Frogboy Frogboy

Sins 1.04 preview

▼

Sins 1.04 preview

from Sins Forums

As some of you know, 1.04 has been split into two updates in order to get an update out sooner that has taken recent feedback from players and evaluated what changes should be made.

Here is a preview of what we have:

---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Sins of a Solar Empire v1.04 Changelist
---------------------------------------------------------------------------


---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Gameplay / Balance:
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
-Market value changes:
 -Ratio of buy/sell is now 2:1 instead of 3:1.
 -Min price now 200 instead of 80.
 -Boom/crashes now last ~twice as long.

-Multiple instances of the Embargo planet debuff from the same player no longer stack.

- Capital ships
 -All non-Colony capital ship top speeds increased from 500 to 525.
 -All Colony capital ship top speeds increased from 400 to 475.

- Siege Frigates:
 -Build costs decreased by ~15%.

- Javelis, Illuminator, Assailant:
 -Linear acceleration decreased from 200 to 150.
 -Top speed decreased from 800 to 500.
 -Range decreased from 130% to 115% of 1.02 ranges.

- Illuminator:
 -Hull points increased from 520 to 620.
 -Shield points increased from 450 to 550.
 -Attack type changed from CAPITALSHIP to ANTIMEDIUM.
 -Front bank damage increased from 33.8 to 65.
 -Side banks damage decreased from 33.8 to 26.

- Defense Vessel:
 -Reduced cooldown by 45%, damage reduced proportionally to maintain DPS.
 -Fleet supply increased from 3 to 4.
 -Now properly benefits from Advent laser research topics.

-Attack types
 -AntiVeryLight chance to hit bombers decreased from 85% to 75%.
 -AntiVeryLight damage vs Light armor decreased from 100% to 75%.

-Map Balance of Power fixed to have less Heavies and populated desert worlds.


---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Graphics:
---------------------------------------------------------------------------


---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Sound / Music:
---------------------------------------------------------------------------


---------------------------------------------------------------------------
AI:
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
-Fixed minor bug in Unfair AI not behaving quite correctly.
-Fix bug where AI would retreat from his homeworld or last planet.
-AI is likely to gang up on the leading player in Easy or Normal.
-Misc tweaks.


---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Networking / Multiplayer:
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
-Fixed minor bug in ico-join game screen where fleet size display was incorrect.
-Improved in-game chat text entry:
 -Escape no longer clears the chat buffer when closing the window.
 -Sending whispers is remembered (don't have to retype the whisper when sending again).
 -Sending to allies is remembered (don't have to retype /a when sending again).
-Chat string and colors changed.


---------------------------------------------------------------------------
UserInterface / HUD:
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
-Fix map names for Backstab and Balance of power.


---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Modding:
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
-Entity name lookup is now case insensitve.


---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Misc:
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
-Fix for saved games not respecting custom game options.


---------------------------------------------------------------------------
End
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Now, bear in mind, this isn't the end-all be all update. The goal is to get something out, possibly this week and then do more later.

For single player games, the main change is in the computer AI not being quite so nasty at easy levels but being tougher at harder levels.

Most of the rest will affect multiplayer where unit balance between the 3 races is more sensitive.

199,929 views 222 replies
Reply #126 from Sins Forums Top
Also, can we have more options on larger Fleet Sizes?

Like +50%, +75% and +100%? Instead of the existing -25% and +25%


Thanks for the great community feedback and game support.

Kudos to the developers.
Reply #127 from Sins Forums Top
For some reason, this thread had escaped my attention until now. Overall, I'm fairly pleased with the changes listed, though I doubt the changes to the Black Market are radical enough to make refineries a viable option again. Trade spam will still be the best way to play as TEC. But, worse, I must admit that I'm disillusioned by the lack of any kind of change to Returning Armada. I'm actually pretty stunned, if not baffled.

It seems that 1.04 will incooperate changes only the most hardcore players will really notice the effect of, while taking inadequate or nonexisting steps to tackle the main issues at hand. I really hope the changes to RA just aren't listed. Or, that we'll at least get to hear the developer's reasoning.

Cue replies taking this entirely out of context. I sense it will have something to do with the word whine. :)
Curtains - Customize Windows with additional styles
Reply #128 from Sins Forums Top
It would be interesting if capital ships had double the shields, hull, and armor.
Reply #129 from Sins Forums Top
Illuminators shouldn't be nerfed like that besides they can make for a relatively cheap and effective planet defense force if any of your planets defenses get overrun
Reply #130 from Sins Forums Top
For the love of god can you be more incorrect.

