Consolidated Vasari Opinion Thread

from Sins Forums
Okay, hopefully this doesn't turn out to be a mess. It's pretty obvious everyone has an opinion on how the Vasari are, how they want them to be, and what they want to see changed.

Right now, these opinions are scattered in a bunch of threads all over the forum. We know the devs try to keep up on all the reads, but why not make it easier for them?

Here's what I propose:

Everyone sit down, and come up with a way to summarize your opinion on the Vasari. What you like, what you don't, if you have any suggestions, whatever.

However, let's also obey these ground rules:

NO replying to critique/debate/insult/whatever another post in this thread. You post your opinion, other people post theirs.
NO jabs/insults (no matter how well hidden) at other people/ideas/developers for not agreeing with your views.
TRY to say everything you need/want to say in one post so the devs/forum goers can read it once and get everything you were trying to say. If you need to add something and you can't edit, reference the old post and quote what you are adding to/modifying to make the flow of thought easier on readers.

This is not another thread to argue/debate different ideas for the Vasari. It is only a thread where everyone posts their opinions so the devs don't need to shuffle through 10 threads riddled with arguments and debates to figure out what people think.
------------

That said, here's my take. Overall, I'm very happy with the Vasari and so far I enjoy them more than the TEC. Their special abilities (especially on capitals) make them quite a bit more varied than their TEC counterparts, and their tech trees are diverse enough to offer some interesting bonuses as well.

But the real diversity only comes into play with late-game tech levels, that are mostly unreachable in small/medium games unless they drag out for unreasonably long periods of time. This denies the Vasari most of their tricks, and more or less forces the player to play them in a manner very similar to the TEC. Yes, they have a bit smaller fleets, and they start off a bit slower, but the core gameplay is essentially the same.

For this reason, I believe the Vasari could benefit from a two main tweaks, both of which were already suggested by me and others:

1) Make some of their defining techs (such as phase gates) available earlier in the tech tree, making them a common enough occurence in at least medium games, and thus allowing the Vasari to be played the way they are meant to be.

2) Slightly rebalance their core ships to provide a little more firepower at the cost of some survivability and possibly even higher fleet point requirement (the costs I feel are fairly sufficient, at least metal. Perhaps a little more credits/crystal, but the metal drags down production in the beginning pretty well as it is).

The reasoning behind it is that any highly mobile force traditionally is able to get in, do its damage fast, and get out before the more cumbersome enemy can drown them in their own units. We know that the TEC are meant to be this cumbersome "hammer down" force, and the Vasari are meant to use mobility and finesse. But currently, the Vasari ships are balanced much more on their staying power (higher base hull hp/shields, earlier tech shield research, self repair) than their ability to destroy their targets more efficiently. So while they can get in as a mobile force, once in the grav well they lose much of their mobility and finesse.

Essentially, I am NOT proposing a change that would make smaller Vasari fleets be able to take down much larger TEC fleets. I am NOT proposing high survivability AND high damage output. I AM proposing a bit of a rebalance that would allow them to show more finesse by being able to achieve their objectives faster, but because their ships would be more brittle and fewer in number, they would not be able to stand up to a large TEC fleet. Essentially, guerrilla and hit and run tactics that have become synonymous with 'finesse'. The TEC player would then have to split up his defensive forces, and the Vasari player could then organize surgical strikes to take out some key defenses here and there, and thus always keep the sluggish TEC on its toes.
12,504 views 71 replies
Reply #1 from Sins Forums Top
Make gate phasejumping cost money/crystals that gets cheaper , so that it can be lower in the tech tree and at the same time not imbalance the game.

maybe at tech 2 it might cost the same as buying a new capship to send a capship , tho at higher tiers it gets cheaper to maybe "free" at tier 15 or whatever .
Reply #2 from Sins Forums Top
Personally, i think the phase gates should be available from tech two and then have the speed increase with tech levels instead of cost.

