Admiral Slinky

True, although I'd imagine they're separated so as to more easily differentiate between functional and aesthetic portions of the game. That way both can be worked on simultaneously. But as with any such separation, if the right hand doesn't know what the left hand is doing, side effects may occur. [Edit]: As to the contention that the research is OP for Capital Victory and otherwise useless: it's a big advantage in Capital Victory, but certainly not a decis

Fair enough. As you can see I did quite a bit of in- and out-of-game digging, but it never even occurred to me to search the game files.

I can't find all of the old changelogs, mostly because the forum search utility continues to be unhelpful, but I can recall reading them all fairly promptly upon release. I daresay that if this problem was at one time an announced change, I'd remember. Nevertheless, I'm happy to be proven wrong if that's what it takes to clear this whole thing up.

If that's true, how could we go about verifying it? It's not just a matter of convincing the AI to surrender (which I think it would probably do if it lost everything but a few frigates)--it's a matter of the game's victory criteria not being met when playing with real people. I suppose I can try testing it by playing a rigged game. If it turns out that's how the technology actually works, it would probably be a good thing if the description were update

"Your rulers relocate to your Titan, preventing you from being defeated so long as your Titan or Capital planet remain intact." That's the text accompanying the Vasari Loyalist's "Mobile Rulership" technology, yet when a Vasari Loyalist player loses both their capital planet and their titan the game does not end. It goes without saying that I am experiencing this problem while playing with Capital Victory enabled. Many a long game has been extended interminably b

"Your rulers relocate to your Titan, preventing you from being defeated so long as your Titan or Capital planet remain intact." Many a long game has been extended interminably by the fact that Vasari players simply will not give up having lost everything including all potential colonizers. The fact that I have, on occasion, been that player does not change my position--namely, that fair play and good policy both dictate that the Vasari should follow the rules as described.

Is there any plan to fix the Vasari Loyalist Capital Victory bug? It's somewhat annoying to kill both the capital planet and the titan, but still have to hunt down stragglers until the player/AI formally surrenders.

I couldn't help but notice that the issue of the weird delay between Phase Stabilizer construction and the ships actually using them wasn't mentioned. One thing I've discovered is that ships outside the gravity well can jump TO the new Stabilizer, but anything already there can't jump FROM it, nor can the outside-the-well ship jump back to where it came from. Sorry to ramble. It's just that this is the only thing keeping me from loving Vasari. Apart from that, I lo

Heh. If only I'd searched the forums more thoroughly. That pretty much follows what I've noticed. Any idea what's up with the Phase Stabilizers in star gravity wells, or is that one just me?

I'm having a problem with Phase Stabilizers. A lot of times, when I build one in a gravity well, ships already in that gravity well can't jump out of it to other Phase Stabilizers, even though ships in other gravity wells can jump in. This happens fairly consistently. Another, possibly separate problem is that abilities which create Phase Stabilizers--Antorak Marauder's and Orkulus Starbase's Stabilize Phase Space ability--sometimes don't seem to register.&n

Awesome. My cursory check of the forums revealed nothing, so I went ahead and posted. By the way, is there something wrong with the forum's Search feature? Every phrase (single words included) I type in comes back with "zero results found." I'm not around the forums enough to notice whether Search is working or not, hence my question.

This has happened to me twice now, once in Single Player and once in Multiplayer. If a starbase-construction ship is under fire and attempts to use its Build Starbase ability, the game minidumps. There have been some near-misses with this; I think what needs to happen is that a weapon hits the constructor ship just as it attempts to build. I have a minidump, should it prove necessary.

I don't believe it does. My constructor ships have been next to exploding mines and have not died (though they exploded soon after due to pirate raids).

Got the same thing, and it just so happened to be my only starbase with a trade-post.

I don't believe you should be able to just tell your ships to avoid mines. That's a little unfair, since without having to make any effort, you nullify a minefield's effectiveness. It would be like implementing an "avoid turrets" ability where ships would never approach within a turret's firing range. Players should have to manually avoid mines. However, the minesweper ability for scouts makes perfect sense. Currently there is no unit for removing mines efficie

2 more things. 1. When Frigates/Cruisers are built at any level Argonev, they sit in place and don't move or execute commands instead of moving away. 2. The Argonev does not auto-attack past the first target unless my ships are in-system with it.

Every time I research Level 2 Resupply on one of my Argonevs, the range of the ability drops to almost zero, down from 10,000 for Level 1. May I assume this is a bug?

I lost all my achievements, as well, and I also noticed the "load a game, get all achievements made in that game" thing. Any way to get 'em all back?

Standard unit counters. Light Frigates are strong vs. Ranged Frigates--if you're TEC, use Cobalts, if you're Vasari, use Skirmishers. If you're far enough advanced, use Kodiaks or Enforcers, respectively. Advent ships are rather weak when they don't work with other ship-classes, so any spam-fleet is easily dealt with.