LordEngelbert

Superweapons

▼

Superweapons

from Sins Forums
As i mentioned on the "Balance/Builds Analysis" thread me and a couple of mates play this over a network.  We were having a nice slow paced game on a large map (the other players complained about small maps with lots of deception and trickery which is fair enough).  It was all going good.  They wanted a big map and I was Vasari, they also wanted peace for a long time so they could catch their breath, again fine, me @ Vasari.com
This went on for quite a while, i had all of 7 planets in a system of about 50 odd i think.  I got my Dark Armada (DA) and i was happy just to sit there and research.  All was good until it came near the time when battle was about to commence.
At this point my ally says to me:
"I say; LordEngelbert Dear chap, would you care to build some superweapons?  I know that i shall be."
Taken aback by the mere suggestion of buggering up another fleet with one shot from half a system away, i promptly built 2.  Joy.  The other guy was TEC and he built 4 or 5 of their big WTF-guns.
The time for battle was finally nigh, we had spent hours preparing for a good old fashioned showdown.  Like wise players we used our artillery, i thoroughly baffled one guy with my big guns and my ally destroyed their home planets.  Sadly as i moved my fleet in (which lagged the game as everyone else was moving too) i realised that there would be no opposition.  The combination of those big guns we had and some bad luck meant that nothing was left.  Absolutely nowt.  I had a few skirmishes but aside from that it seems the only actual use i had for that fleet was to fill up the car park outside my front planet (oh and look pretty).
Anyways, to the point.  Superweapons.  I do believe they are over-powered (though i may be wrong).  The ability to build an unlimited amount of planet/fleet destroying guns in a stand-off like that is a little odd.  Is there some way this could be addressed?
If you disagree about them being over-powered then fair enough, some might even say that i was daft for allowing the battle to get to the point where me and my ally could do that and that "pr0" players always finish the battle before it gets to that stage.
However, it would indeed be nice if there were some way of limiting them (perhaps there already is, i never host the games):  If you could disable them or limit them to a build count of one.  It would be nice.
In my view at least.  I know someone will disagree, but i've put my point across, i bid ye all farewell for now.
27,401 views 60 replies
Reply #26 from Sins Forums Top
As I've been playing the Advent, I'm guessing that my "superweapon" is my ability to fire bursts of Unity as it were and convert significant portions of a planets populace into my own allegiance... to that end, I cant kill anything.I have yet to play Vasari or TEC... what all do their superweapons do? From what I'm gathering one nukes a entire world and one nukes the fleet in orbit, or what exactly is it?


I think the Vasari is the more powerful superweapon in the game. 20 seconds is enough to blow up half the fleet with some of those Vasari capship weapons if timed correctly.
Reply #27 from Sins Forums Top
Just like SupCom or C and C3, I can't see an option to disable BFG'S in a Multi/skirmish game to be game breaking. I've played some C and C'3 games where all an opponent did was make a HUGE defensive line then Superweped the heck out of one player
before sending in the air fleet. While a valid strategy it kinda forced you to play the same way so some of your defensive weapons survive the first salvo to save you from the incoming troops.
Star Control: Origins
Reply #28 from Sins Forums Top
I read all these calls to nerf things. Eh, why don't we just nerf everything so a frigate does 1 point per second, cruiser 2 points per second, and capital ships at 3 points per second.

The use of the "Super Weapons" is an interesting part of the game, and certainly (like said before) puts a sense of urgency. There ought to be a counter to it, I do agree, but nerfing the weapon itself without actually suggesting what to nerf about 'em is just as annoying here as it is to see everyone ****ing about rogues in World of Warcraft.
Reply #29 from Sins Forums Top
They are an element in long games... If you find yourself in a position to be able to build a single such weapon, you are making sacrifices somewhere else in your empire to deploy it. Its a strategic decision, like any other. I would venture to declare that if you find yourself electing to construct multiple such cannon, then you are either a very good player or you have already won the game.These facilities are extremely entertaining. Larger games wherein game length can come into play (and therefore these assets) usually consist of multiple star systems, and since the cannon can only target planets in its own star system, you immediately have an inherent limitation. There is the reason for multiple players to cooperate.On the flip side, trying to break into an enemy system might entail getting a toehold in some no-name sector long enough to develop and build such an asset. Sounds cool.Its a table-turner for sure. Its(they`re) supposed to be.


