dracop dracop

Three Serious Needs of SoaSE

▼

Three Serious Needs of SoaSE

from Stardock Forums
Ok so I finally found some settings I like and have been pounding away at the game. Currently I am in the late stage of a game and two serious needs ahve arisen:

1.) SOME kind of cap. Its ridiculkous, I have fleets with 300+ ships and so does the AI and we are basically in a a manuf war just churning out ships at each other. I know my empire's economics can barely support this war effort and I have 6/7 of all the planets; the faction of AI I am fighting only has 3 (1 terran, 1 ast belt, 1 ice) planets and they can keep pace with my manuf and trade of 18 planets/asteroids?

We need a ship cap (make it a Toggle Option on game settings, this prevents things from getting silly imo without restricting those who insist of 1000+ ship fleets), eitehr a Hard Ship cap (flat number not to cross) or a Per Planet ship cap (eg, planets act as barracks for ships, each planet can only support 25 ships or some such).

Either that or killoff the AI's bonuses after a point; I lvoe a challenge but 6 vs 1 and they keep pace is too much (ive explored all planets and know the numebrs too be accurate).

2.) UI - WE NEED some way to set fleet priorities. In particular in larger battles, the isolate one ship strategy becomes very inefficient. The computer, however, when left ot its own devices, picks a diff target for every ship! Heck half the time it chooses non-defense targets; its aggravating watching the computer attack a mining module (that is gen 0 resources....) when there is a Gauss cannon next to it firiing away. WHich makes a hash out of my stategies - it splits up my ships and sends ships to the far side of a planet to engage Trade stations and mining colonies when I am fighting tooth and nail at a different arc of the planet.

Some way of setting the computer to focus on different kinds of defenses and targets is an absolute must; when you get past the 100 mark, using the Ctrl command keys for groups breaks down as far as macromanagement.

Eg, Focus On Ships or Stationary Defenses or Orbital Economics. I think this when combined with the local AI Defense posture would make the ships behave how they should.

3.) Some of the ship AIs need to be improved: my support cruises and my carriers LOVE to charge in ahead of everyone else in the fleet. Err, they are support ships and should be staying back. My Battleships on the other hand, love engaging froma distance...
Dreadnoughts btw, LOVE firing on planets auto, even when there is a Shield gen up. Altho this could be fixed with the Strategic Targets request up top.
Hehe
Perhaps switch the two AI routines? lol

My $0.02
21,860 views 68 replies
Reply #51 from Sins Forums Top
on the clear cut basis that invincibility in an RTS always always alwaysalways always alwaysalways always alwaysalways always alwaysalways always alwaysalways always alwaysalways always alwaysalways always alwaysalways always alwaysalways always alwaysalways always alwaysalways always alwaysalways always alwaysalways always alwaysalways always alwaysalways always always sucks.
Ashes of the Singularity II
Reply #53 from Sins Forums Top
"Ahem....PEW PEW LASER BEAMS!"

Let's revisit the issue at a later date, honestly. Just focus on other parts of the game, work on balancing later.
Reply #54 from Sins Forums Top
Your proof?

every game where it has happened. also the evidence of lack of modern games with said ability.
Reply #55 from Sins Forums Top
While I might enjoy it (in an evil way) the other player may conclude differently and dimiss a great game.


I should have worded that differently, or you should have read it differently. I meant that SoaSE is a "great game" not that the round we played was a good game, it would be a shallow win for me and a potentially game breaking loss for the opponent who may thusly pass up this (SoaSE) Great Game.

thats hardly relevent. CoC generals anyone?


Its the truth.. you don't know, they may completely have this balanced and its just broken for the moment waiting for a unit or ability we dont have access to, there is a small chance and if Lock_Eye wants to cling to that chance than let him. I for one doubt it.
Reply #56 from Sins Forums Top
thats possible, but not plausible. I dont see a unit being immune to a ceasefire. I think it doesnt nescessarily need to be weakened, just tweaked so that it cant be stacked.
Reply #57 from Sins Forums Top
but not plausible


I agree with you, its not plausible, but possible. The invincability portion of it would work just fine, either by having a longer cool down, causing the cool down to affect all ships in the vicinty, making it force your units to retreat etc... There are still months and months of time to work these issues out.

Its good that we bring these issues up though, we shouldn't tuck them away becuase we don't have all the info. Early detection will help us make this a better game.
Reply #58 from Sins Forums Top
I am not saying tuck it away. Make a thread as a list of potential problems and petition for it to be sticky'd. But what I am saying is don't get all bent out shape by trying to balance the TEC against the TEC.
Reply #59 from Sins Forums Top
Lock_Eye actually gets it.

Points for smartness
Reply #60 from Sins Forums Top

I am not saying tuck it away. Make a thread as a list of potential problems and petition for it to be sticky'd. But what I am saying is don't get all bent out shape by trying to balance the TEC against the TEC.


But I want the TEC to be able to beat the TEC!

Do I get negative points for lack of smartness?
Reply #61 from Sins Forums Top
No Kosc.

Your on a whole different scale. It has no negatives or positives.
Reply #62 from Sins Forums Top
Darn...
Reply #63 from Sins Forums Top
I am not saying tuck it away. Make a thread as a list of potential problems and petition for it to be sticky'd. But what I am saying is don't get all bent out shape by trying to balance the TEC against the TEC.




I won't get bent out of shape... but I think TEC is going to balanced against itself pretty much no matter what. You both have the exact same options... I think that is about as balanced as you get.

I just dont want one of the tactics available to be an "I Win" button
Reply #64 from Sins Forums Top
Hizaed, my comment was more directed at Sentient. But I do understand your concerns, I just don't want a potential neat ability either removed or destroyed.
Reply #65 from Sins Forums Top
Just a thought; ship hard cap is unrealistic. The game should have an economic system that prevents far too big armadas.

Having a huge number of traders etc. shouldn't increase your income indefinitely. A market can only trade a limited number of goods (if nobody needs more, nobody buys more) so the profits should be limited, perhaps not as a hard max with linear income untill you reach the max but as a root curve (I'm not sure this is the correct term in English). Also traders should have upkeep as well, so the upkeep of trade ships would at some point be so high you would realize you have too many.
Reply #66 from Sins Forums Top
Also traders should have upkeep as well, so the upkeep of trade ships would at some point be so high you would realize you have too many.


They do have upkeep, but currently upkeep seems to be hard-capped at 75%, so after that, so long as your economy can support it, you can build an infinite number of ships.

Although I am in favor of an economic 'capping' instead of a hard-cap it should be noted that both of these would limit some of the end-game interest as eventually you get so large you can't do anything(which, while realistic, isn't fun) and then you run across the problem where someone smaller can then take LARGE chunks out of you and the game just becomes a "who can perserve their fleet the longest" and believe me...the turtle strategies WOULD win out in these situations, making the more aggressive gamers lose interest.

Reply #67 from Sins Forums Top
Yes, but taking a new planet should increase the economic trade max and give you the opportunity to keep a bigger no. of ships without loosing money.

I'm sorry for not being more specific, but I don't have the beta. Probably I should stay out of these feedbacks altogether...   But it's hard...
Reply #68 from Sins Forums Top
Hi LodossKnight, you are saying that the economy hard cap at 75% will force players to turtle in order to win? I hope you can explain the logic behind that.

I would be concentrating my fleets to take new quality planets in order to make new ships faster.