[quote who="ZombiesRus5" reply="29" id="3139588"]Sure it does. Check out the Gameplay.constants file.[/quote] Ooh. There's definitely some room to give the LF a late-game boost if this is set up right. I'm playing with this as soon as we get Vasari units.
It's worth mentioning here that if you really hate the defense structures that much you can change them them yourself via a basic mod. I don't know that it will work to bump the number of targets you can attack at once to 200, but you can scale HP/damage as high as you want.
[quote who="lich1989" reply="19" id="3138674"]So are you for or against the superweapon cap? The cap was due to outcry from singleplayer community.[/quote] The singleplayer community did not identify the problem correctly, is the point I think being made here. If the AI got severely bugged and started churning out nothing but LRFs, people would be arguing for a LRF cap. And so they'd get one, and the balance gets messed with forever just because the AI can't play the game.
[quote who="Volt_Cruelerz" reply="27" id="3139579"]Then you run the severe risk of turning them into a rush unit.[/quote] Then I'd say that, yeah, LFs have a bit of an identity crisis going on at the moment. It's too bad this game never made use of different damage/armor types.
If LFs are going to become support units they need to be a bit stronger. I wouldn't even make it a late-game upgrade, I'd just bump up their HP/armor.
I'm all for mines disappearing as soon as you colonize the planet. Or a minesweeper ability that destroys mines instead of just revealing them. Either of these options are better than being forced to clean them up yourself.
This is a really old problem with Steam, it's been either unable or unwilling to remember that setting for as long as it's been around. If you have a real interest in working around it you can put your steamapps folder under source control, but it doesn't look like a fix is coming anytime soon. Anyway, it's nothing to do with Sins. [quote who="McVulpes" reply="5" id="3139379"]no, martox you cant start rebellion offline [/quote] What does this mean, plea
I guess you can counter, but it's still not a great tactic for the AI to be using in the first place. Probably the AI should be using it only when it retreats.
I've always thought the "bidding war" mechanic was a bit problematic, it's a twitch mechanic in a game largely about strategy and placement. On top of that, if there happens to be a battle going on at the time then you have to fight the interface to get your pirate ships. Instead of placing bounty just before each raid, what if factions diverted a percentage of their income to the pirates instead (call it 0-10%)? This rate could be changed by the player at any time and would h
You will use Steam. You will enjoy Steam. You are unhappy when Steam is not running on your computer.
[quote who="Tridus" reply="51" id="3135121"]Since somewhere between 90% and 99% of the people who buy the game play more SP then MP (or don't play MP at all, depending on who you ask), ignoring what the SP players are saying is a great way to commit sales suicide.[/quote] Not what I mean at all. What I am saying is: Don't make game balance changes if the problem is the AI, and vice-versa. That's what a multiplayer beta is for, it doesn't mean that MP is the focus of th
Ok, contributing now. I was just having a Grim Dawn vs. Diablo 3 debate with a co-worker, so I kind of have to do this.
[quote]It is the flawed AI that can't seem to be do anything else.[/quote] This can't be said enough times. Please, devs, if you are going to nerf/buff anything based on beta feedback, base it on MP battles and MP feedback. Skirmishes with the AI involve extra variables. Maybe people are complaining about the game balance, or maybe they are complaining about the AI. You can't know for sure until one of those components are removed.
[quote who="Sakhari" reply="10" id="3133532"]I only prefer the AOE3 version because you're still able to get your end-game combat while the AI gets another chance to quit during the inevitable tedious mop-up phase.[/quote] AOE3-style is the better option, definitely. But I'm hoping to make this request so simple and easy to implement that the devs have no way to escape it [e digicons]:grin:[/e]
[quote who="reticently" reply="18" id="3133341"]I'm not concerned with the AI having Novaliths; ultimately the AI is too dumb to use them well.[/quote] I'm not concerned about the AI having superweapons, but I am concerned about the AI not having other things it needs because it's too busy building useless structures. [quote who="dfalken" reply="23" id="3133514"]Even a limitation of how many can be built will hurt the game.[/quote] Isn't a unit cap kind
[quote who="Sakhari" reply="6" id="3133407"]I'd prefer that it worked in the same way as in Age of Empires 3. The AI 'offers' a surrender, the player chooses to accept or decline, and the game proceeds accordingly (with the AI continuing as normal or abandoning the game).[/quote] The complication is that if you decline a surrender, should the AI surrender again? How long should it wait? Should it surrender to all players in a multiplayer game or just one? Should A
It would be possible for Sins to have a pro scene, but pros want a lot of things that Sins is currently not good at providing. In other words: The game (and the development team) will have to jettison a lot of its strengths and risk alienating a majority of its current customer base, in order to court a market that they don't have much experience with and that much larger companies are already pursuing aggressively. It's an idea that has killed a lot of development companies lately: T
[quote who="GoaFan77" reply="3" id="3132556"]This capitalship requires a ridiculous amount of micromanagement as it is, if we can't even be sure its signature ability on which most of the others are based on will work unless we order our ships to then pick another target, its just not worth using. [/quote] Maybe the boarding ability could also put a buff on the target that lowers its auto-targeting priority?
[quote who="stein220" reply="3" id="3133316"]you do have the option to "Keep Playing" when you win so you can mop up the defenses.[/quote] I haven't played the new expansion yet, so maybe that has some potential. The problem with this in Trinity though was that after victory the AI doesn't play effectively or even ineffectively, it just shuts off.
I think this would be a huge time-saver for games with high ship caps: When a unit in a fleet is destroyed, replace it with a "dead ship" that has a crossed-out icon in the selection bar and does not exist on the map. Have a fleet action called "Replenish fleet" on the orders bar. when the button is clicked, find the nearest idle shipyard and get a list of all idle shipyards that many hops away. The action will issue build orders for all dead ships, distributed am
The purge could get boring on large maps, no question. Especially when the AI parked some tiny fleet at a star and you had ship speed set to slow. So I am not saying AI surrender should be disabled for everyone and every game. But I think it's really important to have this as a selectable option. What I think is happening is that there's a point past which the AI can't really play effectively, and it will quit rather than force you to finish a game you can&#
I always thought that a lot of the strategy of the game was in how many fleets you had and where you decided to put them. So I wouldn't want defenses to be able to hold off a fleet for long, it's more about building enough defenses to keep the planet intact until the nearest fleet can get there. What I would like to see is for the auto-build function to remember the locations of manually placed structures and re-use those locations first. So if I've
Obviously it's not going to be feasible to balance the vanilla game around multiple Titans. But maybe the developers could loosen up that hardcoded cap a bit? This is going to be a very popular mod request once the game comes out, and we modders can worry about how badly it screws up the AI and game mechanics. Using fleet beacons is ok, but it's still kind of a hack.
I am wondering about this, because this was a big issue for some people in Trinity. In fact, during one memorable game I managed to create a fleet so large that the opposing AIs surrendered before it fired a shot. Which, yay, except it kind of ruined the point of comp-stomping in the first place (to watch things blow up real nice). So does this expansion have a way around this kind of premature victory?
Specifically, the “dumbification” of games that we’ve seen over the past decade appears to be creating an expanding market opportunity for those developers who are willing to create games that cater to individuals who are interested in a complex game experience but also want high production standards. This is a real opportunity, and a segment of the market that the largest developers either do not see or do not care abou
