Entrenchment - My thoughts and suggestions

from Stardock Forums

I've been playing the 0.91 beta version of entrenchment and would like to offer my thoughts and feedback. Having read some of the prior forum posts I knew roughly what to expect with regards to the types of additions but had no idea how they worked during gameplay. I've played through a few sandbox games, one with each race plus a Vasari (Me) vs. TEC (AI) game. Overall I'm quite impressed. The addition of more defensive units allows for a better and more ordered expansion of your empire and allows for lines of defense to be built across the galaxy. However I have noticed a few bits which are either suggestions, bugs, inconsistencies or general feedback which I've included in this post:

Bugs:

  • Some savegames created by Entrenchment cannot be loaded correctly. This causes a dump file to be created and a message to pop-up behind the Sins loading screen leaving you with the loading screen doing nothing.
  • Vasari star base moves while under construction.
  • When single-clicking on the left-hand bar on a planet to select all military ships all of the ships appear selected in the empire tree but if a move issue is ordered then only the fleet leader moves. This can lead to your level 8 capital ship jumping alone to a hostile planet while the rest of the fleet are doing nothing. You must zoom in and manually select the whole fleet (I haven't tried with grouping the fleet yet).
  • The capital ship production button has moved on the GUI so the buttons are now Capital ships, Frigates, Cruisers instead of Frigates, Cruisers, Capital Ships.
  • The autocast orders for capital ships don't work correctly:
    • I've seen cases where the colonising capital ship (Akkan Battlecruiser, Progenitor Mothership or Jarrasul Evacuator) sits next to a neutral planet with colonize auto-cast enabled and 300+ units of antimatter but not actually colonize the planet until I manually order it to do so.
    • When ordering a capital ship to move to a hostile planet (in this case a Jarrasul Evacuator) and monitoring it during phase jump I can see that it's already added a order to drain the planet. Surely it should work out orders pnce it arrives and so decide whether to attack defending forces before trying to drain the planet?
  • Colony ships show in their orders "using colonize" if you give them a move order from their factory to a neutral planet even if they've got other planets to cross. Surely the "colonize" order should only show once they've arrived and they can actually colonise it.
  • Hanger defenses show "2 unspent command points" when it actually refers to unused squadrons.
  • If a large fleet phase jumps from one planet to another without using grouping, it can lead to the ships coming out of phase space pretty much in the same position. When this becomes too crowded the ships jumping in appear and then phase jump again to another position within the gravity well.

Gameplay Issues:

  • Vasari star base can move but neither TEC or Advent can, surely this makes it much easier for Vasari players to defend their systems?
  • Vasari Ruiner (minelayer) cruisers start with minelaying as active after being built. This causes lots of mines to be lying around your frigate factories.
  • Player minefields cannot be scuttled and/or manually detonated. This would allow for friendly systems to be cleared of mines.
  • Vasari don't have an equivalent of the Ogarev Missile cruiser / Solanus Adjudicator so have to resort to using the Kanrak Assailant to kill starbases.
  • Advent Transcencia starbases don't have a "killer app" compared to TEC (able to produce frigates / cruisers) or Vasari (able to move).
  • Vasari ruiner cruiser allows them to mine aggresively (jump into a hostile gravity well and lay a strip of mines then wait for hostile frigates to move into the minefield before phase jumping out). This makes the Vasari much more powerful then TEC mines. Advent mines suffer from the opposite (homing mines housed in the hanger leads to few mines being fielded than other races).
  • There is no unit for the Vasari for building starbases, as it is an ability of the Jarun migrator, this makes it harder for TEC and Advent players to see their intentions.

Inconsistencies:

  • TEC mine fields are "phased out" making them invincible. TEC don't have this technology anywhere on their tech tree so how can they use this. Surely this is a feature for the Vasari as their Antorak Marauder can perform the same thing.