You'd think if you have the guts to post 90 times per day you'd bother to check your facts.It's tier SIX, not tier 7.

Which means among the HC specials, it's low level and low cost. Let's compare subverter special with other support cruisers like the command cruiser and whatnot. It's not even close. AOE stun? Shield reduction?Vasari has serious problems with other areas of the game, so it's reasonable that subverters and RA are strong. But your reasoning is just horrible.

*nice deletion of your previous post before I could respond to how ridiculously wrong it was.
End of quote


What about Bombers? What about Repulsion? What about spreading out? They're all counters to Subverters(though not hard counters). I wasn't pointing out the Novalith and 'Engine as a counter to Subverters, but how they're better than the Vasari version.

And don't bring up RA. That's well known to be off-the-roof powerful. Cutting RA clean out of the game, would you consider the Subverter's power as a balance for the Vasari having... the weakest culture, worst super-weapon, a weaker second support cruiser, an overpriced light frigate, a whole gaggle of utterly useless civilian techs, overpriced Trade Ports, etc. etc. etc.? Sure, maybe you could up the price, but that's just about all the nerf it needs(it's RA which needs it more).

But more importantly, how the heck did you come up with your Reply #64 complaint in this 1.04 preview thread, when it has nothing to do with my reply in this thread. I don't mean the deleted one, because that came after your post. Want to complain of Subverters being OP? Go to the Subverters thread. If there was something wrong with my reply here, then you could've raised your complaint here. Have something to say about buffed Illuminators, or the Flak nerf, or Bombers or w/e, you may say it here.
Reply #131 from Sins Forums Top
Illums where far from unused in 1.02 though. They just weren't used before getting gaurdians and cap support.

This gave the Advent a different playstyle.

Not to mention, illums are mil3.


and to 4, It's not about small steps. It's just like in flaks case it's a step in the wrong direction, same with illums.
I never asked for perfect balance, simply to fix the majorly overpowered units/strategies.
Nerfing flaks damage 25% doesn't stop that. It just means people will make more to counter lrms as I said.

Why not do the logical thing and make them just make strikecraft not die so easy to flak/in general? Instead of doing something that'll accomplish the opposite of what they where apparently going for.

And if they really want to make flaks not counter lrms then WHAT WILL?


There where a lot of issues in 1.03 caused by devs not thinking things through right. They don't play at the same level as us. Remember Black Market? Remember siege(-15% cost still isn't fixing it.) This AntiVeryLight vs Light change is one of those.


Is 1.04 better balance than 1.03? Yes, it is.. Better than 1.02? No, not really. Only good thing is caps outrun lrms now so they can't be chased planet to planet and death be inevitable.



And you all are partially missing my point.
Will LRMS be better early game now? YES
Better than the other LRMS early game, however? NO
Better late game than the other LRMS before? YES
Better late game than the other LRMS now? NO.

So before they where worse than the other lrms early game, but where better later game. Now they are JUST PLAIN WORSE ALL THE TIME.
Maybe i'll be wrong. Advent has malice afterall. But it'll silly for illums to rest on the crutch of one ability.

And by before, I mean in 1.02.
Reply #132 from Sins Forums Top
Fixed resource asteroids is going to remain? It looked to me like quite a few wanted the random ones back...

Plus is it too late to ask for a option to choose where to store savegames and recordings? Have the default path as hidden folder local settings whatsit if it's to keep Microsoft happy but allow us to edit to somewhere more user friendly?
Reply #133 from Sins Forums Top
Will LRMS be better early game now? YES
End of quote


I think you meant to say Will Illuminators.... or Advent LRMS....
Reply #134 from Sins Forums Top
My response is AFTER your deleted thread.

In that thread, you mentioned how easily subverters were to counter, and talked about their tier 7 special ability, and Novalith cannons/deliverance engines as your counter.

You deleted it, so there's nothing more I can say about that. Since YOU were the one who brought it up, I can address it here.

My original statement was that RA and Subverters counterbalance the crappy aspects of the Vasari game. YOUR counterargument that followed was nonsense. The reason it was posted in the 1.04 thread was because I was saying how Vasari are currently balanced, you disagreed with bad logic, and I called you on it.

You are playing Sins like a theorycraft game. You look at stats and what the devs THOUGHT were counters, and assume they actually work as counters. Unfortunately, that is just not the case. Guardians are the worst possible choice against subverters, because one good jump is all they need to disable your whole fleet sitting in that shield bubble.

As has been previous discussed, bombers are underpowered and don't counter anything. Spreading out is a really bad idea for Advent, which relies on their units synergizing in close quarters. Further, it's ridiculously hard to pull off micro wise. Have you tested any of your theories?

