[quote]they just made major changes to the tech tree in the Entrenchment expansion. nothing is set in stone.[/quote] 1) That was an expansion. 2) The tech tree was simply added on to for the most part, not rearranged.
What is "lulz" or "lolz?"
[quote]your opportunity for a clean shot and the enemy must ensure he's always in a position to interrupt it. The bottom line is this: if I can't get my "clean shot", then the battle just proceeds normally. If I can get my "clean shot", you lose. Very high stakes indeed, something very few other capital ships can boast.[/quote] The other point is how much effort and BS your opponents are putting into countering your threat of missle barrage, while your effort a
If you find a way to do it, please post back here.
[quote]and to agent of kharma. JJ trading planets led to his death, obviously a very stupid and IMO, newb move. As for you, you kept building carriers long after your opponent built the counter[/quote] Yup, it was "Elrosh" all right. Just watched the replay. And here he is, posting. Why didn't you warn us about him earlier, Astax? Not that I care to pollute the forums with elementary school BS, or dignify this a-hole with a response, but just to set the recor
[quote who="Astax" reply="1" id="2108805"]Is he Elrosh [/quote] Astax, I think JJ and I just played a game with this guy on our team. I will have to go and check the replay, but if that's him, he was a real jerk. He was getting his ass kicked, and when I sent a fleet up to help him, he screamed at me for "leading the enemy fleet to him." He also blamed JJ for "trading planets" with the guy he was fighting (Z00MERS). I'll go and check the replay, but do tell y
[quote]I think a lot of people are mistaking this as an issue about army composition and balance, because it's not. I think from the original post, AoK knew that his army was severely outgunned.... The issue at hand is how quickly AoK's army was annihilated and how little opportunity he had to react to his disadvantaged situation.[/quote] Jesus, Darvin! As that drill sergeant said to Forest Gump, "You must be a f**king genius!" Or, as Samuel L. Jackson said in Pulp Ficti
[quote]you just got owned because you neglected to scout your opponent and then sent in your fleet into a suicide mission and got caught with your pants down.[/quote] Transitive, the above line is the dumb part of your post, because I have shown that I did in fact scout my opponent, and that I did not send my fleet on a suicide mission. The screenshot above showing my fleet's arrival in an empty grav well (if you had bothered to look at it) proves it. However, the rest o
[quote who="Cykur" reply="7" id="2108459"]You know, looking at the picture, you are jumping in with 28 at 49:46. It is 52:30 when you Evacuator jumps out and you have 16 left.[/quote] There was a significant period of time between when I jumped in and when he jumped in. I chose to screenshot my arrival in an empty well because Astax said I get what I deserve when I mindlessly charge headlong into a superior enemy fleet (this shows I did not). The main point of the sc
Screenshot proving that I had 28 assailants when I jumped in, I repeat 28 (TWENTY EIGHT) assailants: http://www.wegame.com/view/28_assailants_proven/ Scroll to the bottom right of the image after you enlarge it to original size, and look at the info card.
[quote who="Hack78" reply="4" id="2108377"]Dude - you are facing 4 ADVENT carriers - that is the same as 6 TEC or Vassari carriers.[/quote] Let me say this as loud and clear as I possibly can. If 3 or 4 carriers sounds good enough to you to wipe the floor with 28 assailants in mere seconds, then we have a fundamental disagreement about game balance, and we always will. Period. Paragrah. That won't change, ever, and we'll just have to agree to disagree.