Mega uber-ships would be worse than superweapons. They would be mobile, and would kill droves of stuff much faster than superweapons. As it is, capital ships are strong enough. Mega-ships would be harder to take out than superweapons.

As of now, the TEC can fly a small swarm of ~30 fully upgraded Arcova Scouts through enemy choke-points without losing too many and place a bunch of Timed Explosives on the enemy superweapon to blow it up, and keep doing so for multiple superweapons until hangar fighters kill them all or they get surrounded and destroyed.

The Advent could do the same with 30-40 Seeker Vessels. They'd charge through the enemy choke-point for minimal losses and launch Martyrdom suicide ramming attacks at the enemy superweapon until the cannon crumbles, and keep killing superweapons this way until all the scouts are dead. The investment would be considerably less than that of the opponent who built the superweapons.

The Vasari could use their Kostura Cannon to permanently disable enemy superweapons with chained shots on autocast, or call the Returning Armada to crush enemy fortifications, or both. They'd need Level 8 research, but the superweapon user would also obviously need Level 8 research.

As I understand it, the Advent converts a section of the population; hit the planet with enough of them and you can overthrow it. The TEC kills a section of the population; hit with enough of them and you kill the whole population (and make it impossible to colonize for a few minutes). The Vasari one...stuns all the ships in orbit for maybe 20 seconds and does a marginal amount of damage. If I'm not mistaken you'd need more than 4 shots just to kill any frigates in orbit. It strikes me as being the most underpowered of the group, given that they all cost the same.


The TEC Novalith Cannon deals 3000 damage to an enemy planet or asteroid. It would take 1 shot to kill any asteroid and 2 shots to kill a fortified Advent or Vasari planet, and population growth would be slower if the planet were to be re-colonized.

The Advent Deliverance Engine converts hostile culture in the target gravity well to 15-20% friendly culture, draining allegiance(and thus income) and cultural buffs and replacing them with Advent culture bonuses(like extra shield mitigation and planetary vision). It would take a lot of shots to eventually neutralize a planet, but the former owner of that planet would not be able to colonize it again.

The Vasari Kostura Cannon disables enemy orbital structures for 3 minutes and enemy ships(not including strike craft) for 15 seconds, while removing 10% of their current hitpoints. So it could potentially be used to stunt shipbuilding(by nuking factories), temporarily disable enemy technology(by nuking labs?), or continuously disable enemy superweapons(by firing chained shots). 2 Kosturas could also used in tandem with a massive carrier fleet, to keep enemy ships disabled and have them get crushed by fighters and bombers.
Reply #30 from Sins Forums Top
The main problem is the novalith. A few of these firing at a single system is goodbye system, kinda takes fleets outta the game at that point. Change the TEC weapon or nerf the crud outta it. It will ruin the game just like superweapons ruined the multiplayer aspect of cataclysm, the game became completly centered around superweapons.

Honestly i don't mind the aspect of superweapons but the artilery aspect of the novalith is just over the top. Maybe just change the novalith to a trade reduction weapon of some form fits their identity and could really hurt a players econ.


As of now, the TEC can fly a small swarm of ~30 fully upgraded Arcova Scouts through enemy choke-points without losing too many and place a bunch of Timed Explosives on the enemy superweapon to blow it up, and keep doing so for multiple superweapons until hangar fighters kill them all or they get surrounded and destroyed.

The Advent could do the same with 30-40 Seeker Vessels. They'd charge through the enemy choke-point for minimal losses and launch Martyrdom suicide ramming attacks at the enemy superweapon until the cannon crumbles, and keep killing superweapons this way until all the scouts are dead. The investment would be considerably less than that of the opponent who built the superweapons.


