Frogboy Frogboy

Sins v1.02 Changelog

▼

Sins v1.02 Changelog

Coming soon...

from Sins Forums

Sins of a Solar Empire v1.02 is coming...

We hope to get this out this week. Ironclad has been working hard to make v1.02 available as soon as possible but we also have to finish testing.

Updated info at bottom:

Here is what will be new:

---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Gameplay / Balance:
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
-Tutorials moving into bad states at random fixed.
-Siege frigate survivability decreased.
-Pirate raid frequency decreased.
-Later stage missions to destroy ships and structures have had their expiry times increased.
-Clairvoyance: duration increased from 30, 45 60 seconds per level to 50, 100, 150 seconds.
-Guidance: cooldown changed from 20, 15, 10 seconds per level to 20 seconds at all levels.
-Guidance: ability cooldown rate changed from +20%, +35%, +50% per level to +40% at all levels.
-Guidance: duration changed 20 seconds at all levels to 15, 30, 45 seconds per level.
-Reverie: friendly units will no longer auto-acquire enemies under the effects of reverie as attack targets.
-Reverie: duration increased from 15, 20, 25 seconds per level to 20, 30, 40 seconds.
-Gravity Warhead: range decreased from 7000 to 6000 at all levels.
-Gravity Warhead: cooldown increased from 18, 16, 14 seconds per level to 25 seconds at all levels .
-Gravity Warhead: antimatter cost raised from 80 to 100 at all levels.
-Gravity Warhead: duration changed from 12 seconds at all levels to 12, 15, 18 seconds per level.
-Gravity Warhead: Speed reduction changed from 15%, 30%, 45% per level to 30%, 45%, 60% .
-Gravity Warhead: Acceleration reduction changed from 20%, 40%, 60% per level to 60%, 80%, 120%.
-Nano-Disassember: range increased from 4500 to 6000 at all levels.
-Nano-Disassember: antimatter cost decreased from 85 to 75 at all levels.
-Ion Bolt: antimatter cost increased from 65 to 85 at all levels.
-Ion Bolt: cooldown from 9, 11, 13 seconds per level to 10, 12, 14 seconds.
-Shield Projection: radius of effect increased from 2500 to 5000.
-Game update rate change hooked to - and = buttons (singleplayer only).
-Two new pirate-less maps.
-First tutorial now handles players spending their ability point before they were intended to and thus not being able to spend it when instructed.
-Phasic Transmissions research is now effective even at max fleet supply research.
-Reduced Phasic Transmissions supply bonus from 20% down to 15%.


---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Graphics:
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
-Shield projection's bubble less opaque.
-Various new ICO art.


---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Networking / Multiplayer:
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
-Games in progress causing "Rejected by Host" error fixed.
-Multiplayer lobby screens now have Map Designer tab.
-Whisper functionality for ICO
-Refactored join game screen.
-Fix for not seeing friend's games.
-New chat friendly ICO font.
-ICO user names are now sorted.
-Self and friends are colored in ICO channel player list.
-Events for players entering and leaving channels.
-ICO nows preserves history when changing channels.
-ICO logged in user count now displayed. This number will only update when you change channels or login.
-Added some default lobby names.
-Reorganized numbered lobbies to increment sequentially as they fill.
-Added notification of what channel you are in.
-Fix for rare multiplayer lobby crash when host leaves a game in ICO.
-Various new ICO message strings.


---------------------------------------------------------------------------
UserInterface / HUD:
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
-Added counter descriptions for all frigates and fighters.
-Game menu now mapped to F10 by default instead of Esc so people can repeatly press Esc to close any submenu they may-Fix rare bug in group selection.
 be in w/o going all the way to the escape menu.
-Various strings cleaned up.


---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Modding:
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
-Loading mods supported

Might be ready by Friday. Maybe.

