Beta 2, minor observations

from Sins Forums

better, much better. I have a few observations, none of which are game-breaking.

1. Looks like bombers are more destructive against star bases now. I had about 7 squadrons of TEC bombers, fully upgraded from a carrier with all tech developed, down a TEC starbase with no upgrades rather quickly.  DOn't have a specific time, just seemed like the shields were gone FAST, and the hull went to zero quickly. MIght just be the upgrades all across the sepctrum v. no upgrades on the starbase, but I thought it was worth mentioning.

2. TEC starbase can fire before construction is complete.

3. Seems like mines have a lower detect-and-then-blow-up radius. I had a few cobolts maneuver through a field, and it seemed the distance where mines detonate/detect wasn't as large. Good thing I think.

4. scout AI should be changed IMHO. The scouts move forward much faster thna the fleet theyre assigned to, and as such take fire at the leading edge of the battle. My recommendation is that is the auto detect mine functionality is on, reduce speed and turn radius to equal that of another frigate. They shouldn't behave that way IMHO.

Stuff I like alot:

1. starbase weapon ranges--spot on. I was pleasantly suprised.

2. kol battleship is now my first choice. I don't know what you guys did with the thing where you can hit multiple targets in an arc at full DPS for the arc to each target, but it makes BB's work a little better, and the kol seems now to be as tough as it's background description would suggest. Not overpowered at all. Just top choice as a combat battleship IMHO.

3. Looks like upgrades stack now... If I do 3 laser weaponry upgrades that for example increase dps by 10 percent each, it looks like the math works this way (((100 percent * 1.1) * 1.1)*1.1). NIce. WHen i completed the last set of laser weapon upgrades, my kohl's laser DPS was 88. I don't think it's always been this way. If I'm wrong, sorry about that. Looks good.

4. Mines seem manageable, except for the problem stated above with scout ships. I was unable to observe whether they do less damage or simply there is less mine density. Overall, though, it's manageable. The AI doesn't spam as many mines in my 4 hours against 6 opponents as normal difficulty.

Good work guys.

2,828 views 6 replies
Reply #1 from Sins Forums Top

All comments noted. Thanks! :)

Reply #2 from Sins Forums Top

3. Seems like mines have a lower detect-and-then-blow-up radius. I had a few cobolts maneuver through a field, and it seemed the distance where mines detonate/detect wasn't as large. Good thing I think.
End of quote

 

If you mean your ships made it through a field undamage, I would have to say that not a good think. IMHO, oh wise devs. I should be able to rely on that minefield punishing anything that chooses to fly through it. If there is a chance that you can fly through a field undamaged then why would one build them anyhow?

I know this maybe to much to ask and/or impossible, yet I will ask for the slightest hope you will say yes. Mines should be treated as a no-mans land by both your ships and the enemies. The simplest way I can explain what I mean is, think in other RTS games. Most have some kind of 'wall'. A way to block and control where your enemies can go. It allows you to control your perimeters. Since both TEC and Advent starbases are non moving this would allow a clear way to force your enemy into its range. Eliminating the need to increase the range and get rid of that nasty idea for all starbases to move.  If you move to make the mines act like a barrier, you of course need to be know where this barrier is both for you and your enemy. Get rid of the invisible mines, make them visible to all ships. You would still need a scout to be able to target them though, just reword how they are used. Per example: Instead of phased in and out currently used. All mines have electronic counter-measure to disrupt targeting computers. Due the the scouts advanced sensors this nullifies that effect allowing you to target and destroy said mines. Now that you know the mines are there you can choose how you deal with them. Lets go back to the example I used before about mining to funnel ships towards a starbase. As an attacker, you are left with 2 options: A. Ignore the mines and make a run past the starbase. Or B. Use your scouts to 'clear' the mine field and bypass the starbase and create a gap in the 'wall'. Or C. If for unseen reason you dont have scouts you could choose to ram through the minefield and suffer the appropate damage, yet still allowing you to bypass that nasty starbase chokepoint.

 

IMHO, believe this to be the best way to cater to everyone wants and needs. For the people who dont want to see mines spamed. Spaming mines would effectivly cut off fleets and world if one was to fill their planet well with mines. Since both friendly and enemies ships treat this area as a no-fly zone unless purposely told to fly through it. It allows both the TEC and Advent players to use their mines to maximize their starbases potential. And also allows players to use mines tacticaly.

Maybe I didnt explain it 100% clearly, but I hope I did enough for everyone to get the concept behind it.  

Curtains - Customize Windows with additional styles
Reply #3 from Sins Forums Top

ACtually, I lost 3 cobolts out of about the 7 that went through. This had me thinking explosion radius has been reduced as well as damage output per mine.

If this is true, then 150 mines per player per system probably is not OTT. HOwever, I'd still prefer to cap mines at about 50 or so per player per system. That's probably too few, though.

Reply #4 from Sins Forums Top

I agree on the mine cap at lower than it is. 150 is too much, and it means that tec frontier planets just become hugely difficult to attack, and the ai has a habit of just wandering through without a scout ship, hence blowing his entire fleet to hell. Ive seen 100 ships destroyed by an ai just moving about the map.

Reply #5 from Sins Forums Top

Quoting overchargethis, reply 3
ACtually, I lost 3 cobolts out of about the 7 that went through. This had me thinking explosion radius has been reduced as well as damage output per mine.

If this is true, then 150 mines per player per system probably is not OTT. HOwever, I'd still prefer to cap mines at about 50 or so per player per system. That's probably too few, though.
End of overchargethis's quote

IMO, 3 out of 7 is not a good number. Idk, I might in the minority but mines should be strong. Im not a fan of the spam but I have faith in IC to find the balance.

If you sliped 4 ships through a mine field, I think 150 cap might be low then. While right now I like the number due to the lag they create. Im still a advocate for my barrier mine idea. I feel its the best of both worlds. Im just afraid of mines getting the nurf axe. They should and are powerful tool in the defensive line. Im sorry if you have to micro a bit more. And I firmly believe that a border world that has a starbase/defensive structures/mines should be hard than hell to crack. Thats what Entrenchment is all about.

Reply #6 from Sins Forums Top

Carbon I agree with you about mines and what their purpose should be but I dont agree as this is a balance for the moving sb. Few reasons like the fact that vas have mines too. Also, mine cost money now so setting up a defense compared to a vas defense will cost much more for the other players. Advantage-Vasari all the way across the board. Offense ,defense,cap killing,planet killing,rushing and raiding with their sw. Yes I know tech has superior repair with bays and hoshikos but  the enemy is allowed to choose when to engage now or skip fighting the sb all together and just kill your planet. The damage and anti loss is a step in the right direction but why not just kill planet and move on especially if your tech cause it wont take long and your fleet will be healed. You will have to have a second line to take advantage of this damage or fleet which still defeats the purpose of spending all the money it costs to build a strong defensive line.