You are probably right that the secret message probably wasn't ever added, but I'm sure we'd all like some confirmation. I still hope that that we hear something from the devs. However, I fear that the cancellation of Sins of a Dark Age might threaten Ironclad's very existence.
No interest? I guess most people are over it, but considering how long it has been, I don't see any point in the devs remaining tight-lipped. They might as will just tell us. Or has there been a reveal that I missed? I'd just like some answers.
I know, I know. This has been discussed to death and no progress has been made (to my knowledge). If I recall correctly, however, the devs did say that clues about the threat were hidden in the game files. I don't think that anyone ever found anything (please correct me/show me if I'm wrong). I think that it is about time that the devs reveal the clues to us, if said clues exist at all. Please devs, just show us! It's pointless waiting for the community to find clues in th
[quote who="Wintercross" reply="188" id="3488712"] The Advent LRF with Beams could either be fixed forward firing requiring the ship be aligned right, or could be on slow moving turrets that would struggle to keep up with fast moving ships like Light Frigates and Corvettes. Assuming the Nitrous engine can handle it, Missiles could have a 'max tracking angle' [/quote] [quote who="Wintercross" reply="188" id="3488712"]Noth
[quote who="Volt_Cruelerz" reply="186" id="3488683"] True, but I still have concerns about such a system. I'm welcome to brainstorm on it to see what we can come up with though. What about the weapon type differences between factions? LRF use missiles yet Illuminators use Beams which personally seem like weapons that should easily carve up armor. It's not that think that this system couldn't work, it's just that it'll take a lot of wor
[quote who="Wintercross" reply="182" id="3488314"] I still think taking the approach of different weapon types and mounts having different turret tracking speeds and projectile speeds. That's one way to balance things out without using armor types. It allows weapons to miss and smaller fast ships to dodge the larger heavier guns. Even beam weapons that are pretty much instant hit, may not be able to move the turret very fast, or may be in a fixed position like the Kol
[quote who="Volt_Cruelerz" reply="181" id="3488292"] If they start from scratch on the mechanics, they will have to design all gameplay from scratch. The game fundamentally is its combat system. This is an RTS after all. Change it too much and it shouldn't bear the title of sequel; it should just be a new (albeit very fun) game. [/quote] I can see what you are saying, Sins 2 would have to be recognizably similar with the same sorts of
[quote who="Volt_Cruelerz" reply="177" id="3488256"] 1. sure, why not... I assume you're not talking Exodia-like auto-win if you get them all though[/quote] Good point, it could easily become either OP or worthless. Perhaps it would be easier to balance if individual artifact fragments were inert and can only function when assembled or the only benefit artifacts give are to some sort of 'prestige stat' which would effect diplomacy. [quote who="V
Personally, I would find it disappointing if whatever is chasing the Vasari is just another race. The Vasari have been fleeing for 10,000 years and they don't even know what the threat is. This can't be an ordinary threat. The only way I could see that working is if in Sins 2, the TR, AL and VL are all extinct, having been wiped out by the chasers. The TL, AR and VR survive only because they closely work together to finally defeat the chasers and possibly even merging into a single fa
Unfortunately, that wont work because regular DPS is largely irrelevant to cap ship function. The game is designed so that caps have less DPS per supply than frigates. A really fast cool-down time for its abilities would be useful though.
[quote who="N3rull" reply="83" id="3438992"] Are we still in agreement that rankulas is shit or...?[/quote] Yes. [quote who="Seleuceia" reply="86" id="3438992"] I have never seen a revelation in a skilled game[/quote] The problem with the Revelation is Guidance. All of its other abilities are fine but none make the Revelation worth it. Having no actual fleet firepower at all and no real bombing potential below level 6 kills the viability of this cap. Guid
New game mechanics that alter ship combat isn't going to happen, most likely. Information warfare as you propose doesn't really fit in the game in its current form, a sequel with differently structured core mechanics could implement information warfare though. The mystery 4th race won't be added, the devs did mention that clues about them were hidden somewhere. Incidentally, will the devs please give a clue as to where the information about the Vasari threat is? We can'
Yes, a single tech for phase missile block isn't enough. That is why there are multiple techs. It would be ridiculous for a single non-top tier tech to completely invalidate an entire upgrade path.