Suggestions:

  • If, according to the manual, the Jarrasul Evacuator contains 15,000 crew and the starbases are so much larger in scale then surely there would be enough people on board to generate tax credits by default. This would also mean that there is some sort of population present in them. Would this mean that for a player to win the game all hostile planets and starbases have to be destroyed? At the moment you just need to kill off the planets to win and can ignore starbases.
  • Can mines be made so that they can be killed more easily. Either have a dedicated frigate/cruiser or allow flak frigates and strike craft to attack them once detected.
  • As a nice to have it would be good to be able to capture techs from other races. Something like a marine frigate (a la Homeworld 2) could capture structures allowing TEC players to use the deliverance engine or capture labs allowing someone to research other races techs (think Advent with Phase stabilisers).
  • It would be good if the Entrenchment pack also adds extra achievements to the list. Something like Starbase killer, Minelayer, Minehunter etc

Other than this I think that the beta whilst showing a few bugs is certainly a step in the right direction and can't wait to see the further add-ons. Keep up the good work Ironclad!

10,535 views 18 replies
Reply #1 from Sins Forums Top

I also have some questions for you printmiles.

First did they increase the number of squadrons for the capital carrier ships? If they did, then for the about the same number of support points, I would have twice as many squadrons for using carrier cruisers then I would for carrier capital ships. 

6 carrier cruisers (6*8 =48 support points) * 2 squadrons = 12 squadrons total

1 capital carrier ( 50 support points) * 6 squadrons = 6 squadrons total.

Second can the Vasari star base jump, as it can move? If it can, then that means that the Vasari star base are to be used agains other star bases, instead of a Vasari equivalent of the Ogarev Missile cruiser / Solanus Adjudicator.

Reply #2 from Sins Forums Top

Some savegames created by Entrenchment cannot be loaded correctly. This causes a dump file to be created and a message to pop-up behind the Sins loading screen leaving you with the loading screen doing nothing.
End of quote

Entrenchment does have some memory issues and loading/quitting issues. IC should be aware of this.

The capital ship production button has moved on the GUI so the buttons are now Capital ships, Frigates, Cruisers instead of Frigates, Cruisers, Capital Ships.
End of quote

This isn't a bug, it was needed to accomodate the TEC starbase. IC probably had some UI limitations on how they could do it, so they needed to swap since the starbase uses the 2 middile ui buttons for ship building, which is traditionally cruiser and capital, but it needs to build frigate and cruiser.

The autocast orders for capital ships don't work correctly:

  • I've seen cases where the colonising capital ship (Akkan Battlecruiser, Progenitor Mothership or Jarrasul Evacuator) sits next to a neutral planet with colonize auto-cast enabled and 300+ units of antimatter but not actually colonize the planet until I manually order it to do so.
  • When ordering a capital ship to move to a hostile planet (in this case a Jarrasul Evacuator) and monitoring it during phase jump I can see that it's already added a order to drain the planet. Surely it should work out orders pnce it arrives and so decide whether to attack defending forces before trying to drain the planet?

Colony ships show in their orders "using colonize" if you give them a move order from their factory to a neutral planet even if they've got other planets to cross. Surely the "colonize" order should only show once they've arrived and they can actually colonise it.

End of quote

This is all the same bug, and if I remember correctly they posted it as fixed for the next build.

Hanger defenses show "2 unspent command points" when it actually refers to unused squadrons.
End of quote

It's actually always been like this. Command points are the "resources" for strike craft, sort of like fleet points and capital crews. It shows the same message on ships as well. So, not really a bug :)

Vasari star base can move but neither TEC or Advent can, surely this makes it much easier for Vasari players to defend their systems?
End of quote

Vasari don't have an equivalent of the Ogarev Missile cruiser / Solanus Adjudicator so have to resort to using the Kanrak Assailant to kill starbases.
End of quote

Connect the dots :) The Vasari base was given more offensive power - I believe one of its weapons really hurts buildings, making it much easier to use it offensively than TEC/Advent ones.

Advent Transcencia starbases don't have a "killer app" compared to TEC (able to produce frigates / cruisers) or Vasari (able to move).
End of quote

Well it does, it just doesn't work. It can throw meteors at groups of ships. But it's bugged :P

I didn't include any responses to your comments about mines because those are getting some much needing loving/reworking for the next build, so we'll see how they come out.

TEC mine fields are "phased out" making them invincible. TEC don't have this technology anywhere on their tech tree so how can they use this. Surely this is a feature for the Vasari as their Antorak Marauder can perform the same thing.
End of quote

All minefields are phased out. Rather necessary since not having them phased negates the need for minesweeping :P

SoundPackager - Customize the Windows sound scheme
Reply #3 from Stardock Forums Top

Quoting homefleet, reply 1
I also have some questions for you printmiles.

