Guys like you aGAvA are the reason I don't play Multiplayer. You're so self-centered. All you can think about is what you want, and to Hell with everything else. The numbers - 95% to 99% - do not lie. And not once have I seen you acknowledge anyone else's opinion, or even a fact, as stated above, as relevant. All you do is state what you think, and flame everybody who disagrees. People like you disgust me.

Oh, and add PBHead to that list. He's the same way. Speaking of, I'd rather listen to Stardock, who is responsible for the game's financial and buisness side, than Steam, which has never been stable as a table with three legs.

As for the OP: As stated before, Superweapons are getting buffed in the next patch, hopefully big time, so that I'll consider re-enabling them for my personal use. Also as stated above, we don't need another thread like this. Read the forums first. Its not that hard.

they did i been playing a 4 hrs game and havent heard one single super weapons yet

I'm fairly confident that the people who make the game and run ICO have a reasonable idea of how many people are actually using it, as compared to a selection bias skewed beta population.

And we wouldn't have to get into it at all if we didn't have people making asinine suggestions like only listening to the MP community instead of the massively larger SP community about an issue that was an entirely SP problem anyway.

It wasn't a singleplayer or multiplayer problem, it was an AI issue. It still is. Do you really think the 4 per player limit matters to the AI on a small map where a player maybe occupies six or seven planets? I tmakes no difference to them, they wouldn't have built more than those 4 in the first place.

On bigger maps you're likely have multiple enemies at once, meaning if anything it makes the issue worse by multiple AIs spamming the nukes on YOU (yes the AI still gangs up on humans even if they are not allied with each other) with no chance of retaliation. After all, you only have four nukes, and they have 4x9 (worst case), in clean numbers 36 superweapons moving about. Way to shoot yourself in the knee.

As I see it now there are two ways of handling the superweapons:

1. Remove the frickin limit, make a lever in startup screen to deactivate them (and fix the delivarence. Won't ever get tired of noting this). The way supers are now they are more of support powers than anything else. Players can trip over them once or twice, but that's it...

2. Limit supers to 1 per faction and make them actually SUPER. Including all the benefits and backdraws. You have to sink tons of money into them. When they are completed they have zero AM and have to charge up for 10 to 15 minutes, also big fat warning for all players ("our scientists noticed a giant source of energy charging up" or whatever). If the player manages to shoot they have to affect multiple planets at once, with the center planet (the one you aimed at) getting the worst of it. The superweapons are supposed to force players into action, break stalemates or tip the balance of battle. If people freak when hearing the superweapon announcement GREAT, that's what they are suppposed to do.

I've been voting for #2 for awhile now.

Honestly, it took me a long time before I realize you could build more than 1. It's a super weapon, merely possessing one should be game over unless their massive fleet comes at you right now and takes out the weapon. station your fleet there and it should be an epic battle in a race against time.

i like the ideas from mcintire

to the first one: maybe it would be also nice if you could set your own SW Cap. Disabled - [Number] - Unlimited

the second idea sounds very good. Atm SWs ar not realy SWs. they are good (Engine is not...), but they are not game-ending.
Only if you are able to spam them out...15+ SWs are realy ugly.

Let the players freak out if they hear the warning.
the way how to let the players freak out are realy huge.
Turn planets into asteroids with Nova, destroy every ship (no capital) and building with kostura, take controll over the planet and its buildings with engine...are only my ideas.
If it would be limited to one SW with long charge up time, it would be nice to see something like those powerfull weapons.
But i think it would fit better to a mod. Just buff the SWs a little to fit better to the actual cap, build in some new Techs into the Defense Tree or something like that would be enough.

i still think you're missing the point, the game is designed to be played a certain way, you dont see sonic the hedgehog flying because you want him to, cus thats how you want to play the game.

when people complain about things like this its only because they dont grasp how to play the game to the fullest of their own potential, im not about hating on people, but changing the game because the sp community won't learn from playing multiplayer games, the game just shouldnt be change for lack of effort.

No single player, player will ever beat a multiplayer gamer. Not in sins atleast, neither will a multiplayer gamer, who has the experiences and is generally good.. will lose to the same issues you guys bring up.

I personally am for the ability to define la limit or not.

Can we please get an option on the pregame set up for

Super weapon infinite

and

mav <number>

No option to turn off is needed on this.

If that is possible - can we also get the increase in Ship Capacity - the Titans take up a lot of cap and reduce overall fleet size.

