[quote]It was only mentioned once, but does no one have any problem with Trade Ports being better than Refineries for collecting resources? That seems like a strange oversight...[/quote] Refineries were always really weak for what they did, now they're a waste of a hotkey and hardcoded slot for building.
And yes, it's completely ironic that I want to win because of my skill and not imbalances. That I want to win against a challenging opponent instead of some noob still learning the game, that doesn't even build a capital ship at the start. So again, it's totally ironic that I want a challenging victory based on skill not the race I choose at the start. ... Do you know what the definition of irony is? Your post suggests otherwise.
[quote]In the end, competitive gaming is about fair play and a dedicated fan base therefore, companies cater to them more often than not because the casual player will usually enjoy the game regardless of the changes especially if all factions become balanced.No. As I already pointed out, competitive gameplay is almost always completely counter to yay-team gameplay. Both Natural Selection and Tribes 2 were games that originally had an extremely heavy focus on group-tactics and tactical teamwork.
[quote]Overall, your gross generalizations and "experiences" have been with the ultra competitive crowd that do only play to win, and stomp other players. But the majority of clans play for the competition.HAH! I find you amusing, at the very least.[/quote] Those people play to win, it was a misuse of the word on my part in that situation to be sure, they do not play for the fight, they do play for the win at the end. We are not like that. I'm not here to argue symantics, I'm here to ex
[quote]So, if I understand correctly, you can now buy an unbounded amount of metal+crystal @ 300, and sell an unbounded amount of metal+crystal to the market @ 100? And while crashes and booms and fluctuations change this, this behavior is generally the default?And if I understand correctly, this means that TEC players with lots of trade ports are going to be throwing credits at the market like candy for metal and crystal, whereas Vasari will be hard-pressed to get much money from their neutral
[quote]I think we're getting a little side tracked here.We just want the game to be balanced. Balance is good for both competitive and non-competitive. When the balance is skewed, the "win at all cost" players will abuse that strategy over and over. That's bad for all parties.However, don't get that confused with competitive gaming. I'm competitive, but won't take advantage of exploits and things. I won't feel happy unless myself and my opponent are on an equal playing field. The only time
[quote]I think you meant to say apples to skyscrapers. Cause they're not even in the same realm of existence[/quote] As a side note, quite the amusing analogy! Well done sir. Certainly made me chuckle.
[quote]I'm sorry we like the most effective STRATEGIES? Or is it not strategy to use the most effective unit? Or should we only use the counter unit that isn't all around good enough and if the original counter unit is countered it does nothing to it, whereas many LRMS can kill at least some of their counter unit because they're just better all around, they won't win on a 1-1 ratio for fleet cap/cost, but they'll still kill some. As a whole the LRM is still the most effective unit, it's just not
[quote]I think it's because 99% of 'competitive' "PLAY 2 WIN" players like you are generally whining douchebags that I really couldn't give a damn if you all just got shot into space. I had another thread on this same topic somewhere else. I've been an admin on several servers for a huge variety of games, and the asshole with the clan tag is almost always the asshole who is going to start bitching, fighting, cheating, and exploiting.The guy who plays because the game is fun sees changes and adap
[quote]It's not like your whole game plays on "build w,x,y,z attack here and win" it's mostly about setting up your economy.Is that why the most popular build orders are centered on:1) LRM spam to win the game.2) Quickly tech-rushing to an overpowered tech to win the game.3) Building an EXACT number and type of units to cripple the enemy to win the game.Competitive gaming has been breathing life into games since they were created....typically games were made to be competitive.They do? Name one.
