The v1.2 BETA for Sins of a Solar Empire: Trinity/Diplomacy players is now available! This update makes some changes to the game's engine and other core systems, so we're opting to release it as a beta before making it final.
IF YOU ARE NOT COMFORTABLE WITH USING UN-FINISHED UPDATES, DO NOT INSTALL THE BETA.
Since this is a beta, it may be buggy and do unforeseen things. If you're not able/willing to help test this out and risk strange things happening, please wait until we release the final version.
WARNING: THE BETA WILL INVALIDATE YOUR EXISTING SAVE GAMES!
BETA 4 HOTFIX CHANGE LOG
BETA 4 CHANGE LOG
[ GAMEPLAY ]
We expect this to be the last beta update for v1.2 of Sins of a Solar Empire: Trinity/Diplomacy. Please let us know of any major issues asap. Beta 4 will be released later today (Thursday - 3/10)
BETA 3 CHANGE LOG
BETA 2 CHANGE LOG
BETA 1 CHANGE LOG
[ Engine ]
[ Gameplay ]
[ AI ]
[ Interface ]
[ Misc. ]
To update to the BETA, run the Impulse client and once you're logged in, click the blue button in the upper-left corner. Check "Show pre-release versions" and that will display the beta update. Update the game via the Update or My Games tab and that's it.
How to provide feedback
For gameplay related feedback, please post it in a new thread on these forums. One issue per thread, please - that'll make it easier to keep track of things.
If you encounter a crash or a multiplayer desync we will need you to send in some information to sinssupport@stardock.com.
For crashes: Send us your PC's dxdiag report, the Sins mini-dump file, and your latest save game. Please also provide us with any information or details you can about what was going on before the game crashed and if the issue is reproducible.
For desyncs: We will need the last saves for all the players involved and as detailed a description of what was going on at the time the desync occured. Also, please indicate if the desync is reproducible from your last save point.
I have to agree with the rest that this is usually the opposite problem for the AI. If you want to guarantee the destruction of an enemy fleet use phase jump inhibitors. If they are running while you are attacking one of their planets then your fleet is clearly better and you are still going to give a big blow to their income.
3 Capital ships is a very reasonable number for most fleets. I wouldn't complain about seeing that few unless the enemy fleet is above 1000 fleet supply.
a recent post on AI wishes. I think the point he was trying to make wasnt "the AI should commit suicide on my uber-fleet", but "the AI should realize that it's down to 1 or 2 planets and if it insists on going out in a blaze of glory, it shouldn't be running". The other argument is that the AI should surrender well before this point, when it has obviously lost already.
personally, I dont understand why the game doesnt allow modders to make a few simple scripts to tack onto the AI thinking process. Like maybe I think a better AI in the above situation would scuttle most of his structures on his 2nd to last planet, so that on his homeworld he can churn out a ton of light frigates/scouts for the final battle. so, i make a script with all that called AIendlosingstrat. when the AI gets to that scenario, it looks through the available scripts and chooses one at random (or could be seeded based off other factors in the other post).
But don't hold your breath.
Any updates on when the next version will come out? Will the next release be the final version?
I have a question for everyone. Is it possible to create a ship that can change its mesh color according to the background?
For example, a concept/prototype ship that is a stealth/reconnaissance ship that enters an asteroid field/plasma storm area and cannot be seen because the hull or shield is mimicing the background. The shield or hull (most likely the shield) will prevent the ship from being detected by most sensors unless they are researched and/or upgraded.
I think its possible but I am not sure. I think this would be a nice idea to add to gameplay if possible.
Sadly stealth of any kind isn't possible not because of the mesh but because of the unit icons. The best you can do is not give the ship a mesh or an icon, which prevents the player from seeing them, but units will still auto target them which defeats the point.
