bilun

Addressing the Advent Loyalists

Addressing the Advent Loyalists

Introduction:

 

It's no secret that the advent Loyalists are at present a weak faction.  I've spent the last few days thinking about what exactly makes them weak and more to the point how these problems could be addressed with simple changes which are actually a reasonable expectation this late into beta.

 

I'll start by discussing the problems and some of their causes, the move on to proposed revisions.

 

The Problems:

 

I. The coronata Titan is subpar

The coronata has one very potent trick up it's sleeve(Suppression Aura)- but it's still a one trick pony when it comes down to it.  Repossessions was great back when it could be used to steal capital planets, but now is rather circumstantial as unless the enemy happens to have a non-capital desert/terran planet deep within their culture it does little besides save a bit of time.

Subjugating assault doesn't really become reliable until later ranks and even then only is at all useful when the enemy brings combat frigates(this ability will do nothing against an enemy using carriers kept at a  safe distance & front line capitalships).  These two qualities create a problem: if the ability is to be useful you need to drop 3-4 points into it, but if you do, the enemy can make those points utterly wasted by adopting what is already a very potent viable strategy.

The biggest problem though is Unity Mass.  It has 3x the cooldown of snipe, less then 1/2 the range, a hefty nearby fleet component to deal it's full damage, and for all those drawbacks does only 15-20% more damage at full fleet support.  Honestly I think the key to making the Coronata viable lies in buffing unity mass.

 

 

II. Weak late game

Most agree that the chief problem with the advent loyals lays in their late game rather then their start.  The question then becomes "why is this the case"? 

Well first off, they have none of the late tier "gamechanging" technologies some other factions have(such as the TEC loyal's Twin fortresses, the Advent Rebel's wail of the sacrificed, the Vasari loyal's ability to strip planets, or the vasari rebel's jumping starbases).  Their only T7/T8 research "fury of the Unity" is laughably weak for it's tier.

Another issue that contributes to their weak late game is of course issue I(the coronata titan is weak).

Though personally I think one oft overlooked and every important reason is their lack of strikecraft support.  Pretty much none of their new combat techs(Ancient retribution, Assimilated Populace, and Planet-for-a-planet) affect strikecraft.  And let's face it, especially now with the presence of titans that eat frigate fleets,  carriers ARE the most important late game frigate(they can stay at a safe distance & have a lot of a hull/shields).  Most other faction's damage boosts apply to strikecraft(TEC loyal militia techs, tec rebel savage thrill, vasari extra weapons tech upgrades).  The point is it's a major oversight that pretty much none of the factional main combat techs affect the offense of the single most important late game frigate,

 

 

III.  Culture still isn't very good

Even with the huge tech benefits the advent loyals have, it's still too easy to defend against culture once the enemy has access to culture buildings of their own.

The 2 ranks of zealous worship required to be taken before Confluence of the Unity is researched delay the advent loyal's actual culture advantage too long(think of it this way, for the cost of zealous worship+confluence the opponent can put up 2-3 culture buildings to defend with, which even +60% culture isn't going to let you push through).

And later game when the opponent has a strong economy to build culture buildigns with and capitalships to spare it's extremely difficult to cause any real damage with culture if you're not already winning(which is to say have enough of an economic advantage that culture bombing makes sense)

 

IV Heavily split between tech trees

Most of the late-tree advent loyal goodies are in the harmony tree, but at the same time the advent loyals are a very militaristic faction and their most important combat tech, ancient retribution requires 6 hostility labs.   As a result it's difficult for them to hit all of their important techs in a given game(by contrast most of the more successful factions can get almost everything important with either a civilian or militaristic focus).

This also holds in the early game, as the advent loyals pretty much need to rush 2-3 harmony labs if they want to benefit from their early culture, but at the same time like any advent faction also need to rush out 3 military labs for repair platforms/ship techs.

This is a smaller problem the I-III, but is still worth noting.

 

My solutions:


Changes to the Coronata Titan:

Unity Mass:  Reduce cooldown to 15 seconds, increase maximum number of allies benefited from by 10 at all ranks

[comments: short and simple- shorter cooldown and slightly higher max potential damage.  Would give the Coronata a larger punch when supported by a large fleet]


*Subjugating Assault:  Attacks against enemy capitalships while subjugating assault is active drain 3/4/5/6 AM.  

