Quirks, Irks, and Things that Bother Me TAKE FOUR
Sins Forums
First off, I know Deciever has a post with a list of fixes the community is voicing together to have fixed. I applaud his effort, but this post is more of a rant, a run down of just little things that as I've played, things that have annoyed or confused me.
TAKE FOUR
For a third round of redunancy: REPULSE
I still can not stress how much this needs to be addressed.
The Overseer
It needs a 360 degree firing arc like the repair bots on the hoshiko. Also, why is this thing tier 4? Advent get guardians at tier 3. TEC get hoshikos at tier 3. Vasari get their first support cruiser at tier 4. That aint fair. I have to spend the money on another lab AND extra money on the tech for a somewhat less effective version of the hoshiko? Bull.
Also, the tier 4 and 5 abilities on this ship are laughable. Unless that 50% extra jump time gives you enough time to take out a specific target (PJI or a lightly upgraded starbase), it's useless. So you can see them jumping in? OOOOOOO boy, that's exciting. Never mind the econ tree techs where I can see 1, 2 jumps, and then EVERYTHING at tier 8. The 2 jumps is probably a bit more accurate. It's a bit cheaper in total and in the end probalby a better overall option than the overseer if you wanna see what ur opponent's doing.
Strikecraft cost no $$$ to replace
This one irks me a lot. My opponent can jump in with 10 carriers, 30 squads of fighters, take out whatever he can of my lrf's/bombers/scouts/whatever, then jump out, and replenish his losses at NO COST. Meanwhile I must pay to replace the frigs I lost. Bull. Strikecraft shouldn't be ridiculously expensive. No, then they'd be useless, but right now, i don't like the system.
If I could have my way I'd:
1. I'd lower the health and shields of all lrfs as they stand by 10%. I've never understood why these units are so tough. From the description you see in game, these are supposed to be like archers. They do a lot of damage at a longer range, but are very weak and frail, so can easily be destroyed by something that gets up close. As it stands Illums on paper look as strong if not stronger than Enforcers, and LRMs + Assailants are fleets that are so tough that they can just make enemy siege frigates go *pop*.
Lrf's will still crush light frigs, but you'd actually be able to counter lrfs now. Maybe. I don't know if 10% would be enough, but considering I'm already suggesting to nerf the Illum, a 10% additional nerf is appropriate.
1a. If 1 does or doesn't happen, I'd lower the Illum health by 100 and the armor by one. Illums have the best health and shields of the lrfs. Shields yes. Health should be worst. Also, LRFs need a slight nerf in shields and assailants need a slight buff in shields for balance of the lrfs.
In order for shields from toughtest to worst it should be advent, vasari, tec.
In order for health from toughest to worst it should be tec, vasari, advent.
2. Because of the fix I propose in 1a, I'd probably have to nerf flak. Flak already can just barely beat lrfs. With that fix, Flak would now crush lrfs and fighters. To fix this, I'd lower the multiplier against light armor by either 25% or 50%. I'm leaning towards 25%. Flak wouldn't be as effective against bombers anymore, but then again, you're not supposed to use flak on bombers anyway. Still, perhaps the hit % could be upped on bombers. In theory, bombers move slower and wouldn't be as hard to hit (Battle of Midway and the torpedo bombers anyone?), so giving a 100% hit rate against bombers would help offset the damage reduction I'm proposing against bombers.
3. I'd upp the anti-heavy armor bonus that light frigs get by 25%.
4. Leave flak as is against fighters. Something needs to be able to crush fighters. This is the only thing that counters them. Fighters are made for free and at the cost of antimatter. Something has to be able to do it. Perhaps nerf flak slightly, but do it too hard and carrier spam will become popular again.
5. Up repulses cost for antimatter per second to 12-15 antimatter per second.
My main point is #1. I realize that to do that fix, this game would need a series of rebalances, but then again, the game isn't exactly balanced as is (as exemplified by the fact that no one uses light frigs). I've never understood why lrf's are so tough. When the devs saw the Illum was weak way back in 1.03 or 1.04, whatever it was, they didn't bring the other lrfs down to it. No. They brought the Illum up. Up so far it crushes just about anything. I'm going to be testing to see if that anything includes enforcers.
