The problem with adding better defenses is the imbalance to the flt it would create.
Aggressive scouting is what your missing. Upgrade planet health. The defenses are fine if you know how to employ them.

I do think the defenses should be cooler than a turret and a hanger bay.

In the SoaSE betas, the volcanic planets used to boost your max # of fleet points. Not sure what happened to that...

That would make sense, as a volcanic planet is pretty low in overall value compared to the capital-generating colonizables (with the exception of the dead asteroid, of course).

-- Retro

CAPITAL SHIPS THAT ARE MORE THAN GLORIFIED CRUISERS!!!

Capital ships already ARE more than glorified cruisers. A kodiak has 600 shield and 1050 hull; a level 10 Kol has double the shield and three times as much hull at level one, and is a whole lot meaner at level 10.

-- Retro

They should have it so that in large random maps 4v4 , players on the same team will start together.

I really hate it when 20 minutes into the game , someone leaves/quits because he got ganked due to a harsh starting position.

Also ...sometimes the first asteroid is missing the phaselane to the homeworld. This is really harsh.

And why should Ironclad listen?

Because once I hosted a 4v4 , and it miraculously did turn out that way with teams on their own side and everyone was like w00t yessss this is gonna be good!!!! so its obviously something people want.

I dunno. On the one hand it does kinda suck if you're the guy who starts between the opposition and you know they're gonna try to take you out ASAP, on the other hand it does add to the challenge some and encourages your allies to engage in teamwork to try to save you. One strategy is to build a mothership and try to migrate to a friendlier part of the map.

That having been said, it might not be hard to modify the random map files so that allies start next to one another, but unless custom maps like that can auto-download or Stardock modifies them and includes the modded maps in a patch it's unlikely that we'd ever get to play them online.

Yea I totally agree that sometimes its part of the challenge and I actually think theres some adaptive skill to it , but only when its 8 skilled players. If there are newbs playing they probably wont grasp the concept of killing isolated enemies faster then the enemy can kill isolated allies.


I think there should be an option in 1.1 , where you can override team_index for any map so that it becomes -1 , thus random.

Have all the maps set with proper team indexes for maps such as Aerolian Sector , Twin Empires , Maelstrom , the randoms.
Then if people want the game to be random for the "adaptive challenge" then they can switch this option on which puts players on -1 on the team_index.

So like Maelstrom you have the option of 3 players together , or have it random like it is now.

Hello people, personally? I'd like to see something that makes Sins a multicore game , because right now a lengthy single player in big map and lots of AI gets very slow after few hours.

Sorry, don't know what you mean by "multicore". Can you please explain it?

-- Retro

I would like to see the following improvements to the online multiplayer system

1) Custom maps can be downloaded from the host prior to starting

2) Option to view the map prior to starting - some ppl don't like playing on a map they don't know. This should be a host setting and obviously should not be available for random maps as that defeats to point of a random map.

3) People who are getting setup to start a game can also monitor the lobby without having to change chanels back and forth - you miss things when you change from the game chanel to the lobby and back again. I hate having to ask someone to go check the lobby to see who is there and invite them to a game I am hosting. Especially as there is a chance that their spot may be taken if people suddenly all try to join your game at once.

4) An option to make in the lobby for people looking for games and maybe something to indicate the type of game they are looking for. e.g. Waiting for a game/not interested in playing at the moment. Game type - FFA, teams etc...

I'm guessing support for multi-core CPUs so the work is distributed.

BTW - anyone know what the main cause of people lagging is online - is it the other people's network connection or is it due to their computer failing to keep up with the game (i.e. is the CPU or network speed the bottleneck???)

Well, for me, I'm pretty sure it's still my CPU because it "lags" the same in single player as in multiplayer, or at least when it's my fault. (I have a Dual Core AMD Opteron 2.4 Ghz.)

