I've played a few games of various sizes and difficulty levels. I have a couple of observations, and I apologize in advance if one or more of these issues has been raised; I just don't have time ATM to keep up with this thread:

1. I still think the game needs the ability to increase game speed, the game still plays too slowly, IMO.

2. While I appreciate the improved AI, There are some things that need to be tweaked. For example, if there is a safe passage between two systems, trade systems and resource ships should never, ever, go through hostile territory (regardless of jumps). If there is no safe route, then that's a different story. As another example, there have been instances where a computer controlled fleet just hyperjumps back and forth between their system and my system. Once they reach my system, it appears as if they realize they can't win, turn around and run. However, over time I am able to whittle them down with my system's defenses. The AI should do exactly what a player would do in that situation. Wait and attack with superior strength.

3. Related to #1/#2, the game is still too easy (I apologize if I am sounding like a broken record). I have played numerous games in a small galaxy (one star) with all 10 empires on hard and had no problems methodically defeating all of my opponents. The only thing I have yet to try is a small galaxy where the other 9 AI opponents are locked and allied against me. I'm not sure what I would do remedy this issue, but I think the AI needs to attack in greater strength. It seems to me that they just break themselves against the defenses of one or more systems and leave themselves wide open for counter-attacks from my fleets.

4. I like the addition of the military research base/civilian research base. However, I think one thing you could potentially do to improve the strategic importance of having more than a certain number for a specific level of technology is to provide passive bonuses (beyond the build speed increases; the speed increases do not seem to really be that important). Maybe each tech level (and beyond) comes with its own passive ability that is unlocked once the appropriate number of labs are constructed. The passive abilities should increase in power, so that there is reason to build X labs, even if a particular tier of research doesn't include anything that the player might normally research. For example, on the civilian path, I usually only build 5 labs to get the resource station, the rest of the civilian tech is researched much later in the game as a luxury. None of them are central to my strategies.

5. I like the new artifact/exploration system. You'll have to excuse the ignorance, since I have never found the need to research it (and once I have the extra resources there just doesn't seem to be a need), but do the probes that can be research for the scout frigate allow any sort of exploration to occur? Perhaps to give them additional strategic importance, if they are used on a planet, they can explore 50% of the planet automatically...

6. I also agree with some other people here; I think a ships overall effectiveness should be related to its overall health. If a ship has only 50% of its hull points, then all of it's parameters should be lowered by an appropriate amount. I'm not sure what that should be, but perhaps that can differ from ship to ship. For example, a Kol is designed for battle and as such should probably have redundant systems. Maybe more than 25% of the ship needs to be destroyed before it looses effectiveness. Also, it might be interesting to allow fighters, bombers, and possibly frigates to target subsystems. Nothing too complicated, but maybe a target engines, or a target weapons setting, which could be combined with the above system to more quickly reduce certain types of ship effectiveness more quickly.

I guess that's it for now. I'm probably going to give the 9 on 1 a shot and see if that is any sort of challenge... Thanks for listening.

Agree. This is imho desperately needed.



Agree. The AI still sends ships in suicide missions, attacks with single ships, retreats when it should fight and fights when it should retreat. Etc.



Sounds like a nice idea. And I agree with you about civil research. I usually don't bother building more then 9 civil labs (the jump speed increase is imho quite nice, even though it's only 2 seconds) and never research anything above. To expensive and not really useful research there.



Targeting subsystem will never be in. But some lowered effectiveness would be nice. Let's say a 10% damage and weapon cooldown penalty if ship hp is under 75%, a 20% damage and weapon cooldown penalty if ship hp is under 50% and finally a 30% weapon damage and cooldown penalty plus a 25% ships top speed lowering if ship hp is under 25%.

It shouldn't be an excessive penalty, but some would imho be nice.



Shameless self promotion:

I've made two custom maps which are made with various bonus for the AI so it's a better enemy. They're located in the modding section of the forum. Perhaps those will give you a challenge (play them on hard and with marauders on).

I'm sorry, but stealing 20+% of the enemies expenditures / trade is very powerful.

Against the AI it is not.

You have a point.

thats why its quite high up there, also, both people can get it so it evens out

IMO, if they are going to implement something like this, then they can take it that extra step farther. For example, make the ship parameters "visible" (i.e., a percentage for weapons and one for engines) and allow certain types of craft (e.g., strike craft) the ability to target either weapons or engines. The penalty they inflict should not exceed the normal penalty based on overall health, just speed up the parameter degradation. Also, while they are attacking particular sub-systems they would only do a fraction of their overall damage to the hull, so it's an either/or proposition.

Sub-system targeting can have significant tactical repercussions. Tired of the enemy fleeing when they're up against the ropes? Take down their engines and make it harder for them to flee. If you're not worried about losing out on DPS initially, have your strike craft reduce their weapon effectiveness, maybe the reduction in their DPS can allow you to flee or buy you enough time to send reinforcements...

I really like the idea of having ships perform at reduced effectiveness when seriously damaged. I hope this gets in.

Here are a couple of gameplay questions/comments.

1. When you have 1 capital ship at level 1, and another at level 10, does experience still get divided between the two?

2. Does anybody remember way back in the day when the original 'WARLORDS' game came out (1991?). When you owned about 70% of the map, the other AI players would attempt to surrender to you in exchange for their lives (you had the choice of accepting their surrender, or cutting off the heads of their messengers and pursuing the war). Sins really needs to have a similar concept in place (throw them out the airlock!). If you own 70% of the map against the AI, victory is guaranteed and you shouldn't have to play it to the bitter end


Here is a minor AI problem I haven't seen anybody else bring up.


1. I've played games against the AI where there are no more pirate bases left, but the AI still spends a fortune on bounty. This really hurts the AI at this point.

Ah! Good point. We'll get on it! Surrender code is coming but not for beta 3 as we may work it into the new diplomacy model.

Any tidbits on said model?

It'll be better

.........I hates you   

It might be interesting to add the variety of Phase Jump speeds... IE have a red phase lane which goes much slower (or faster?) and notably it would be nice if when 2 phase lanes intercepted it created a bubble or false Gwell, the interference creating a small but empty pocket of non phase-jumpable space.

This would give us much needed no-man's land without coming up too often, and would always be a sort of cross roads area.

I suggest this because I keep finding the game to be too static, I am either always conquering or sitting still and defending; with some more no-man's land there might be more emphasis on positioning fleets and counter positioning.

Also can we have an infinite build toggle command?

When one of my systems is invaded with a force I have 0% of stopping, I'll sometimes scuttle all my structures to get some $ back. What I don't like is that while my structures are being deconstructed, their hitpoints stay at 100%. So enemies can fire on them all they like, my structures will give me back the same refund regardless if they get damaged or not.

My suggestion is to make the 'scuttle' command either innefective during combat (in the same gravity well), OR make the refund % influenced by any damage the structure might have taken.

I'd go for both actually. So that if you started the deconstruction earlier and an enemy force jumps in the deconstruction will cease. So your refund would only be what was deconstructed before the fleet arrived. I'm sure people have better things to do when under attack than to demolish the buildings...

They still build 'em though!

Yeah, so why can't they deconstruct them as well under fire?

Perhaps they shouldn't? Than again, trying to save your behind by building defenses is something completely different from trying to demolish something to earn a buck. Normal people usually don't think too much about money when bullets are flying by their ears. Lord of War [movie] excluded. They do think how to survive and are prepared to do whatever it takes for it.

This thread has been locked in advance of Beta 3's release.

Please remember to uninstall your previous version of the game before installing Beta 3!