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.

 

231,131 views 260 replies
Reply #26 from Sins Forums Top


show me more than 20 people with more than a self proclaimed "few" hours of playing that have gone on extensive rants about this.
End of quote


Funny, didn't you participate in a recent 5 page discussion, discrediting those who complained in the process, that appeared on the same day the game was released? And what day is it now, pray tell?
Reply #27 from Sins Forums Top
Oh, and lets not forget those "inexperienced", push over developers while we're at it.
The Political Machine 2024
Reply #28 from Sins Forums Top
I think this is the first game in recent memory, if at all, where I've seen the Devs interact with the fanbase on this level. The very fact that it's two days (one day for me) since the release and you're addressing these issues and listening to the community is friggin awesome for lack of a "cleaner" phrase.
Reply #29 from Sins Forums Top
Ouch. I'm inclined to agree with Schod on this issue. I'm by no means s00per-skilled at Sins, but I appreciate the challenge of having to watch for siege frigates, to scout out my enemy's intentions, and to carefully consider the balance of developing, expanding, or fortifying. It's just downright good RTSing, and the power of siege frigates is a significant part of what drives the gameplay. I consider tough siege frigates part of the learning curve and overall balance.

The bottom line is that I trust you guys at Ironclad, but from where I'm sitting, it sure looks like you're watering down the game balance in response to the overloud whinging of a few frustrated gamers who haven't quite grokked the gameplay yet. :( I hope I'm wrong.

-Tom
Reply #30 from Sins Forums Top
Funny, didn't you participate in a recent 5 page discussion, discrediting those who complained in the process, that appeared on the same day the game was released? And what day is it now, pray tell?
End of quote

that tallied a total of 5 people that were at all vested in the thread, with the occasional self proclaimed newcomer-comment.
Oh, and lets not forget those "inexperienced", push over developers while we're at it.
End of quote

you're telling me that all games coming off shelves are pure gold? because if I remember correctly a programming degree means experience in lessee now... programming

the devs have created a golden game, thats without a doubt, but gold corrodes unless carefuly guarded. The dev's extreme ability to listen and react to the community is a DETRIMENTAL aspect within the first few days of release, not a good one. I'm not asking that the game be kept vanilla, just that we not pee in the snow until we know what lurks underneath.
Reply #31 from Sins Forums Top
there are nuances to this game that are progressive out of the original aspect of the game, trust me nothing is more awe-inspiring then being hit by a sneak-bombardment by siege frigates taking "back roads"

if the devs remove what is considered "unbalanced" they are not going to end up removing fundamental aspects of the game, they are going to remove specialized tactics that require a tad bit of skill to counter and a lot MORE skill to pull off.

again in case this still has not pierced a few really thick skulls, I'm not preaching that we do nothing at all: I'm saying we delay what is going to be immediate gratification so that the game's skill base remains intact. if too many newcomers make enough complaints about "this and that" being too powerful because it takes some effort on their part to counter (for example assassinating cap ships, or making a sneak attack) then we're going to have a bland game where only one very VERY braindead strategy of push-and-pull reigns supreme, I will NOT stand idly by and let that happen.


patience, padawans.
Reply #32 from Sins Forums Top
Oh schem, do we have to go through this again.

No, no we don't.

Lets see how this works out, and if it needs to be changed then it will be changed.
Thank you very much.
Reply #33 from Sins Forums Top

Ouch. I'm inclined to agree with Schod on this issue. I'm by no means s00per-skilled at Sins, but I appreciate the challenge of having to watch for siege frigates, to scout out my enemy's intentions, and to carefully consider the balance of developing, expanding, or fortifying. It's just downright good RTSing, and the power of siege frigates is a significant part of what drives the gameplay. I consider tough siege frigates part of the learning curve and overall balance.
End of quote


Wouldn't it be a lot more interesting if you were looking out for a more balanced fleet, than a spam of a single unit?

Reply #34 from Sins Forums Top
Has it occurred to anyone that the reason the siege frigates were nerfed wasn't because people couldn't beat their spam, but rather because the AI used them in a spam strategy in the first place?
If that isn't the real reason, then I apologize, but I must admit, regardless of whether or not I could beat them, I wouldn't really enjoy playing against an AI that spammed siege frigates at me. It sort of misses the point of combined arms battles.
Reply #35 from Sins Forums Top
At least they chose a survival reduction over a damage one (so an undefended world will still be hit just as hard). We also don't even know the degree of the change.

