Sins Forums
I'm still getting significant unpleasant frame loss whenever chat text is on the screen.
Sins Forums
[quote]I do not take orders from those who lack respect for the game.[/quote] I do not pay attention to or take seriously anyone who lacks due respect for me when I have been nothing less than cordial.
Sins Forums
[quote]I swear these people must be the same people complaining over at World in Conflict's forum. I see very similar words and writing style being used.Thinking42Man is talking about "competitive play and casual play" and goes on and on about it...... There's another dude over at WiC forums that keeps on jabbering about the same stuff.I also think it was rude of Thinking42Man to use Frogboy's name in the subject line as if it's some kind of personal attack. If not for Frogboy and his talente
Sins Forums
[quote]Competitive play doesn't have the same requirements as casual play, and has very little in common with single-player play. Your weekend baseball, tennis, parking lot basketball, chess, or poker games don't use hardcore tournament rules, because that'd be stupid, and actually lessen the fun for everyone involved. Video games are no different.Hardcore, competitive RTSs are played in a completely different fashion than normal matches, and have different needs and requirements. Think
I agree with all the suggestions made by the OP, great work man :CONGRAT: I'd only like to add that the Black Market should be made more responsive to player purchasing (to discourage bulk purchasing), and that the highs and lows that occur due to this be more persistent, so the effects of heavy buying/selling are felt for enough minutes to have a considerable impact.
[quote]4) Overall, we believe that Sins of a Solar Empire is a pretty well balanced game out of the box. The fact that people are quibbling over whether "LRMs" should have 15% less range or whether a given unit should use 5 supply versus 6 supply I think speaks to this. 5) Lastly, Stardock nor Ironclad are going to make changes to the game that are to the detriment of the single player game experience. Why were siege frigates nerfed? Because it was a "quick fix" to help improve single p
[quote]4) Overall, we believe that Sins of a Solar Empire is a pretty well balanced game out of the box. The fact that people are quibbling over whether "LRMs" should have 15% less range or whether a given unit should use 5 supply versus 6 supply I think speaks to this. 5) Lastly, Stardock nor Ironclad are going to make changes to the game that are to the detriment of the single player game experience. Why were siege frigates nerfed? Because it was a "quick fix" to help improve single
So much teching will prevent you from expanding, and you are vulnerable to harassment. I do think the black market should be more responsive and should stay in boom/crash longer.
Doesn't requiring a unique CD-Key to get online, get patches, and get tech help via this forum count as copy protection? Not that it's a bad thing, but from my point of view, this game uses more copy protection than most games, which only require a unique CD-Key to play online.
I do think mitigation is a good mechanic to prevent focus fire. It does encourage the use of repair units and certain defensive cap ship powers. I just think it needs to be tuned so that it works as intended. The AI also needs to be tweaked so you can target types of units without being forced to focus fire on one of them at a time, without excessive, even impossible, levels of micro.
Please make exploring your planets worthwhile. I am lucky to find a unique feature after fully exploring (2/2) six planets.
The system is still imbalanced, because the loser of a bid war that goes to 3000 in the early game gains ZERO benefit from the 2750 he has bid, while getting ALL of the penalty. Devs, please consider my suggestion. I fear you will stop seeing pirates in competitive games, otherwise. Myself, I never play on pirate maps. It's too easy to save all my money for bidding and end the game before it gets started.
I think this is a balance issue that the developers/balance team should look into, however. I would like to see these useful in competitive matches in the official version.
The point is that if one person getting them too often causes an imbalance, which I assert does, it should be changed. Otherwise, pirates will disappear from competitive play.
Well that might be great later on. For now, we should work with what's there and not ask for things that would overburden the developers.
Wouldn't my game then go out of sync while playing online? What do you think of that change, in the context of it being patched into the official version? I think it'd be a good one. The AI would have to be tweaked so ships would spread fire unless given a specific order to fire on a specific ship, but I'm sure the developers could accomplish this with ease.
It might, but it would also be a good step towards good balance and viability of pirates in competitive games. Perhaps the player with the highest bounty could be attacked by a fleet 15-30% larger than it would be if his bounty were not the highest.
I think the developers would be well founded in a decision to increase maximum mitigation by 5-15%, and reduce the rate at which it increases to 60-80%.
I'd love to see Phase Jump Inhibitors' range increased by 20-40%. They don't seem worth it otherwise. It shouldn't take more than three to cover the entire gravity well of an average planet, as it does now.
I'd like to see mitigation looked at. As it is, mitigation seems to raise too quickly and do too little even when maxed out. I think it'd be great if mitigation capped out at 5-15% higher than it does now, but built up only 70-90% as fast. Of course, it'd be nice to see the AI changed so it more intelligently spreads its fire, to compliment these changes. That is, unless I'm mistaken that the developers wanted to reduce focus fire and anal micro in this game.
I'd love to see pirates send a fleet to each player who has bounty levied against them. The current system of only one player receiving all the pirates, even if others have bounties, seems like a balancing nightmare. It would be easier if the pirates sent fleets against anyone who has a bounty. It might also make sense to increase the intervals between pirate attacks to 130-180%, while you're at it. I'd hate to see pirates disappear from competitive play. It seems like a great concep
I'd also like to see mitigation looked at. As it is, mitigation seems to raise too quickly and do too little even when maxed out. I think it'd be great if mitigation capped out at 5-15% higher than it does now, but built up only 70-90% as fast. Of course, it'd be nice to see the AI changed so it more intelligently spreads its fire, to compliment these changes. That is, unless I'm mistaken that the developers wanted to reduce focus fire and anal micro in this game. Oh, another t
I'd love to see pirates send a fleet to each player who has bounty levied against them. The current system of only one player receiving all the pirates, even if others have bounties, seems like a balancing nightmare. It would be easier if the pirates sent fleets against anyone who has a bounty. It might also make sense to increase the intervals between pirate attacks to 130-180%, while you're at it. I'd hate to see pirates disappear from competitive play. It seems like a great concept.
Are you sure that HP regeneration continues at the maximum rate while a ship is in combat? Also, wouldn't the best tactic be to spread fire with all your ships at first, then focus fire with some of them to pick off the now damaged enemy ships, so that their mitigation only has a chance to increase moderately before they are destroyed?
You know, I think this mod might benefit from a revision keeping in mind that changing something simply for the sake of changing it, and without an eye towards the effect which that change will have, is rarely wise, and will often fail to result in improved balance.
