Peter Ebbesen

[quote]Finally, Annatar, you need to be civil and learn some basic manner for communication. To be honest, your writing style and use of similes are the worst I've ever seen. I completely understand Dorian's reactions to your post, becase I would behave same if I were him.[/quote] Are we thus to infer that you too would have told somebody else that their opinion was worthless because they did not prefer the same gamestyle as yourself and thus couldn't be assumed to evaluate things the

[quote who="Astax" reply="18" id="2064326"]He doesn't want you to adversly affect his experience ebcause you don't understand the delicate balance of the game that coems from two thinking players locked in a struggle where small advantage can lead to victory. With such a thin margin, any change, even small one, can through stuff out of whack. Previously complaints by single players has already caused grave changes to the game that impacted multiplayer adversly. [/quote]</p

[quote quoting="post"] 3. Starbases need the ability to inhibit phase jumps. This would increase their strategic value in uncolonizable systems tenfold. [/QUOTE] While you are right about their value in uncolonizable systems, that would make phase inhibitors worthless in other systems that host a starbase except as a backup. There seems to have been a deliberate design decision to make sure that starbases do not replace the existing tactical structures but supplement them

[quote who="Viramor" reply="14" id="2061376"]Torpedo cruisers also do far too much damage to cap ships, theyshouldn't be able to shoot anything other than structures.[/quote] Have you actually checked where the damage to your capital ships is coming from or have you been looking at the huge explosions? I'll freely admit that I have not conducted actual torpedo cruisers vs. cap ship tests, but unless there's something terribly wrong in the game, anti module attacks (such as the t

Wbino, do a mere 15 torpedo cruisers wipe out your own starbases in a minute - or are you talking about killing AI starbases? Are you talking about starbases that are part of a defense network with some mobile unit support or are you talking about starbases fighting alone? The purpose of static defenses have always been to secondarily free up mobile units and primarily delay the enemy by tieing them up in a position for some time, not to defeat an enemy on its own. <

Verybad, just how costly do you think the torpedo cruiser, that have the survivability of the LRM frigate and does negligible damage to everything except structures, should be? You can't make them very costly or change them to require large amounts of supply while still being so vulnerable or nobody will use them, since you'll be better off just buying ordinary frigates that can output serious damage to all types of ships. I'm not suggesting that the current pri

Look, it is completely irrelevant what "tech" setting the game is in - there are very few reasons for putting any sort of defense on the ground if it could be put in space instead. The foremost reason for doing it would be to repel a ground invasion: Active planet based defenses makes excellent sense when the assumption is that any enemy wants to take the planet mostly intact with an invasion force. It should be abundantly clear in Sins that this is not the case: eradicating the popul

The diplomacy is definitely the weakest aspect of gameplay in singleplayer, even beating out the pirate/bounty system - mainly because it has nothing to do with diplomacy and everything to do with fulfilling seemingly random objectives. Expect the AI to create mega alliances/cease fires against you unless you go out of your way to create your own big alliance (which is, in its own way, quite fun - for a very limited amount of time).

Minidumps are very normal in Entrenchment during the beta, though thankfully not as common in 2.5 as they were in 2.0. You are advised to package up the minidump files and send them to the support email address (I don't recall it right off, support@somethingorother) - you can find it in one of the stickied threads.

[quote quoting="post"] Do any women play Sins online ? I don't go around asking folks if they're guys or gals, but I get the sense that Sins online is almost exclusively a guys' game. Are there even any women playing it in single player? [/quote] It is very likely that there are many female players both in SP and MP as well as on the forums... who don't advertise their sex due to the utterly predictable behaviour of immature males of all ages. That's how it u

I have to say that I consider your suggestion awful. Torpedo cruisers are not only cruisers, they are just the wimpiest and weakest cruisers around when it comes to defenses, having hull, shield, and armour like a LRM frigate and dying easily to a minimum amount of focused fire from cruisers, cap ships, strikecraft, and even frigates. Increasing their cost to make them prohibitively expensive, as you suggest, would render them completely worthless in any and all circumstances save those where

Beta 2.5 I've heard several others mentioning the issue but have not noticed save games provided. As I experienced it recently, here is a save game: http://pi2r.homepage.dk/tmp/EnemyShipsWeirdNotMoving.rar Background: - Game is random large-multiple systems with all settings fast except for research which is slow (I wanted to see the impact on AI performance with negligible research even when having large empires). 7 unfair-random