[comments: This would make the ability useful against capitalships as well.  at 3/4/5/6 it would still likely be better to attack frigates when they are present(Slower drain rate then the kortul per target), but it would add *something* when attacking capitalships]


* : this change may to be a bit too fundamental for this stage of beta- I mainly posted it because I think it would address an existing problem well- but it is less important then most of the other changes


Changes to Advent Loyal technologies:

Confluence of the Unity: no longer requires Zealous Worship, now only requires temple of communion tech to research.

[comments: This change will allow the advent loyals to actually adopt an aggressive early culture game.  With this change they can have confluence early enough that the enemy hasn't had time to build a bunch of culture buildings yet.  Perhaps with this change the advent loyals would actually stand a chance at causing some lasting economic damage]

 

Fury of the Unity:  Reduce to T7, increase damage bonus from 5% to 12.5%.  Additionally as long as the 7 harmony temples necessary for this tech are maintained, this tech grants 2 extra hostility temples for the purpose of research.

[comments: This is the biggest change.  it would provide the advent loyals with a strong late game tech that makes them VERY hard to fight inside their culture.  Being that TEC loyals have a lower tier tech that gives +30% damage in friendly gravity wells, it feels reasonable to me for the advent to get 12.5% extra damage in friendly culture.  The extra 2 labs is to make going 7 labs deep in the harmony tree actually make sense to the advent loyals who also NEED to be going 6 deep in the military tree for Ancient retribution.]

 

Global Unity:  Reduces the cultural resistance of enemies against advent loyal culture by 7.5/15% in addition to it's current effect.

[comments: This would make mid-late game culture a bit more viable for the advent loyals much as the confluence change would help the early game.  A reduction to enemies culture resistance could make culture pushing(and thus forcing the opponent to attack or lose their planet to culture) actually a viable later game strategy]


Ancient Retribution:  The 10% damage bonus of this tech is additionally granted to strikecraft

[comments: This combined with Fury of the Unity buff would make a decent portion of the advent loyal damage buffs apply to strikecraft.  Honestly it would be even better to have Planet-for-a-planet apply to strikecraft, but I suspect that would be harder for the devs to implement because of engine limitations.]


Conclusion:


All in all these changes would accomplish the following goals:

-improve the coronata titan

-improve late game fleet potency by extending boosts to strikecraft & making the advent loyal later game tech(Fury of the Unity) stronger & more accessible

- Increase the potency of advent loyal culture warfare a bit more(by allowing confluence to come out earlier & adding a late game culture resistance reduction)

 

Honestly with these changes I think the advent loyals would be viable and playable in the way they are intended: as an aggressive mix of cultural and military pressure. 

Moreover the only aspect of their early game(which is already decent) which would really be buffed by these changes is their culture-capabilities(earlier access to confluence).  Consequently most of these buffs are focused on bringing the advent loyal late game to par.

 

Anyway, post your own thoughts on the causes of the advent loyalist's problems and potential solutions here- any feedback to my ideas is also welcome.  That said the one restriction I'd like to request is: please try to keep suggested changes fairly simple.  At this stage of the beta I doubt Stardock is willing to completely rework abilities/techs.  Even the addition of secondary effects I've used in some of my abilities may be in point of fact too much.



 

 

 

 

43,424 views 56 replies
Reply #26 Top

Quoting Seleuceia, reply 24
it's just that they can handle only so much

Seriously? It takes me 5 minutes max to browse new posts, and I often read silly ones too. Guy who does balancing can't spare 5-10 minutes to write 1-2 posts like "we've fixed this internally" or "Yes, we will nerf skirmisher, it's OP".  It is clearly not a time issue, devs just lack involvment to do so. Which is strange, considering indie roots of SoASE.

Reply #27 Top

Quoting Mecha-Lenin, reply 26
Seriously? It takes me 5 minutes max to browse new posts, and I often read silly ones too. Guy who does balancing can't spare 5-10 minutes to write 1-2 posts like "we've fixed this internally" or "Yes, we will nerf skirmisher, it's OP".