[quote]I'm only on page 1 so far, but I have to say that I agree wholeheartedly with Uranium's post. Build-orders are an atrocity against real strategy. They are anything but actual strategy--static, automatic responses to start every game are silly and ruin games, they do not define "competitive play." Edit: Quick response. The fundamental difference in perspective between the "RTS/competitive play" crowd and the rest of us seems to be in defining our "fun." For me, I do not enjoy games tha
[quote]@HaesoI never once in my post said that I was a competitive player, in fact, as you so aptly noted, my idea of fun is different from the competitive player's idea; so following that through to conclusion I must not be a competitive player then am I? Wait a minute, that's what I said in my first post, holy shit you just told me of what I already said.I agree with you 100% that without criticism the devs won't get done what needs to get done, I never challenged that fact. What I challenge
Is there any way to DOWNGRADE to 1.02 to see an INCREASE in game balance. Because ya know, if I could, I'd do it, and just wait for 1.04 to play on ICO again. I enjoyed playing a race other than TEC now and then, but now, it's not really practical :(
[quote]Due to the 'magic bottomless black market', cash was already the most useful resource, and these changes haven't really changed this. Oh well, we can all edit the base market price to 2k or something and use the player-based market, which is more limited and more interesting. I mean, super-cheap resources (yeah, 300-600 for resources is super-cheap) was always a crazy idea.EDIT - Frankly, if the price goes DOWN as slow as it goes UP, it's better than the 102 system where it spiked in 10
[quote]Any game that has a winner and loser will be competitive. Don't tell me you play so that you can lose.I don't know about anyone else, but I play for fun. Now I'm not saying the game can't be competitive, but it is after all a game, and games should be fun. If you truly enjoy the game then it shouldn't matter if you win or lose. You should play to win because that is the object of the game, but if you lose you shouldn't throw a temper tantrum like a three year old and bitch about how t
[quote]Horay!Competitive gaming: Systematically draining the fun out of every game since 2003http://www.penny-arcade.com/comic/2008/02/25btw onyxia deep breaths more[/quote] This isn't hello kitty space adventure, some of us enjoy competition, have fun comp stomping. You know what, I take that back, you probably can't even beat the new AI.
[quote]Can anyone name a single REAL problem with hurting build orders?[/quote] ... uh, a build order is the heart of competitive play in an RTS, if you don't like it go play an FPS? Adaptability and micro are good and all, but a solid build order will beat a bad one that has no thought invested in it, that's just the way it should work... By the way this fucks more than build orders
[quote]this is an RTS gameEdit: before anyone bitches anymore at how soon these posts were made - these are predictions based upon play so far. We're not saying "This is how it is" this is just what it appears to be.This is NOT an RTS, and the sooner people realize that, the happier they'll be.(It's not a pure 4x game, like Master of Orion, either.)I like the way you suddenly became a "we", there, too. It adds weight to your argument. Like you're the Queen of England, or something, you know?[/qu
[quote]Your those two guys that were spamming the ICO online chat earlier today, complaining about noobs and not having enough resources per-planet and what not. I believe there were posts earlier complaining about how the first person to buy crystals won? Since after the first person, everyone else was having to pay a considerably higher amount? Well now, if everyone buys crystal at the same time, everyone pays the same price.Seems like what people were asking for to me.[/quote] ... Or
[quote]OMG CHANGE RUN FOR YOUR LIFE AHHHHHHHHHHH ITS EATING MY LEG![/quote] OMG I DON'T CARE ABOUT BALANCE AND I LIKE TO SIM CITY AND JUST MASS TRADE PORTS, THIS PATCH IS GREAT. Basically?
Reposted so I can actually edit the damn thing, did I mention these forums are great? Hidden changes to patch enrage me. The balance for competitive play is dying, fast. Market Exploit: Click it fast enough and you can have almost as many resources as you want, for cheap. The previous way it worked, was as soon as you clicked it, it went up now, now, as soon as you click it, it starts to go up. It's not instant. Meaning the faster you click, the more you get for cheap
Hidden changes to patch enrage me. Market Exploit: Click it fast enough and you can have almost as many resources as you want, for cheap. The previous way it worked, was as soon as you clicked it, it went up now, now, as soon as you click it, it starts to go up. It's not instant. Meaning the faster you click, the more you get for cheap. Market sell price. 1/3rd roughly excepting booms I'd imagine? but 1/3rd normally, meaning that Vasari as a rule, who before had to sell resources in order
[quote]Thank you Haeso for summarizing a lot of the flaws already brought up with the current fleet cap/tax system. Though they were already covered earlier in this thread, it is obvious some people (Martyr) did not take the time to read the entire thread and instead decided to bring up arguments that had already been addressed. I was hoping this could remain a friendly discussion about the fleet issues but some people (again Martyr) feel the need to attack others just because they have differen
[quote]well, after readng this entire thread, I can see a lot of flawed arguments on both sides.I have played on large and huge maps, and yes, the unit cap is frustrating to deal with after a certain point.the diplomacy system needs a little work, sure.the allegiance bit is a pain in the ass.rebels and pirates make it hard to defend your planets.the answer is not spamming, or you could just use the basic frigates and still win the gamethe answer is not an uber economy, nor is it a freaking turtl
[quote]I only got the game yesterday and I could see this flaw playing just small and medium games.Since the folks at stardock are not stupid, they can see it too. I think the reason its in is because stardock, in making good AI's, often simplify things so the AI can handle it. To many variables, too much depth to the economy and the AI is going to have to really massively cheat to keep up with an expert player.Really the one thing that irks me is that you can't switch back to a lower fleet ca