My point is simple:

Before posting advice on the forums full of relative newcomers who are impressionable (mass halycons, mass disciples, who knows what's next), you should playtest it against good players first. I saw so many posts saying how great Halycons were, so I had to end up killing scrubs who massed Halycons like it was the Holy Grail of Sins. This is unacceptable. It is very hard for new players to distinguish the correct information from the incorrect, and unfortunately you have a good writing style. This makes them assume you're actually knowledgeable about the game, when in fact you have almost no play experience and no games against good players. Everything you say is just based on stats, which doesn't necessarily translate to the real game.
Reply #135 from Sins Forums Top
I wouldn't argue with HuntingX. In my opinion, he could easily defeat 90% of the players in the game. He's very good, and he knows what he's talking about.

This could change overtime when more people have more playing experience, but for now it stands true.
Reply #136 from Sins Forums Top
- Defense Vessel:
-Reduced cooldown by 45%, damage reduced proportionally to maintain DPS.
End of quote


This may turn out to be a nerf for defense vessels. Since strike crafts go in/out of range often, high cooldown's drawback is less than what the #s suggest.
Reply #137 from Sins Forums Top
Will LRMS be better early game now? YESI think you meant to say Will Illuminators.... or Advent LRMS....
End of quote


Yeah i meant illums.

Can't edit now because of stupid forums.

Fixed resource asteroids is going to remain? It looked to me like quite a few wanted the random ones back...Plus is it too late to ask for a option to choose where to store savegames and recordings? Have the default path as hidden folder local settings whatsit if it's to keep Microsoft happy but allow us to edit to somewhere more user friendly?
End of quote


Yeah a ton of people asked for this.. and it was in that post of mine that had a ton of replies.
Reply #138 from Sins Forums Top
It would be interesting if capital ships had double the shields, hull, and armor.
End of quote


This is actually something I pretty much agree with.

Of course some other things would have to be changed for balance, for instance possibly capital ship direct damage abilities. Or for instance this would make embargo rush more powerful because it would take forever to damage the Sova....

But I think overall capital ships could use a doubling of hp. A little while ago I modded the game for my own pleasure, giving all capital ships exactly double starting hull and shields, and double hull and shield growth per level, and the result was that capital ships were not in all situations a no-brainer focus fire target.

I like how this patch increases their speed, so that at least if the enemy does nothing but focus fire on your capital ships, they now have a decent chance of escaping (so you don't have to run like hell immediately).

I am in favor of greater capital ship survivability because 1. they seem a little weak for their cost and supply usage, and 2. because if capital ships survive more often you get to use cool abilities more often and the game becomes more fun :)

You have to pay for the capital ship, you have to pay for the capital ship crew, and then you have to 'pay' for the 50 supply they eat up... sure they provide siege and siege frigates do suck, but in most situations it is more efficient to destroy orbital structures and then move on to the next planet, not wasting time sieging a planet. I think the Advent might have a better reason to build capital ships, but for the Vasari I never build more than 4 even in a huge drawn-out game, and I think that is a bit much. As the most fun units in the game, I would like to see them buffed in survivability in a later patch, so that they are at least worth building.
Reply #139 from Sins Forums Top
It would be interesting if capital ships had double the shields, hull, and armor.This is actually something I pretty much agree with.Of course some other things would have to be changed for balance, for instance possibly capital ship direct damage abilities. Or for instance this would make embargo rush more powerful because it would take forever to damage the Sova....But I think overall capital ships could use a doubling of hp. A little while ago I modded the game for my own pleasure, giving all capital ships exactly double starting hull and shields, and double hull and shield growth per level, and the result was that capital ships were not in all situations a no-brainer focus fire target.I like how this patch increases their speed, so that at least if the enemy does nothing but focus fire on your capital ships, they now have a decent chance of escaping (so you don't have to run like hell immediately).I am in favor of greater capital ship survivability because 1. they seem a little weak for their cost and supply usage, and 2. because if capital ships survive more often you get to use cool abilities more often and the game becomes more fun You have to pay for the capital ship, you have to pay for the capital ship crew, and then you have to 'pay' for the 50 supply they eat up... sure they provide siege and siege frigates do suck, but in most situations it is more efficient to destroy orbital structures and then move on to the next planet, not wasting time sieging a planet. I think the Advent might have a better reason to build capital ships, but for the Vasari I never build more than 4 even in a huge drawn-out game, and I think that is a bit much. As the most fun units in the game, I would like to see them buffed in survivability in a later patch, so that they are at least worth building.
End of quote


I still have a lot to learn about the game, but I believe a capital ship should be the king of the battlefield. It should be a frightening sight to see one. Currently, very few people fear a capital ship except for maybe the one with embargo capability.