I wasn't talking about the time investment...

If you were SD, would you really want to read posts like mine or Qu4r's (or countless others) that rail the company for being incompetent or unable to balance game or blah blah blah blah blah?  I stand by my statements and the criticism I have on SD, but at the same time I can't blame them for not wanting to read it all...

Sareth, I will reiterate my earlier points that the dev's priorities do not have balance at the top...they are more concerned with having a cool game with a working engine and lots of neat concepts/mechanics than having a game with perfect balance...that's not to say they don't care about balance, but it isn't #1 on the list, and even if it was, game balance isn't their primary strength....

What balance changes may be "obvious" to you are not obvious to the devs, especially when such a "balance" change may take the game in a direction they don't like...the silent majority of SP players is their base, and despite all the Steam/ICO/MP hype, SD's heart hasn't changed...

Reply #28 Top

Considering how absurdly imbalanced SP is right now too, yeah I think it'd be worth reading some posts on the subject. I mean sure it's easier to get away with in SP because the AI isn't very bright, but it really shouldn't be easy mode just because you picked Vasari. :P

Reply #29 Top

A cool game that lasts has balance.  The better the balance at the beginning of the game, the cooler the game experience will be.  The silent majority of single players are easily assuaged, they just want new content to mix up the games experience.  Most of the time the modder provide this new content to maintain the new experience.  The developers are the ones that provide the multiplayer community with what it needs, until they start using steam support for ICO downloads.  Even then, you need to still balance the game for sins multiplayer, because a lot of mods in a small community = a divided community that is hard to get games going, which = a multiplayer community that will die.  The only way to grow the core multiplayer base is to rely on the developers themselves to produce content for the game, and to balance that content. 

This silent majority you speak of seleucia has the majority of their sins experiences gathering dust on their shelves.  They played single player, enjoyed it, and then moved onto other games that outcompeted sins.  The developers were outcompeted not based on gameplay depth.  They were outcompeted because of glaring balance issues, and large bugs that went unfixed for years.  Considering the amount of copies sold, the sins multiplayer community should be in the low thousands, not in the low hundreds.  The developers haven't even been able to retain 1% of their entire base to their multiplayer community..which I find quite alarming!

As for the brand value of the companies of stardock and ironclad, that is for the community to decide.  Fundamentally, brand is the market value of a market's ability to trust that brand for keeping its promises.  Brands are a great way to increase your value as a company. It is in the power of the consumer to choose whether or not they trust the company, the company has only to keep its promises and act with honor.  When a company starts to go down the slippery slope into dishonor, first starting with little lies here and there, that become bigger lies until the brand is a hollow name, then you have real issues.  I've seen this happen with many companies, and game companies are particularly notorious for manipulating branding to exploit their markets.  Now that I'm starting to see these small lies here and there, i'm starting to worry about how the companies of stardock and ironclad are going to start down the wrong path.  I'm only stating this because all a company needs is one person to convince someone with power in that organization the error of their ways to institute a preventative fix.  My suggestions are the epitomy of useful, constructive criticism.  If the developers don't listen, if they want to keep their blinders on, then not even their community can help them from falling into their temporary instanity.  Such is the way of small tight nit, high powered groups.  I have a better understanding of these tight nit group dynamics then they do, as being on a submarine, living at work, forces you to learn, and learn fast.  That is why I give the developers the benefit of my experience completely free.  Most people in the corporate world pay high dollar for this sort of advice.  If they don't have open minds to the issues, then that is their problem.  I wish them the best in their ventures, yet I know they will self sabotage themselves(if they follow this path) if they don't listen to their culturally equalizing community.

There are very few video game companies that actually maintain their brand, and those that do are usually making great games.  The total war series is a great example.  I know what i'm getting with each new total war release, period.  Stardock/ironclad don't have that sort of consistency, therefore their games aren't going to get the attention that they deserve.   

 

Reply #30 Top

Quoting Seleuceia, reply 27
If you were SD, would you really want to read posts like mine or Qu4r's (or countless others) that rail the company for being incompetent or unable to balance game or blah blah blah blah blah? I stand by my statements and the criticism I have on SD, but at the same time I can't blame them for not wanting to read it all...