Update:

Some people are complaining that we're simply catering to "whiners".  I would remind those people that Stardock has many many years of experience in putting together lists based on user feedback and making its own judgments on the matter.  The GalCiv series, for instance, has evolved plenty over the years and it's unlikely you're going to find any reasonable person who would say that we simply make changes based on who is loudest.

Prior to release, our internal testing of the game has produced a lengthy list of suggestions for future updates (1.01, 1.02, 1.03, and so on). Stardock and Ironclad get together, discuss what things we would like to change, and then prioritize it. The only thing that was "rushed out" for this release was some additional maps that don't have pirates so users have a choice.

It is not hard to defend against siege units.  But that is irrelevant. No counter to a given strategy should require more effort than the initial strategy. Throwing a swarm of siege units, takes virtually no effort. Defending against it requires considerably more. Similarly, the strength of the pirates is fine.  It's how OFTEN they strike.  The changes are not drastic, however.

For those of you who aren't familiar with Stardock, we can understand your concerns.  For those of you who have GalCiv II,  I would hope you all know better than to think that we make changes on a whim based on who posts loudest on a forum by now.  Ironclad shares the same views as we do on this matter. It's their game and we get together and discuss these things at length.

 

231,137 views 260 replies
Reply #201 from Sins Forums Top
New player here. Haven't played that many RTS games. Playing on medium and loving it. Yes it's hard but why should it be easy? Where is the fun in that?

Half the problems I have not experienced. Pirates I can handle, using the many tips and guides available. Hell, I even used them to my advantage last night. Siege frigates? No problem.

The AI is random. Sometimes it’s good, sometimes it’s a bit stupid but MOST of the time it’s f’ing excellent!

My view is that there should be no perma-nerfing. Just make the experience as customisable as possible for every player. There is no formula that will please everyone.
Reply #202 from Sins Forums Top
I see nothing in the patch version 1.02 about opportunities to:

Set slower main game speed and research speed in Single Player, as it is pre patch.

I really hope this part would make it in. If this can’t be done for this patch will it then be made for a later patch or could it be done from modding tool?

Or will this never be made for any patches or modding tools?
I really would like to know if this game would be a sure winner for me :)

Please just give "painful slow" back from beta days - Like Blair Fraser wrote:
if any change fails the test, we can always revert back easy enough
End of quote


Elemental: Reforged
Reply #203 from Sins Forums Top
Balance Changes are good. Always good. The more, the better. You won't 'kill' the game with regards to well-thought out changes, only possibly alienate loud mouthed rankwhores who have some kind of emotional investment in the way the game is currently played.

Seriously, frequent balance changes haven't 'killed any games'. Most games that start good, stay good, with a few exceptions of the community dying off due to high initial sales and poor sustained marketing. (Ala Rise of Legends)

"Don't turn this into Starcraft or Dawn of War!"
Blah blah blah. Please, there's a reason why those games are so successful. Just because you consider yourself some 'hardcore grognard' who can 'deal with imba' doesn't make the game anymore fun or unique.

Quite frankly, frequent updates and balance changes are the norm for any RTS, and moreover, something people expect when they get a Stardock product. Did you play Galciv II? Then you know how things are going to pan out- things will change, get used to it, that's what you paid for. (And what pirates are not)

Reply #204 from Sins Forums Top
Yes, I agree. Shame on your Stardock!! How dare you fix a problem that is clearly recognized by the community, and has facilitated numerous complaints, even from your own team. How dare you!! At least wait a few months until it becomes a major issue!

End of quote


Heh, sarcasm? ;)

I'm not here to point fingers but have fun. I'll accept just about any kind of change they are willing to muster, as long as they help the balance of the factions. Nothing I personally dislike more than everyone playing the same faction, only to exploit and hence win.

Ironclad and Stardock, great game!

X
Reply #207 from Sins Forums Top
If you scare off all the newbies with a game that is too difficult then you will not be able to grow the player base. Difficulty is all about scaling to challenge the individual player. While reducing the pain of a game feature is not the right long term fix, it is a fix that helps immediately meet a need for the overall community without spoiling too much challenge for the upper echelon of players.
Reply #208 from Sins Forums Top
Great patch log.