TAKE THREE
For a second round of redunancy: REPULSE
If there was a way to force the guardian to stay and not break the "channeling ability", it'd be fine. One use of repulse would take 210 antimatter. As is the unit can break the channel at any time and save 150 100 antimatter ish and 7-8 can fire indefinitely. So....
IT STILL NEEDS FIXING
The Random Map Generator use of "Random - any"
Go to the map creator. You'll notice that there is a planet type called "Random - any". I think this is overly used in the random map generator. This is where the complete randomness of the maps come from and is the source of my hatred for about 20% of the maps we play. Anything can end up here, and what you see is that by having too many randoms, people can get boned by the map and not have any planets or neutrals near them.
Clarification - Vasari Starbase
I want to revise my sentiment here. I think the construction rate of this should be the same as Advent and TEC starbases, and that in enemy grav wells it should get a -25% build rate penalty. Maybe 50%. What I'd really like is to have the armor taken away from it while being constructed. Why is a target that's under construction getting the full defensatory bonus it would get only if fully up and running?
TAKE TWO
For redunancy: REPULSE
Its still pisses me off.
The Vasari In General
Anyone else notice that with Vasari you're crossing your fingers for neutrals? This race is a gamble to pick in my mind, because how effective you are is pretty much linked to how many neutrals you find. Assailants are weak and only good at taking out capital ships. The enforcer is the worst HC. The Skirmisher does 10 dps, as much as a cobalt, but still takes up 2 extra ship slots. The Scout is the worst for combat purposes. You need the $$$ to offset this loss, and if there aren't neutrals, your job gets a lot tougher.
Add in the wrench of the starbase. This thing to me is a gigantic glorified frigate. The Vasari frigates aren't strong enough. The starbase is too strong and too easy to tech. You can't use Ogrovs against it as effectively cause they gotta move...stopping them from firing. Guess my biggest quarrel is how effective they are early game. The only thing that can have a prayer to fight off a starbase in the first 20 min is Advent bombers (because tier 2), or long range frigates. That's it. They are too tough and construct too quickly in enemy grav wells.
Quick construction in friendly grav wells? Absolutely. In enemy grav wells? Cut it to half the rate of the construction a TEC or Advent one. It's too powerful otherwise in early games.
One Phase Lane Homeworld Starts
This actually is very VERY disadvantageous and needs to be addressed in the random map generator. For lack of better words, getting boned by the map aint right. Getting a ton of magnetic clouds and neutrals instead of planets is one thing. Having fewer phase hurts in two ways. First, you lose tactical options. Instead of expanding in one of several directions, you can only expand in one way....which sucks. Second, your eco is hurt. Badly. Essentially you're eco takes a 10% hit because instead of having 90% and 80% allegiance planets, you get 80% and 70% allegiance planets because everything is now further from your homeworld.
Randomness of Neutrals
Two things with this. 1, I'm sick of maps that are completely loaded with neutrals. The only way you can hand the Vasari a game even more is to hand them a stuffed human (normal or with psionic ability) with an apple in its mouth. In the random map generator, I'd like it if fewer planets were completely random and could instead be set to be.....sound the trumpets....planets. Don't take away all the neutrals, but sometimes there are just simply too many.
2. There can be anywhere from 0-3 neutrals in a grav well. That's a bit lopsided don't you think? I realize most times maps randomize and actually stay pretty fair, but about 25% of the time it feels like my opponent has 3 grav wells with 3 neutrals per well, and meanwhile I've got three magnetic clouds all saying "Screw You Amish Guy".
No Allegiance on Neutrals
There is no allegiance on neutrals......yeah...that makes sense. Ok, maybe playing all fast in multiplayer screws with this perspective. It seems neutrals either are nonexistent or completely give the game to a player. I'd really like to see them reworked. You could lower their income or up their income but give them an allegiance factor. Either way, I know I don't like what the game has now. I've had a map with Vasari where I had 21 metal per second without taking single lava planet or buildng a single refinery. It aint right. Just plain wrong.