Are you serious? Not about pulling something like this off but about it costing the opponent more than you. In the time it takes to pull off this manuever you can earn the funds for another superweapon, there not that expensive. Not to mention easy to defend a few hangers, place em as far as possible from the phase lanes, and a couple of light carriers in a defensive fleet could wipe them out pretty fast.
Reply #31 from Sins Forums Top
Just like SupCom or C and C3, I can't see an option to disable BFG'S in a Multi/skirmish game to be game breaking. I've played some C and C'3 games where all an opponent did was make a HUGE defensive line then Superweped the heck out of one player before sending in the air fleet. While a valid strategy it kinda forced you to play the same way so some of your defensive weapons survive the first salvo to save you from the incoming troops.


Incorrect at least for SupCom.

In Forged Alliance (SupCom) theres the ability to to disable Units/Buildings/nukes/etc in Multiplayer/LAN/Skirmish, can't remember the exact location though.
Reply #32 from Sins Forums Top
There ought to be a counter to it, I do agree, but nerfing the weapon itself without actually suggesting what to nerf about 'em is just as annoying here as it is to see everyone ****ing about rogues in World of Warcraft.



Just to reiterate what i said, i would like an option for them to be turned off. Not downgraded to the point that they are useless. I guess you could also have an option to make them artifacts, you know like uber weps made my a long lost race that you find. Would be interesting. 3 options like that would be nice, limit, disable and artifact.
I did read somewhere that someone suggested the TEC get a trade superweapon. They do to already to some degree, its that thing that gives them 15% (i think) of what everyone spends. But the point made about them having a SW relevant to the race makes sense. I thought they were an emergency coalition type thing...thrown together in haste to defeat the evil dark hordes and stuff. Where do they get this uber gun from?
(this is the thought that led me to the artifact bit).

anyways, an opinion on dark armada being a SW would be nice.

Reply #33 from Sins Forums Top
As I understand it, the Advent converts a section of the population;


It is a large culture spread on that planet, for effect imagine that you just built a communication temple on that planet. This is extra handy because Advent get additional shield regeneration while under their cultural influence.

It's not an "I win" weapon by any means, however it's also an economic attack as the target empire's income and resource production starts taking hits as their culture drops. I'm playing a game where I'm hitting all the opponent's planets with my superweapon and want to see if I can cause a massive chain-reaction of planets flipping at once :)
Reply #34 from Sins Forums Top
Are you serious? Not about pulling something like this off but about it costing the opponent more than you. In the time it takes to pull off this manuever you can earn the funds for another superweapon, there not that expensive. Not to mention easy to defend a few hangers, place em as far as possible from the phase lanes, and a couple of light carriers in a defensive fleet could wipe them out pretty fast.


30 TEC Arcova Scouts = 6000 cash
or
30 Advent Seeker Vessels = 6000 cash

Built at 5 adjacent planets, they'd take 90 seconds to build and from then on it's up to map conditions how long they'll take to pull off the maneuver.

1 Novalith Cannon = 8000 cash + 600 metal + 500 crystal

It would take 136 seconds to build a Novalith and then a while for it to actually begin bombarding to problematic levels.

The only thing the scouts have to do is reach the superweapon - placing the explosives or executing the suicide ram wouldn't take long enough for hangar fighters to kill the scouts. Even 12 fighter squadrons from 4 Advent hangars(with the capacity upgrade) would only deal 412 damage to 12 scouts in a single pass, and that's with all the laser upgrades and before mitigation/regeneration/armor/repair are included. TEC fighter squads would be weaker. And it would take the fighters 12 seconds before they make another attack run, in which time the enemy scouts would've bombed/rammed the superweapon and begun to run.

Of course, the scout strike would take some micromanaging, while the Novalith would not. But they would be irritating enough to attract the enemy player's attention anyway(a group of pesky scouts, of all things, blowing up one of your big guns). If some scouts survive the attack and manage to escape, they can be used on another strike.

