now...
Reply #12 from Sins Forums Top
Maybe it makes sense to split up the current grav well/space lane system? What I mean is having an inner grav well (IGW), for placement of fixed orbit platforms (maybe allow for actual orbiting structures) and an outer grav well (OGW - much larger than current one used) used for combat situations. If the IGW suggestion is implemented, ships can still attack the orbiting structures, but if they don't "enter orbit" they won't be as effective trying to knock them out. Since orbiting objects obviously will be moving faster than the ship NOT in orbit.

The space lanes need to be there (necessary for trade, refinery, and fleet movement)as trying to move a fleet under normal propulsion would take FOREVER! The OGW from planet to planet should be closer to each other too. As far as making sure your fleets don't go off randomly (chasing targets), well...that's just game AI tweaking.

Iduuno...This was thinking out loud stuff, so be gentle with your critiques. Not knowing what is going on behind closed doors at IC/Stardock, I can still speculate as to why the game is the way it is. I'm fairly sure that since they've already played with orbits, real gravity, no phase jump lanes, etc (right from the horses mouth...and haven't implemented it in our Beta build, that they aren't going to. The fact that they left the capabilities in the engine (for moddders) suggests this as well. Somebody will have to be industrious and desire these features enough, to build a mod for the rest of us to try out these ideas.
Reply #13 from Sins Forums Top
Shoot I loose ships all the time given I'm almost always zoomed out taking in the view. I just drag a box over an area and any ships in it get highlighted then I give them a rally point - simple and already in the system.

With that said it would be nice to have fleet keys and when a battle is over I just click on the fleet key and all surviving ships will rally at the point I select. For example a default fleet for each planet you conquered.

Note: this is a different concept from the current group setting but truth be told they can serve in this fashion just as well.
Reply #14 from Sins Forums Top
Shoot I loose ships all the time given I'm almost always zoomed taking in the view. I just drag a box or an area and any ships in it highlight them I give them a rally point - simple and already in the system.


D'oh...keep forgetting about the rally point feature! Hey, didn't I tell you guys I'm not a tatical gaming genius already? HEHE! I need to try using rally points, but that still requires me having to "set" it, thus another thing to keep track of (like keeping track of all my ships!),now I'll be keeping track of my ships and where all my rally ponits are. LOL!
Reply #15 from Sins Forums Top
Let's imagine for a second they acutally implemented 1Spartan's (and others) suggestion(s)... I can envision entire galaxies with thousdands of ships ending up everywhere on the map. They'll look like a bunch of rainbow, sprinkled donut holes! I suspect this is why the game is the way it is now...


Correct me if I'm wrong, but it seems that your thinking of a completely open jump system where you can move anywhere in the galaxy. This would definitely be a gameplay headache.

What I was suggesting is a reorganization of the galaxy layout. In this design, ships would be allowed to move freely within systems (i.e. jump anywhere within the system and allow for more exploration). At the galactic level, ships would only be allowed to jump between systems and other galaxies using predefined phases lanes (just like what is currently implemented already).

... it would be nice to have fleet keys and when a battle is over I just click on the fleet key and all surviving ships will rally at the point I select.


Spartan, I think your post-battle rally point would be a very useful feature. This idea would fit great into a mission queue where battle plans for a fleet could be specified.


Reply #16 from Sins Forums Top
Let's imagine for a second they acutally implemented 1Spartan's (and others) suggestion(s)... I can envision entire galaxies with thousdands of ships ending up everywhere on the map. They'll look like a bunch of rainbow, sprinkled donut holes! I suspect this is why the game is the way it is now...


Correct me if I'm wrong, but it seems that your thinking of a completely open jump system where you can move anywhere in the galaxy. This would definitely be a gameplay headache.


No need to correct ya...that is what I was thinking.

How long would it take to adequately setup defenses for such openness? If any faction(s) can jump to ANY planet, ANYTIME...you'd have to spend a huge amount of time building up gauss platforms, fighter hangers, shield generators, large fleets, etc...in order to protect each of your planets. Then instead of eXplore, eXpand, and eXterminate all everyone will be doing is DEFENDING. If multiple AI or human players decided to gang up and had no restricitions like those currently in place...you get the idea!

The way it is now, you at least have the capability to create chokepoints to prevent this. I think there should be better options for players to break the well defended chokepoint. Like infiltrator/cloaked ships and tech that can sneak past phase jump inhibitors/shileds. This will help balance out the well fortified blockaded chokepoints IMO.

Reply #17 from Sins Forums Top
How long would it take to adequately setup defenses for such openness...


You wouldn't want to defend the entire openness of a system. Instead, you would only want defend areas of interest (e.g. planets, resource assets, phase lane entry points from other systems, etc.). This openness wouldn't make protecting your assets any harder than it is now for a planet. To a degree, chockpoints would be reduced if you didn't defend all entry points.

If multiple AI or human players decided to gang up and had no restricitions like those currently in place...you get the idea!


This isn't really a good point. You'll break just as quickly now if everyone goes after you.

I think there should be better options for players to break the well defended chokepoint. Like infiltrator/cloaked ships and tech that can sneak past phase jump inhibitors/shileds.