Pirate fix aside, nobody properly thanked IC for '-Loading mods supported'. So, thanks for fixing that problem so quickly!
Reply #209 from Sins Forums Top

well done SD/IC  :CONGRAT:  yet more proof as to why you guys will do well in the future

I only have one slight concern but im sure the devs though of this
that the longer the pirates take to attack the bigger there fleet gets as there is more chance of the bounty getting higher there4 that almost nullifies the delay

ps This post is not to start a flame war but to make shure the devs have coverd all angles compleatly and maby voice somthing somone else is thinking :>

This post is not to start a flame war but to make sure the devs have covered all angles completely and maby voice something someone else is thinking  :) 

thanks again devs for all the hard work and time you putting into the game and the patience you guys are showing.  :CONGRAT: 
Reply #210 from Sins Forums Top
Good to see that the pirate raiding will get decreased a little bit. I like the idea of the pirate raiding because it keeps you honest, but at the same time I always feel like I am defending against them, not my actual enemy.
Reply #211 from Sins Forums Top
This may have already been asked and answered, but will it be compatible with saved games? Just wondering if it's worth continuing with the game I started last night.
Reply #212 from Sins Forums Top
Thanks SD/IC very much for continuing work after release, doing so in such a rapid fashion, and particularly for these changes:


-Game update rate change hooked to - and = buttons (singleplayer only).
...
-Loading mods supported
End of quote

Reply #213 from Sins Forums Top
just dont dumb down the AI...thats all i'm asking...in fact make it better...
Reply #214 from Sins Forums Top

MAKE THE VASARI SAY "HOW SINISTER!" HOW COULD YOU LEAVE IT OUT!!!!!!!!!!!!!! my heart is broken....
End of quote


Yeah, I saw a video with that in, I want it too! :O

Btw, what is ICO art? Character portaits? If not, can we then plz have some more of them so players in a match dont use the same, also because they are beautifully drawn? ;)
Reply #215 from Sins Forums Top

"Don't turn this into Starcraft or Dawn of War!"
Blah blah blah. Please, there's a reason why those games are so successful. Just because you consider yourself some 'hardcore grognard' who can 'deal with imba' doesn't make the game anymore fun or unique.
End of quote


;:[STFU!]

EDIT: The last thing we want is the units to die at the rate they die in Starcraft. ^^
But I know, I also want a 10 year balance support for this game. :D
Reply #216 from Sins Forums Top
Hi there everyone, ... if you can all cool your jets for one moment...

1. Schod raises a good point, as he is not saying 'anti-nerf' he is saying that the Devs should wait longer to employ changes. That is generally a good idea.

2. However, the siege frigate thing was discussed internally at legnth as they said, which gives the dev's far more legitmacy in making those changes.

The only realy problem with Schod's arguments and many of your counter arguments is that they are becoming rude... regardless of who started it, you should take a small step back.


And notably I will defend the siege spam. The Spam tactic should be viable when used cleverly... the tactic is not a problem, and many of you think the AI is abusing it as a result of some bug. The AI is purposely designed to take advantage of this (90% certain on that) because it is effective.

The problem is the siege spam can kill one planet, and then keep going... it is fast and armored enough to deflect fleets long enough to escape. The issue would not be such a problem if the spam succeeded in killing the planet, but the siege fleet was utterly wiped out (by not too great defenses and fleet)... more importantly pursuing ships/fleets should be able to catch and destroy them.

The tactic should exist because undefended worlds should be attacked in such a way, and it is a desperate 'terrorist' sort of strategy which no doubt would occur to some admirals when their balls are to the wall. Spam strategies are only a problem when they are significantly or incredibly more potent to a combined arms tactic.

Even currently the siege spam is not superior to combined arms, but it is disproportionally effective in a strategic nature. Thus why the devs are changing it.