First did they increase the number of squadrons for the capital carrier ships? If they did, then for the about the same number of support points, I would have twice as many squadrons for using carrier cruisers then I would for carrier capital ships. 

6 carrier cruisers (6*8 =48 support points) * 2 squadrons = 12 squadrons total

1 capital carrier ( 50 support points) * 6 squadrons = 6 squadrons total.

Second can the Vasari star base jump, as it can move? If it can, then that means that the Vasari star base are to be used agains other star bases, instead of a Vasari equivalent of the Ogarev Missile cruiser / Solanus Adjudicator.
End of homefleet's quote

I can't honestly answer the question about carrier capital ships as I've never had them long enough to get them to level 10. One of the advantages that I've found using capital ships (Sova class carriers etc.) compared to an equivalent amount of cruisers is that:

  • You have some kind of firepower to defeat light frigates
  • You've got the planet bombardment facility
  • And... you've got the squadrons!

With regards to your query about the Vasari star bases. I haven't been able to get them to phase jump but maybe this is something being worked on?

Reply #4 from Stardock Forums Top

Thanks very much for the response Annatar11. It's great to see that some of these "issues" have already been spotted and are being worked on. I'm looking forward to a much more stable release come next week <fingers crossed>.

I'll have to dig further to find the identified bugs list in one of the many forums here.

Reply #5 from Sins Forums Top

Could you also do a test on the capital carriers, to see if that question I ask about was fixed, printmiles?

Reply #6 from Stardock Forums Top

Homefleet this should answer your question (I hope, if not let me know):

TEC Type Capital Ship Carrier Cruiser Carrier
  Name Sova Carrier Percheron Light Carrier
  Credits 3000 835
  Metal 400 150
  Crystal 250 135
  Supply units 50 14
  Max squadrons 6 2
  Hull 2850 (Max 5109) 1580 (Max 2054)
  Armor 4 (Max 13) 3 (Max 9)
  Shields 1075 (Max 2424) 650 (Max 780)
  Antimatter 270 (Max 648) 400 (Max 480)
  Average weapon damage 3 (Max 10) N/A
  Average weapon damage 30 (Max 101) N/A
  Planet bombing damage 37 N/A
  Type Fighter Bomber
  Number in squadron 6 5
  Hull 60 (Max 78) 100 (Max 130)
  Armor 1 (Max 7) 5 (Max 11)
  Average damage 2 3 (Max 4)
Advent Type Capital Ship Carrier Cruiser Carrier
  Name Halcyon Carrier Aeria Drone Host
  Credits 3000 1280
  Metal 400 230
  Crystal 250 220
  Supply units 50 20
  Max squadrons 6 3
  Hull 2075 1650
  Armor 3 3
  Shields 1600 1170
  Antimatter 270 600
  Average weapon damage 20 N/A
  Average weapon damage 14 N/A
  Planet bombing damage 37 N/A
  Type Fighter Bomber
  Number in squadron 9 7
  Hull 40 75
  Armor 1 1
  Average damage 1 3
Vasari Type Capital Ship Carrier Cruiser Carrier
  Name Skirantra Carrier Lasurak Transporter
  Credits 3000 810
  Metal 400 160
  Crystal 250 140
  Supply units 50 14
  Max squadrons 6 2
  Hull 2425 1460
  Armor 4 3
  Shields 1275 780
  Antimatter 250 400
  Average weapon damage 9 N/A
  Average weapon damage 12 N/A
  Planet bombing damage 35 N/A
  Type Fighter Bomber
  Number in squadron 4 3
  Hull 85 140
  Armor 3 5
  Average damage 3 6
Reply #8 from Stardock Forums Top

I've just been having a look through the (very) long list of items being fixed and addressed. I think they're almost there but doubt that the game will be released next week judging by the number of issues they've fixed.

Reply #9 from Sins Forums Top

It won't be, Blair said so in another thread :P I don't know where the media sites got their info from (probably just ripped off the old store page, or something - it was set on Feb 4th for a while).

