Cykur

I have to acknowledge how powerful Distortion Field is, but you do have to bring a good number of subverters and use some micro to manage it. They go down pretty fast, and are also susceptible to antimatter draining, etc. I play Vasari a lot, and if I didn't have either Subverters or RA to count on, Vasari would be pretty screwed late game. Of course, on the rare game that I manage to get BOTH going, yeah, it does feel pretty insanely OP -- but I'm already winning by that point usually. <

The fix would be to have a way to flag a planetary system to be avoided by autopathing so ships take the longer route. I requested this in the first wishlist I wrote back when we were playing 1.02. Of course, no one should give bad move orders, but when ships are set to rally to a fleet, it is really annoying when they sometimes shift their route to go through the pirates and you lose a couple ships before you see what is happening. A simple way to flag a system as "Avoid" would be gr

You might want to lock the AI's to their own team so they can't decide to ally against you. Once you win a game like that, then think about playing with them unlocked

An ignore command would be good. Also, I have had problems with people who jump into the game channel while trying to set up a game and harass / spam the people waiting for the game to launch. The ability to kick people from the channel you created would be nice too -- but this is more complicated, so a simple ignore feature would probably suffice.

[quote]I would nominate Maelstrom for 3v3. I'm surprised people like Entanglement over Maelstrom.The nice thing about Maelstrom is that while there ARE planets to expand to, every HW has 3 possible directions to be concerned with, and neighbors are not far away. This creates opportunities to either expand, attack, or fortify depending on what strategy someone is employing. What Clan are you representing so I can color code it correctly?[/quote] Clan X

I would nominate Maelstrom for 3v3. I'm surprised people like Entanglement over Maelstrom. The nice thing about Maelstrom is that while there ARE planets to expand to, every HW has 3 possible directions to be concerned with, and neighbors are not far away. This creates opportunities to either expand, attack, or fortify depending on what strategy someone is employing.

[quote]Tradeports are simply spam them everywhere. Refineries are based on supply and demand. say you have a bunch of metal and no crystal and one ice planet. the ice planet gets a refinery maybe 2. in addition to it's tradeport.[/quote] Actually, if you were just covering the ice planet and not much else, a tradeport would still be better because you can just buy the crystal off the black market with the money. However, if you could cover a couple ice planets and another neighboring p

https://forums.sinsofasolarempire.com/306945

[quote]A refinery uses every extractor in the current and neighboring systems. Each extractor can support[B] 1[/B] refinery, and neutral extractors can support 4. So if you have a few worlds and can place a refinery to cover them all, you only need them at one world.[/quote] [quote]Cykur, each owned extractor can support 3 refineries... you must've made a mental type there, eh.[/quote] Ouch! Good catch! I have no clue how I typed 1 instead of 3!!

[quote]Cykur, how often do you go past the simple TEC trade-port technology on their empire tree? Sure, in multi-star systems you'll probably go all the way to pervasive economy...in which case your whole tidbit about getting the refinery tech for cargo-expansion is true...[/quote] Damn straight it is true, you just answered your own question about technology amortization. [quote]In a long game a good spot usually presents itself. Small games, you probably won't even get around

[quote]I have a few questions: Distance of trade routes = Each of your planets in a "line" that has a trade port is part of a "trade route"? Is another player necessary, or can your planets just trade with themselves? Secondly, does distance of refinery to extractor effect income rate, or is it the same? IE, Is it beneficial for two planets linked phase-wise, lets say an ice and a metal, to both have their own 3 refineries, or better for just one? [/quote] Yes, each planet in a lin

[quote]One of the problems with refineries, relative to trade-posts, which you don't address here is the amortization cost of the research per refinery/trade-post built.[/quote] This argument doesn't hold at all. As TEC, you have to research refineries before you can research huge cargo holds. I think it is pretty clear no one uses refineries in short games -- I certainly don't. But in long games, you will research refineries just to get the massive boost from huge cargo holds that a

[quote]Your rate resource gain can never hope to match your credit income....if you are really hurting for metal/crystal just use the money you earned with trade ports and buy them.[/quote] Did you read any of this? lol...I just explained it. This isn't always true, even in 1.03. And with the expected black market price adjustments in 1.04, it won't be true either. You spam tradeports, but pick a few good locations for refineries -- don't spam them.

