Hound

Played with Vasari mines some more. A single offensively laid Vasari mine left 20 cobalts with about 30 hull each. A second detonation wiped them all out. A full squadron of homing Advent mines can probably destroy one cobalt. The power gap between these two is much too big. The Vasari mines have gamebreaking potential while the Advent mines are useless for the cost. I'd imagine the TEC mines are closer to the Vasari but TEC can only do it when they are defending and the constructors

Couple more problematic scenarios: - Vasari mines being used in large fleet engagements. With many ships on the screen, you won't notice a Ruiner laying mines on top of your ships before it's too late. It's too easy to pull off and there's no downside since your own ships won't even take damage. - Having carrier spam sit in a minefield while their fighters destroy everything. Ok it only works for Vasari but the only way to get to the carriers would be to bring a scout and clea

The SB constructor does not need to disappear after it finishes the SB. You could just use the same one to build more Starbases.

This is what I've learned about mines after playing beta 2.5: Mines are best used offensively. They cost so much you need them to blow things up - otherwise they are a waste of resources. The cost makes it appropriately expensive to mine jump-in spots but it's still annoying that you have no choice but to jump in a minefield even if you know it's there. There should be a way to prevent that. Vasari mines are very powerful and have great fleet wrecking potential. Freshy deploye

[quote who="kyogre12" reply="10" id="2051142"] This last thing is a little off-topic, but does it bug anyone else when the torpedo frigates attack your ships? It doesn't do much, but the massive explosions block your veiw and prevent you from telling what's going. [/quote] I just had my Adjudicators go crazy attacking a little constructor because they had no other targets. It sure looked flashy for dealing 1 point of damage per shot. I'd rather they didn't fir

No but you can build a defensive base while your planet is under attack. The first thing a smart attacker destroys is your constructors. If you can't build a single turret or repair bay why should you be able to build a massive Starbase?

I still think Starbases should be built like any other structure. What is really annoying is the race against time to hunt down the SB constructor frigate before it magically turns into a rapidly growing Starbase when it had 50 hull left. The Vasari don't even have to move the constructor, it can turn into a Starbase as soon as it comes out of the Frigate Factory. And once the Starbase is under construction it is ridiculously hard to destroy before it is finished. You need mas

I don't like it how Starbases are nothing but sitting ducks after the fighters have been dealt with. It's not really hard to bring enough fighters or flak and then bring in the torpedo cruisers. The SB's cost SO much to upgrade they should be able to reach the Torpedo Cruisers with their "extreme" long range weapons. Torpedo cruisers would still own every other orbital structure and make for good hit and run tactics against lightly defended worlds. And they would still snipe a

Carriers are unable to launch strikecraft in Plasma Storms but the Transcencia SB I built in one could launch its squadrons. Shouldn't the storm affect the SB's strikecraft as well? And I wish the Transcencia would start without squadrons so they wouldn't be "wasted" if you build it in a Plasma Storm. It could have more plasma firepower instead.

I think the dead crew pool is ship specific. If your level X Radiance blows up you can only resurrect another Radiance to level X. All the dead crews are stored and resurrectable but you have to build the same caps that died to get the benefits of Resurrection. Can someone confirm this?

In beta2 it seems that Starbases are a hard counter to fleets. You'll lose so many ships it's not worth it to engage a Starbase unless you have won the game already. Torpedo Cruisers on the other hand are a hard counter to Starbases. A Starbase does not even get a chance to fight back. So a Starbase goes from being completely overpowering to completely defenseless. I think it would be better if this dynamic was a little less extreme. I don't think a massively expensive Starbas

I don't think the devs need any defending Annatar. I'm sure they know it wasn't the best possible way to handle things. And I'm perfectly relaxed, thank you. :)

And hopefully there was a lesson learned and next time the new ICO and the new patch will go live simultaneously .

I don't think I have ever crashed in 1.12. Today I can't suddenly finish a game without minidumping. It seems the games crash for everyone. Could this have something to do with the ICO maintenance yesterday?

You have to watch the replay (and hope it works). As Advent, it's easy to counter another Advents Illuminator spam with carriers. Depending on the map, it's sometimes a good idea to expand with a colony cap on one front and a colony frigate on another. Especially if there are neutral resources and you have to build a colony frigate for those - you might as well speed up your expansion. Colonize bigger worlds with the Mothership and asteroids with the Missionary. Neutral resources are

The strong point of the Gauss gun is the really short cooldown. It can deal lots of damage quickly especially to structures and with Flux Field / Finest Hour it's just lethal. I'd still like to see the Damage on the Nano Disassembler cut because using the Evacuator feels like cheating.

The damage on Nano Disassembler is way too high considering it bypasses mitigation and also gives a significant armor penalty. It should be around 200/400/600 instead of 600/900/1200. Lvl 3 Nano Bomb pops frigates in one go and wrecks caps very quickly. Lvl3 Nano Bomb is also much stronger than Vulkoras' lvl 6 Disintegration which is just wrong.

Once you have been wiped out you have the option of sitting there feeding your team until it ends. Or doing what little you can. Then the whole team can surrender at the same time when it's clear it's gg. Why would you even quit or surrender before the winner has been decided? If your team wins it's still a win for all team members.

That was a good read, thanks Cyk. I think Marza is the best early cap killer though. It can effortlessly wreck a Radiance in spite of the AM burn and it even beats the Egg with Nano bomb. Last time I fought a lvl 1 Marza with my lvl 1 Radiance I tried everything - staying out of the Marza's frontal firing arc and using my side batteries, detonating all its AM.. nothing helps. I wish the Marza would at least turn slower so that an intensively microed anti-capital ba

Exactly. You need three level 6 Revelation Battlecruisers where a single lvl 6 Marza or Vulkoras will do. Revelation = horribly useless siege cap. Buff Hysteria, pls. [e digicons]>_>[/e]

Dunov can restore Starbase shields in Entrenchment. And shielded structures of an Advent ally.

Strikecraft should definitely have a price tag attached to them. But individual rebuilding costs are too complicated for Sins. Instead, make carriers cost 20% more fleet supply which translates into credits/metal/crystal per second. This would represent the cost of constantly rebuilding strikecraft.

Trinity = Radiance, Rapture, Progenitor Radiance uses Animosity -> enemy focus fires on Radiance Rapture uses Vengeance -> Radiance retaliates focus fire damage Progenitor uses Malice -> Retaliated damage is propagated for more damage It's not as effective as you'd expect.

[quote who="P5yy" reply="6" id="2015813"]Get rid of win loss stats altogther replace it with Hours spent playing the game.. 1-10 hours = ensign 11hours-100 hours = luitenant 101 hours - 500 hours = commander This way if a noob wants to improve his ranking , quiting is the last thing he wants to do because he doesnt rake up the hours. Also eliminates the problem of failed restart games giving ranks.[/quote] Sou

The only relevant stat is the number of games played. IC should just get rid of the wins and losses and stupid behavior like that along with them.