Im not to worried about a new tec coming in to play with the devs.I think that if the sub gets fixed we will be lucky but giving advent pm block tec could completely even out all 3 races for vasari.Vasari should be a SOFT counter to advent , advent to tec ,and tec to vasari.With the nerf to subverters and the buff to hoshis this should be a bit more in line.Vasari vs advent was not even a contest.Would like to see a buff to celio main ability,overseers 2nd ability,and buff to subjugators 2nd.Possibly bring it up to 30 hp/sec.Fix fighters and game will be much better state.I dont really want all 3 races to be equal vs each other.I like the variation about this game.
Oh one more thing.Make scouts an extra supply count and longer build times.
I believe I said something along these lines earlier in this thread. however, I feel that an advantage of 1 race over another should be able to be countered/nullified with the right research. I am most for phase missiles being affected by mitigation because then they have an advantage, but basic game mechanics have it on a leash. Also, Advent have lots of mitigation research in the civil tree that will be the way to even the score vs vasari. The trouble is that vs vasari, an advent player has to then grab that research in addition to fielding standard counters. So, I'd say that the vasari should need to do some form of research to to counter something of the Advent player. That might be culture, seeing as thats what Advent is now fielding to counter. However, culture isn't that formidable a weapon, imho.
yes to subjugators. would be great if they worked. Might get better autocasting for all ships in the process; depends how they fix it
Anyone else have massive issues getting Auto colonize to work? It seems to work for a while with the Jarrasul Evacuater but after a few times it never uses it again. I let it sit for a couple of hours at a planet that was colonizable and it never did it even though set to do so.
Are you sure you researched ice/volcanic colonization and that enemy culture wasn't too strong?
Positive. I've I can colonize manually without an issue. They just don't auto colonize. Not seen a particular pattern to it, sometime it works at the beginning of the game and quits later other times it doesn't work from the start.
You already have a thread about this. Actually, in the original, you said it was just TEC. Now you're saying it's all of them?
I'm not sure where (I really did look for an obscene amount of time), but I did write somewhere that the above problem might be why the AI feels worse in the new beta (although, now that I think about it, its been better. maybe it was just a problem in beta 1?). I have had games where the AI wiped out a planet and left a colony ship there and nothing else, but (my theory) it can't colonize because of this auto-colonize bug. So, the AI doesn't rapidly expand and seems much worse.
Reading all these threads, it sounds like TEC is going to be the race to beat. The funny thing is, is that they already were the best race in the last version of the game. I say that, but I would like all of you to bear in mind that I was strictly a Vasari player for a VERY long time.
TEC has some great early game combos, however, late game both of the other races should be able to roll over a TEC fleet with their special abilities.
Incorrect.
All factions in a game should be equally viable in all stages of a game (early, mid, and late). It is lunacy to make a game where one faction must win by a certain stage because the other factions will beat them at a later (or earlier) stage. That is piss-poor game balancing, right there. Prime example: Horde sucked before and after tier 2 in Warcraft 3 for a very long time, as a result, you had to win in tier 2, and the game was crappy for Horde players.
Also... I keep seeing people saying that the Advent are obliterated almost dismissively by the Vasari in the late game. I will repeat that this has not been my experience. Each post like this I have seen attributes perfect game-play and ability usage to the Vasari, but is very discreet on spilling the game play of the Advent forces - let alone the balance of them. I think there is a lot of bias here, and that most of it is based on paper comparisons or on personal failings in game play.
I call again to not overreact with "balances". Certain forces are obviously too strong, and some obviously too weak. Slight tweaks to those... whether it's a 360 degree firing arc for dominas, or switching to pulse weapons for Vasari fighters and/or sentinels, directly or indirectly nerfing bombers, etc; should be administered and tested before anything more radical is done. The goal here isn't to make all three factions identical, or make each equally powerful in all situations. It's to address an overall balance. If IC were to blindly follow a lot of the more adamant demands for changes in these forums, we would simply see an endless cycle of rotating over-poweredness of an individual faction in any given patch cycle... and frankly... thats part of the Blizzard model that no one needs to follow.