Reply #10 from Sins Forums Top

Quoting homefleet, reply 1
First did they increase the number of squadrons for the capital carrier ships? If they did, then for the about the same number of support points, I would have twice as many squadrons for using carrier cruisers then I would for carrier capital ships.
End of homefleet's quote

Note that carriers now cost 14 support points, not 8, now that they carry two squadrons instead of 1.  So it's more like 3:1, not the 6:1 ratio you were quoting.  But even without that, the capship carriers come out way ahead of the cruisers; the capships have guns (not battleship-level, but enough to outgun frigates), and more importantly, the capships have activated abilities.  The Vasari Carrier, for instance, has a passive that makes nearby fighters invulnerable; it heals nearby units; and, most importantly, it can generate temporary bomber squadrons.  These are HUGE benefits, easily offsetting any loss in number of squadrons.

Reply #11 from Sins Forums Top

I have to agree on the Vasari mines. I have not played Vasari in the beta yet but I'm going to assume those mines are free? Here's the story.

A friend and I were playing against one hard Vasari comp the other night. Things were going well, we were taking over neutral planets, building up our economies, turtling in general. Once our borders and the Vasari clashed, things started getting interesting. I warped in a Kol along with a supporting fleet into a neutral asteroid belt and within seconds the Kol was down to 500 health while I was off doing something to one of my planets. I looked over to see what they were up to and I thought wtf how does my Kol only have 500 health in just seconds after warping in? Well this was our first introduction to Vasari mine laying. Apparently the Vasari have the ability to poop out mines at will, and not just ten or twenty mines, but hundreds. The computer would lay mines at predictable phase lanes and annihilate half our fleet within seconds of warping into a system. It would also criss-cross its gravity wells with mines. Our tactics evolved and we would warp ships in above or below the main phase lane minefields and we eventually learned how to destroy mines. I was kind of confused since I thought all mines were invisible like TEC mines so why need scouts if you can see the Vasari mines with anyone? Well keep reading I figured it out. Yeah we are really a bunch of comp stomping noobs.

What was maybe a 2.5 or 3 hour game became a six hour game simply because of Vasari mines. I had to build fleets of 20 scout ships to accompany my battlegroups just to efficiently destroy the mines. How this works, in case you don't know, is you get lots of fighters ready in a gravity well, and you manually send your scout ships out close to mines in the gravity well. Scouts reveal the mines, fighters blow them up. This is a time consuming and ridiculous process when the computer has 100-200 mines per planet. Oh yeah, make sure the rest of your fleet is set to hold position unless you want them to idiotically fly into the mines the computer loves luring them into. My Advent friend had trouble viewing the mines with his scout ships so he relied on my scout ships for mine clearing. I don't know if he is retarded or if it is a bug or if Advent scouts can't see anything or what. 

As a mostly TEC player, I know TEC has to pay 1,000 credits plus some metal/crystal for a mine field, and it takes time to build it. The Vasari just drop them wherever they please without build times, sovreignity, or any of that nonsense. It's a great way to cover a retreat as well, since any impetuous persuers will get blown to bits rather cheaply. Well what do you guys think?

 

Reply #12 from Sins Forums Top

Quoting Paul, reply 11
I have to agree on the Vasari mines. I have not played Vasari in the beta yet but I'm going to assume those mines are free?
End of Paul's quote

They cost antimatter (25 per mine?).  Other than that, free, although according to the changelog for the next beta build of Entrenchment, they'll cost actual resources, and all players will have a hard limit of 150 mines per player per gravity well, regardless of race.  Effectively the Vasari will be as limited as the other races, which is probably a good thing.  it still won't stop anyone from laying all 150 mines in a cluster right at the end of a phase lane to demolish an incoming fleet, but it WILL stop a Vasari or Advent from filling an entire gravity well with mines.


As a mostly TEC player, I know TEC has to pay 1,000 credits plus some metal/crystal for a mine field, and it takes time to build it. The Vasari just drop them wherever they please without build times, sovreignity, or any of that nonsense. It's a great way to cover a retreat as well, since any impetuous persuers will get blown to bits rather cheaply.
End of quote

Minefields have an activation time before becoming dangerous; it was 10 seconds, I think now it's being changed to 30s.  So they're not going to be much use for covering a retreat any more, since presumably the pursuers will charge right through before the mines go active.  Except maybe for the Advent, where the carriers sitting at the edge of the system can drop a bunch of homers at the start of the battle, right on the retreat path, far in advance of any retreat...

