very...

i would be dissapointed if there was a solid cap. I havent played beta but who needs 10k ships... maybe me against a few mates would like 500-1000 ship armies... that was half the alure to this game of the ability to be just limited by time / resources / and your rig! oh and fyi me and my mates all have rigs with specs above and beyond baleurs system.

Now im not talking about 10k ships here... but i'd like to be able to go above 300 as someone above stated....

If the limits go as high as I think they will, 500 ships should definitely be achievable on the larger maps.

As long as the unit cap is high enough to have the proper number of ships for the huge maps and the unit cap isn't set at the lowest common denominator of gaming rigs.

What i don't want to see on the biggest maps is a never ending war with fleets so far apart that you losing planets as fast as you conquer them. You would need a minimum size fleet to defeat planet defenses and this would limit the number of fleets.

It would be silly to have to mod the unit cap (and no automatic mod sharing in the in-game lobby) to play with enough ships on the biggest maps assuming you can with high end rigs. If the maps are too big, well I'm somewhat cool with that as 5 years down the road we can come back to this game and have truly epic games. But it would suck non the less if we can't play the biggest maps effectively.

Note that I have no played the game and I am not stating anything about what is in the game, just "what if"'s and common sense. (cept the mod sharing thing, that's confirmed)

I did a testing in beta 3 where i modded files as Baleur just said, where i had 20.368 ships the engine is wonderful, and can handle so much, but the problem is the hardware.
Oh and this was done on a Quad QX6700 2.66 GHZ 8800GTX 4GB PC6400

i dont feel like 1-3 fps is fun at all, maybe in a year or 2 the hardware will be good enough

20.368 ships

@Multi

i believe you are making a mistake assuming EVERY ship will be in one system.

In X3, you could build yourself a vast fleet, but if you ever went to the same system with them you might as well press the power button on your PC. X3's engine does not render visuals of ships when you are out of system (on a different map basically, but you could still track and order those ships in real time) so you could have a crap load of them, but when it had to render ships your PC could be quickly brought to it's knee's.

Now i know Sins is a VERY different game, with the zoom feature and no load times between systems. I would assume though (note i said assume) they would have a much less resource intensive process for dealing with the ships when they are not displayed.

A better experiment would be to put say 300 in a system and keep going until it got too laggy. -edit- i mean 300 per system -edit-

Good to see you around more often again Multi

Thanks Craig Yeah ill be around more thats for sure

and this doesnt support high end machines, it schackles them to the low end.


"think they will"
the limits are most likely stacked at 2000, seeing as thats the number we keep getting and multi here (seems) to not fight me when I say it. you're maximum ships runs barely over 300 as a frigate spamming TEC.

precisely why this concept is so wack, if the computer can handle a serious number of ships I shouldnt have to deal with some arbitrarily low constant because we're concerned that someone else might not find running their toaster through a 200 planet map as agreeable to their computer as mine.

which is why the alliegance and the per-planet concept was good. an empire should have a fighting chance if it has half the planets, but it certainly shouldnt have all the advantages of a twice as large empire with fewer drawbacks.

you guys are dramatizing the effect of a per planet basis to a giant slipperly slope effect, thats sad. the few games where I've seen the slipperly slope take effect is when the person losing is seriously outproduced, in which case your huge concern(disproportionately sized fleets) only becomes an issue due to the new system

it sounds to me like you have two phantom issues, and you're creating one so that the other has absolutely no effect. poor balance.

ah yes, I'm the idiot. I'm the one turning my once upon a time middle-of-the-line gaming rig into a space heater.
dont ever try that again, or at the very least give me your video card so that at least something in your computer wont explode.

oh I hope so, but all indications seem to point to a cap of exactly 2000, we even have a photo of it at precisely 2000 in a very late game, so I'm not too optimistic.

also note: multi probably would ahve torn me a new asshole on any little factoid I got wrong.

again you're not listening, thats a matter of choice based on someone's computer.