-Itharus
Weird, I might have to play Vasari to see if it does that for me. Are you using ZombieRus' patch so it won't crash?
It is incorrect that a perfectly legitimate opinion is incorrect.
Agreed. But thats the point of the betas. May as well start with something slightly on the overboard size so it's crystal clear how far a certain approach can go and what the unintended consequences are, then tone it back down if thats the way to go. if you try to nudge in a certain direction, you might be at it for 50 years with all the different approaches before you decide on something.
The only problem with that is, AJ, that betas are mostly the result of the devs and some very dedicated gamers, and if those gamers generally approve of an over-reacted change, sometimes it can take a damned long time to get rid of it even if the general population hates it, because let's face it: Devs care more about their loyal testing crew than the general consumer (which is only natural). So basically... even going too overboard in a (public) beta can be disastrous.
Better for more frequent smaller changes over fewer larger ones is all I'm trying to say; especially with Impulse being so handy at distributing them!
Rowanlad: Nope, I'm sorry, but I wont get used to designers making bad products. Essentially removing stages of a game from certain factions is just bad design, period. Your example is also flawed, in SC:BW all three factions were competitive in the three main stages of the game, yes they had different strengths at different stages, but they were not "beaten" by stage alone. And if you were referring to SC2: well, that game is just broken - not to mention incomplete.
Maybe you should, as a customer, demand better design rather than be content with slop .
PS: If you couldn't stop a zergling rush, you were bad
Well, if you look at the game's update history, I think you'd see that what will probably happen isnt a zillion micro-patches. The game keeps getting patched and thats suprising; most companies would have moved on by now and I'm glad they're still working with it. but to keep that spirit, I prefer they do it their own way. Which, from what we've seen in the past, seems to be infrequent, bigger patches.
This would depend on your range; if Vasari could get past the initial rush on relatively equal footing, then they were in the clear. However, this was very difficult to do if the TEC player knew what he was doing and the range was favourable for him (which it generally was in a 4v4 or 5v5). Nothing has changed here; the TEC rush game remains as vicious as it ever was, and the Vasari no longer have the Skirantra crutch.
We really do need to deal with TEC at a fundamental level, softening that brutal rush and giving them more staying power in the late-game. Right now, TEC is all about striking fast and getting ahead early, then never letting the enemy recover (or just killing them outright).
Correct, I had forgetten about that post. Yes, it appears to be all races. I am not using any custom addons, just Diplomacy and the latest official Beta patch.
With the current change log, TEC definitely will be the dominant faction...however, I don't think directly nerfing the TEC early game is the way to go...
Weakening LRFs (mainly through the damage table) will inherently weaken TEC more than Advent, and if the skirmisher got a slight DPS boost (say, increase from 12 to 13), then that would give Vasari a better early game too...
This is a change I think should be made regardless of the faction balance as this patch will do nothing to change the LRF/Bomber spam...however, such a change will also inherently balance the factions more in the early game, and nothing else would really have to be done to the TEC (early game, at least)...
The buff to Novaliths is ridiculous...33% trade reduction is fine, maybe even 50%...but not 100%, that is just as bad the OP kostura...the hoshiko buff is perfectly fine if dominas get similar buffs and subverters aren't nerfed to hell...
So, in general, I think most of the changes of this patch are a step in the right direction....but some key things are missing that will give us the balance we really want...this patch is an attempt to bring better balance, but it isn't doing a good job of fostering diversity...LRMs, bombers, and carrier caps will still dominant...the same technologies will still not get researched, the same capital ships won't get built, and the same SB upgrades will be ignored...
I think some caps are more likely to be built. The Dunov and Radiance are looking better.
I advocate switching the Novalith's debuffs around, so that the pop reduction is the one that's 100%.
Also that flak get a hefty nerf vs fighters, since those things counter both bombers and lrf, and tend to just kind of vaporize currently.
There are many great features available to you once you register, including:
Sign in or Create Account
