Peter Ebbesen

[quote who="MindsEye" reply="12" id="2043710"]Some people(like me) do not like to play as vasari.Therefore giving one race huge advantages(like the egg) makes the game not nearly as fun. [/quote] So, rather than letting each race have their own huge advantage, you'd prefer that no race had any significant advantage over any other race in any area of the game? That sounds boring to me. Going that direction the Advent shouldn't have the tactical advantage of being able to upgrad

[quote who="Dargoon999" reply="7" id="2043417"]Why not make a tech that players have to research to be able to move thier bases in the well. [/quote] The humans aren't that advanced. Do it the way Weber would - give them fragile tow boats making movement out of combat a possibility (a slow one) but in combat an impossibility. :)

Indeed, Shadowhal - it is a rather glaring weakness, for massed bombers [i]hurt[/i]. I did state that this was versus the AI and primarily in sectors where I can build (at least) 25 points of tactical defense to get some fighter cover, even if only minimal. Against a human player, priorities might change, but those beefed up Vasari starbases are so damned tough that once I've slapped on the Assault Systems and full Defensive Enhancements (step 3->4 is truly beastly now), it seems to me to

[quote]With the change in the targetting for the anti-structure cruisers, they are certainly not useless in a battle once defences are gone. In one battle against the Advent, they had twenty of the thing pouring 58 plasma damage each (double that of the Destras) into my ships. Chewed everything but capital ships to pieces.[/quote] I am impressed that the torpedo ships could chew up your fleet given that, according to the data files /gameinfo/gameplay.constants it looks as if anti-mo

[quote who="Shadowhal" reply="2" id="2043426"]now with structures having their own armor type, does anyone know, how much dmg capships make against them?[/quote] From /gameinfo/gameplay.constants, Capital ships and their abilities, Heavy Cruisers, and Anti-module (torpedo ships) all deal 100% damage to module (Starbases).* Bombers and LRMs deal 75% damage. [But LRMs are rather squishy] The remainder deal 50% damage. Fundamentally, bring out the big guns

[quote quoting="post"] - lowering Starbase firepower slightly against fleets [/quote] I don't really know... I've been playing Vasari vs. unfair AIs the last two days and while I have been truly amazed by the damage and survival potential of my starbases - in fact, I have yet to lose a single one that has been backed up by 25 tactical points worth of stationary defenses (standard regeneration/weapon jammers/fighter hangars/jump inhibitor setups), that has a lot more to do wi

[quote who="RaveBomb" reply="5" id="2041128"] Peter: By your logic, shouldn't turrets then start firing the moment their construction starts? [/quote] No. Turrets are fairly small installations with, most likely, a small crew. They are constructed by crews from a construction vessel. How far on in its construction will it need to be before it houses a crew, has ammunition supplied, and has any weapons installed? Most likely, very far in. A starbase is citysi

One thing I really miss playing Vasari is to have, say, two mutually exclusive options that could be enabled with autocast for a minelayer: 1)Auto lay mines near phase lanes 2) Auto lay mines near planetary bombardment range Sure, the current system works with excessive clickage and allows you to place the mines exactly where you want to, but the ability to give decent (though not as good as if you micromanaged it) orders for repeating minelaying patterns, which would

If you do not have an opinion on the topic, why post the topic? If you do have, why not state it instead of creating what is for all purposes a spam thread? In either case, I read your "...." and raise with "....!#¤&%#/¤" - and I don't feel I have enough of a feel for torpedo frigates to call it either way. They certainly do not impress me as much too powerful [i]or[/i] much too weak.

[quote who="Pezkenin" reply="2" id="2041038"]Despite peter explanation a 1% done SB shouldn´t be capable of scaring a fleet, instead the fleet should focus hi fire and bring it down.[/quote] Given how few hull points an 1% done SB has, any fleet commander that is scared by it instead of focus firing it down should be demoted due to incompetence unless his fleet is very, very, small indeed.

If I were building a huge defensive installation in space, not something puny, but truly huge and capable of housing tens of thousands of people, I'd probably start installing weaponry as early as it made engineering sense rather than once the rest of the station had been constructed. With something on that scale, there's really no reason to assume that the weapons can only go online once construction have finished since it is a station being put gradually online as different segments are don

I would love to see the individual weapon ranges on starbases and, possible, on everything else. (E.g. press ALT to see maximum range of everything on screen plus individual ranges for starbases, ranges coloured as now, press CTRL+ALT to see the individual ranges of all weapons of all ships - a potpourri of ranges - with ranges coloured according to weapon type (e.g. yellow=laser, red = missile, orange = gun - or something) -- or a setup with like above where you could configure which

Not only that, the defense tech tree [i]feels[/i] rather empty right now. Sure, to take the Vasari as an example, with 12 techs in it it has the same number as the lesser lines the warfare/empire trees, but each of those trees carry three lines. This is a somewhat related issue - I cannot help thinking that creating a handful of new defense techs each providing marginal upgrades to all starbases (range, damage, extra armour for fighter and bombers in the starbase and things like that), possib