Speeding up the cleanup after you are "winning"?

It seems to take forever

from Sins Forums
I'm very new to the game, so please have some mercy. There is a good chance I am totally missing something, hence why I am making this post.

Against the AI, I love this game for the first half of the game. I like the strategy in expanding. I like figuring out how to be more efficient. I like the fact I can have multiple fights going on without paying attention to them too much. I haven't played many games yet (3!! heh), but I am really enjoying the first half of my Sins games.

However, the last half really seems to suck. So I finally have decided its time for the big battle of battles. Its time to crush their fleet and remove them from the galaxy. This seems to take FOREVER. I warp in to their nearest colony and start bombing their world. Woot, here comes their fleet. After I pound them for a bit.. they usually flee and keep doing so until I hit their homeworld. However, the whole process of slowly killing their colonies and mopping up their fleet seems to take forever. The thing that was so fun at the start (fights being slow) really starts to drag on when the enemy has essentially lost. I think it took me over an hour last night to completely mop them up on the smallest setting. I can't imagine playing a large or huge galaxy.. it seems like you could spend days slowly slogging your way through their worlds.

Am I missing something? I do have some siege type ships to speed it up. But it just feels really slow. In games like Gal Civ you could hit a bazillion worlds at once but in Sins it seems hard to do so because most planets only link to 2-3 other places. So you slowly creep through their empire killing stuff until it finally ends.

Any advice for speeding this up? Am I missing something? Am I the only one that feels the slowness of the game is great at the beginning but a major detractor towards the end? Anyways, thought I'd throw this out there in case I am totally not understanding something. Heck there is tons I don't understand yet, but the process of finishing the mopping up part of the game rapidly is the only one that actually frustrates me.
strategy
16,186 views 34 replies
Reply #1 from Sins Forums Top
This is something that the producers are looking at in the next update, but they keep pushing back the date for some reason. For now, deal with it. And if you want something to keep you entertained for a while, hit an astriod near thier home so they bring the fleet back, immediatly head over to the homeworld afterwards, shoot one volley of bombs and watch the battle.
Reply #2 from Sins Forums Top
I know what you mean, it turns into a game of tag. What I wouldn't give for an Imperial Interdictor!

I usually bait their fleet into moving into one of their poorly defended territories by sending a group of siege frigates in alone. They'll jump their fleet in for some easy kills and as soon as I see them enter "Phhhhase sspace" :) I jump my bomber-heavy fleet in who have been waiting at the next planet. They'll get a minute or two to pound their fleet before it runs away (bombers will be able get close as they're fast).

A couple of times I've had to chase down a 30+ fleet consisting entirely of Guardians. It looks impressive as they jump in a looong line, but it's annoying to have to swat them all.

I think the Phase Space inhibitors should be made much more effective. At the moment the appear to be a minor inconvenience as opposed to a fleet crippling trap.
Elemental: Reforged
Reply #3 from Sins Forums Top
Right now, I just hit the + key to speed it up. Game over in seconds. :)
Reply #4 from Sins Forums Top
Oh, you cheater.