Maybe you could make the explosion of a capital ship destroy a good portion of the enemy ships in the vicinity, which would make spam fleets think twice before attacking a capital ship. Just a crazy thought.

Reply #140 from Sins Forums Top
Maybe you could make the explosion of a capital ship destroy a good portion of the enemy ships in the vicinity. Just a thought.
End of quote


I think this would be a bad idea, kinda like a minimum range for missile frigates :P

But yeah I feel that with the possible exception of Advent capital ships (Advent don't have as many trade ports as TEC and don't have RA to tech up to, and get more capital ship experience later, besides which their capital ships have excellent abilities) it isn't cost effective to build even a second capital ship until fairly late into the game. At least with more hp they might be worth the money....
Reply #141 from Sins Forums Top
[MAGOG]Kruelgor: "I still have a lot to learn about the game, but I believe a capital ship should be the king of the battlefield. It should be a frightening sight to see one. Currently, very few people fear a capital ship except for maybe the one with embargo capability.

Maybe you could make the explosion of a capital ship destroy a good portion of the enemy ships in the vicinity, which would make spam fleets think twice before attacking a capital ship. Just a crazy thought."

Oh no. The game would lose alot of tactical fun if all fleets are now supposed to consists of 1, rarely 2 and maybe even 50% of the time none capital ship's because they got power/price buffed beyond reason. I like their power level just as they are, though maybe they could use some extra space for strikecrafts(bombers/figthers) (though how manageable the battles throughout a gamesession in larger maps are, because of the ships current HP/damage levels, is something I don´t know ^^)... :(
Reply #142 from Sins Forums Top
well no capital ships shouldn't be gods of the battlefield lol

I just think they should be worth building (besides the first free one) :P
Reply #143 from Sins Forums Top
Oh no. The game would lose alot of tactical fun if all fleets are now supposed to consists of 1, rarely 2 and maybe even 50% of the time none capital ship's because they got power/price buffed beyond reason. I like their power level just as they are, though maybe they could use some extra space for strikecrafts(bombers/figthers) (though how manageable the battles throughout a gamesession in larger maps are, because of the ships current HP/damage levels, is something I don´t know ^^)...
End of quote


Yep, the game is fine as it is, but my imagination gets carried away sometimes.
Reply #144 from Sins Forums Top
My response is AFTER your deleted thread.
End of quote


Thread? I never created a thread about Subverters. Yes, there is indeed a thread about Subverters in the Strategy forum, and it's not by me(it's created by Arsonestic).

I did make a post about them in this thread in reply to Ganondorf, Reply #65, which I deleted. See,

My original statement was that RA and Subverters counterbalance the crappy aspects of the Vasari game. YOUR counterargument that followed was nonsense.
End of quote


if this is what you're original statement is, then why do you think Subverters should be nerfed?

Sure the counterargument was nonsense in this context. I was pointing out how the Vasari super-weapon isn't as good as the others, and so why are people crying if the TEC/Advent support cruisers aren't as good as the Subverter? They have advantages elsewhere, use them when possible(the super-weaponry thing is just an example).

RA and Subverters counterbalance the crappy aspects of the Vasari game, indeed.

I saw so many posts saying how great Halycons were,
End of quote


I never told anyone to mass Halcyons. And mass Disciples was Kruelgor's idea, not mine. I never supported that idea either.
Reply #145 from Sins Forums Top
I like the changes. And as advent I really like the changes!

I think making the LRM ships less able to give chase and keep up with moving targets should make people think twice about fielding massive numbers of just this vessel. Sounds like cap ships will be able to do better against them.

I want to applaud the devs for making these balance changes in small steps like this. There are lots of things that need help but focus'ng on these 2 issues, LRM's and Flak's is a safe way to fix the game without breaking it again in the process.

Kudos to you.

Can't wait to play it.
Reply #146 from Sins Forums Top
On the patch:
Frogboy came out and said this isn't the Patch To End All Balance Patches right in the OP. This is a patch to rush out some needed changes to the black market and whatever other balance changes can be easily implemented with a minimum of testing. Some posts advocated redoing Advent tech trees, or changing the effects of culture. I'm grateful that the devs are more patient than those posters, since sweeping changes like that would benefit from more extensive testing than would be possible if they were considered for 1.04. Honestly, folks, try to think about the realities of coding and game design - we want them to take the bigger changes and test them extensively. This is an excellent patch that doesn't try to do too much given its short development cycle.