Magnetic Clouds
Have you guys ever actually fought in a Magnetic Cloud? I know I haven't. Taking a fight here is an act of desperation rather than an act of tactics. I don't think I've ever had the opportunity to fight an Advent in a magnetic cloud. He just jumps out and waits for me elsewhere so he can use his abilities. As of the moment, Magnetic Clouds are nothing more than glorified space wasters that just add more time for your scouts to explore. You shouldn't be happy if you see these within the first 2 jumps of ur homeworld. It aint fun.
2 mine Ices and Lavas
Ever had that night where you're playing sins and the map just doesn't wanna give you a break? Not only are you boned by the map, but you also get to expand to a lava that has.....TWO mines!
I like the randomness of mines on planets. I do. 2-3 on Terrans and Deserts makes sense. These planets offer more population, so the emphasis here isn't minerals. It's credit income. Especially with the extra logistic slots.
I don't get why Lavas and Ices can have from 2-4. It should be 3-4. The WHOLE POINT of an ice or lava is to get extra income of ONE type of mineral. I can not tell you the number of times games get more frustrating because I have 3 of these 2 mine suckers, and meanwhile my opponent has a lava and an ice with 4 mines a piece. It's like being a he man taking a pitchfork to the back of the head but the pitchfork doesn't do brain damage. You're just gonna keep going and try to muscle through it, but in the back of your head, something aint right.
Take One
The Uselessness of Light Frigates
I'm probably not giving anyone a revelation with this one, but thanks to long range frigates, light frigs can't get anywhere near support crusiers to do their job. Really, if you think about it, the only time it would ever make sense to make a large contingent of light frigs in your fleet is if your opponent spammed flak. Even then, the damage multiplier LF's get against heavy armor is only +50%, which just isn't enough for the meaty flak and all of it's health. I'd like the multiplier to be increased to something in the ballpark of 200% at least, maybe even higher. Seriously. Right now if you see someone making a ton of cobalts, you just laugh.
The way it should be is you see light frigs coming for your support cruisers and ur reaction is "Oh Crap, get them out of there"
The OP of Repulse
Not going into detail, as it's not news. I'd like light frig abilities to outrange repulse. That'd help....a little. You could fix repulse by either upping the delay between uses (to say....like 30 seconds to a minute), or by upping the antimatter costs. Personally, I'd like the latter so someone can't abuse it insanely, but either'd work.
The OP of Illums
Not going into detail either. It's not news.
| Hull | Armor | Shields | Damage | Ship Slots used | |
| Kodiaks | 6300 | 5 | 3600 | 108 | 60 |
| Crusaders | 4650 | 4 | 4950 | 114 | 60 |
| Enforcers | 5875 | 4 | 3500 | 100 | 60 |
| Illum | 6200 | 2 | 5500 | 166 | 60 |
| Assailant | 6000 | 2 | 3600 | 130 | 60 |
| LRM | 7000 | 1 | 4200 | 165 | 60 |
What I don't grasp here is why the Illum's health is so high. It should be TEC health = highests, Vasari Middle Man, Advent third. This is the theme of the races that sets them apart. For some reason though, the Illum's health is very very high. It should be around 5000 for 10 illums, or 500 health for each Illum. That might help some of the problems with Illums. The DPS is ok. It should be the highest for all the races considering it's Tier 3. It should not have 620 health and 2 armor. It should be lowered to 500 health and 1 armor. That'd help with balance.
Assailant Weakness
On a related subject, why is the assailant the worst for shields overall? Shouldn't that be TEC?
Starbase Spamming
This is a wierd wierd phenomenon I've seen. You typically see this on 5v5 maps where there are 3-5 allies bunched on one side of the map and the feeder has all the time in the world to get a monster eco going. This person, instead of getting a fleet, will put a starbase at EACH and EVERY system, including neutral sites, and support purely with econ and starbases at each planet. Oh, and they'll probably mix in the superweapons.
