traveurysm

Some good input. Excellent post Peter Ebbesen; you make a few points I hadn't thought of and, I will confess, slightly dampen my enthusiasm for moving starbases. But do not remove it, for reasons I'll go into in a second. -Ue_Carbon, thanks for your repeated emphatic reminders. : ) I realize ICO has heard this debate before and ruled against my position, but we are in a beta and it's our job to talk about percieved weaknesses in the game design. The devs wanted to balance TEC/Advent b

The thinking behind uses of the starbase are as follows: Vasari bases are for area defense and economic boostage and importantly can be used as offensive weapons - jumping in an escort fleet to guard the starbase as it is constructed at the edge of the well, then leisurely strolling along and crushing everything in its path (and with frontal shields, that includes other starbases). TEC Argonevs are for point defense and establishing forward bases. They can't move so their use

[quote]Banks can now engage a variable number of targets where the max number of targets[/quote] [quote]If more targets are present than the bank's limit, the bank deals 100% damage to the number of targets its limit allows and the leftover targets are unharmed.[/quote] Question: Is it possible to control which targets you're hitting? For instance: I have a bank that can hit 4 targets. There are 8 targets in range: 4 of frigate A and 4 of frigate B. The AI is automatically tar

[quote who="Tridus" reply="9" id="2009972"] What, exactly, do you base that on? Mines are the most loathed and complained about thing on this forum. They hurt performance and game flow at the same time. An option to make them go away entirely (ala pirates) is a good thing. [/quote] Tridus, as far as I know there's no scientific evidence one way or another about how popular mines are. Thanks for calling me on that. Let's not say they're popular or hated. Polari

True statement. Ironclad should get the credit; thanks for the correction. Though Stardock of course deserves some congratulations too for implementing genius when it came to them. : )

That's a great idea; I wish I'd thought of it. In keeping with the keep-it-orbital theme of sins, Wonders should be logistical structures that can be upgraded to house normal logistic structures inside (in addition to the Wonder benefits). They'd be like building artifacts, only different. They'd also feel like peaceful starbases - a logical progression from Entrenchment. And, I submit, more strategically interesting.

INTERFACE: This is Sins' greatest achievement among many great achievements. The game comes with dozens of strategy game breakthroughs like the empire tree, intuitive fleet control, and the ability to automate just about everything that the rest of the industry is (or at least should be) scrambling to catch up with. An interface any less genius would have made Sins a real chore to play. As it is, the scope of the game makes the interface only sufficient, but even that is a tremendous achievem

Congratulations Stardock on the best strategy game not just of 2008, but of all time.

[quote who="BaggerX" reply="6" id="1984102"]Quoting FCN_Athena, reply 5 I really disagree with the idea of mines being used to make an entire grav well dangerous. Mines should be used for tactical advantage, just like other defenses. I think whoever was talking about improving the ability to lay mines to create barriers (e.g. being able to draw lines which the minelayers will use as guides for laying them) was right on the money. They should be used to force the en

[quote who="PurplePaladin" reply="25" id="1981606"]This discusion sounds simular to pirates; some like them, some really disliked them. So, I hope they will at least put a toggle, Mines/No Mines, just like pirates. That's one sure way to please the "Underminers". [/quote] I disagree agree for two reasons: 1) The vast majority of players really like mines; they just don't like the way they're currently implemented. That's what beta is for. When the game is rele

[quote who="Shadowhal" reply="23" id="1981052"] make the vasari (and possibly the advent, however they work) version work the same way as tec. it is an ability, it has to be manually selected, it costs something and it places a small field of like 10 mines where you want it. [/quote] I absolutely agree. A thought on mine caps: everyone seems to agree we should have them; the difficulty facing Ironclad is: what should it be? I propose adding a Fleet Logistic line for

Lots of great responses. Shadow_of_Light, your post makes a lot of sense. It's just annoying to watch your ships die to mines because you didn't (or in some cases, in spite of your best) annoyingly micromanage. lamdaman: Good post. You touch on an issue that runs, perhaps, a bit deeper. Advent mines are a bit different; this post adresses TEC and Vasari mines. ANNOYING MINE PLACEMENT MICRO: As this thread has established, mines are about denying a

While I don't necessarily agree with you Slinky that mines become inneffective with that ability - since all the ability does is automate what you would tell your ships to do anyway - I do agree that it would take all the fun out of it. You build mines to make enemies go boom. So I stand corrected. Changing ship behavior probably isn't the answer; changing mine behavior probably is. There are a lot of ways to de-clunkify a lot of the aspects of mines (I'm thinking TEC mines he

Windmage - thanks for your input. 1) If the mines are invisible, this behavior would have no effect. But when visible - and they very often are - such a behavior could save a lot of tedium. It certainly couldn't hurt. 2) It's hardly the same thing - explore autocast sends the scout to another gravity well and is useful for keeping your intel up to date and scouting the map at the beginning. Minesweeper autocast keeps the scout in the gravity well and is solely useful for

One of the things I love about Sins is that micro can give you an edge but it isn't necessary. You can just send a fleet to attack and the fleet AI is smart enough that you dont necessarily have to worry about it. But you CAN - through focus firing and careful use of abilities - get an edge in combat. Such micro is fun; it's about decisions and timing as opposed to tedious, repetitive tasks. As currently implemented, clearing and avoiding minefields and launching torpedoes are tedi

I didn't get that ... was able to rebuild the refunded mines. tbh, I've been using the exploit to spam money so I can check out all the cool techs. : x But this will get old by game 2.

1) Build a minefield (for 1000 credits, etc) 2) Right click the minefield button once, taking one of the ten mines off the queue. You get a full refund of 1000 credits. Take all the mines off for a 10,000 credit refund on a 1000 credit investment. I love Entrenchment so far! And Sins is my favorite of approximately thirty strategy games I've seriously played. A real achievement; kudos.