But the idea that spamming units in and of itself is somehow 'poor-play' or even 'immoral game design' is foolish. Certain extremes have counters, and are easily dealt with... the Siege Spam just hasn't had its counter strategy fleshed out yet.

Player's should be allowed and at times encouraged to use allot of carriers or siege, or LRMs... it is up to the opponent to make them pay for it. The dev's don't need to super enforce combined arms on everything.
Reply #217 from Sins Forums Top
And remember that this is large scale 4xRTS, which means that the units do have a different balance system than a normal RTT(= Starcraft RTS type games). :CONGRAT:
Reply #218 from Sins Forums Top
Changes look pretty good, I would like to eventually see a slider so those of who want fast and frequent pirate raids of epic intensity can have that game, and others can slide it down to 'No Pirates' or "Raid every 2 hours" if they want. Flexibility is a great thing and lets us all (well most of us anyway!) play the game the way we want.

As for the bickering on this thread it is sad to see, I see no reason for any of it - this should be a community that is mature enough to make rational arguments without attacking other people through name-calling - this is not the WoW forums! Take it to another thread if you want to argue about the merits of a particular tactic, that is ancillary to the changes themselves.
Reply #219 from Sins Forums Top
best thread EVER
Reply #220 from Sins Forums Top

Update:


Some people are complaining that we're simply catering to "whiners".  I would remind those people that Stardock has many many years of experience in putting together lists based on user feedback and making its own judgments on the matter.  The GalCiv series, for instance, has evolved plenty over the years and it's unlikely you're going to find any reasonable person who would say that we simply make changes based on who is loudest.


Prior to release, our internal testing of the game has produced a lengthy list of suggestions for future updates (1.01, 1.02, 1.03, and so on). Stardock and Ironclad get together, discuss what things we would like to change, and then prioritize it. The only thing that was "rushed out" for this release was some additional maps that don't have pirates so users have a choice.


It is not hard to defend against siege units.  But that is irrelevant. No counter to a given strategy should require more effort than the initial strategy. Throwing a swarm of siege units, takes virtually no effort. Defending against it requires considerably more. Similarly, the strength of the pirates is fine.  It's how OFTEN they strike.  The changes are not drastic, however.


For those of you who aren't familiar with Stardock, we can understand your concerns.  For those of you who have GalCiv II,  I would hope you all know better than to think that we make changes on a whim based on who posts loudest on a forum by now.  Ironclad shares the same views as we do on this matter. It's their game and we get together and discuss these things at length.


 


End of quote



Yes! Thank you for the great response. The pirate-less maps will be awesome. I love the way the game is changing to encompass more options and change, so people will be able to play the game the way they like, but still enjoy the core elements the same as everyone else. (Personally, I'm not a huge fan of the pirates, but they do add a lot to the game. Higher timers is just the right answer.)
Reply #221 from Sins Forums Top
DEVS what are you doing all is fine but dont change anything about the pirates
most people like it that way it now is dont listen to the few whiners who cannot win from pirates please please please please hear my cry!!!!!!!! :SNIFF!:  X-( 
Reply #222 from Sins Forums Top
For the people talking about the AI exclusively doing siege rushes--dunno if we have the same game running.

In my current random-huge FFA, most of my fleet is out in the universe fighting on the frontlines, leaving my one system defended by a few ships and a bunch of static defenses. There's one AI (medium! not even hard) that's been continually trying to get in, and I am absolutely shocked at the things it's done so far. A bit of background: there are two ways into my empire from the star, both to asteroids with tactical cap full of turrets and repair platforms. I had one fleet at one of the asteroids, and another a few jumps away. The first few times, the AI attacked the asteroid my fleet wasn't at with a fleet of roughly equal size, and made me jump to get it. The next one after that, it launched an attack on the one. I jumped my fleet over. And then it launched an attack on the other one. My other fleet only barely got there in time, and once the AI retreated, I moved it back to watching the wormhole. The most recent attack came in two waves--I looked at the first one, saw my fleet could handle it, and then turned my attention elsewhere. The first indication I got of something gone wrong was the capital ship shields down message. I go back, find I'm outnumbered by a factor of two, and end up losing a level 10 battleship before I retreated.