80-90% phase missile block is way too high and it would make all other phase missile block techs useless. Phase missile block should be a useful defense against phase missiles but it should not completely invalidate them. 20% block might not be that good but combined with other techs it would be.
Good post, OP. [quote quoting="ARESIV"] Give Advent a culture independent phase missile block technology [/quote] This is the best option IMO and could make phase missile nerfs unnecessary. I propose that Protection of the Unity should grant 8/16/24% phase missile block for AR. For AL, I propose that Ancient Retribution grants 24% phase missile block instead of a 2% shield mitigation buff. [quote quoting="ARESIV"] Disruptor Nanites does
There needs to be a coordinated effort to find the hint. Division of labour might make this less daunting.
[quote who="GoaFan77" reply="9" id="3316051"] But then you have the problem of if had a PJI built, you could then go over the tactical slot limit after researching BDJ. It just seems like an impractical way to balance this ability, and it's probably not possible as Sins has yet to have any structure change its slot values due to research or abilities.[/quote] If it goes over the tactical slot limit, the structure could just deactivate. Although I agree that it could be an imp
[quote who="GoaFan77" reply="5" id="3315666"] Quoting HouseRalan, reply 3increase the tactical slot count for the PJI. Though that would hurt all factions, not just the VR, and regardless if the VR has researched the tech or not.[/quote] If Bi-Directional Jamming increased the tactical slot count of the PJIs as a secondary effect, then that would solve it.
This issue is interesting, some thorough testing needs to be done. [quote who="Turchany" reply="1" id="3315312"]it is just worth nothing, it lasts only some seconds[/quote] Read before replying. [quote who="Turchany" reply="1" id="3315312"]Vasari has other way better OP tools [/quote] Just because there are other issues doesn't mean that this shouldn't be fixed.
[quote who="GoaFan77" reply="3" id="3312521"]Adding more tactical slots isn't bad. And while I think a tech should increase starbase upgrade slots, I think that deserves its own tech. If compartmentalization really needs more effect, just buff the cost discount.[/quote] Agreed. However, I think it is extremely unlikely that new techs would be added. These effects should be worked into existing techs. Maybe the extra slots could be granted by Twin Fortresses. [quote w
EDIT: TEC Loyalist section of OP updated. [quote who="Bilun" reply="100" id="3312823"]Your missing the joke- Beta 1 only had the TEC in it.[/quote] You had the decency to tell me when I've been trolled. Thanks. [quote who="ARESIV" reply="108" id="3312823"]A lower tier for the AL Damage techs would still be a good idea.[/quote] Lowering Fury's tier or shifting it to Hostility achieves a similar affect but in different ways. I would support any
[quote who="SithLordAJ" reply="87" id="3312318"]How so? You still need a heavy investment in culture to make fury happen where it will count.[/quote] I meant that moving Fury to the Hostility tree will solve the issue of AL needing too many labs to get their damage buffs. [quote who="Turchany" reply="91" id="3312318"]How so? You still need a heavy investment in culture to make fury happen where it will count.[/quote] How did I not notice . . . . Thanks. <
[quote who="ZombiesRus5" reply="82" id="3311716"]PLEASE move it to tier 2. It should also activate Assimilated Populace if researched[/quote] I've got Assimilated Populace and Repossession covered already. Suggested changes already noted. [quote who="ZombiesRus5" reply="82" id="3311716"]The fact still stands AL has to build 14 labs to get it's 30% damage bonus from rebellion, while TL only has to build 5 military labs. I'm not complaining about the damage b
A similar idea to that has been proposed for the Revelation's Guidance ability. I think that the concept could be worth doing but I'd rather see it attached to Confluence of the Unity or something instead.
Making GRG only effect hull is reasonable but keeping AFF as an active ability means that the Kol's issues with AM efficiency remain. Giving Militia Weapons and Armour a tier 0 affect would give the TL something unique at the start of the game. Group Shield can't stay online long enough often enough to make a real difference. I'm starting to prefer a different approach to Furious Defense. I think instead it might be a good change if it was made passive as s