.... You can do that? >_>'
Reply #5 from Sins Forums Top
I'm really hoping for a more aggressive in general. I understand that most people just say "well, now I get to bomb the planet", but it just turns the game from a grand space battle to a game of wuss tag.
Reply #6 from Sins Forums Top
People knock the TEC ultimate weapon (Novalith Cannon) alot on this board, but at the very least it can save you alot of time on cleanup. It can destroy an asteroid colony in a single shot and you dont even have to move your fleet there to do it.
Reply #7 from Sins Forums Top
The thing is, there is no way to see how many games someone has won right? There is no ranking system right? No top leaderboard? So whats the point of staying and wiping someone completely out? You know you've won and you don't want to waste the time to mop him up, so just leave. It doesn't hurt anything, and if you've won you've won. That and if you're the game host you can end it manually =)
Reply #8 from Sins Forums Top
for single player i normally get two XL fleets to pinch the enemy in and slaughter them from there other wise mopping up is one of the toughest things to do, i also never colonize the planets i bomb, no point, more time to use
Reply #9 from Sins Forums Top
Incentives to stay in the game late is where Sins seems to fall a little flat now. If you're on the losing side, it's nearly impossible to recover if your fleet was decimated. If you're on the winning side, you have to play tag to make the win "official" (not that it's ranked anywhere). I imagine most of this has to do with game balancing, which is on-going and will be addressed in future patches, but since there hasn't been as much official word about this yet we're still speculating right now.
Reply #10 from Sins Forums Top
Like the game and game developers say "its a slow game; 'real time' strategy" (look at the game review at "Gametrailers.com" for proof
Reply #11 from Sins Forums Top
Make the end of the game official to whom? And even though the devs say "it's a slow game;'real time' strategy" doesn't excuse poor game mechanics and little to no incentive for playing the game. At this point I'll do a fun game a week and use it at LAN's, no more, unless some form of ranking and tracking system comes later. They need to get this stuff fixed and implemented, alot of the multiplayer gripes I have could have easily been implemented before launch. SupCom is popular for a reason, not all of it has to do with the game itself, alot to do with the mulitplayer aspect.
Reply #12 from Sins Forums Top

Incentives to stay in the game late is where Sins seems to fall a little flat now. If you're on the losing side, it's nearly impossible to recover if your fleet was decimated. If you're on the winning side, you have to play tag to make the win "official" (not that it's ranked anywhere). I imagine most of this has to do with game balancing, which is on-going and will be addressed in future patches, but since there hasn't been as much official word about this yet we're still speculating right now.
End of quote

Oh I disagree there.  I've been on the ropes many time and still managed to win through a good use of tactics and timing.

Many players will build overwhelming force indeed but won't split them up allowing me to take out their home world. The loss of income means they can't easily replace their ships after that because they have such a high fleet supply level.

Reply #13 from Sins Forums Top

Make the end of the game official to whom? And even though the devs say "it's a slow game;'real time' strategy" doesn't excuse poor game mechanics and little to no incentive for playing the game. At this point I'll do a fun game a week and use it at LAN's, no more, unless some form of ranking and tracking system comes later. They need to get this stuff fixed and implemented, alot of the multiplayer gripes I have could have easily been implemented before launch. SupCom is popular for a reason, not all of it has to do with the game itself, alot to do with the mulitplayer aspect.
End of quote

You assume an online ranking system is desireable.  I don't agree with that at all.  I highly doubt there will be a ranking system any time soon. It certainly won't be with my blessing anyway. Not unless said games are purely optional.

As someone who has played a lot of such games, ranking systems tend to ruin the online experience as it becomes just about using whatever is the path of least resistance to victory. Getting the win becomes the "fun" element rather than playing the game.

Reply #14 from Sins Forums Top
We've got a scrub! But seriously, I agree with the option. Thats why SupComs multiplayer is superb ( not the program itself just to be clear ) but it gives you the option to play ranked or custom. We could argue for hours about how ranking makes/breaks online RTS games, but it wouldn't get us anywhere.The bottom line is that ICO needs to implement ranking and other features for those who enjoy it and to help keep people involved with it, fix the firewall issue, and balance late game tactics.
Reply #15 from Sins Forums Top
Well, what I have found very helpful, is if you've already decimated their fleet, and you have a fairly large fleet yourself, send a few ship into each surrounding planet, OR even a scout to each planet, and see where hes running to next! By surrounding planets I mean somewhere near where he was settled around. Or if you're Vasari, the final phase detection research is quite helpful too.
Reply #16 from Sins Forums Top

We've got a scrub! But seriously, I agree with the option. Thats why SupComs multiplayer is superb ( not the program itself just to be clear ) but it gives you the option to play ranked or custom. We could argue for hours about how ranking makes/breaks online RTS games, but it wouldn't get us anywhere.The bottom line is that ICO needs to implement ranking and other features for those who enjoy it and to help keep people involved with it, fix the firewall issue, and balance late game tactics.
End of quote

LOL. Not a scrub.  #1 ranked player a year on Boneyards (Total Annihilation). Finalist in PGL. Top ranked human faction player in Starcraft beta back in the day.

