Ironclad Games and Stardock Entertainment are pleased to present the change log for Sins of a Solar Empire: Trinity/Diplomacy version 1.3! This is a major gameplay update for Sins that practically rewrites much of the original design and balance for the game.
NOTE: THIS UPDATE WILL BREAK SAVE GAMES AND REPLAYS
[ Gameplay ]
[ Graphics ]
[ Interface ]
[ AI ]
Not a typo. Just game tested it. Strike craft got armor upgrade.
I think the part they didn't want to affect the strike craft was the HP increase.
This update is going to take some getting used to. I haven't quite figured out how to make my empire like other empires yet. It's a bit weird to have an empire that is rated as "Friendly" bombing the crap out of my planets because I hate them and can't get a cease fire.
In theory, wouldn't this be where player issued missions come into play? I haven't played the new patch much yet, but in theory if the AI actually listens to requests now you could keep giving attack missions to one AI against another to prevent them from ever making peace.
Nice touch with the deconstruct and looks to be really balanced adjustments. Four thumbs up!
There is that possibility. I did observe that the HP did not increase with the pact.
In general, this is fantastic...cheers to the never ending support Stardock has given to this game...
I don't get it why can't patches be retroactive for games that were already saved?
Am I the only one who thinks that the pacts that are truly worth going after are purely Vasari? Seems like everyone will want to buddy up with the nearest Vasari player/AI. The phase-gate pact alone is... priceless - not to mention an additional targeting bank for caps/star bases. Seeing other races able to have the Vasari's mobility is a personal nightmare of mine. Meanwhile as a Vasari player it feels like I'll "over-paying" for the other races' pacts.
Not trying to criticize, I do highly appreciate the update. It's great to see that your teams care enough about their customers to re-vamp the game. I'm sure I'll get used to the changes .
-Itharus
One potential P.I.T.A.: If you're in an online game with unlocked teams (or an unlocked AI game with limited winning parties)... think twice about that phase gate pact. It will open you up to some nasty pre-positioning before a really vicious backstab, if your frenemy abuses your gates.
Edit: DS dude w/ the save question: I think it's because the way they save the game... it's sorta like a running track of what's happened. It can't show you what wasn't there in the last patch, and if the engine is looking for what's not there - it's gonna cross its eyes at you and blow a raspberry. It's like an old record player... it just rolls one direction from start to finish. You try to move it back and add something in, you scratch the record.
I don't get why people are so surprised about this issue. This has been an issue for just about every game I bought. And I have bought a lot. Civ5 is another that even with the last patch they said you could play the saved game but the results would be wonky.
Trade and armor pacts are both excellent, and the Energy, Antimatter, and Culture pacts are all real good as well.
Agreed. Already played a few games with -Ue_Carbon and had great and evil fun with them.
Essentially all they would need to do is act like each patch version was a mod, then if you tried to load a game on an older version it would load the files/mod/patch that is needed for that game (i.e. every saved game and replay starts by saying use this game version, then the game proceeds to load the files needed for that version and start the saved game/replay).
It would take longer to load and use more hard drive space but its doable, though I dought its worth implementing for sins at this point.
Also I didn't see this in the patch notes (I might have missed it) the TEC hanger's damage has been doubled (base of 80 instead of 40) when you get the flak upgrade.
While that sounds doable, what about patches that change the .exe? Or something hardcoded? Trust me, the engine doesnt like hardcode issues.
Perhaps, but I am very glad they added that modifier for modding. Also I fail to see how that is weaker than the mass reduction pact, though exactly what affect mass has is probably not well understood by the average player, and certainly not by me. I never noticed much difference with it earlier on the Vasari armor upgrade.
That's why I don't think its worth doing at this point; if you implemented this early in development it would be easy to do, but adding it to a finished game would take alot of work.
So I'm playing around and... pretty sure the shield pact is bugged. As in, increasing the chance of everything going through your shields. Whoopsie.
Well if it is set up the same way as the ability modifier of the same name, I think you're right. Of course I thought the Subverter's anti-shield ability only further increased the chance of phase missiles bypassing, but if I'm mistaken and that one effected all weapons, this one probably does to.
The Thruster Pact is awesome btw.
As for Mass Reduction I assume it helps with the 'gravity' affect on ships. Aka moving towards the center mean going faster and moving away from the center slower. Also think it helps with turning rates.
You might not notice a difference with the faster settings but crank it down to 'watch grass grow' speed and I notice a difference.
You got to be kidding me...this is ridiculous...really really hope they get a hotfix out fast...
Entity file does in fact confirm this...value should be negative just like the Kol's adaptive forcefield...
Just finished a 6 hour game with friends. Love it. I have to get used to the new abilities.
Question. (This may be newbish, sorry).
Do envoy bonuses stack? IE, a Vasari envoy, his Advent envoy ally , and his TEC envoy ally all sent to a 4th player ally's planet. Do they stack? And if they do, is it one per race? IE, three Vasari envoys (of all different allied players) send to a 4th player ally's planet.
Hi again. Sorry for reposting so soon, but I noticed that the patch notes say that the Vasari Armament Pact affects Starbases and Capital ships, but the in game text does not reflect this.
Here is the text typed out as it is read in game:
"Armament Pact
(Need more research to change this alliance)
Requires 19.00 Relationship
Status: No Requests
Additional target banks: 0 -> 1
Additional bank targets: 0-> 1
Star Bases Improved: All
Improvements to targeting systems allows the weapon systems of both factions to attack an extra target per bank."
Oh . . . also there is a typo. "Allows" should be "allow".
Sorry again. Found another typo. Please don't hate me.
Under Vasari Research Pact (yellow text):
"Shared research in refinery extraction and capacity grants both parties enhanced resource aquisition rates." (sic)
Acquisition is misspelled as aquisition.
I . . . am going back into the fray. I apologize if I am back with another typo. I love this game. And I am trying really hard not to sound like a jerk.
Okay this is my last post. Found two more typos.
Under Vasari Phase Drive Pact (yellow text):
"Each faction shares their knowledge of phase space, granting one another access to phase stabilizer connections and improved phase engines."
"Their" should be "its."
Under TEC Siege Pact (Yellow Text):
"Shared advances in planetary bombardment research leads to deadlier weapon systems to use against foes and better defenses for allied planets."
"Leads" should be "lead" because the advances lead to the deadlier etc. . .
There are many great features available to you once you register, including:
Sign in or Create Account