I at least know it isn't my computer that is lagging - only network connection.
I have a G15 refresh, so I can see what each core is doing (Q6600) and never see one at 100%. And on the largest MP game my ram usage has only gotten close to 40% (8GB)
Hence my question - some people complain about me lagging (I'm in Australia), but I don't see how it can be my computer that is the cause. On the other hand when other people lag, I get the impression it is their computer as when I host and wait a minute they don't catch up - that doesn't seem like network lag to me. Unfortunately I have to drop them to get the game going before everyone else quits.
Of course, I could be wrong on this - would be interested to hear what others think!!!

I want Faster Game play speed game takes way to long it should be an option for those that want faster games that don't last 3 to 4 hours.

They said in 1.1 that they were going to add more artefacts. Or at least would like to. (can't remember the exact words used)

Here's a doozy - the ability to be able to control the AI and MAKE IT COMMIT TO THE MAKE OR BREAK BATTLE ON THE MAP!!!
(yes I know there is functionality to "control" the AI, but the AI won't actually do anything unless the odds are overwhelming (in it's favour of course). It just tells me it will do what it can!!!).
I was playing an MP game with 5 systems (HUGE 5v5 game) - I had #2 ranked fleet and someone else (call then red) had #3. We were winning the battle for the galaxy we started in (2 vs 3 opponents) and I had 2 novo online to help.
Anyway, after a major battle with the two remaining players in the galaxy (I had taken out the noob who attacked me with scouts!!!) we were close to cleaning out the galaxy and then #1 guy (blue) rocks up having jumped to our sun.
We were fighting one planet in from the sun. I had 3 factories seperated from the planet by a wormhole, so had a good reinforcement location which was pumping in refinforcements. So red and I had more ships in systems and probably could have won it. And then red disconnects. So the red team (now an AI) runs away from a fight which we had numerically superior number for, even though individually it had about 1/2 the blue's ship number. Well, that was a pain as it put me in the position of fighting it out by myself. The AI wouldn't even go and attack the other AI (pink) or player (green) that was still in our galaxy trying to support blue. The only reason I got a win is that blue quit and green (the only remaining opposition non-AI player) realised that once I knocked the blue AI down I would win.
It was an epic game, but the AI sucked ass as it wasn't winning so refused to fight (very noobish).

I know this might step up the system requirements, but I would like to see maybe some more detail to the ships themselves. Recoiling cannons batteries that move with their targets as well as having the ships actually leave the factories after they are made instead of just popping up just outside...I know it's kind of a aesthetic thing (as opposed to gameplay) but I have always admired the Homeworld series for their attention to this kind of detail. You guys have done great with making the system reqs for Sins available for a vast array of systems, but I think some of us with higher end systems want a little more optional detail. But not so much more detail like Supreme Commander: Forged Alliance (jesus, that game is steep in reqs!).

I really like the idea stated by Ke5tral to have tech trading. That seem like a great way to climb up the tech tree faster (making games slightly shorter for bigger maps)...though we'd have to translate the races technologies and/or make them equals.

On the topic of new ships, maybe a salvage vehicle to steal ships...or a new type a capital ship, rather titan ship...you can only build one and it can make or break a battle. Who knows, I like the game a lot...keep it up! More to come after I play more!

A political system in the tech tree. In which you have to take one of four to three upgrade, that have powerful prons and some cons.

Military research stations will have "Student Projects": abilities that once in a while will blow up an enemy scout that enters the system...

After all, it IS a military research station, where they design new weapons systems...

It would be cool if fighters could get in formation when idle rather than just clump up. Oh, and I like the idea about actually building the ships....though I hope it wouldn't steepen reqs.

1. A campaign for sure :CONGRAT: 
2. Moons and they are customizable into military bases for increased defense and military research, or a logistic base for better economy, construction, and civilian research. Either customization will increase the population in a system, but the logistic one brings in more.  
3. Animation for wormhole passage. The ships just blink to the next wormhole currently, and it's rather boring. :NOTSURE: 

I was just thinking the other day, it'd be cool if you could colonize a system of moons around Gas Giants, a more rare option being a terran or desert or something with a coupla moons, so you get just a little more taxation and tac/log slots