Culture is slow-acting and there are lots of ways to stop it. It's not bad, but don't make it the centerpiece of your strategy. It's more useful for boosting your own loyalty than it is for lowering enemy loyalty. Advent in particular is militarily weak in the early-game, so you have [i]very[/i] little leeway for non-military expenditures.
[quote] is do sins for xbox 360[/quote] Not happening. Consoles have [i]atrociously[/i] low RAM and Sins as we know it would be infeasible. Sins Rebellion has a [i]minimum[/i] spec of 2 GB of RAM, and recommends 4 GB. [quote]would fun to see sins on your tv[/quote] You could always hook up your computer to do this if you like.
[quote]carrier pretty much useless unless you already have a fleet ready[/quote] Uh, what? The carriers are fairly potent stand-alone forces with superb firepower from their strike craft. Certainly you must be cautious around an enemy fleet with an unsupported carrier, but they're rip through militia. The Kol is a joke against militia; it has durability but its damage output is a fraction of a Sova equipped with missile platforms (seriously, three bomber squadron
Unless you're really into this kind of RTS, that's probably the best course of action. If this game had come from a smaller or newer developer I'd be praising it unconditionally right now. But Blizzard has a reputation and resource pool that raises those expectations substantially, and I really feel they just barely cleared the hurdle with Starcraft 2. I will tell you that at this point in Warcraft III's lifespan I was hooked and playing nothing else, but I
That actually only makes things worse as far as my complaint goes: that it trivializes logistics planning for these structures.
[quote]To be honest, if you're Advent and are facing a skilled Vasari enemy somewhat close by, you're pretty much out of luck anyway[/quote] Actually if you're [i]really[/i] close Advent may be in luck. You can really choke a Vasari with cost-effective disciples and seekers. Balance your proportions based on how many assailants he has. The more assailants he adds, the more seekers you build. Just go for pure masses of units, and the technolo
The first pirate raid at the 15-minute mark is basically a game-ender if someone gets hit in a bad spot, and after that they're horribly insignificant. Pirates just don't play very well in competitive multiplayer.
[quote]Darvin3: I think the term is 'turtling'? I like to completely take over the first system I am in, fortifying the crap out of an upgrading all of the colonisable caps and then just take over the critical bits in the other systems.[/quote] Sure, that's cool if you want to play that way, and I don't want to come off as somehow knocking you down. However, this is going to take a [i]really long time[/i] which is going to give even low-difficulty AI's plenty
Indeed; multiplayer uses faster. You might [i]occasionally[/i] get people to go with fast, but faster is generally the default. All game-speeds are playable and the game will have a different feel and pacing to it depending on which you play.
[quote]Hate to bring this up again, but wouldn't Z-Axis be considered cheating? We all want a fair game, no?[/quote] Exploits are not explicitly "cheating". Definitely this would be considered very low.
This is great news.
Due to the way multiplayer RTS games are designed these days, attempting to create units or extra resources will just desync the game and cause the hacker to disconnect. A "map-hack" to reveal the entire galaxy would certainly be possible, and I'm sure there are ways to intentionally crash the game, but that's about all that a hacker could achieve.
[quote]Also, the difficulty seems to have been given an steroid injection as I'm now being bombareded by the novalith cannon by easy AI![/quote] Uh... how long are you leaving it alone for? I play against the higher difficulty AI's, and I rarely see superweapons until after the 2-hour mark. That should give you more than sufficient time to be ready for them to come online. Anyways, if you don't like superweapons you probably shouldn't be playing multi
[quote]The new Diplomacy system makes it so that pacts and even treaties are more valuable and secure than before. I actually kind of like it for FFA.[/quote] Totally in agreement; Diplomacy works very well for FFA, but that's not really practical for most multiplayer games simply due to game-duration.
[quote]Please, no one reply to this thread . It's time for it to rest. (anyone who posts again will get the frownie as well)[/quote] [e digicons]>:([/e] [e digicons]>:([/e] [e digicons]>:([/e] [e digicons]>:([/e] Stop replying to this [i]horrendously[/i] outdated thread. Most of the information is [i][b] no longer applicable to the current version of the game [/b][/i]. I'm actually
[quote]It will be interesting to see what will happen to the game and community now that the game is now available on Steam.[/quote] Indeed; I expect to see quite a few new posts this weekend. I'll be keeping tabs on the strategy forums and answer any questions people may have.
While I totally agree with your position on logistics, Seleuceia, I believe your proposed changes would trivialize logistics planning with regards to labs and factories. With that said, I believe this is a discussion that needs to be happening and I certainly hope the devs are paying attention. Trade ports have gotten out of control with faster game speed, but they've always been a problem.
The viability of refineries depends on a lot of factors. Your credit:resource income ratio, how many good locations you have to build them, logistics saturation, opportunity cost versus trade in more marginal locations, and lots of other little factors all have a big overall impact on refinery viability. The big problem is that for small early-game empires most of those factors are decisively in favour of trade, so it's actually rather uncommon for an empire to find itself in
[quote]I imagine the GameStop guys would have quite a bit of reason to prevent that kind of thing from happening. That maybe the very problem they were talking about.[/quote] Frankly I'm surprised Gamestop didn't pull some strings to keep Sins as an exclusive. Now that Stardock isn't competing with other digital distributors it's a no-brainer for them to be available through all channels. The only real loser here is Gamestop, which just lost their only sign
Worth noting that a lot of weird unit prototypes were unveiled prior to SC2's original beta that didn't make the final release (anyone remember the lame "Soul Hunter" that rode a hoover-board and shot electricity out of his hand?) Not only that, but many of these units may end up being campaign-only. I'd really only give any of these units a 25% chance of actually being available in online multiplayer.
Good micro in Sins is the difference between victory and defeat. It's all about position and tactics, trying to move individual units to mitigate enemy damage output and maximize your own. Most units are forward shooters and have sluggish turn speeds. Just because the game moves in slow motion doesn't mean there isn't micromanagement.
[quote]I'd rather build battleships, but seeing as carriers are so OP'd, guess I ain't got a choice should I make the mistake of going to ICO...[/quote] Battleship opener is a double-whammy, not only is it just weaker than a carrier opener in general, but it is also [i]countered[/i] by a carrier opener. The Kortul is the only battleship remotely viable as a multiplayer opener, since it balances its offensive and defensive capabilities with a reasonable antimatter ove
[QUOTE]Cool. Well give me time, buddy. I'll try to catch up and hopefully be another good challenge or ally for you. I'm determined to become a better player and hopefully master each empire.[/quote] I know where you're coming from. I had to pick up this game, too, at one point. I've got a more extensive multiplayer background, so I was ready to jump into the multiplayer fray early, and I was [i]still[/i] taken aback by focus fire. The AI deceives you
[quote]At the risk of rebuke, I've found that even an Easy AI has been a challenge[/quote] I eat unfair difficulty AI's for breakfast, so our game experience is worlds apart. [quote]I've not experienced that, but again, I'm fairly new and still playing at an easy level[/quote] You haven't experienced the true difficulty this game has to offer until you've had 80 LRM frigates or 80 squadrons of bombers all attacking your capital ship. This
[quote]I reckon they should have a nude ability to entice the other 2 male races.[/quote] Who says the Vasari are male? Maybe a deep raspy voice is a really feminine trait for their species? In all seriousness, lore-wise the upper ranks of Advent society are primarily female, but it's not a 100% deal. Same goes for the TEC; they seem to have a cultural bias (similar to modern western society) that military service and higher political leadership is primar
