DanielZKlein

I wonder why these are all such huge games. Is no one playing 1v1 or 2v2? These 5v5 or 4v4 games are impossibly hard to follow (too many things going on at once) and can sometimes be a bit random.

Cool, and there also seem to be a few others sharing replays in that thread. Thank you Carbon and Astax! I still think that using a service where replays can be linked to more easily (and rated etc) would be preferrable, but at least this way I get a few replays ;)

Seriously, is there no replay watching/sharing culture in this game? I find this very weird for a game with such heavy bias on multiplayer and such great replay controls. There is the WinCustomize page which lists replays and is, I guess, kind of official. However, for the year of 2009 (which we're more than a quarter of the way through now), there is a grand total of 2 replays... one for the Entrenchment beta, and one of some guy playing against the AI in Entrenchment

None of this agrees with what I've been observing in Sins 1.16/Entrenchment 1.02 so far. Even when massively behind the player, the AI does not surrender. I've literally had a situation of me owning 14 planets against the AI being stranded with no fleet on only their home planet, with their resource asteroids bare and no orbital structures whatsoever, and still the AI would not surrender. I wonder if the routines that decide whether or not the AI surrenders could someho

So I heard Ironclad had taught the AI how to surrender. I don't think they have. Has anyone seen this happening? I had a game just now where I played on a very small map, immediately rushed the AI's only planet, destroyed their fleet and their capital ship, then took out all their production facilities and destroyed 3 of their 4 mining buildings. At this point I pulled my fleet back and waited. There was absolutely no way for the AI to get back into the game, and they didn't seem to be trying

To be honest, I don't really see the point in building defense guns (gauss, beam, missile) in multiplayer. With their small range it's so easy to go around them, draw the enemy out etc. Repair bays I find last quite a while to LRMs, especially if your fleet is there, picking off the lrms, and even more so if you have two repair bays that can repair each other. Hangars full of fighters of course rape lrms, as well they should. You know I read a post somewhere else on these forums suggest

Here's the problem: for most races, the long range frigate is the first military frigate you CAN research (next to siege, which is not useful in combat). To have THAT counter something much further down the line (support) is pointless. It needs to counter the main unit type or else the research would be wasted in any fast paced game. Also, look at what else you have. You have specialized anti-fighter units, which are good against large groups of units, but from your "realistic" point of view I d

As for the damage reverie should require to snap out of it, it's 200/400/600, but as I said that's currently bugged.

Hey :) A lot of your answers can be found in the entity files you can download from the sticky in the strategy forum. I'm by no means a good player, but I understand some of these things, so here we go: Vertigo is AoE, aoe ranges are 2000/2500/3000. For comparison's sake, the Disciple has a fire range of 3500, so at level three the radius of the circle of Vertigo's AoE is only slightly smaller than that. That's a pretty big area. Reverie is probably the most overpowered capital

There are similarities, but you're trying too hard. First of all, wc3 units are by far more diverse than SoaSE units. If you think Crypt Fiend and Huntress belong in the same category, you haven't played the game much. Secondly, SoaSE's carriers are conspicuously absent from your overview, and here's why: they don't have an analogue in wc3. Next, wc3 has an unforgiven tech race. Once your enemy goes to tier 3, you pretty much HAVE to go tier 3 as well. As far as I can tell, this isn't quite the

We played a very cool game tonight. After setting the game up in #sins on irc.stardock.com, we had a very interesting 2v2. It was TEC and Vasari vs TEC and Advent (I think [Ray]Therlun went random). Basically the game turned into two 1v1s with a minimum amount of resource trading between the players. On the "left" side of the map, I fought tomet. I tried to do a decent expansion game while building up a fleet of assailants and tomet fast teched to Kodiaks, almost kicking my ass in

The best way to actually FIND an enjoyable game with people who know what they're doing is to come to the IRC channel #sins on irc.stardock.com and ask if anyone's up for a game. I find that on ICO I always run into folks who are either playing their first game of Sins or really didn't quite understand how an RTS works yet. The thing is that this kind of game is really boring to the more competitive player, so the players who've moved beyond this stage stop playing games on ICO.