I figured out this is something that a large contingent of bombers can cure, but it's just wierd to see. You spend all your money on a "fleet" of stuff that either can't move (TEC/Advent), or is stuck in one system (Vasari). Ok, with the TEC, each starbase gets red button, so any one starbase can destroy a fleet, and Advent get meteor and Mass Disorient, so that's nasty too. For the record, I get why it's not a bad idea. You keep a high eco and your empire is well defended with strong buildings. I get it.
I just liked it better back in vanilla where my fleet could just keep rolling on through cause aint no one gonna stop me. Just nostalgia I guess.
The Enforcer/Skirmisher Nerf
Each of these ships gets reintegration. In exhange for this though, the devs nerfed the damage these do. JJ has already shown that the enforcer is the relatively weakest HC. I say the enforcer get's reintegration, so it makes the issue "fuzzy". What I don't get is why the skirmisher does 10 dps and the enforcer does 20. The enforcer should arguably be doing 24 dps, but I think I like the idea of 22 better.
The skirmisher takes up 7 ship slots and does 10 dps. The Cobalt takes up 5 and 10 dps. The disciple takes up 4 and does 8 dps. The pattern is 2 dps per ship slot. So why does the skirmisher only do 10 dps? I know it gets reintegration, so giving it 14 dps would be unfair, but jesus, a 30% nerf in damage to compensate for reintegration is excessive. I'd like to see it upped to 12 dps.
The Advent Culture Cannon
This superweapon is just overall odd. Vasari and TEC superweapons are direct and to the point. 2 Novalith shots take out 1 planet. The Kotsura cannon, although expensive, requires no pre-research to get and gets a discount with slave labor, and with 3-4 you can disamantle enemy fleets, plus, it opens up a phase lane for phase stabilizers. Sounds good to me.
The way I think it could work is if the culture would last a little longer. I think the right amount of time would be so that I could fire at the area, fire somewhere else, and then fire there again, and the culture from the first shot would still be there when the third shot got there. That'd help because then your opponents would ACTUALLY be forced to do something about the culture cannon. As of the moment, it's too easy to just get media hubs and spread a few more than you usually would around your empire to counter it.
Fighter Futility
Flak are very strong against them. So strong to the point that I'd say that this counter is just as strong as using lrf's against lf's. If light frigs could dismantle flak quickly, we might have a solution, but at the moment, it's reeeally hard to make an arguement for fighters when you're going to lose them so quickly to flak. Upping the antimatter regen rate of the carriers might help with this. (just a suggestion)
The Wave Tree
Why are these upgrades at tier 4,5, and 7? Why? They need to be waaaaay lower. Tier 2,4, and 5 respectively.
The Capital Colonizing Bonus for TEC and Vasari
The Vasari bonus seems a little iffy. 20% faster build for some time. 20? Just 20? Advent get 20% discount per level, and the vasari just quicker build times? This might help for rushing, but this needs to be a bit more drastic than that. I'd say go a minimum up to 50%. Up the build rate and how long it lasts with the up of colonize. At the moment, there's absolutely no incentive to bother with level 2 colonize until the egg reaches level 9.
The TEC bonus perplexes me even more. The bonus is 0,1,2 extractors built for free. So no bonus at level 1 for TEC? That seems a bit unfair. Shouldn't it be something like 1,2,3. What I'd like is for it to be 1, 2, 4.
Terran Upgrade is linked to Desert Upgrade for Advent
Tier 1, you must tech desert before you tech terran. Why? The Vasari are ALIENS and can up their terran pop % at level 1.
Culture Killing Rate
I think my beef here is that you up your own % by .10%/s, but only take down your enemy by .07%/s max. I'd like for the two values to be the same.
Quick Start in Online Matches
This might be nostalgia talking, but I don't like quick start. Like, at all. I know, quick start takes probably about 15-20 minutes out the game, but that's what made rushing so annoying now, and has brought Illums to the forefront of being OP.
What I miss is that you could build 3 scouts, have them explore, and you'd actually have about a 10 min warning of if your opponent is rushing. Now....you just know your opponent is gonna be rushing if he's at least slightly experienced. Takes the fun out of the game when you can't go out and get some planets before the big fight.
Just miss the olden days. That's all.
That's all I got for now.