[quote quoting="post"] This is obviously a bug which I hope will be easy to fix. [/quote] I would have to disagree: This is obviously a feature, which I hope will not be changed at all. Something as huge and compartmentalized as a Starbase ought to come online during the building process rather than being inert until the very end, and while it is unrealistic for it to have its full firepower available at the very start of the building process, it is a much better approximat

Generally speaking, I've noticed much the same with respect to the AI petering out after the first few hours on large maps. Sometimes you get a surprise, though. I was playing a large random multisystem map (all speeds fast) with unfair AIs as Advent, had maxed techs, and had cleaned up half my original system and was busily demolishing the remaining players in it, when one of the AIs from a different starting system decided to pay a visit. It immediately flew from the star to what I

[quote quoting="post"] Mines are best used offensively. They cost so much you need them to blow things up - otherwise they are a waste of resources. The cost makes it appropriately expensive to mine jump-in spots but it's still annoying that you have no choice but to jump in a minefield even if you know it's there. There should be a way to prevent that. [/quote] A question: What makes you think that just because it is costly to jump into a mine field you know is there, you s

[quote who="Psyco567" reply="1" id="2051407"] 2. The TEC starbase ( and possibly others?) can fire while under contruction, that's probbably not intentional right? [/quote] We've had a thread on this recently and come to the tentative conclusion that whether you like it or not, very reasonable arguments can be made for why they should be able to fire under construction given the scope of the construction project. (Arguably not all at once - would fit better if the strength o

[quote who="Levelheaded" reply="6" id="2049820"] Yes, not much of a fighter but then again: What vasari capital is. [/quote] The Kortul. :D That said, I love Marauders.

[quote who="Spatzimaus" reply="2" id="2049234"]While it is inconsistent, I actually like it. It's a very easy way to remember which systems have starbases and which don't; the starbase systems stand out this way.[/quote] Perhaps for you, but not for me. That's because I don't build Hangars on every Starbase. Hence, when I see them the marks in the left bar, I know it is either a starbase or some ships I have forgotten or have ended up there somehow or another and I go to the sys

Neither, GoldenShadow. If I knew of the Marza deathtrap, I'd probably go for a fleet strike with one single intention: killing off as many of the Marzas as possible; that means capital ships, carriers, and possibly even LRMS and it means accepting punishing losses. Even if I lost everything but the capital ships, and perhaps even if I lost 2-3 of them, it would probably be worth it to remove highlevel Marzas from the game forever, especially when one had a chance to fight them without signifi

[quote quoting="post"] Now, for the question part: Do you think it's worth it? If so, I must be missing something very very obvious. Which is entirely possible of course but I am having difficulty seeing the use of a starbase as an economic tool. And I think having more options in a game like this, the better. [/quote] Yes, it is definitely worth it - in some games. 16 minutes to pay off for a new economic addition to the game that can be built everywh

One fairly easy thing to do, presumably, would be to up the priority for fighters or bombers in targeting torpedo cruisers if in a system with at least one friendly structure, however, I have not thought that idea through, so here goes: What would the disadvantages of that be - in other words, in which devious situations would it be smarter [i]not[/i] to go after the torpedo cruisers first, accepting the significant casualties to your squadrons.

[quote who="-OW- Athena" reply="13" id="2044880"] Vasari base, cannot cheaply engage an enemy fleet; this is true. But a Vasari player gets the invaluable guarantee that any fleet that jumps into the base's well WILL have to face down the base if it doesn't hustle out fast (and hustling out means phase jump degredation). TEC and Advent bases can't wait to gun down the enemy fleet but they're forced to sit and wait for the enemy to come to them. Meanwhile, the enemy is bombing the planet

That's a crying shame, Matthew, when you could be playing your favourite race instead and be using your valuable experience to support reporting the issues it has through your experiences. After all, the beta period is ultimately about testing the game, not about playing the race you think is most powerful.

[quote who="GoldenShadow" reply="3" id="2043801"] I just don't like the idea of the torpedo cruiser at all though. Why does something that can destroy structures in seconds not hurt regular ships at all. It makes no sense. [/quote] Dunno. One could, as one possible explanation, use the simplest of arguments: Starbases cannot dodge. If we posit for fun that those huge torpedoes are stuffed with heavy duty explosives, shaped charges, jammers, with comparatively l

Yep, and if playing e.g. Advent, in a system I would want to defend I'd be much more tempted to go for a Starbase with massed hangars with mass disorientation and meteor flinging behind a line of their (with expansion techs) very strong defensive structures maximizing the use of their combined arms approach. I haven't tried it, but at least on paper it looks like a great idea to use the Starbase more to control the situation while the static defenses (and any fleet in the vicinity) does the a