This is a great idea. There do need to be some defense penetrating units. IC might have this already in place. I dunno.
Reply #18 from Sins Forums Top
All games I have played the AI and I end with a staggering amount of ships- I think there should be a limiting mechanism. Perhaps something similar to Logistics in GalCiv II

The solution for limiting the number of ships would be to raise the price of capital ships. The ships should be so expensive that, even the richest empire could field only a few hundreds capital ships. In history, but also in fiction, fleets are very expensive. For exemple, at Trafalgar, the strength of the two fleets was under 100 capital ships, at Jutland there were about 400 ships (including almost 200 destroyers, torpedo boats and other support ships), today, the most powerful fleet, US Navy has a tottal of 300 ships. In fiction, at the decisive battle of Endor, the total strength of both combatants, in terms of capital ships, was approx. 100 ships or less, with a few hundreds starfigters. Only in Star Trek DS9, the battles are huge, at the battle of caradssia prime, there are over 1000 allied ships, by contrast, at Wolf 359 the Starfleet field only 40 ships.
In conclusion, the ships should be expensive,slow to build but also powerful and with a high surviability. Introduction of a limiting mechanism, like population capacity would hurt the gamplay, because the game would became a rce for building more houses or logistic buildings or what ever they are. I prefer to have 100 ships that can survive, than to have 1000 that die as fast as they are produced.
Sorry for the long post......... and for the bad spelling  
Reply #19 from Sins Forums Top
@Slim - We are not arguing a 100% free travel system, not that it it would really increase the defensive aspect of the game from a tactical or strategic viewpoint anyway. We are simply proposing free system travel and lane travel between different stars.

The point you keep arguing about the nightmare of defenses everywhere -etc... is untenable from a military perspective and simply not economically feasible under the current game model. So it is a moot point at best.

To put it in terms everyone should be able to understand lets look at the current and historical defensive disposition of the USA. Do we have military bases in every city and when the US was being developed did we have such a system in place? The answer to both questions is obviously 'no'. We did have bases at important locations during the development phase of the country just as we now have bases at important strategic locations.

@mircea - there is already a limit capacity built into the system without doing such drastic alterations such as adding hard coded limits (which is a bad thing in general for modmen). The easiest solution would simply be to boost maintenance cost limit for the ships. This is so because the current beta mode has it locked at 75% so there is in effect no cap right now for what it is worth.
Reply #20 from Sins Forums Top

@Slim - We are not arguing a 100% free travel system, not that it it would really increase the defensive aspect of the game from a tactical or strategic viewpoint anyway. We are simply proposing free system travel and lane travel between different stars.

The point you keep arguing about the nightmare of defenses everywhere -etc... is untenable from a military perspective and simply not economically feasible under the current game model. So it is a moot point at best.

To put it in terms everyone should be able to understand lets look at the current and historical defensive disposition of the USA. Do we have military bases in every city and when the US was being developed did we have such a system in place? The answer to both questions is obviously 'no'. We did have bases at important locations during the development phase of the country just as we now have bases at important strategic locations.

@mircea - there is already a limit capacity built into the system without doing such drastic alterations such as adding hard coded limits (which is a bad thing in general for modmen). The easiest solution would simply be to boost maintenance cost limit for the ships. This is so because the current beta mode has it locked at 75% so there is in effect no cap right now for what it is worth.


It's not that I don't understand your opinions, I respect and value them, but...if you make it so you can go anywhere you want in a system (even with jump distance/capital ship limitations or whatever), that'll still require some sort of preventative defenses in ALL your territories. Regardless of "real world" comparisons, this is what would happen in the "game". RTS's typically turn into the he who has the biggest fleet the fastest wins. I know IC is trying their hardest to make it so this isn't the case. I hope they can...

In my currnet game, I have an entire galaxy to myself and only have a small fleet of capital ships and frigs in the "key" phase linked entry points (it has taken me awhile to take and colonize this sucker). The nearest enemy faction sent a whopper of a fleet and wiped them out. I couldn't get my reinforcements there fast enough to help out. I ultimately beat them back, but they are gearing up to attack again. Because I have several HUGE fleets wrecking havok in the other galaxy and I can only build units so fast, there's no way I could fend off an assualt(s) coming in from everywhere in this whole galaxy. Just how would you protect your assets if you were in my situation? That is MY perspective on it anyway. I bet IC has played with many different game mechanics and probably have come to the same conclusion, thus the current state of the game.
Reply #21 from Sins Forums Top
@Slim - The point you are really arguing is the entire point of an empire building game. Simply put with all things being equal the question is 'can you do it?'. It is as you have stated, you keep fleets at key locations throughout your game and they change over time just like they would in a free system travel environment. Once you take total control of a system then you would/should station your fleet at the system's sun because it is the ONLY point of entry for hostile forces from other systems. You could/would then be able to scrap excess defensive instillation from planetary areas if you are so inclined to reduce the economic drain from static platforms. You can then apply those resources to new mobile defense endeavors. Moreover if you choose to maintain a "state-of-war" disposition at all the planets within your secure system it is fine as well. Because you never really know what your opponent will hit you with and when.

So if you play the "front-line" or "stronghold" strategies they both work well because both have their inherent advantages as well as disadvantages. Again the choice is yours. To me strategic options such as these are the core decisions that have far reaching tactical merit and make a simulation truly a thing of fun.