[quote]I think refinery price should be lowered in 1.04. There is no point in them costing nearly twice what trade ports do.[/quote] Actually if Black Market resource prices have their low range go up, say from ~300 to ~500, a well placed refinery will be a no brainer and will actually pay for itself faster than a tradeport. At ~300 buy price, the refinery produces 1.8 cr/s value, but at ~500 buy price, it will produce 3.0 cr/s value. At that production rate, even adjusting for the hi

Vasari have Subverters

Yeah, I have posted several times over the last couple weeks that refineries are not as bad as people make them out to be. When well placed, they are actually more profitable than tradeports. And they are especially valuable if someone is playing an epic sized single player game that takes hours. I almost never build them for multiplayer, the games are too short. That said, you have to understand where to put the refinery...if it isn't carefully placed, it is a waste of credits and s

No espionage, but the Advent Revelation gets a nice ability to see any planet they want for a brief time. It recharges fast, so it lets you look anywhere on the map you want. (I always am surprised when I see people listing this as a useless ability, it rocks.) With 1.03 resources on the Black Market are so cheap it is very effective to have tons of tradeports and buy what you need whenever you see a price crash.

Well, you don't spam refineries, that is for sure. The nice thing about tradeports is they are kind of no brainers, and under most circumstances, superior to refineries. They are also superior early game. You also want at least one in most systems to create a longer trade route. Now, assuming one is awash in cash, I don't think we would value resources as less than 300cr per 100 resource. I know I tend to buy freely whenever I see it has fallen below 350ish on the black market.

OK, 2 comments: First, Advent and Vasari are both weaker than TEC economically. Until Vasari get RA, at which point they get free ships, so you can argue that ultimately, if the game goes on long enough, Advent appears to be the weakest. BUT The Allegiance upgrade of 10% is actually pretty huge. It doesn't seem like much in your capital, going from 100% to 110%, but if it takes a periphery world from 40-50% or 50-60%, that is a pretty huge econ boost, all for a techn

Devastator hands down. I make Desolators if I start doing well. =) Some people really like the Whale and the Marauder. I don't know anyone who likes the carrier capship.

Significantly bending space time seems to be the trick though. Anyone have a smallish singularity I could borrow?

You can do well with a small highly developed empire as long as you use it to destroy the bigger guy before he turns into a big highly developed empire. If you develop a strong trade and research infrastructure while the other guy is expanding, sometimes this pays off. I have seen many multiplayer games where one team expands too rapidly and can't hold the worlds from the team that took their time and went military. Then there are other games where a player expands faster BUT does hold it and

Scouts, huh? The scout explosives cool down is actually 10+ minutes, I'm pretty sure....and they have to sit there for a while to place the explosives, which usually involves some of them getting chewed up. I find you need a lot of extra scouts to succeed. It is a pretty good tactic when you catch an RA in infancy...but kind of difficult to completely shut down a larger infrastructure, unless it is completely undefended -- and that could still call for 100 scouts to get the phase gates and en

1) The "community" isn't united to begin with..so when you say "dividing it" I think you mean something else. 2) Why would Ironclad shoot themselves in the foot by arbitrarily changing major mechanics of a game that people like? Unless of course they were making the game better. 3) Considering you make huge posts about things you WANT changed, maybe you should make a definitive list of things you DON'T WANT changed. 4) Ninjas will force you to install the expansion - especially

Chasington: First, I never did get around to testing phase missiles myself, but ASSUMING these are the right mechanics, your math is still wrong: 60% Mitigation means only 40% damage is getting through -- you should be multiplying by 0.4. Your numbers are correct for 40% mitigation. At 60% mitigation we get: (A) = 5.2 (B) = 5.5 If mitigation is 80%: (A) = 2.6 (B) = 4 This just shows that if phase missiles bypass mitigation, the