On a timer:
I like the idea - it's not like you wouldn't have the chance to win the game sooner than the time alloted. There's already an empire rating in place, having an optional timer end the game and use that to declare a winner would let people limit the length of games while still getting a sense of closure when they have to stop (just make it obvious to players that the host is setting a timer so they have a chance to object). And if you disagree with that as a feature, list some reasons why it shouldn't be an option in the game, don't just declare that "none [sic] cares" when what you mean is that YOU don't. It's bad enough that readers tend to miss your good ideas because of your obnoxious presentation, innociv, try not to compound it by devolving into a complete asshat.

On illuminators:
I admit it, I'm a history buff, and the one comment about illuminators as destroyers appealed to me. I can understand changing the damage type of the illuminators to help overall game balance, so I don't object to that at all. But if you wanted to keep some of the anti-capital ship and anti-HC flavor in the illuminators, you might drop their illusion ability and give them a short-range torpedo ability instead. It would be a shame (illusion is a pretty unique skill), but it would fit the concept of a destroyer very well.

As a historical example, the Battle of Jutland in WWI was effectively ended when the Germans destroyer-rushed the British, forcing their capital ships to turn away and giving the German capital ships the distance they needed to escape. While the destroyers took heavy damage because they had trouble surviving hits from dreadnoughts and their main guns couldn't dent a capital ship's armor, the admiral in charge of the British fleet still felt compelled to maintain range to prevent the destroyers' torpedoes from hitting their marks. Yeah, reality can make for poor game balance, but it would give illuminators an offensive ability on par with the other LRMs...
Reply #147 from Sins Forums Top
Personally, I think the timer is a nice option as well. The only thing I'm against regarding setting up a timer is the opportunity cost to implement it. I'd prefer the devs focus on game balance before adding any bells and whistles.
Reply #148 from Sins Forums Top
They already have alpha/beta-tested (matters how easy it is to transfer it and add a menu to adjust it when setting up games) a timer, the demo :).
Reply #149 from Sins Forums Top
i like the proposed changes in this patch quite a bit. they are all in the right direction.

the changes to the economy are the most encouraging and should do ALOT do put Vasari back in the game.

i think the next topic that should be looked at on the civilian side of the game is Culture. it is exceedingly difficult to get your own culture to overturn a hostile culture and this seems to deny a strategy that the Advent faction seems particularly geared to exploit.

the capital ship speed change is much welcome, particularly the colonizer ships. this will allow these ships to actually participate in battle in a relevant time frame (instead of being a full 2 jumps behind the rest of your fleet) and also allow them to retreat more easily if necessary. very good change.

siege frigates are the most dysfunctional ships in the game right now and i don't think a small cost decrease will help at all. they need to have a non-bombing use to justify their presence in your fleet. the problem is that they are too fragile and too narrow. if you're going to sacrifice as much fleet logistics as you currently have to for siege frigates you need something to make up for the 3 other frigates you didn't build.

the speed nerf to LRMs is a good idea. it will make it much easier to outmaneuver these ships which greatly increases the ability of a cap ship to escape them and for carrier cruisers to perpetually circle them. this is a good change.

the illuminator changes look like they are solidly in the right direction. i am not an Advent player so i can't say with any confidence if this change is sufficient or not but at the very least it gives a much needed counter to Light Frigates which was completely lacking from the advent faction before.

the nerf to Flak damage should help to prevent these ships from playing a role that they shouldn't be able to. the only reason they are currently used against LRMs is because of their impressive durability. either durability or damage vs. LRMs had to be sacrificed for the sake of balance.

in the next patch i would like to see Strike Craft evaluated for balance. there is a general feeling right now that fighters are just barely good enough and bombers don't cut it. alot of this is a side effect of the current domination of LRMs and the large amounts of Flak frigates built to counter these LRMs (which also prevent strike craft from ever being relevant). I think small adjustments made to bomber damage and fighter survivability would be all that is necessary if LRMs and Flaks are properly balanced.

Most of all though I appreciate how quickly this patch was released. It shows alot of effort and dedication from the developers and that is always a good thing. Thanks alot!

Reply #150 from Sins Forums Top

the nerf to Flak damage should help to prevent these ships from playing a role that they shouldn't be able to. the only reason they are currently used against LRMs is because of their impressive durability. either durability or damage vs. LRMs had to be sacrificed for the sake of balance.
End of quote


I disagree. They should remain counter to lrms. This kills mindless strats. The day flak stops killing lrms is the day I start to mass nothing but lrms.