A scrub only applies when winning is the whole point of the game. People in tournaments or in other RANKED systems are playing to win and should do whatever it takes to win.

But we do not want to encourage people to play purely for the win in Sins. And I think you would be surprised at the relatively small % of people who are really interested in ranking systems.  As an OPTION, I don't have any objection. But I certainly would be against any sort of default ranking system.

Reply #17 from Sins Forums Top
As I said we don't need to argue about ranking so I don't see the point of you throwing you're apparent greatness in RTS games around? I meant it as a jest bud =) The option would be nice, and again fix the late game problems.
Reply #18 from Sins Forums Top
I personally think they should fine-tune the balancing of the game before even touching a ranked multiplayer system.

I agree with taking over planets being too slow, but it would be quite overpowered to take them well, fast.
Reply #19 from Sins Forums Top
Incentives to stay in the game late is where Sins seems to fall a little flat now. If you're on the losing side, it's nearly impossible to recover if your fleet was decimated. If you're on the winning side, you have to play tag to make the win "official" (not that it's ranked anywhere). I imagine most of this has to do with game balancing, which is on-going and will be addressed in future patches, but since there hasn't been as much official word about this yet we're still speculating right now.
End of quote


Not really. If you're losing as TEC, you could throw a few thousand cash into building a scout fleet and sending them deep into the enemy empire(thanks to the scouts' speed) with Timed Explosives to bomb the heck out of them, then scuttle the scouts to avoid cool-down and repeat the process, playing guerrilla until you're dead. Unless the enemy has a Level 6 Jarrasul Evacuator, they won't be able to kill planets TOO fast and they could end up with their economic infrastructure severely ravaged.

If you're Advent, Seeker Vessels could be used with their Martyrdom attacks to crunch enemy siege frigates, but the 250-damage attack isn't really strong enough to do much harm to larger ships/structures without racking up huge costs(for yourself).


Oh I disagree there.  I've been on the ropes many time and still managed to win through a good use of tactics and timing.
Many players will build overwhelming force indeed but won't split them up allowing me to take out their home world. The loss of income means they can't easily replace their ships after that because they have such a high fleet supply level.
End of quote


The enemy can just declare a new home world somewhere else.
Reply #20 from Sins Forums Top
You assume an online ranking system is desireable. I don't agree with that at all. I highly doubt there will be a ranking system any time soon. It certainly won't be with my blessing anyway. Not unless said games are purely optional.

As someone who has played a lot of such games, ranking systems tend to ruin the online experience as it becomes just about using whatever is the path of least resistance to victory. Getting the win becomes the "fun" element rather than playing the game.
End of quote


That makes a lot of sense, many people dont realise that those on the forum and those who are most vocal about things are usually the minority.

Just an example from another game is company of heros, most people who chat in the chatroom and on the relicnews forums hate the map "The Schdelt" because its a "bridge destroying artillery noob fest" however i like it, and many other people must like it too because its one of the most hosted 3v3 maps. You are totally right, many people are just interested in having a good time. C&C 3 is an example of a game i think ruined by a ranking system, forumers will cite its because of poor balance, lousy patches etc etc, but theres about 200-800 people playing online regularly down from thousands because people are fed up getting kicked from games because they suck or because they are too good etc.
Reply #21 from Sins Forums Top
I think he means instead of automatching automatically being ranked, there would be a seperate ranked automatching system.

Automatching systems take alot of time and energy to replace and they can really break a game if poorly implemented. Stardock is trying for a deliberate strike against the current RTS culture trying to move it away from the cutthroat do or die of the infamous "scrub article". Such a culture is only viable if the publisher supports it, and quite frankly doesn't really impact the bottom line of sales. Stardock has already made it's claim to fame without neccessarily imitating blizzard, COH or any other such game by falling into the 'balance trap' you see so often.

