Agent of Kharma

[quote]They indeed tried to fix the lrm problems by making the carriers strong, and then here comes flak, light frigates, etc...[/quote] If you are referring to buffing carrier cruisers or carrier caps, AFAIK neither was an attempt to fix lrm problems. In both cases it was simply an attempt to buff underpowered, underused units. The right way to solve lrm problems, off the top of my head (I'm going based on my recollection of the game when I played actively) is simply to r

I understand everything you said, and if you are an SP guy, I feel for you. Still, there is no way MP is the primary concern of the devs. It never has been, it never will be. If you are telling me they don't care about SP either, well, I guess it's a sadder situation than I thought. I do agree about players leaving, smurfing, trolling, going afk, etc. in MP. Actually, this game had the worst MP community I ever saw by far. I have no idea if it imp

[quote]Hello AOK, I thought you disappeared into abyss...[/quote] Hi there. Yup, I disappeared into the abyss for quite a while :-) [quote]I highly doubt that this game, which has so many complex, deep techs and amount of ships and stuffs, will be ever roughly balanced.[/quote] Some of the most glaring and obvious balance issues which have been present from day one don't seem to be a product of game complexity, rather just laziness or a non-caring at

[quote]The amusing thing right now is that in this beta LRMs are nonexistent against Titan firepower.[/quote] Speaking from experience in Entrenchment and Diplomacy betas, I'm almost certain that the Titans will be brought into "rough balance" within short order, and I don't consider that so much of an issue. But chances are, they will never be fine-balanced for multiplayer play (nor any of the other additions), and it will simply be adding imbalance on top of imbalan

[quote]Its what Stardock does after Rebellion is released that will determine whether this game is ever "balanced" enough for your standards. What they could have done in Diplomacy is mostly irrelevant.[/quote] What they could have done in Diplomacy and before (regarding balance) is relevant. If they didn't see fit to put the resources and time and energy into balancing the game before, I don't see a reason to assume they would do so in an expansion. [quote

[quote who="RonLugge" reply="3" id="3101798"]Indeed. AoK, you could make a very good argument that the game is already horrifically imbalanced in many ways prior to Rebellion. With Rebellion, they're adding new -- and hopefully interesting -- features, and giving players the opportunity to provide feedback on them, and help shape -- shape, not dictate! -- the final form of the game, most notably in terms of balance.[/quote] What precedent can you point to that leads you to believe

Ah, perhaps I didn't explain myself very well. Let me try again. The plain game itself (in other words, NOT THE REBELLION EXPANSION) is not balanced. Or, at least it wasn't balanced for the years I played it, so I can't imagine it is currently balanced unless some old-timer like a Cykur-type pops in here and says "Yo Agent, after you left, the devs spent tons of time and resources on the issue so yes, the game itself is finally balanced!" Since the "plain game itself" was never ba

Don't get me wrong, I love the devs of this game and all, and I love this game. They are great people, its a great company, its a great game, blah blah. But the game you have now is not balanced correctly. What do you expect to happen to balance after you add all this new stuff to it? This is the overriding issue of why I, personally, will not be spending money on this expansion. But I guess all you guys either don't care, or the newness of the bright shiny cool new toys outweighs balance

[quote]The problem wasn't that I couldn't send ships after the Orgovs, but that they were hopping around from well to well and seemed to move at a fast pace. That's what bothers me.[/quote] This is a sub-problem of a larger general problem I forever encountered when I was active playing this game. You are winning against some a-hole who attacked you. You had to sacrifice a lot to get to this position, and you lost a lot while the a-hole was raiding your planet

Is this actually gonna be a "Sins 2" or is it just a mini-expansion for all intents and purposes?

I've never understood why people think this way. We don't need limits on ships. As Sanchez said, just throw the same supply worth of smaller ships at the Titan, or if Titans are actually cost-effective, just throw the same number of Titans.

[quote who="DirtySanchezz" reply="2" id="2947521"]So, Agent, did you ever buy Diplomacy and are you going to log onto ICO and play again?[/quote] Yeah, bit the bullet and bought it a long time ago. I didn't buy it because I liked the concept or what it had to offer. I bought it simply for "support" (i.e. patches for the game for another year or so). Unfortunately, the game wasn't patched much since Diplomacy, and the patches still didn't address balance i

[quote who="Ryat" reply="11" id="2947373"]Yep, its the scramble bomber buff plus the Illuminator bug removal that shifted the balance.[/quote] Also the scout nerf.