There might be merit to your point generally, but I'd just like to point out that this bloodless sort of test badly reflects actual game reality. Focus fire alone can boost the performance of an army a lot, and if army A defeats army B in a straight no focus fire match, that doesn't mean army A will also defeat army B if they both focus fire, because then suddenly other things enter the equation. But yes of course in this case Advent is simply too weak because of the bug with illuminato

Hi, Since 1.03 came out, lots of people complained about the new black market, saying that it makes Credits way too important in comparison to Crystal/Metal. People also claimed that this made TEC much stronger than the other factions because they have the best Credit income (I assume this has to do with the early trade ports?) Now I really don't play much competitive SoaSE at all, so first I have a couple of really naive questions. Please bear with me: 1) What changes exact

Hey, I was playing a big FFA earlier today and I was allied with a friend of mine. We had practically won the game, fielding huge fleets of carriers/heavy cruisers against what amounted to tiny fleets of tier 1 units on the enemies' side. In the end there was an alliance of 3 players vs us and we were winning quite clearly, when suddenly my friend had his 24h disconnect and an AI took over for him. Instead of helping me wipe out the enemy, though, the AI suddenly turns against me for no r

I don't quite understand: Advent is at 75% hull and 75% shields? So all their ships got nerfed?

Okay, so it really had a lot to do with the map size. You've got to give the AI time to build up. That's what I wanted to know. Thanks! :)

I think you read a little too much into my post. I have absolutely none of the unrealistic expectations of game AI that you seem to think I have. Just as a quick aside: the comparison to Civ4 is completely pointless. Understand that the only reason I brought up Civ4 in my original post was as a success story for allowing players to fiddle with the AI. You also seem a little confused as far as the performance of the original Civ 4 AI goes--in short, it sucked big time. Difficulty in Civ4

Now I've read the dozens of threads of people that are disappointed with the AI in this game, and I agree with them. When 1.03 came out, I made a new game on Point Blank, the smallest scenario, vs one "Unfair" enemy, and it still felt like playing against an infant. I colonized my asteroid very slowly, then moved over to the AI's home with like 12 light and my cap, and what did the AI have? 3 light and 5 siege (?!). Of course he runs the moment I appear and I get to destroy his frigate factory a

The system described by OP is of course moronic as someone else already pointed out. You're just adding another step in conveying the momentum to your ship. Somehow the most stupidly easy solution does not occur to anyone: you shoot mass out the front of your ship and just use your ship's thrusters to counter the force. Those thrusters are already designed to accelerate that ship quite some, so they can easily counter that force. And yeah, remember that it's not speeds that are applied but momen

Cool, thanks. Next problem: after doing that, the map goes straight to a defeat screen, and if I click "continue playing" there, I see that the entire galaxy is empty. Did the .galaxy file format change? That would surprise me.

When I create a map in Galaxy Forge and put it into the Galaxy folder, it doesn't show up in game. It used to, in 1.02, and maps that worked in 1.02 don't show up anymore. Is this version related?

(Oh god, this turned into the OT from hell. Apologies to OP. Maybe I should take all this and make it into its own thread? Nah. Maybe later.) Reading these posts, I've been thinking about ways for us, the competitive players, to come up with such a system ourselves (at least for the time being), and I think I have a workable idea. I'm going to lay it out as it comes to me, so bear with me if it's not perfectly organized: There would be a webpage where you register with your Sta

So you're saying that essentially ICO doesn't really add any value to the game? I can't see joining random games with people who'll quit halfway through being much fun. In Battle.net, a disconnect meant a loss, no matter for what reason, so with the automated match making, once you got a few wins you'd move beyond the quitters and play other people who are serious about the game. I really can't imagine that this can be all that much trouble to code. Can anyone say anything POSITIVE abou

Hi, Let me start by saying that this game is fantastic. I've played it at a friend's place and I'm all but completely sure that I'll buy it the moment there's more than 18 eurobucks on my account again, which will be soon. I don't buy games often, being on a tight budget, and the last time I did shell out money for a game it was for Hellgate: London, so I'm somewhat scarred. (Yes, I've been flagshipped) Now for me the Single Player experience is irrelevant. I played one game agains