I still recall a World of Warcraft patch note saying the damage of a spell was buffed. It was increased by "1" (the spell did about 250 damage at the time).
Reply #36 from Sins Forums Top
Kindness is a virtue, be good to others.

We'll see how the patch plays out, there's some nice changes, fixes and such - could be good. If not, they'll fix things next week.

Right now I'm in a 8 person FFA vs 2 easy, 3 normal, 2 hard - seeing which AI does what, when and how, doing my best to track things...I get easily distracted by my three front war.

Will be interesting to see what happens when patch comes out...for all we know frigates went from 500 armor to 400 or something. I'm more happy about any/all ICO fixes!

...until I see a Shofixti-Glory device, I will not rest!
Reply #37 from Sins Forums Top
Oh, this company gets me all teary eyed... *sniff* A gaming company that actually listens to its players and adjusts their product toward their wishes, hopes, and desires... *wipes away tear* Oh its a thing of beauty... I thought that kind of consideration and dedication was lost in the gaming world, but then, BAM, here comes a developer who actually CARES about their players and the quality of their game... *blows nose* It just gets me all choked up inside... Hurray for Ironlore and Stardock!
Reply #38 from Sins Forums Top
Wouldn't it be a lot more interesting if you were looking out for a more balanced fleet, than a spam of a single unit?
End of quote

ok people still dont seem to get it: if you buffed siege frigs through the roof a balanced fleet still trumps them every single time, its just a matter of not being caught doing naked hoolah hoops with peter pan when you're supposed to be rigging defenses and keeping an eye to your borders

I have yet to see a siege rush do any damage AT ALL against a fleet of equal SIZE, let alone cost in resources or ship points.
Reply #39 from Sins Forums Top


that tallied a total of 5 people that were at all vested in the thread, with the occasional self proclaimed newcomer-comment.

you're telling me that all games coming off shelves are pure gold? because if I remember correctly a programming degree means experience in lessee now... programming

the devs have created a golden game, thats without a doubt, but gold corrodes unless carefuly guarded. The dev's extreme ability to listen and react to the community is a DETRIMENTAL aspect within the first few days of release, not a good one. I'm not asking that the game be kept vanilla, just that we not pee in the snow until we know what lurks underneath.
End of quote


Did you, or did you not say people with a few hours of experience? If you want to be critical, you're a newbie too, since the beta had placeholder a.i. and the game has changed dramatically since then (if the comments are any indication). Also, how do you know long people have been playing? Is it possible that they might have just recently registered, or simply held their tongue until they could no longer bear the issue at hand? Just a question......

In terms of games coming off gold upon release, not all is perfect, but clearly the developers are making an effort. The fact that the developers noticed it was an issue, and a so did a number of members seems to indicate something. The developers are credible, no?

What gets me is that people are defending a strategy that is clearly spam based. Perhaps I'm mistaken, but wasn't the point of this game to promote combined arms and diverse fleet layout? Why should I have to learn strategies to counter or chase around a fleet composed of one specific unit that is clearly too effective, and can quickly turn the tide of a battle whether the entire fleet is destroyed or not? And don't get me started on the arguments that lambasted people for not being "experienced" enough... Nevermind that people have time and time again, stated that they have used all manner of defenses to no avail. Then people recommend one follow one specific game strategy to counter this "rush". Am I missing something? I thought the game was beyond a strategy of single-mindedness.

If all of this is that big of an issue, then simply mod it, or implore someone else to do so.

I just do see the need for all this ranting and raving.
Reply #40 from Sins Forums Top

Im thinking you would complain if they hung you with a new rope...

well obviously someone forgot to guess "i" when filling in your hang man
"Iama_d_ot"

End of quote


Don't you mean "Iaman_d_ot" with an "n"?
Reply #41 from Sins Forums Top
"I have yet to see a siege rush do any damage AT ALL against a fleet of equal SIZE"

Me too. You know why? Because the $%@#*&^ siege rush kills any chance I have of ever getting my fleets to the same size!

Yes I know you know more on how to play the game Schod, than I do, and that makes us not have the ability to talk on the same page. I cant come up to your level of play style yet, so in order for me to not think they need to make this easier for the new comers, your gonna have to come down to mine.
Reply #43 from Sins Forums Top
Dammit! Why does everyone seem to ignore the point that the AI shouldn't have been spamming these things in the first place?