 

The main downside of the Vasari mines seems to be that you needed a dedicated cruiser to lay them down, at 9 support points per ship; to get a decent-sized field you'd want to group four or five of these together in each system, and you'd need several of these little fleets.  On a large map, this meant that most of your systems would never have any mines placed, as there simply isn't time to move those minelayer fleets to each system unless you've completely gone defensive (and you're Vasari, why NOT attack?); if you split the minelayers up to cover more systems, you'd end up with pathetically thin fields in each.  As a result, only the chokepoints or key neutral systems would be heavily mined, while a Terran player can mine all of his systems simultaneously if he has the resources for it without having to shuffle fleets around.  (On the other hand, he can't mine an enemy system, or mine an ally's system for when he becomes an enemy...)

Also, that Vasari minelayer cruiser is in lieu of the structure-killing cruisers the TEC and Advent get, so you shouldn't compare them in isolation.  Since the minelayer cruisers are very weak in combat for their price, they wouldn't accompany your battle fleets, which meant that your newly-acquired territories wouldn't be mined quickly, while the Advent and Terrans can immediately fort up their front-line systems without having to bring in a vulnerable second fleet to do so.  Especially the Advent, since the carriers can mine a system during the initial attack... and carriers are never a waste of support points for the Advent.

 

Personally, these differences are the best part of the whole mine concept to me.  Each race handles them very differently, and yet the overall balance is still pretty good.

Reply #13 from Sins Forums Top

Thanks printmiles, that answers my question on the capital carriers. I see then just increased the supply points for the Cruiser Carrier to make up for the increase in the number of squadrons for the Cruiser Carrier.

I went to ign.com and found some more information on the star bas, here it is.

Each of the game's three races has their own unique upgrade options as well. The TEC, for instance, can use their star bases to build new cruisers and frigates with Remote Construction, as well as using the Docking Boom to repair and rearm any friendly ships that happen to be nearby. As a true expression of abject fatalism, they can even upgrade their star bases with a Safety Override that will blow the station and any neighboring invaders to pieces.

The Advent take a predictably subtle approach. Their star bases can be outfitted with Evangelization Nodes that help spread culture to nearby worlds. They can also make use of Induced Reverence to increase the allegiance of the nearby planet's population. When invaders do come calling, they can use the Mass Disorientation upgrade to disable the enemy ships. Best of all, they have an upgrade called Meteor Control that is exactly as cool as it sounds

Vasari star bases are remarkably tough when properly upgraded. Not only can they use Rapid Reintegration to consume nearby debris and convert it into nearly instant repairs, but they also can be equipped with Front Deflector Shields that give them time to soak up enemy fire while friendly reinforcements are coming in. But their most awesome ability comes from their Phase Stabilizer. This upgrade gives them the chance to travel point-to-point between any star bases equipped with this upgrade

This still leaves me with the question that I had asked you before. Can the Vasari Star base jump, as it is an mobile star base? It would explain why the Vasari don't have an equivalent of the Ogarev Missile cruiser / Solanus Adjudicator as they could use there own star base against enemy ones.

Reply #14 from Sins Forums Top

It can't jump. You still have to deploy it in the enemy grav well.

Reply #15 from Sins Forums Top

Or if the starbase can't phase jump normally, could a marauder use it's stabilize phase space ability to allow a starbase to phase jump to it.

Reply #16 from Sins Forums Top

No, but the Starbase can create its own node so other things can jump to it.

Reply #17 from Sins Forums Top

So only ships can jump between sta rbases? And the phase stabilizer on the star base, does it replace the normal phase stabilizer and act just like it? Can I call in thew Dark fleet for a star base, just like the normal Phase Stabilizer? Is the old Phase Stabilizer still in the game? And if it is, there any type of supply point or cost to balance  out the use of the old system and the new starbases?

I also want to check and see if I am right on this.

1. The Vasari star bases can move?

2. they can be upgraded with anti-building weapons?

Reply #18 from Sins Forums Top

I also want to check and see if I am right on this.

1. The Vasari star bases can move?

2. they can be upgraded with anti-building weapons?
End of quote

Yes. :P

The starbase just gets an upgrade that unlocks an ability to create a phase node. It doesn't replace existing phase gates and it doesn't get Returning Armada.