It's about communication with the playerbase. I can name several games which developers actively communicate with players via forum, ranging from minimum budget indie games to multi-million dollar games. I can see how devs don't want to get into balance discussions, but as I said, writing 2 sentences about issue X is not a problem and helps to ease a lot of tension on forum.

+1 Loading…
Reply #31 Top

hey, um... before everyone get's all worked up... (might be too late), if the Dev's said "It'll be done when it's done."; where the heck are people getting the idea that they're running out of time? I haven't seen anything from this site stating a release date of any kind. I mean, I've heard the 6/12 number tossed around, but where is that coming from? any official source posted in an official way?

Reply #32 Top

Sareth, SD is a private company (one of, if not the oldest private video gaming company) who's owner has a simple goal: make cool games...

What does cool mean?  Well, it means whatever the hell the devs want it to mean...they are making this game the way they want it, that is what they did with GC II and it's what they're doing with Rebellion and the magic fairy games...they don't need to do anything, because at the end of the day all they care about is being happy with their final project and enjoy playing it themselves...

Balance only needs to be "good enough"...you can argue all you want about how game balance is important for longevity and success and what not but it doesn't matter because the devs have their own motivations for making this game....you may want Sins to be the big hit of the year, but for better or worse their goals are not to make oodles of cash and beat out SC 2 for online player counts...

It is what it is...

Quoting Mecha-Lenin, reply 30
I can see how devs don't want to get into balance discussions, but as I said, writing 2 sentences about issue X is not a problem and helps to ease a lot of tension on forum.

I do agree with this...they really could save themselves a lot of grief by doing so, but all we get are change logs with just the actual changes, no explanations...

 

Reply #33 Top

Quoting SithLordAJ, reply 31
I mean, I've heard the 6/12 number tossed around, but where is that coming from? any official source posted in an official way?

http://www.vgreleases.com/PC/ReleaseDate-842590.aspx

http://www.game-debate.com/games/index.php?g_id=1684&game=Sins%20of%20a%20Solar%20Empire:%20Rebellion

http://www.gametrailers.com/game/sins-of-a-solar-empire-rebellion/14711

Some of the bigger, more credible websites (Gamespy, IGN) have 2012 TBA as the release date...

You will find the sites that don't have the June 12th release date have very old information, sometimes not having been updated since the initial announcement...hell, one website even claimed the release date was in 2011...

Is it official?  Hard to say...clearly SD has kept it on the low down so they can "back out" if they need to without too many repurcussions...

Call me a cynic, but I honestly don't see a reason to wait unless they are doing another beta update...the game isn't going to be balanced if they waited 2 months until it was released, so might as well just release the damn thing...diplomacy v1.34 came out 2 years after the initial release of diplomacy, and that game still has issues, so I think it's rather to silly to assume that waiting a little longer is magically going to make v1.0 balanced...

It's not just rebellion, no recent strategy game I know of was even close to perfection at release...it's just not practical, devs need a large player base and a longer time scale than a beta can provide in order to perfect their game...

Reply #34 Top



III.  Culture still isn't very good

Even with the huge tech benefits the advent loyals have, it's still too easy to defend against culture once the enemy has access to culture buildings of their own.

The 2 ranks of zealous worship required to be taken before Confluence of the Unity is researched delay the advent loyal's actual culture advantage too long(think of it this way, for the cost of zealous worship+confluence the opponent can put up 2-3 culture buildings to defend with, which even +60% culture isn't going to let you push through).

And later game when the opponent has a strong economy to build culture buildigns with and capitalships to spare it's extremely difficult to cause any real damage with culture if you're not already winning(which is to say have enough of an economic advantage that culture bombing makes sense)



Confluence of the Unity: no longer requires Zealous Worship, now only requires temple of communion tech to research.

[comments: This change will allow the advent loyals to actually adopt an aggressive early culture game.  With this change they can have confluence early enough that the enemy hasn't had time to build a bunch of culture buildings yet.  Perhaps with this change the advent loyals would actually stand a chance at causing some lasting economic damage]

 


 

My idea to buff Advent loyalist culture:

Any hostile planet that advent loyalist culture touches (once confluence or possibly a new tech after confluence is researched) has a reduction of its maximum allegiance by 5/10%

This would allow the advent loyalists to dish out a lasting economic impact on their enemies, even if the culture isn't strong enough to overwhelm the enemy planet.