It'd be interesting if the game's lifespan runs on content patches and mods and *not* competitive play. I'm sure it would piss plenty of competitive people off but refreshing to those RTS players not looking to wade around a community of sharks.

The competitive RTS community has really gotten rather spoiled developing some kind of narcissistic ego complex when referencing new players who have no desire to compete. They typically denigrate such people to be the bottom genepool game purchasers, when quite frankly they're the ones who more than likely make the bulk of purchases and make the money. I mean, if you look at the 'loyal and competetive' RTS fanbase, they really have the potential to make a great deal of trouble while giving little back. They don't buy new games and they set on the forums whining about this and that, forum venom which can really build up and kill a game, Ala Titan Quest.

By completely ignoring them, you can greatly reduce the impact they have on the game. Look at Big Huge Games.
The last game, Age of Legends was great, but failed to attract a competitive audience because of numerous bugs in the networking and ranking systems that had little to do with code. It certainly didn't kill the game- they made plenty of sales.

But it was truely an example of how nasty forum wars can get, and how trying to cater to the competitive crowd is really dangerous if you don't have the expertise to do it.

Frogboy is a TA veteran and I think he's familiar with what really extended TA until now, an established and loyal community of /modders/ that increased the longevity of the game long past it's competetive relevance. TA really went a different path from Blizzard in that while it is no longer relevant economically, it really had a -huge- impact on the development of the RTS genre as a whole.

Blizzard has real expertise in maintaining a community and creating a competitive structure. Their QA testing is also top notch, which contributes to the 'polished' feel of the games. These are different types of skillsets that an established monolith like blizzard might have, but a smaller game development company would be hardpressed to find.

I mean seriously, they have devs doing community rep service. This is refreshing and an intelligent choice, but it also means they don't have the spin doctors (or the inclination to hire them) that Blizzard and other competetive companies use to whip player communities into a frenzy.
Reply #22 from Sins Forums Top
By killing the homeworld, he also kills a heavily populated planet, decreases allegiance for a time, and stifles the economy for at least a few minutes until you can build up the capital for another homeworld and rebuild.

I mean, seriously, if you're looking at a 75% logistics cut, and you suddenly lose 14/credits a sec and then some from disloyalty, you have a real problem.

( This is why scouting is extremely important.)
Reply #23 from Sins Forums Top
It's clear the devs are trying to make a strategy game that has a different dynamic from the typical 4X or RTS. Once they threw a few of the tried and true game dynamics out the door, they soon realized they have to figure out good alternatives and balancing becomes a whole new problem.

We just need to be patient. The devs did a great job so far and I have faith it'll work out in the end.
Reply #24 from Sins Forums Top
Back to the topic of "mopping up after"... :)

Personally, I don't mind it at all. Since I'm a fairly new player and am not an online RTS player (because of the aforementioned Aces and Pros) I find it to be a nice lax period of time where I get to check out all my researched goods and test them to see their effects.

I also don't think that the mop-up would take that long at all. Build several fleets, attack from different fronts, and tighten the noose until you have the AI cornered...? Doesn't seem that hard to me at all.

But, then again, I am only starting off on easy right now. I guess there may be more going on if it's several AI and harder ones and it may make it more difficult. Personally I think that taking one AI out of the picture and then back-tracking to take out the other ones may be the way to do it. Colonize on the way of destruction and you can expand nicely... no?

Just a n00bs input...
Reply #25 from Sins Forums Top
And I think you would be surprised at the relatively small % of people who are really interested in ranking systems
End of quote


Even if that's true, which I doubt, everyone (online) wishes there was a way to speed up the end-game.

I've played maybe 5 or 6 games online and have yet to see an actual 'victory' screen (and I won all of them). Instead, everyone just disconnects. That's not fun.

I'm not sure how it could really even be fixed, beside some kind of bonus to siege frigates proportionate to percentage how many planets you control in the star system.

But you're probably against that.