Also i have to say that the evacuator needs a new model.
Ashes of the Singularity II
Reply #3 from Sins Forums Top
I wouldn't bring the Phase Gate that low. I think a tier 5 research should be fine for the PG. Which is the same tier as the refinery. 5 civilian research labs are doable in the average small to medium game. A tier 9 speed increase for the PG isn't a bad idea.

Summon Dark Fleet should cost you. Right now it sucks away all of your fleet supply, but that doesn't matter. It should not start out in autocast. Plus it should cost something in metal/crystal to send the signal (something has to fuel those massive reactors). Ill leave up to you to figure out how much.

I think the Vasari frigates are fine the way they are now. In an even fight they will come out on top. Its the Cap ships that need work. Ill be honest i hate micromanaging. I cant keep up with 6, or 7 cap ships all with different ability's to keep track of. In large scale battles micromanaging will be out of the question for me. I dont plan on doing much online play other than testing because of this. Autocast, and the AI in general needs to be a little smarter than what it is now for both sides. Especially if there are going to be 100+ planet battles. I want to be able to form a fleet. Send it off on its objective, and hope the AI is smart enough to be able to complete that objective without doing stupid things like autocast heal when it isnt needed, or phase out hull when the ship hasnt taken any damage. If the AI isnt fixed on release, IC needs to make it a priority for the 1st patch.




Reply #4 from Sins Forums Top
Get in and get out quick.

One marauder, one desolator, four destructors and accompanying support. Assuming you can kill the massed bombers of course, you move them in, bypass the defenses or destroy them(your desolator gets bonuses against orbital structures) and bomb the shit out of the planet, much much quicker than TEC can. Perhaps in a straight up fight they aren't a kill it quick and get out side, but they can bomb a planet down much faster than TEC can.

Phase gate tech, available from the start would mean vasari need nerfed a bit(or a lot maybe), that wierd x gates per level thing seems more annoying than anything, there's already substantial micromanagement in the abilities, some of which need fixed bad and some of which really need to be micromanaged. 5 might be a good spot for the initial tech, but perhaps too low. I'd go with 7 for a start, see how it plays.
Reply #5 from Sins Forums Top
OK I'll chime in. I haven't played much since beta4, but I did finish a game with the Vasari last night finally. First of all, I'm kinda dissapointed in how much they feel like the TEC. I know this has been debated to high heaven, but I was hoping for something a bit different. All of their begining buildings/ships are almost exactly like the TEC except for the capships abilities, and maybe the Vasari cap scout ship.
However I dount were going to see a total revamp of the Vasari, but I hope the Advent feel different right from the get go.

Also, as has been said by almost everyone, the Vasari are overall pretty weak in the early game, which is where a lot of games get decided. Losing your flagship is hard to overcome, and the Vasari just don't have the firepower to take on the TEC early. Late game, the balance totally shifts to the Vasari with the dark fleet tech. So I'd say buff the Vasari frigates and maybe cap ships (definately the frigs, cap ships maybe). One thing that would help a lot is to make the Vasari frigs take the same supply as the TEC's frigs. Right now the DPS of both races frigs are pretty much even from what I've seen, which is a pretty big disadvantage considering their supply differences. Keep the slightly better hull/shields, and the higher cost, but make them take the same supply. This might swing things in the Vasari's favor, but we can try it and see .

As to the dark fleet, it needs a BIG hit with the nerf bat. It's just insanely overpowered right now, an almost guarenteed victory in a Vasari vs TEC game, and in a Vasari vs Vasari game, whoever gets to tech 15 first wins, which seems kind of off.
Reply #6 from Sins Forums Top
Trading and refineries need to be described alittle better. I just though refineries added to your credit income from trading, not getting metal+crystal!
Reply #7 from Sins Forums Top
I hope the Advent feel different right from the get go.
End of quote


I doubt this... At the least I foresee the same build structures and numbers of ships in each class...

