Gan0ndorf

I have personally tested this vs huntingx, the replay was posted somewhere. I didn't micro to hell because i wanted to see if it was indeed overpowered, i should have won by macro alone. I didn't, because if you do rush at 5min (like i did in the test), you haven't even expanded and you won't be expanding, because you're going for the kill (else you lose). It's a standard rush, you do it, and then it's up to microing your sova, bombers and a few frigates to win the game. Won't work always, you w

Ok to make it clear, my game doesn't crash when i play with other people who have also stable clients and connections. But if i try to play someone else, there come the crashes. This is not MY problem, it is related to the SINS client, and if you say otherwise, then you're obviously not playing this game so you don't know what you're talking about. The imbalances are not a matter of opinion, there is something called logic, and it's not an opinion once you agree on a few asser

You need to fix client stability first, i'm not repeating a tournament match 10 times because of crashes. After this, the gross imbalances need to get fixed. Then i'd be interested in doing a tournament.

Lol all rts can be said to be equal to warcraft ONE by your logic. So we have some weaker cheap unit, then going up the tech tree better units damn those games have somethng similar!

This patch is going in the right direction, there are still more changes that need to be done to go from a grossly unbalanced game to a reasonably balanced one. The market change follows the suggestions given by players, which is great. Many changes seem to come from players because they indirectly affect balance (it's not just randomly changing numbers around, which is good), so they have the real gameplay in mind. I still think strikecraft need more work, and capital ship speeds have

No what we have now is client-server, with the game host (the one creating a mp game) being the server. P2P networking has no host, ever had a game stop in starcraft when the game creator crashed ? Or in any other RTS. This issue also makes many games stop before they're over, if for whatever reason the host quits. Sins is the first game with this issue, it needs to be adressed asap. P2P means there's no privileged node on the network. Now there have been 2 ways to implement that, eithe

I agree with most changes if they're done as a hotfix, and more balancing will be done later on. The strikecraft problem has been addressed in another thread and helping guardians repel lrms might help. With the current situation guardian's repel ability is useless since lrms can just outrange it. The market works better now than in 1.03, but price fluctuation need to be alot less random and more (or almost exclusively) based on player actions. About sell prices : you can sell for the f

Tumbler, 4 drone hosts killing 4 out of 10 frigates, without any real fleet, is a good result. They have a support role, of course they won't work alone. Also they work only when the alpa strike is enough to kill or almost kill frigates, so a test with 4 carriers will of course result in dead carriers. Once you have enough to alphastrike frigates (i found they start working very well after 15 squadrons, decent with 10+) and have some frigates to fight the battle and take the damage, the

You need to move the carrier cruisers around, away from the battle where your other ships fight. Keep them circling and keep them away from hostile ships. Don't jump into a system where hostile ships are setup at the entry point. You want some distance between your carrier cruisers and the enemy ships, and you want to keep that distance for as long as possible. Upgrade the damage, and focus with your fighters. You really need always a mixed fleet to get them to work. I have won multipl

Lol @culture in MP. It's a secondary aspect, on very large games, gives you a 10% economy bonus and some time before the enemy can colonize in your empire to build ships directly on your doorstep. It doesn't win games vs players of equal skill. If you want to depth of a 4x game you can find in single player, try out some mods. MP cannot be that, since human players are not predictable like the AI or better they are. Human players will do their best to find the most efficient path to vic

Normally i would agree with the OP (on the fact that mitigation is not enough to make FF useless) but after losing a battle where i was using FF and my opponent was not, with similar fleets, i must say it's not always the best solution. Depends on armor/weapon bonus of the ships involved. Sometimes you don't want to focus on one target, so either let them autoattack or manually focus multiple targets is a better solution.

The reason the posts aren't constructive is that most of the MP game sessions aren't as well. Just had a huge game ruined by a minidump crash. Of course i like this game (or i wouldn't be playing it), and the more i like it the more these little bugs get me upset. Especially if it's stuff that everyone experiences frequently, that usually gets caught by testing. I also see the devs using statistics or i don't know what info, maybe giving them some input on what happens on ICO and in mu

I don't think you really beta tested. Maybe you played it, probably using lan or something without any real testing in the conditions the game is being used. Free beta testers are good to test how a game does with many people, but usually there's some (payed) QA going on trying to find these bugs. These crashes, game freezes (i'm writing and i'm in a ffa the game just froze for everyone, for no reason. Network screen doesn't say lagging or anything), migrating bug, market bugs, are easy

So i tried out this new patch that was supposed to fix a few issues : - black market : exploit fixed, but it now unbalances trade ports, once you mass trade ports you can simply buy infinite resources and build/rebuild your fleet easily; - multiplayer issues : client crashes still reported. out of the 10 people in the lobby in ico, half report client crashes (but there are no client crashes. It's just our imagination); - migrating still not working. either completely bugged or

If you don't play MP just load a saved game and set autosave intervals shorter (if that is possible).

[quote]You do realize right now it's in the 4:20-7:20 AM in the morning range for the US for a workday.. right?[/quote] I'm not from the US, if this game is for US citizens only, where can i get a refund ? :D Let's not start denying problems now, ICO is empty most of the time, for the reasons stated over and over. Some have been addressed, but it's still terrible to the point that ouf of 100k customers only 20 go to ICO to play multiplayer. Maybe 150 in US prime time and that's

Bah i'm unable to try 1.03 due to lack of players (0 games, 3 players in lobby and 29 total online) :( Will try again this evening. Maybe tell those 100.000+ sins customers that there's a multiplayer option.

I've been playing advent mostly, they're not as bad as people say on the forums. They need to be played differently than tec or vasari and require a little more micro to be as effective as other races. For competitive play, there is no competitive play in sins. Just some more serious players, but nothing near the level you have in other games. This has been stated clearly by the devs, is by design. I don't think i've played enough to upload my replays as example.. after the pa

Good news on the crash fixes, and the player quitting fixes. No mention of the migrating issue ? So if in a let's say 3vs3, the host dies, the game is over early ? Why is there a host at all if mutliplayer networking was supposed to be p2p ? Since 99.2% of sins customers play single player only, this according to the data released on the forums, it's obvious 99% of the balance changes will go towards single player. Many ICO games are vs AI, even pure multiplayer games tend to become vs

Hope the devs hotfix it. Which they didn't :(

[quote]Don't forget, not everyone is online every minute of every day[/quote] How does that explain 80 out of 100.000 online ? Don't forget, i'm not an idiot. One hundred thousand, compared to 80. 0.08% online right now and 99.92% offline, if this looks regular to you, i can only invite you to check what the ratio normally is, 2 weeks from release. 0.08% of a day is 1 minute/day of online gameplay on average. So if a game lasts 120 minutes, you are saying on average people play one game

The regular maps need to be updated with set starting positions for teams.

Good to hear, this gets my hopes up for decent multiplayer gaming in the near future. 100.000 players, we should have around 10.000 online on ICO but it's still stuck at.. 78 in this very moment. Those numbers are obviously true (or you wouldn't be reporting them), so i'm astonished by the low presence on ICO.

Fix the client crashes, hotfix exploits as you know them (don't wait for maior patches to fix game-breaking exploits), fix the network code (this host quits - game stops thing is not acceptable). I know some things couldn't be tested in beta (but i still wonder how those regular client crashes made it through), now we're at 1.03, get those fixed asap because they are game-breaking, to all effects and all levels of gameplay (competitive or not).

Migrating fails even if there are multiple potential hosts in the game. It's just bugged, but bug not acknowledged yet so i don't expect a fix in 1.03.