[quote]Your Assailants are shooting at his Illums in the picture, and the Illums are near the edge of the gravwell.....by not having pulled them out at the same time as the cap, they are pretty much dead...they aren't getting out now.[/quote] Yes, well my first priority was clicking on my cap, unattaching it from the fleet, and then pulling it. My second priority was getting the rest of the stuff out. I didn't pull everything all at once because the fleet was set to jump a
[quote]I dobut you retreated right away. Present the replay, if it is in 1.02, but it is probably 1.01. You claim you died in seconds, but that is certailny not true... It would take few mintues to kill your force. Even with Malice I don't see it taking less than 3 minutes, he was not microing the fighters.[/quote] Okay, then I will present the replay, and you will see it wasn't "minutes" (certainly not 3 minutes). But since my credibiity is being called into question, I will
[quote]You act like 12 fighters is not a lot. Like I said in my post because they are coutner to assailants you can count them as equivelent to 24 assailants. They can anhialate assailants, that's their job.[/quote] Fine! I want them to annihilate assailants! BUT IN SECONDS?!?!!? [quote]Now instead of admitting you made a mistake charging into the enemy....[/quote] Charging into the enemy? My God man, do you even read what I write? I had taken
[quote]Fighters are not OP. They counter Assailants.[/quote] I didn't dispute that. I merely questioned the bizzarity of balancing a game such that 3 or 4 carriers can evaporate 28 assailants in seconds. 3 or 4 lrm won't evaporate 28 lf in seconds. 3 or 4 flak won't evaporate 28 fighter squadrons in seconds. Apparently, only carriers have that power. I've played Cykur many times. His carriers will annihilate my assailants for sure. But at l
[quote]That said, this guy had 4 carriers which are the hard counter.[/quote] Sure, I've always known that carriers and fighters were OP. But we aren't talking about 10 or 15 carriers evaporating 28 assailants in seconds, we are talking 3 or 4 carriers (the fouth one showed up later - it wasn't even there most of the time). If you say "that's still enough to pull off that kind of slaughter," then carriers and fighters are 10 times more OP than even I ever thought they were
[quote]I already discussed issues with the tech level of the siege frigate. To sum up those arguments: The siege frigate is simply available too early. All the game balance issues you rage on about are a direct result of this, and can be easily addressed by bumping the siege frigate a few tech levels. You cheerfully glossed over it, however.[/quote] You are a dreamer if you think Ironclad is going to change the tech tree of this game which has been released for over a year now.
[quote]In the picture you have 16. So either you miscoutned, or half of your 28 already died by this time.[/quote] It was 28 - I watched the replay 3 times, so with that particular pic they were already down to 16. I can post one with all 28 shown if you don't believe me. [quote]Your fleet was entirely inadequate to fight him, by jumping in you lost automatically.[/quote] If that's really the case, then I no longer want to play this game. I'm tired of the B
Okay I've never figured out how to upload screenshots to this forum, but here's a screenshot I made and put on the web. This is my cap pulling. Trust me, that's 28 assailants (purple). About 10 seconds later, everything is gone. http://www.wegame.com/view/28_assailants_evaporate_3/
I was just playing multiplayer as vasari. I built up and attacked an advent homeworld. I had 28 assailants, with all first tech level hull and missle upgrades, plus the egg. I jumped into this cat's well, and he jumps in with less than half my assailant count in illuminators, plus 3 drone hosts which later became 4, plus a mothership. Now, this battle lasted about 10 seconds. As soon as he jumped in I saw he was gonna FF my cap with his illums so i instantly pu
[quote]the complaint was and is that their is no way to use siege frigates against anything except fully subdued opponents who cannot fight back.[/quote] You are right, that is the complaint of the "buff siege frigates" camp. The key phrase you used is "fully subdued opponents who can't fight back." The point is, the "buff siege frigates" camp wants them usable against opponents who *AREN'T* fully subdued, and who *CAN* fight back. That is the critical, overriding po
[quote]Really? You're serious? A player has to go twice as far out of their way to damage a world, and you don't see that as having any significance? Starbases can protect planetary infrastructure, wreck ships jumping away, and provide a dozen more squadrons for local defense, and that's not good enough? Landmines can cover a world to protect it from bombardment, and that doesn't help? A player has to commit more forces than ever before to successfuly siege a world- that is, if he plans to ge
What you are talking about is an advanced tactical "player assist" AI. I have dreamed about such things for years, and in far more detail and complexity than what you outline above. To the level of being able to set a ship to run away after a certain number of hit points have been lost, etc.
Assuming he's just throwing illums at you (and nothing else), counter with the following: fighters scouts heavy cruisers lrm/assailants
[quote]With entrenchment, this argument can be cleanly thrown out the window. Siege frigates won't be getting anywhere in a system full of turrets, mines, and a starbase, even with ultradiamondium armor.[/quote] I love entrenchment, but to be honest, it won't do a damn thing to stop siege frigates if they are buffed. Defense, even with entrenchment, simply isn't what this game is about. Why? Because you can simply go around defenses, and avoid them. The devs ha
Sins Forums