Sadly we won't find out until RETAIL...
Reply #8 from Sins Forums Top
I like the title, now whats my motivation for the reading?
Reply #9 from Sins Forums Top
Vasari concept is fine as is, and the idea of "start similar, then branch out" is lovely. Just balance out the early / late game some -- preferably without that silly X gates or costs resources to gate mechanic -- and things will be great.
Reply #10 from Sins Forums Top
I have my motivation, the forum are deteriorating to a state of choas that I didn't cause.

This must be corrected.

My stance is yet unclear to me. I viewed the Vasari as a powerful race at first, one that should outmatch the TEC. I have some different interpretation on the Lore myself, but in the end I see them more of a nomadic people. A highly technologically nomadic people. The Vasari are people of circumstance, so it makes sense that they should be able to control circumstances. That is why they have such a high enphasis on mobility and intelligence, to be able to make confrontations be as favorable to their side as possible.
Reply #11 from Sins Forums Top
I like the vasari as is.
They lose one on one, but becouse of thier technoligy they make is so it is never one on one.

However changes do need to be made so they are more powerfull early on, and still don't completly crush the TEC late on.

acording to the lore it seems that the TEC should be the ones that get more powerfull later on, tough we KNOW how accurate THAT argument is!!!
Reply #12 from Sins Forums Top
The Lore is nothing to truely go by. I think the Devs created a lot of confusion by putting time into the equation.
Reply #13 from Sins Forums Top


acording to the lore it seems that the TEC should be the ones that get more powerfull later on, tough we KNOW how accurate THAT argument is!!!
End of quote


Eh, they have some pretty nasty stuff late in their (civ) tech tree!
Reply #14 from Sins Forums Top
Didn't want to start a new thread so I thought I'd post it here.

I won't play Vasari any more, they require too much micro-management to really take advantage of their abilities.

Example: One of the caps has an ability that shuts off phase jumping for a short time. Cool! That freaking rocks! Except they have another ability you'd like to use in combat and with them both on auto-cast it burns out the power pool too quickly and then the ability isn't available when you need it to go off. In order to take advantage of it you need to watch the battle and use the attack option a few times by hand, always saving enough power to use the anti-jump if it looks like they're running.

Some people may like that much micro, myself I just say screw it, I'll just play TEC.
Reply #15 from Sins Forums Top

I won't play Vasari any more, they require too much micro-management to really take advantage of their abilities.
End of quote


It's even worse with their cruisers. You can micro your capitals since you often don't have that many of them, but with the cruisers it's a total mess.

But all in all, battles still need a very high amount of micro management for your ships to be effective, which I hope will be changed in further patches.
Reply #16 from Stardock Forums Top
What about making more variety than just adding different special abilities, and textures and models. Look at each race and what would be their design philosophy. The Star Wars universe does this well, where the Rebellion has great fighters, and the Empire has powerful cap ships. Or have a race like that in X3 where their ships break apart into many more smaller pieces. Or something like the Borg where they cripple you and assimilate. There are a hundred different ways to go but the current system.

PS-Great game other wise, but the very basic ship system now can be a killer for me. Also on the start up screen you mention that the game may not be enjoyable in it's Beta state with a limited selection of ships.... Does this mean that limited in the fact that all the factions are not included, or there will actually be more ship types?

Reply #17 from Sins Forums Top
Oh man are you in for a ride of posting... I suggest reading through the other Vasari posts for an idea of the debate...

in sum though, the Devs are keeping a basic ship strength/roles the same across the board, play through and the races become more distinct towards the medium to later stages of the Tech Tree.

I don't neccessarily like it myself, but you should play and read more if you want a better idea of how its going to work in the end.