Schod, you make a very good point, but I think it was annoying to (especially) newbies because the siege fleet just ignore any balanced fleet and went to the heart in a suicide run. THAT'S what I, for one, object to.

I couldn't care LESS if the AI siege frigate spam were easily stoppable, even by the newest players here. What I REALLY care about is that that spam existed, when it shouldn't have!

Why do the anti-nerfers keep saying that players need to learn to beat the siege frigate spam, when there shouldn't be one in the FIRST PLACE?
Reply #44 from Sins Forums Top
It baffles the mind.
Reply #45 from Sins Forums Top
Did you, or did you not say people with a few hours of experience? If you want to be critical, you're a newbie too
End of quote

YES! YES NOW YOU SEE IT!

I'm not proposing that we shut our ears and yell "nananananna, I cant hear you!"
in fact I've said many a time that I'm just as noobish as anyone else on these forums, but I also know that from what I've seen I cannot make any sort of qualified judgement: and I HAVE had experience with the games overall mechanic for almost a year

in short: give yourself time long before you give yourself the ego to say that the game is most certainly broken, when years have gone into its development and balance. time, time time time time time.
In terms of games coming off gold upon release, not all is perfect, but clearly the developers are making an effort. The fact that the developers noticed it was an issue, and a so did a number of members seems to indicate something. The developers are credible, no?
End of quote

yes, but they are charting uncharted territory, this type of game has not existed ever before. the one key rule in staying alive in new territory is to MOVE SLOWLY and ACT CAUTIOUSLY, getting out a patch that makes instant changes to pirates and siege frigs is neither moving slowly nor cautiously.
What gets me is that people are defending a strategy that is clearly spam based
End of quote

...
look again, my little friend. on the occasions that it is spam based, we have not defended it (in fact we've said sure it can be changed if we find later that it in fact needs changing, but we need to make sure it does first) on the occasions that we do defend it, it is quite clearly not spam based. sneak attacks require a LOT of scouting and cautious forward movement, otherwise you're as screwed as a structural pylon. even then you want to guard your frigates, or small antagonizing defenses will tear you to shreds.

Don't you mean "Iaman_d_ot" with an "n"?
End of quote

I admit, I didnt want to confuse anyone by making the joke too lengthy.
I just do see the need for all this ranting and raving.
End of quote

I'm fine with the ranting and raving, so long as we dont act on it as a matter of pleasing the masses.

lets make sure your hypothesis is right before we move to act on it, otherwise you're just going to end up with a hindenburg.
Reply #46 from Sins Forums Top
"Why do the anti-nerfers keep saying that players need to learn to beat the siege frigate spam, when there shouldn't be one in the FIRST PLACE? "


Yep agreed...

Thats why they have decided to fix it. And like Martha says, thats a good thing... :LOL: 
Reply #47 from Sins Forums Top
Schod does make a good point, but I think it would only really stand for another "balance" issue with the game, and not for siege spamming. Spamming by the AI is a sign that the AI thinks it could be a good way to win a battle - so, since this game doesn't want that sort of strategy (the devs have stated that themselves) and especially with siege weapons, clearly the AI has to be made to think that the siege spam won't win for it.
Siege units were never made for spamming. I wouldn't mind so much if they spammed carriers or gun frigates, or hell, maybe even capitals. But siege? No. THAT's what I'm objecting to.

I'd agree with Schod wholeheartedly if the unit in question weren't a siege unit, or any other unit that you might not spam with common sense (for example, in the American Civil War they might "spam" riflemen, but certainly not cannon).

What do you think, Heffy?
Reply #48 from Sins Forums Top
"I'm fine with the ranting and raving, so long as we dont act on it as a matter of pleasing the masses."

Doesnt matter if the masses might be correct on this eh?...



"I admit, I didnt want to confuse anyone by making the joke too lengthy."

At my expense of course... How rude. Oh not about what you said, only the part about saying it was just a joke.

"lets make sure your hypothesis is right before we move to act on it, otherwise you're just going to end up with a hindenburg."

Or we could act like the sky is falling and not change a thing, huh chicken little. Tell ya what shody boy, If they cant do it, let make it an option. A click to change the way the siege fleet acts, or doesnt act. Best of both worlds if they can pull it off. Does that work for ya?