I've seen siege frigate raids, too (I refuse to use the term 'siege spam'), but the only reason I've ever lost a world to one is because I overextended and left the world nearly defenseless.
Reply #223 from Sins Forums Top
Btw, could anyone answer this?: What is more ICO art? Character portaits?

If not, can we then plz have some more of them so players in a match dont use the same, also because they are beautifully drawn? ;)
Reply #224 from Sins Forums Top
I commend Ironclad and Stardock on their development of this AI.

For any RTS'er that has played Starcraft, Warcraft, AOE, EaW, and pretty much any other modern game in a multiplayer setting, you know that players come up with these rushing tactics for early game winning.

Why not program the AI to be smart enough to mimic human behavior? Isn't that the end goal. After all we are programming an artifical intelligence that is made to survive. I mean what would be the point of programming deep blue to play chess but not try to win.
Or (for us sci-fi junkies) have terminators that were programmed to make you breakfast in bed, get the morning paper, and take the kids to school???

None!!!

Why would Ironclad design and implement an AI that wouldn't try to do everything it can to beat you? I applaud them for using a strategy that I hate and think is horrible. I don't like it, but I think, hope and progress towards successfully defending myself 100% of the time against the siege attack.

Just like when you got Zerg rushed in Starcraft and were like OMG WTF!! You cry NERF, but blizzard didn't help you (at least we have dev's that are uber awesome in continually trying to balance the game and help us out). You had to find a way to counter the attack then go kick the players ass and show them that they are retarded for thinking they can use such a stupid strategy.


Same concept here. We are all so new that we haven't learned how to effectively defend ourselves from the siege attack in the early game. I haven't done it 100% but I am going to try. It's called a challenge. I like challenges. They hurt but they make me stronger.

Once I can do it 100%, I can go kick the AI's ass and while I am enjoying some slave labor filled parties on their homeworld I can ask them WTF were they thinking!
Reply #225 from Sins Forums Top
In ancient times, big long range weapons was called a siege unit because it's sole purpose was to attack fortified defenses. It has long been evolved to attack mobile targets as well, thus are now called artillery units.
Seige units, beside the artillery element, usually comprised of short range weapons such as ladders and rams. Siege units can withstand some punishment but definitely cannot handle an assault by direct combat units alone. It's defense and health should be between an artillery unit and a direct combat unit. So if seige units charging through the outer defensive placements and direct combat units to reach a castle alone are pretty much suicidal. Some, if not most would be cut down before reaching the castle walls. But, when the remaining units do reach the castle walls, it now depends on the fortification of the castle itself to withstand the seige assult if outer defense cannot eliminate all of them in time.

With that said, it is similar to the seige rush situation in the game. The seige rush strategy should work on lightly defended and lightly or heavily fortified planets despite the update. Problem is what is considered a lightly outer defense against a 20 siege frigates rush? If the defense is consist of a Combat Cap ship with 10 combat frigates, 4-5 gun placements and 1-2 hangers. Is that lightly defended? If not and the 20 siege frigates still pulverize a heavily fortified planet before they die, then something is wrong here. If this is considered a light defense against the seige strategy, then what would be an adequate defensive force composition be?

Anyway, I would give the devs' plan to decrease the survivability of the siege frigate a chance even if the game is only out for a few days. There will be internal testing of the new patch before releasing it to the public (right?). I see no downside for this update since newbie friendly devs are good for Ironclad business, especially in the beginning, even though statistically, they should wait a bit longer (like a full week), and the current update changes can rollback in a later update if it unbalance the gameplay too much. Also, knowing some of the devs had worked on Galciv II, I fully trust their decisions and motivations for this update.