The Start up screen is a disclaimer that the game is a work in progress and you shouldn't expect it to be perfect, also there is still one more faction that is in the game that we won't have until release... that would be the additional ship types.
Reply #18 from Sins Forums Top
Oh man are you in for a ride of posting... I suggest reading through the other Vasari posts for an idea of the debate...
End of quote


More than that, he completely ignored the fact that basic game design has "locked" some of his ideas out -- cap ships, with frigate / cruiser support is a basic game "rule", and can't be changed, for example.
Reply #19 from Sins Forums Top
*surfs the post wave on the back of yoshyusmc*

my only answer is that you need to learn through experience, play some online games.

There are a hundred different ways to go but the current system.
End of quote

ok, I'll just tote this and say:
the current system is elegant and beautiful, it does not emphasize strength in strength vs. strength in numbers (protoss-zerg syndrom) and doesnt emphasize completely divergant playstyles either (borg... um X3? syndrom) in fact what results are two races that initially seem "similar" but in fact are incredibally divergant, I cant explain this to you though, you need to play the game to understand.
Reply #20 from Sins Forums Top
I love the Vasari the way they are. I think that their ships are much more fun to play with, over the TEC. I only have to issues with them. The Dark Fleet capability is rather annoying, in that if you research it, it seems like you are almost assured a game win, just be numerical superiority. Also, I think that they ought to be a little more diverse in the way of buildings. They are (at this point) almost identical to the TEC in the way of logistics structures. I'm sure many people do not mind this, but it irks me, personally. Maybe (just a suggestion) they could have one building for ship production? After all, they are a highly advanced race . I would think that they would have determined that it is more economical (maybe) to have one ship construction facility rather than two.
Reply #21 from Sins Forums Top
I would think that they would have determined that it is more economical (maybe) to have one ship construction facility rather than two.
End of quote


Actually, the current setup "makes sense" -- a facility designed to build smaller ships wouldn't even fit a capship in it... and think of all the wasted space if you used a capship builder to make a frigate.
Reply #22 from Sins Forums Top
Actually, the current setup "makes sense" -- a facility designed to build smaller ships wouldn't even fit a capship in it... and think of all the wasted space if you used a capship builder to make a frigate.
End of quote


well if they were really this advanced, then with in the same structure they would have facilities for building both. say a massive Cap ship building bay and a smaller frigate bay on the side. Im not saying they should implement such a thing, but it would work logically. And it might just be a good idea. Especially as a later tech building used for saving logistics points.

However what i do think would be nice to see would be an "additional building unit" of some sort that would allow the Vasari to build their ships faster and cheeper once the tech was researched and the building built next to a ship yeard. I think that would be cool. (and i know they already have techs that make stuff cheaper, im thinking more along the lines of production speed) More ships faster in mid/late game would be good. especially if the talk of taking hit points away from Vasari ships actually goes anywere.

On that note. I think a little trade, a few hit points for more fire power would be a good idea. It seems to me the strategy of the Vasari in general is that of hit and run. Get in do damage and run away before the bulky mega fleet of the TEC can lumber in to bring its guns to bare. Right now it seems that it takes just a little bit too long to distroy things based on how Advanced the Vasari are meant to be. Even after several weapons upgrades.

I think an over all hike to their weapons out put would be good for a trade off for Hit Points.
Reply #23 from Sins Forums Top
I'm fine with the Vasari, I just can't play them. That voice and script, can't stand it. The game looses alot with the volume turned off.

Anyone planning on comming out with a voice over mod for the Vasari?
Reply #24 from Sins Forums Top


Anyone planning on comming out with a voice over mod for the Vasari?
End of quote


yah, think the devs said they were :P
Reply #25 from Sins Forums Top

I'm fine with the Vasari, I just can't play them. That voice and script, can't stand it. The game looses alot with the volume turned off.

Anyone planning on comming out with a voice over mod for the Vasari?
End of quote

The voices in beta 4 are all placeholders done by us in one night of messing around. The voicework from professional actors is now in the game and you'll hear it at release (the Vasari is substantially different).