Of course, if you don't have the economy to pull off even that much before the enemy builds another gun, or kill the superweapons through conventional fleet combat, or build Kostura/Novalith cannons for your own defense, then the superweapon-wielding enemy has all the right to kick you out of the star system.
Reply #35 from Sins Forums Top
besides incurring economic peanlty and nerfing damages for superweapons, also, have a significant range reduction, maybe it can only fire two jumps away, or increase in range comes in increase in resource costs, each phase lane that it can fire over will cost 10000 in cash, 3000 in crystals and 5000 in metals.
Reply #36 from Sins Forums Top
10,000?! and all the rest?! maybe a 1000 per phase lane or a sliding scale, 100 for the first, 200 for the second, 300 and so on. a cumulative thingy
Reply #37 from Sins Forums Top
Or you could just leave them alone. I'm relativly new to the game, but from what I can see they're PERFECTLY fine. If you let them build several of those cannons, it means you aren't fighting them. In which case they have EVERY right to go and kill you and end the game. If you actually fought him, there's a multitude of ways to remove the gun before it causes any serious harm. That mass scout-bombing seems like a perfectly valid tactic. I know from experiance it's easy to get scouts through enemy territory. I've flown a lone scout right through the center of a heavily defended gravity well before n it survived (Albeit with like... 10 hp lmao.) So moving 40 of them would be a breeze.
Reply #38 from Sins Forums Top
In my opinion, they are nice as they are and NOT overpowered. First of all they add utility to a stalement problem. Here is an example: I play Advent, my opponent, may he be NPC or human has a chokepoint to the rest of his empire (I know no official maps are build like that but it is just an example). He amasses his entire fleet there, so what to do. Of course you could just fly through, lose alot of ships and have him chasing yours through I don't know how many systems. On the other hand I think it is quite neat that you can e.g. beat him by using your Deliverance Engine to spread your culture there and either neutralize his rock and make it uncolonizable for him or just spread your culture to such a degree that you get a nice bonus for your shield mitigation.

To come to the point: It depends on the mentality of the ones who use them. If you have someone who turtles in and tries to nuke you away with superweapons... it is sad, but you can turn his own strategy against him and open a path so you can "honorably" take out the rest. The money he spend on the weapons you can spend on your fleet and techs.
I don't see why they are called superweapons actually. The only one where the weapon function is primary is the TEC one. For both Advent and Vasari they are utilities to either help in offense (and defense for advent).
And incase you play multiplayer and don't like them, just make a deal along the players not to build them. That easy.
Reply #39 from Sins Forums Top
Woah, I never said to nerf them at all.

They are definitely something that was intended to be in the game, and they are very balanced, if you ask me. They add a set of tactics and strategies with how to deal with them.

That being said, I don't quite like them. I would much rather win a battle because I fought well, had superior units, had superior tactics, or just had a massive amount of force, and I would prefer to have to fight my enemies on the same basis. Sure, I could just say "Hey, I won't use them as a personal choice," but it ends up becoming something of a handicap. I would much prefer having an option to disable them when hosting/creating a game.

I'm not whining, I'm not complaining, I'm just stating that I've never much liked superweapons, and would prefer a method aside from modding that would give me an option to disable them.
Reply #40 from Sins Forums Top
I never build them. but then I only play against the AI, who never build them either. Thankfully. So it's something of a non-issue (unless 1.03 adds AI superweapon building...).

I don't like the idea of 'superweapons' in RTSs anyway, and certainly not a strategy rather than tactics-oriented game like sins. If the AI is programmed to make use of superweapons at some point in the future, I hope it comes alongside an option to disable superweapons entirely.
Reply #41 from Sins Forums Top
Just checking my info.
Didn't I read somewhere that superweapons should be limited to firing in-system only?
Reply #42 from Sins Forums Top
Just an option to turn them off would be great. Think command and conquer... when you make a game, you can turn off super weapons.
Depends on the version of C&C there. I know in Generals you cannot turn off superweapons. Yes, you can turn off the buildable superweapons, but you cannot turn off all that carpet bombing and general points-based abilities. I consider these superweapons too since you can use them without penalty and without exposing your forces to attack. I haven't bought a C&C game since Generals because I absolutely hated that aspect of the game.