Reply #35 Top

Hate to be a proverbial wet blanket, but we're starting to get a bit off topic- would sooner not see this become another argument over the legitimacy of stardock's balancing methodology.  I get some that some people are frustrated, but I'm starting to get sick of seeing so many threads hijacked by this debate which generally IMO isn't very productive.

 

 

Reply #36 Top

Quoting sareth01, reply 29
They were outcompeted because of glaring balance issues, and large bugs that went unfixed for years.

What you convenient forget is that these so-called 'glaring balance issues' where not the same from patch to patch. At one point, Illuminators and Missile Barage were OP and the Kortul's power surge was weak. Then scout spam became dominant and then carrier spam. It is deceptive to imply that nothing has changed in this game for years. The balance has never been perfect but it has been tweaked and shifted many times. And there were not any large bugs.

 

EDIT: Good points given in the OP, Subjugating Assault should drain AM, not only from cap ships but also Titans and SBs for it to be truly useful. Also, Repossession really needs to be unnerfed.

Technology changes sound good. One alternate suggestion that I've heard for Global Unity or Confluence would be to capture any neutral world under your culture without any hostile ships in orbit.

Reply #37 Top

Uh, just so you guys know, Steam says Rebellion is out June 12th 2012. I would think it's probably accurate, considering that's where you get the beta.

Reply #38 Top

Quoting bilun, reply 35
Hate to be a proverbial wet blanket, but we're starting to get a bit off topic- would sooner not see this become another argument over the legitimacy of stardock's balancing methodology. I get some that some people are frustrated, but I'm starting to get sick of seeing so many threads hijacked by this debate which generally IMO isn't very productive.

What should we talk about then?  Shall we beat a dead horse and continue discussing how OP the Vasari are and rehash all our solutions?  Shall we rehash how to buff the Coronata?  Rehash how to fix unyielding will?  Rehash how to fix the DE and culture and all the useless techs in the game?  Their comes a point where people get tired of theorizing and proposing new ideas...things are getting repetitive and for all we know some of these issues have already been fixed or at least taken into a new direction...

Reply #39 Top

Quoting JuleTron, reply 36
Technology changes sound good. One alternate suggestion that I've heard for Global Unity or Confluence would be to capture any neutral world under your culture without any hostile ships in orbit.

That sounds like TAR on crack...seems OP to me...still finding a bonus to max allegiance to be the simplest, most effective improvement...gives an early economic edge that Advent certainly could use...

Reply #40 Top

Quoting Seleuceia, reply 38
Rehash how to fix unyielding will? Rehash how to fix the DE and culture and all the useless techs in the game? Their comes a point where people get tired of theorizing and proposing new ideas

Talk is cheap. Choosing which solution to implement and the exact numbers will take time. Having weak techs doesn't negatively impact game play as long as they are not vital so not everything has to be tweaked to perfection. The devs have clearly been busy, we gave them what they wanted (i.e feedback) during these 3 betas and now we wait, by playing sins in its unbalanced state or by getting on with other things.

Reply #41 Top

The June 12th release is official. There's an E3 interview where one of the devs confirms it:

http://www.neogamr.net/news/e3-2012-we-chat-with-stardock-and-ironclad-about-sins-of-a-solar-empire-rebellion

It made me chuckle when he described the Vasari Loyalist Stripped to the Core/All Mobile strategy as "high risk-high reward".

Reply #42 Top

Did this Advent royalist vigina face topic just turn into "im venting that the devs are not giving us shit and times running out?

Reply #43 Top

Does that surprise you???

For the record, I actually made legit responses to the OP...

Reply #44 Top

Quoting DavidtheDuke, reply 37
Uh, just so you guys know, Steam says Rebellion is out June 12th 2012. I would think it's probably accurate, considering that's where you get the beta.

This is irrelevant and so is Seleuceia's links. Without direct word from the devs or an official announcement, I see no reason to believe any of those accounts better than tossing darts at the calendar (well, there is some logic to the guessing like the game probably won't come out on a sunday...).