Reply #49 from Sins Forums Top

Ouch. I'm inclined to agree with Schod on this issue. I'm by no means s00per-skilled at Sins, but I appreciate the challenge of having to watch for siege frigates, to scout out my enemy's intentions, and to carefully consider the balance of developing, expanding, or fortifying. It's just downright good RTSing, and the power of siege frigates is a significant part of what drives the gameplay. I consider tough siege frigates part of the learning curve and overall balance.

The bottom line is that I trust you guys at Ironclad, but from where I'm sitting, it sure looks like you're watering down the game balance in response to the overloud whinging of a few frustrated gamers who haven't quite grokked the gameplay yet. I hope I'm wrong.

-Tom
End of quote

Unfortunately, that's what happens with unlucky timing but it's the right call from where we stand even if it looks like we are catering to the more vocal members of the community. Stardock and IC have been discussing many of the issues in the patch for quite awhile (you can see attempts to correct these issues in the changelists right up to gold and past - e.g 1.01 nerfed the HP and A of siege slightly). I know Craig's been spearheading the pirate change for months and Brad for quite awhile with the siege.  Arguements are placed forward, ideas debated, solutions thrown about, fights break out, tempers flare, foos-ball breaks are had, we seek more input from the rest of the world, we browse the forums for ideas etc. Somehow it synthesizes into the right choice. (Though I still argue, and this is to the rest of the IC team, that pirate power is going to have to come up slightly to match the minor frequency shift - we'll see I guess)

Please remember too that we know very well how important the balance, timing, feel, and power of everything is to the Sins experience that I think a lot of you have come to love. Afterall, we've dedicated the years of our lives to finding the perfect mix that we felt would bring this crazy idea of RT4X to life. So much of Sins relies on so many complicated relationships and we are always wary of pulling the wrong jenga block. It's taken a hell of a lot of testing, trial and error to get where are now we aren't going to sacrifice it all for any number of whiners just because they are causing a fuss. We only change things when its best for the game.

Ultimately, I predict that the pirate and siege complaints will continue after this patch because I would consider them fine-tuning changes, not drastic overhauls. (Unless of course everyone has adapted to deal with both situations by the time it comes out)

Edit: Before someone catches be a bit of contridiction: yes, we did indeed add a couple non-pirate maps purely based on the vocal intensity. This is something we felt would help out a lot of new new players who wanted to play without pirates and didn't want to have to play with Map Designer. Though I'd argue we didn't really add anything that actually wasn't already in the game.

Reply #50 from Sins Forums Top

I'm not proposing that we shut our ears and yell "nananananna, I cant hear you!"
in fact I've said many a time that I'm just as noobish as anyone else on these forums, but I also know that from what I've seen I cannot make any sort of qualified judgement: and I HAVE had experience with the games overall mechanic for almost a year


Yet, some, how despite your inexperience, and the fact that the developers have worked internally with this game, you consider their point moot.

yes, but they are charting uncharted territory, this type of game has not existed ever before. the one key rule in staying alive in new territory is to MOVE SLOWLY and ACT own CAUTIOUSLY, getting out a patch that makes instant changes to pirates and siege frigs is neither moving slowly nor cautiously.

Isn't that what all patches do, chart uncharted territory? If there were one perfect patch, why need several versions? And I ask again, how do you know the developers have made a desire mistake, the patch hasn't even been released!?

look again, my little friend. on the occasions that it is spam based, we have not defended it (in fact we've said sure it can be changed if we find later that it in fact needs changing, but we need to make sure it does first) on the occasions that we do defend it, it is quite clearly not spam based. sneak attacks require a LOT of scouting and cautious forward movement, otherwise you're as screwed as a structural pylon. even then you want to guard your frigates, or small antagonizing defenses will tear you to shreds.

Look my big headed (since we're hurling insults now) friend, you claim you haven't "defended" it, yet have made a number of excuses discounting those who made the complaint. And if you'd had read most of the post in that infamous topic I mentioned, most of the players saw this fleet coming prior to it attacking, but didn't know its destination. So, in essence, I fail to see where you reached the conclusion that it is a "sneak attack". And I thought spamming involved using one unit exclusively. , am I wrong?


the ranting and raving, so long as we dont act on it as a matter of pleasing the masses.

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!