I don't see anyone calling for the weapons to get nerfed. I see people calling for them to get limited or turned off via a new option. I do think the Vasari superweapon is underpowered and a piece of crap, but it IS balanced when you consider that the Vasari have useful offensive ships that have repair abilities. Late in a long game, challenging the Vasari gets pretty difficult.
Reply #43 from Sins Forums Top
I don't think the number of superweapons needs to be limited. If you have the money, time, and ability to build 20 superweapons, you already won the game a long time ago. Think about it.
Reply #44 from Sins Forums Top
If you put an option to disable them, everyone stops complaining.
Reply #45 from Sins Forums Top
Well I'm a bit confused: Only played about 7 games so far, but not on large maps, and it seems to me, on large/huge maps, your just asking for most players to max out tech, and get superweapons, but more importantly, they break the turtle/stalemates. I know when my opponent has them early, due to scouting and other Advent abilities, which also lets me know he's used a lot of resouses and tactical slots to do so, making attacking him more imparative.

Just like in Star Wars, if you know a deathstar is being built, or is already built, you just gott'a attack with all you have before your planets start tunring into astoroid belts one by one; that's why there's in the game imo.

But I also agree, making a cap of one per planet, or an option to turn them off would be welcome for some, but get ready for a lot of stalemates on large maps if you do . . .
Reply #46 from Sins Forums Top

I'd like to see super weapon locations announced as soon as construction starts, but otherwise I think they are fine. It reduces incentives for players just to turtle in and play Sins like its sim city. Most decicive battles I fought usually happened before the super weapons could come in. If my opponent spends his resources to get super weapons, chances are I can field a larger fleet and is razing his planets long before the cannon is online
Reply #47 from Sins Forums Top
Well I'm a bit confused: Only played about 7 games so far, but not on large maps, and it seems to me, on large/huge maps, your just asking for most players to max out tech, and get superweapons, but more importantly, they break the turtle/stalemates. I know when my opponent has them early, due to scouting and other Advent abilities, which also lets me know he's used a lot of resouses and tactical slots to do so, making attacking him more imparative.Just like in Star Wars, if you know a deathstar is being built, or is already built, you just gott'a attack with all you have before your planets start tunring into astoroid belts one by one; that's why there's in the game imo.But I also agree, making a cap of one per planet, or an option to turn them off would be welcome for some, but get ready for a lot of stalemates on large maps if you do . . .


I'm perfectly fine with that. That's EXACTLY what they are. But what I'm asking for is an option to play WITHOUT that damned death star hunting me down all the time. I don't want them taken out of the game or nerfed or anything of the sort. I just want an option to play without them.



Reply #48 from Sins Forums Top
I disagree. They are called superweapon for that reason.
Thats what i liked about Supreme Commander, that the superweapons werent nerfed or wimpy in any way like in other games.. Most games that have nukes for instance, they cant even destroy a single medium sized building.. (C&C3, Starcraft, etc)
Its pathetic!

Nah, i think 18 tac points and the 8k credits, and the 8 labs required is payment enough. All the enemy has to do is swoop in and destroy it, or keep his fleet mobile / not allow you to scout him so much.
If we nerf everything that is working as intended we end up with a crippled game.
"Nerf carriers!" "Nerf anti-strikecraft frigates!" "Nerf LRM!" "Nerf Dark Armada!"
Please :)
Reply #49 from Sins Forums Top
I disagree, I believe it adds to the strategic value of the game. Dont put all your eggs in one basket. Or maybe you shouldnt build up so long. Peace is usually short lived anyway.
Reply #50 from Sins Forums Top
If you put an option to disable them, everyone stops complaining.


Yeah.

I suppose I could make a mod where they aren't available to build, that wouldn't be too tough I don't image...