Quoting RiddleKing, reply 42
Did this Advent royalist vigina face topic just turn into "im venting that the devs are not giving us shit and times running out?

wait... did RiddleKing just complain about people going off topic?!   :omg:

Sinperium! Reverse the wormhole now, dammit!

Reply #45 Top

Quoting SithLordAJ, reply 44

wait... did RiddleKing just complain about people going off topic?!  

Sinperium! Reverse the wormhole now, dammit!

We've already crossed the streams! It's too late!

Reply #46 Top

Quoting SithLordAJ, reply 44
This is irrelevant and so is Seleuceia's links. Without direct word from the devs or an official announcement, I see no reason to believe any of those accounts better than tossing darts at the calendar (well, there is some logic to the guessing like the game probably won't come out on a sunday...).

Believe whatever you want, but people who have actually played with the devs on ICO have confirmed that no new patches will be released...why not release on June 12th if you aren't going to even patch the beta anymore?

Reply #47 Top

bumping once again I hope that when the game is released I will see some patch notes about Advent Loyalists optimism for the win!

 

Reply #48 Top

What you convenient forget is that these so-called 'glaring balance issues' where not the same from patch to patch. At one point, Illuminators and Missile Barage were OP and the Kortul's power surge was weak. Then scout spam became dominant and then carrier spam. It is deceptive to imply that nothing has changed in this game for years. The balance has never been perfect but it has been tweaked and shifted many times. And there were not any large bugs.

Hmm lets see if i'm really trying to be deceptive, or if you are really just trying to tarnish my name with nothing to base it on.

Here is the quote you wished to pick at.

They were outcompeted because of glaring balance issues, and large bugs that went unfixed for years.

One key point that destroys your view of my "percieved deception" is that I take into account the fact that there were many (and I quote) "BUGS".  See that little letter "S" at the end of that word?  I acknowledged that there were MORE THAN one bug that caused the issue.  My issue isn't the fact that there are bugs.  My issue is the fact that any balance bugs that did exist took so long to change.  This is an issue within the power of ironclad/stardock.

Glaring balance issues in fact stayed the same after many patches, causing many players to get fed up and leave.  Many things were changed, and many aspects of game balance did in fact change.  The illuminator did need a nerf, yet it was nerfed far to late in the scheme of things, like FAR to late.  Do you know how I know that it was FAR to late when the illuminator nerf happened?  Because I was playing as an advent player, spamming illuminators like the best of them, ramming them down the throats of as many opponents as possible.  I did so for quite a long while, and I wasn't even close to being a "hardcore" sins player.  The nerfs happened far to late for anyone wanting to play another race to even enjoy online multiplayer.  This is but one example. 

Many balance changes were needed in the beginning that weren't addressed until months later.  In those months, many players would just up and leave.

Also, minidumps have been around since day 1.  My very first game online vs. other human beings ended in a minidump.  The reasons why these minidumps occur might change, yet the very negative effect of the minidump itself still frustrates players, still hurts the growth of the online community. 

Also, the balance in the game was close to perfect in Diplomacy, after the balance patch.  They also had little to no desync issues and I don't remember minidumping ONCE.  This was the most stable the game had ever been online, period.  I got so used to the game not being not buggy that I had forgotten about these bugs.  Yes I had actually stopped thinking about them, stopped worrying about whether or not this game would be the one that gets dumped/desynced.

I think it is perfectly reasonable to wish a return to the diplomacy post patch era of game stability and quality of game balance. 

For the record, I've also provided feedback to the OP on the original post.  now i'm enjoying alternate conversations that have arisen. 

Its a good thread OP!

Reply #49 Top

Minidumps were extremely rare in my experience and the reason why it took so long to balance illuminators was due to a very obscure damage bug.

Quoting sareth01, reply 48
BUGS". See that little letter "S"

The fact that the word used was in plural form is irrelevant. It is possible to have several bugs unfixed right from the beginning. The 'S' doesn't clarify the meaning. No matter though, your reply is clear and balanced.

 

 

Reply #50 Top

of course devs won't have to answer to us if they do not implement anything on release oh no something much worse is in store, here is looking at you Yarlen