[quote who="nagersea" reply="4" id="1998036"]The Vasari colony pod upgrades don't appear to function correctly either. There is no change in the star base stats and credit income for the supporting planet does not change.[/quote] The income isn't part of the planet. It shows up under your income separately, but it definitely shows up. I've tested it.
[quote who="MindsEye" reply="3" id="1997254"]Im not against putting a PJI on a starbase too but the main PJI should be the structure. The structure could stop ships altogether while the starbase slows jumps like the vanilla.[/quote] I'm not seeing a better idea than this. On mines: Yes, auto-clearing has to be part of it.
[quote]The 1st terran population and the desert population research for example are very cheap, you could get those early - actually the High Density Zoning could be much smarter than upgrading infra on your HW! The other population research for TEC planets is quite expensive, and should come only later, save perhaps the 2nd terran population (3 in total I recall).[/quote] 8%(7.5%)/15%, 23%(22.5%)/30%. The first and second Terran population upgrades are worth considering, but
[quote who="garion333" reply="10" id="1997901"] ... Vista ... [/quote] Did you miss the memo? This thread is about pie now. ;)
[quote who="Flipkik" reply="4" id="1997657"]Vasari can go over the limit with the research "phasic transmissions". Grtz, Flipkik[/quote] That's not really "over the limit", it's just "a larger limit". 15% more, if memory serves.
[quote]The motherboard is a: )Phoenix - Award WorkstationBIOS v6.00PG[/quote] No. That's your BIOS. Fairly standard. (In other words, doesn't tell us a thing.) Try running CPU-Z .
[quote]Every time I've tested zonealarm, it has caused application conflicts.[/quote] I had to get rid of it because it kept on crashing fullscreen applications (namely GC2, but others as well) because the VSmon service kept crashing, restarting, and stealing focus, without even actually showing anything. So every 5 minutes I'd be alt-tabbed to the desktop, and when I'd try to go back into my game, it would crash. So then I tried Outpost. Funny story, that.
[quote]The structure could stop ships altogether while the starbase slows jumps like the vanilla. So you could still do raids by taking out the PJI but it will be annoying with a sb there as it will slow you down.[/quote] Now that's an interesting idea.
[quote who="Annatar11" reply="18" id="1997134"]Well like I said, I do only have the 1.05 files at work.. so if you have 1.1 or better yet Entrenchment just open up FrigatePhaseLongRange and FrigateTechLongRange and look at the weapon ranges [/quote] Yeah, checked, and you're right-for some reason my convertdata isn't working, even though it's the one in the Sins folder (probably because of Entrenchment), but I have the 1.1 files in the Forge tools 1.1 pack, so that's close enough I su
[quote who="Annatar11" reply="15" id="1997119"]Yeah, the Assailant and the Javelis are flipped on that chart [/quote] I see. Thank you. Saves me setting up a game to compare them. :)
It does 150 damage per volley, one volley per 1.25 seconds, at a total of 20 volleys, which takes 25 seconds to go off. It does this damage to all enemy forces within the range of the ability (10,000km). Shield mitigation does reduce it. A frigate or cruiser will have its shield mitigation maxed after approximately the 6th volley-a capital ship after approximately the 7th. Due to armor increases from tech, differing armor among s
[quote]Assailant has 7820 default, Javelis has 9800 [/quote] For some reason I was under the impression it was the other way around. I don't play TEC much anymore, though, so I don't see many Javelis-on-Assailant matchups. Is this wrong?
[quote who="shfir" reply="18" id="1997016"]My idea is to give Bombardment Cruisers (what I call 'em) a low-damage long-range weapon. If they have a "target painting laser" with the same range as their ability that does 1 or 2 damage then when given an attack command will automatically stop at max range and autocast their ability at the target. If you were unobservant and told them to attack a ship, they won't do enough damage to be worth turning on passive regeneration. <br /
[quote]I also want a space pony. [/quote] Don't we all? Thoughts and opinions not added, so no need to karma. :P For what it's worth, though, I am as opposed to having more than one starbase per gravity well as you are opposed to them phase jumping (which I am also opposed to). Assuming the other problems with starbases can be fixed (namely range, and more to the point the ease with which enemy fleets can currently avoid them), having more than one of them
[quote]so that you don't need to hold your breath and hope your ships making wide forward arcs on turns don't hit them.[/quote] +1 [quote]- The medium range weapon should be able to hit Vasari/Advent long range frigates. The TEC always had a range advantage with the Javelis, so it needs to keep it.[/quote] Wait, what? Doesn't the Assailant have more range than the Javelis?
[quote who="Howdidudothat" reply="2" id="1996910"]This was changed in v1.1. It is a welcome change, and as many people have pointed out, it is a great savings late game. It basically gives you ships at 60% cost.[/quote] Not to mention essentially instantaneous builds. With the cooldown, you'll need more than one phase stabilizer to supply your fleet with enough ships, but seriously, weren't you going to build them everywhere anyway ? You can't
[quote who="Will the Great" reply="14" id="1996160"]Hey, I can make up forum stories too. Once I beat a Vasari player by scout rushing him. See? It's easy to make things up to bolster your case![/quote] Once I beat a Vasari player while playing Advent by using MARZA ! Oh, wait. Wrong thread.
[quote]Most of all though the self-destruct ability on TEC starbases being set to autocast is just seriously wrong...[/quote] This.
Again, how is not detonating them different from "dodging" them? From a gameplay perspective, at least. From my perspective, it allows approximately the same solution to be implemented with less coding. I said they should go boom-if another ship is present to detonate the mine(s) in question. I think we can all agree on that last point.
[quote]Uh... why should scouts be immune to mines? [/quote] Because currently it's impossible to sweep mines without intense micromanagement. Have you not run into >3k mines per gravity well yet? Scouts also need for their detection range to be increased. My personal theory for why "realistically" scouts wouldn't detonate the mines is that they're traveling fast enough to 1) not detonate the mines or 2) the mines are smart enough to know eve
[quote]preferably ours considering we have a better dental plan.[/quote] God knows I need a better one.
Terran planets have a maximum of 24 logistics slots, asteroids 12, desert planets 36, volcanic and ice planets 20. TEC can research a tech to increase the logistics capacity across the board for all planet types by I believe 4. However, as labs take up 4 slots a piece, the answer to your question is effectively yes, this is normal. You're going to need to spread out your labs amongst your worlds, if you want to build anything else at them.
The archives are OS dependent because it archived the installed version. If you had an archive that you had performed a download and archive operation with, it would work. My understanding is that this is in line to get fixed (don't ask me how), but don't take that as official word on it, either.
No idea. Are you running on a fresh install? :P - For what it's worth: [IMG]http://img411.imageshack.us/img411/835/achievementsdg5.th.jpg[/IMG] The only achievement I think I had the time to get in vanilla Sins was win as TEC. All the rest I've done in Entrenchment. Obviously I'm not done yet, but they do work just fine for me.
[quote who="FCN_Athena" reply="14" id="1994944"]Congratulations Ironclad on the best strategy game not just of 2008, but of all time.[/quote] Fixed. I suppose SD can take -some- of the credit, but still.
