mbar8

Not sure about starbases but the 25% reduction with enemies in gravity well does not apply to capital ships from what I've seen. They only get the 50% from being under direct attack. Only light carriers seem to get the stacked 38% reduction. Thanks for explaining where the 38% comes from Annatar.

You press the plus/equals key repeatedly during load screens to make it go faster!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

[quote]I think Impulse is moving along nicely (IE dependancy no withstanding...). I use both Steam and Impulse and cannot wait for Impulse to have content parity with Steam so i can buy a few games they already have....and hoping for a few they don't. Enjoy! [/quote] I second that. Hey I'm an advocate for Steam and I think they offer a great service. Impulse though has taken digital distribution to the next level by allowing you to download and activate your product t

Okay. I changed my mind. What DID you say to get them so mad?

[quote] I've read probably a billion comments on what to do (if anything) about this issue and its been debated endlessly here at Ironclad as well. Anyways, here it was is changing in the 1.03 patch: -Carrier's squadron buildrate penalty with enemy units in the gravity well reduced from 25% to 15%. Now before I'm bombarded with another billion comments, let me explain the situation and why we've made this course correction.[/quote] Thanks for making a twea

[quote]Either remove the flak frigs, or swap the fighters for bombers. Until then you're drawing play balance conclusions based upon a player imposed imbalance. The bombers would be much more resistant to the flak frigs, allowing them to survive longer and do more damage and give an overall better showing - despite the fact that they are the "wrong" counter to LRFs.[/quote] When fighters are replaced with bombers they do last longer and will destroy over half the LRMs but the LRM fle

[quote who="Cephelo" reply="23" id="2247451"] .OK, now try setting up a fight that isn't rigged to make your point. Take the same 19 LRF and 6 flak up against 7 carriers with 14 squads of bombers - let's see how that turns out eh?[/quote] Nah. How about you do it then let us all know. The "rig" is this, fighters are the hard counter to LRFs. Knowing that then what do I need to do to protect them? They need flak. The point being I was not trying to prove anything when

Shadow of the Colossus on PS2. Wow! You almost can't believe a PS2 is running it and it oozes style from every pore. Huge open environments. It could be basiclly described as a game with about 12 boss battles. I avoid games with boss battles like the plague because I hate them but SotC is way different. Each Colossus is enormus and to kill it you have to find a way to climb onto it and crawl over it's body to hit it's tatooed weak spots. Getting onto and crawling over t

Well I intended to safely tuck away my 1.16 and 1.02 backups as a benchmark. I want to see what the new missile barrage graphic will look like but that's about it. Then I'm rolling back to the 1.16 and 1.02 version I think. I won't be buying any more micro expansions until balance is addressed. The speed reduction of carriers seems to be more of a personal choice of the devs rather than a response to the customers.

Good point. I hadn't considered scuttle time. I guess I was thinking more along the lines that fighters should have the flak counter and be suppressable just not as easily as they are in Entrenchment. With the whacked balance issuse introduced in Entrenchment I'm almost sorry I bought it.

There is a saying attributed to the NASCAR racer Dale Earnhardt. "It doesn't matter whether the fans are cheering or booing as long as they are making noise."

[quote]All that needs to be fixed is flak vs fighter right now. If this was fixed lrf could be countered without bringing back old build rates.[/quote] I agree with this. I think most understand the idea of build rate penelties durning battle. It commits you to fighters or bombers. But but being able to very hard counter 100 fleet supply of carrier fighters with 25 fleet supply of flak is not balanced by any stretch IMHO.

Ah that takes me back. I loved watching Starblazers as a kid. The Yamato (Argo) is one of my favorite starships.

Mazra Missile Barrage: The hard counter to frigate spam.

This change to carriers is probably a good thing if you are talking about Sins 1.16 to 1.17. But add Entrenchment buid rate penalties and you have just removed the LRF counter. Now the build order will be LRF then HC and maybe a smattering of support cruisers to augment the repair and firepower of those two units. I hope I'm wrong but I really doubt it. I think EadTaes is right in saying that before all this carrier nerfing there was a counter to them. Light frigates had the speed and

I think I understand slowing carriers down if we are talking regular Sins. But this change added to the build rate nerf in Entrenchment is puzzling. This double whammy will make carriers very unappealing except as a mobile hanger. They are slower than LRF now making the LF useless as it's counter. I think the Mazra adjustments are inline with what the "Nerf the damn Mazra" thread has "wanted" It at least gives the opponent a more visible cue and time to react. You'd still have to pay

Well I guess I can keep spamming those LRFs cause now LRFs will be able to overtake kited carriers. And the point to LF will be what now? Hello. Is this thing on?

[quote]Here is the replay http://tinyurl.com/jj-advent 18 lums vs 24 assailants (4 lums survive) and 30 lums vs 30 assailants (17 lums survive)[/quote] But if Vasari has teched up with phase missiles what would be the results? I mean I know you could ask that of just about any tech but don't Vasari players tech phase missiles rather quickly?

I'd say you'll be fine. I run Sins mainly on my laptop which is a 1.66 Duel Core with Intel graphics and only 2 GB memory. The game runs much better than other games when comparing the recommended minimum requirements. I'd say memory is one of the bigger performance enhancers for Sins and 4 GB should run nicely. But if you really want to make sure a demo of sins is available. I always try before I buy.

I mentioned this in another thread but I'd like to see fleets turn together like a school of fish instead of like they're being lead on a leash by the lead ship.

Sounds like an interesting idea. It would also be nice when LFs are made into a fleet that they would all turn at the same time like a school of fish. Currently they all follow the lead frigates old way point path which slows their turning down even more.

A Mazra is the strongest neutral planet cleaner you can get. You can send it in on it's own and for the most part it can be left alone while you focus on other needs. Terran and Desert planets will need caution and maybe 1 or 2 trips to a repair bay before they can be cleared. Sova is very good if you pick Missile Battery as it's ability and suprisingly is only second to Mazra in it's ability to clear neutrals. Akkan is also stronger than it first may apear but you may have to move it into th

[quote]I think that the build penalty should be only for carriers that are engaged. Or they are in the midst of a battle. If there is a battle going on in a grav well and your carriers are in said grav well but they are on the far side of the grav well from the battle then they should not have a build penalty. So they should make it so there is a build penalty on a carrier ONLY if enemy units (should include SC) are within a certain range of said carrier.[/quote] That would be fine wi

[quote]Y'think it would work if this was actually attempted? The hard-counter system always felt rather 'lazy' to me... 'Why does X counter Y?' 'Um, because we said so. So we gave it double damage.'[/quote] I would really like the info on ships and counters to be up front and make sense. I think LRMs and LFs would both have their place in REAL strategy. LFs are short range but fast. LRMs have long range and more fire power but take FOREVER to cross a gravity well. This is GREAT!!! So

I play single player so apparently my opinion means very little to some, however I will post my thoughts. In the recent version of Sins 1.16 and Entrenchment 1.02 a build rate penalty was implimented to stikecraft and a bit of a buff added to flak range and power. Many feel the buff to flak is good and was needed. However fighters are the hard counter to LRMs and because of the combination of buff to flak and build rate penalty to strikecraft it makes it possible to focus on building LRMs if