The singleplayer community did not identify the problem correctly, is the point I think being made here. If the AI got severely bugged and started churning out nothing but LRFs, people would be arguing for a LRF cap. And so they'd get one, and the balance gets messed with forever just because the AI can't play the game.

I am against caps in RTS games in general, I've never seen one that didn't point to a more fundamental game balance problem. And you can't really fix balance with a cap anyway, if something is so great/uncounterable it needs a cap then it's going to be the central tactic of every battle forever, whether you have 1 or 100 of them.

Except that there's a guy that's trying that..

You are a self-centered.

This has nothing to do with skill. You can't ignore comments made from the SP community that's just stupid. So it may be "incorrect" but if the majority of people in the SP say it's hurting their enjoyment why wouldn't you try to fix it?

And ffs you arn't that great anyways stop going around being so condenscending. There are guys who don't play on ICO that could destroy you.

The point I think that people need keep sight of is that this has been primarily attributed to stupid AI's rather than the SW's themselves by the more active (and generally more experienced) forumites while the less experienced SP players can't tell the difference when they see the event.  They may be wrong, but there's no reason to be condescending to either side.  MP players know that they aren't OP or else MP would be dominated by them.  SP players don't realize that and just see what they see and chalk it up to the Novalith being OP rather than the AI not knowing how to do anything else.  Bilun did math showing that you don't need more than four to wreak economic havoc on the enemy anyways, so honestly, at this point, I'm just kind of apathetic about this at this point...

Vasari doesn't need more than 4.
Advent could use a buff and we all agree here
TEC got the hardest nerf because Novalith batteries can't exist anymore.  That said, it can still be very powerful..

Idk..  Idc.. 

I think forum posts should be nerfed.

Hmm. Sounds like we'll need to cap HC to make up for the reduced number of LRF.

I happen to agree with this one, I don't like arbitrary hard limits.  A soft economic limit maybe, but I've always hated limits that say you can't build more than X just because.  I feel enough limitations exist in the game, this one should probably be reconsidered.

As I've said in other posts, I think this limit is a really bad idea.  As was mentioned above, the AI will still gang up on the human player.  When that happens you are stuck with just 4 SWs.  Also, on huge, multi-star maps, which is what I prefer to play on, you've really monkey wrenched the human player.  Now we have to go through the pain of dismantling and rebuilding and/or waiting forever for a shot to make it to another star.  The limit also detroyed the awesome Novalith battery, that was a whole lot of fun. 

These multi-play guys can go fly a kite.  This isn't a MP only game....deal with it!! 

To make everyone happy I agree that the DEVs should just add a slider in the game setup.  That should make both those who called for the cap, and those of us who hate the limit, very happy. 

Depending on what the buffs eventually turn out to be, they can stay...just please add that slider and include an infinite option.  Someo of us REALLY liked the SWs the way they were.  Buffing them a tad seems in order, especially the Advent SW, but it's a careful balance.  Make them super, but along with that their cost balance out too.  If you buff them, make them more costly. 

LOL 200 lums arent that bad. 300 now thats trouble.

I don't know, I sent 1800 fleet cap in Corvettes at my friend in Beta 1 (where one corvette still cost only 1 fleet point). I think he jelled at me quite a bit louder than he did with the normal LRF/Lum spam...

(Yes I pretty much sacrificed all my capships for it, but at that time I wanted to know what those buggers could do)

As I said before, limiting supers is like shooting yourself in the knee. Same goes for the limit of shiptypes requested in another thread. Especially when facing uneven numbers (you versus multiple AIs) you'll quickly find that limits tend to backup enemies and kill you, and I doubt that's what singleplayer fans want.

I'm generally not a fan of hard caps under any circumstances. That said, I can see why someone would want to set up a game in which super weapons were limited.

How about a pre-game four-option toggle?

• No superweapons (I don't like it, but I put it there for consistency)
• No more than X superweapons can be built at a time
• No more than X superweapons can be built at a time PER SOLAR SYSTEM
• Infinite superweapons

Comments?

It'd be really nice if the devs added this to the gameplay file...

I think the best would be an option that is 0-2-4-8-unlimited and per star system. And also to put the Novalith back among the missiles for TEC loyalist research.

/facepalm no that would mess up the tec loyalist early advantage

No it wouldn't, why do they need the ability to rush to Novalith?

I'm all for a superweapon cap. It makes you strategize more with planetary shields. If I know my foe is just going to nail me with 20 novalith cannons I'm not going to bother building a planetary shield or even researching it. But now that I know my planet can survive, I"ll research it and build it.