Two things: 1. "Over the top" ultimate techs. When I say "over the top," I don't mean imbalanced or OP. I simply mean something "larger than life," something that gets blood pumping to the penis more than a new ship type or ability or whatever. EXAMPLE: Vasari ultimate techs. First one allows phase jumping starbases. Second one removes constraints on the number of starbases allowed in a gravity well, so that the vasari could actually pha

@StatusIpod, don't know if you are a relatively new player or not (haven't seen your name before), but any old-timer not living in cognitive dissonance will tell you this game has been plagued with severe balance problems since it's inception. There have been wild swings between balance patches, and there has alw

Well, disagree all you want I guess. It doesn't change the fact that it's a no-brainer as far as something the devs would want to do. It's such a no brainer that the only way it wouldn't be implemented is due to time/budget constraints on their part.

[quote who="SithLordAJ" reply="5" id="2894361"]I have seen other games where developers listened too much to what people told them they wanted. The game loses its direction and its unique vision. If everyone gets their say as to what game they want, it ends up being a game no one wants.[/quote] Actually, you misunderstood. It's not about listening to the fans, or giving the fans what they want. It's just about balancing the game. The devs lack the "traditional" resou

[quote who="master1a" reply="2" id="2894211"]Kharma there is more to balancing the game then raw numbers[/quote] Of course I know that. But it doesn't mean that headway can't be made with raw numbers, and it doesn't mean that raw numbers aren't important. You can say the same thing you just said with anything. You can tell some pro quarterback "there's more to football than passing." You can tell some porno star "there's more to XXX movies than having a big d

DISCLAIMER1: Stated up-front for the devs, I do not advocate the following capabilities for the current version of Sins. I advocate this capability for either a NEW EXPANSION, or a NEW VERSION of the game. DISCLAIMER2: If this has already been proposed (I haven't seen it, but I haven't been on these forums in a long time), please kindly ignore this post. Most everyone agrees the devs made a great game. Unfortunately, the devs lacked the "traditional res

Holy cow. I haven't been here in months and months. Surprised as hell to see any remnants of the muliplayer community here at all (names like Cykur, JohnJames, Darvin, etc). You guys still play? You have to be the only ones... right? I mean the online player counts have to be abysmal? At any rate, this game will never be balanced. Period. Are you guys hoping that it will be? It's not gonna happen. I'm not knocking the devs, they j

Not sure I understand the rigmarole about custom maps, custom games, etc. Everybody I know just plays ranked games. The system will find opponents for you, it will select a map, and then you play. At the end, you move up the ladder, or down it. You are allowed to contest a couple maps (select a few maps you don't like). I don't do this because I'd rather get exposure to all the maps, even if there's a few I don't like. But the option is there. The

[quote]I am sad to report that the release of Starcraft 2 seems to have reduced Sins online player counts by about 40%, as predicted.[/quote] You mean there was still a significant number of people playing Sins? Shocks me. [quote]Hopefully some former regulars will tire of the clickfest and long for a non-clickfest RTS.[/quote] Don't be deceived. Sins, as played online, has always been a clickfest. In fact, I have found that people exploit micro t

[quote]. I guess what I'm saying is, people like DesConnor might be on board for a couple hundred hit point increase or something, but not much beyond that, while I believe much more than that is needed. [quote]This is related to what I intended to start, but I think arbitrary HP increases would be too ineffective.[/quote][/quote] Just to clarify, I wasn't stating that HP increases are the way to go (I don't know if they are or aren't). I was simply stating that a hi

[quote]And Kharma, what exactly was your concern? If no one else does I will start the topic over the next great balance debate, though I have not yet decided whether it will be over unit type balance or pirates.[/quote] Actually, I think the topic has already been discussed at length by whoever. My concern is capship survivability. Now, most think capships need more survivability, but the difference between me and most folks, I guess, is that I don't think a little tweak

[quote]The only issue I have with your damage sharing with the Radiance is that it doesn't help the Radiance survive.[/quote] It is in the spirit of the original ability (taunt), i.e. the radiance takes damage instead of the fleet taking damage. As far as survivability, all capships need more survivability, not just the radiance. I sort of consider that a separate issue. Having said that, I guess you could also make my animosity idea buff shield mitigation or somet