I have Supcom, but my computer cannot possibly run an 8 person game on an 81^2 map, (something considered impossible for just about any modern non-rediculous gaming rig) I obviously am not going to torture myself by putting it through a process taht will only damage my rig

now, having played the unoptimized betas 1, 2 and 3 on a computer with HALF the requirements of the betas at the time (with the only issue being a bit of lag and a broken graphics renderer) I'm not concerned about low end machines running the game on what would be considered the standard maps, maps of which the fleet cap should not even approach 2000 per player anyway, what I'm concerned about is that the nice rig (that I payed 1.5grand to get, thank you) is going to go to waste on a game that is functionally inoperable above HALF the number of stars that retain my preference. that is absurd.

to quote something I remember blair saying a few months back "we have to balance the game for all available options". if the game is completely non-functional at those levels then it certainly is not "balanced"

Rawr!

I agree with schod for once. To all of those of you saying that a solid cap makes for more strategy, tell me this, if I am twice the size of you, how does having the same number of ships as you give any more strategy. It downright punishes me for expanding because now I can't defend nearly as well as you can, much less attack as well. Now everyone will find the magic empire size where attacking, defending and mining are all in perfect balance and a game will never end, and games on large maps especially will never end. After all, just try to kill your enemy with the winning size empire, no need to unnecessarily hinder yourself.

Throught the entire beta process I have felt misled by IC and SD (the primary reason I stopped posting early on), despite the utmost respect I had for SD in regards to GCII. This was my first beta test and if anything I have learned not to preorder anything until I know exactly what it is I will end up receiving. I feel like I had no actual say in what went in to the game but that I volunteered my PCs as guinea pigs to make sure the engine behind the game worked. Although we got many official responses to our queries, a "this is a good idea, we'll see how it works" was extremely rare, and usually it was just, "what? it crashed? we'll look into it" and other extremely vague responses to technical feedback, with the computer literate only suggestions of how to fix something. It looks like as far as gameplay concepts are concerned, only the devs know what their players will really want, not the actual players themselves.



Craig's response here only further supports my dispair at the situation because he offers no response to the concern that schod has put forth (granted schod could have used a nicer tone) but instead (for lack of a better term) kissing butt to multi who (no offense to multi though) is defending the dev's decision.

This is also why I will stay out of TA until release, and probably any other beta that requires me to preorder.

if people dont like my tone, I apologize. I dont intend to make people defensive and/or uncomfortable. frankly, anger/panic does not suit me well.

but this is a feeling very VERY close to being duped. I've now got to take the word of people who haven't failed me yet, but who have just taken a HUGE shot in the dark. too much of the game's central mechanic seemed so essentially perfect and prestine in beta 4 that I frankly expected that was how the game was going to be moddeled. but between the new system of research trumps planetary real estate, reduction of income based on level of research (a concept almost immediately ditched in beta 1) and the installation of a completely solid top-is-top limit has thrown me for a huge loop.

in two months I damn well hope the devs have mastered a completely different gameplay mechanic using no more than a few dozen people, but I've seen workaholics and I cant possibly see this being an exhaustive and complete testing of the new system. If IC continues to put a lot of effort into the game post-release, maybe it will mean something. but right now I seriously fear that this game is going to recieve a lot of reviews about imbalanced gameplay mechanics because of the last minute fickle choices being made.

seriously? what was so wrong with the planetary setup? perhaps even with a research-focused add on? now I'm basically stuck spamming research instead of pylons or overlords, and its not making me happy.


now for all of you who are going to jump on my back about this: I really sincerely hope that IC has at the very least made something tantamount to beta 4's core mechanic, solid and reliable. unfortunately I dont see that as a high likelyhood, the final build has all but a few dozen work hours of a few dozen people, as opposed to the original system which has had dozens of play-hours of over a hundred people with constant influx of information.
If I'm the only one to see more commonalities between beta 1 and 4 than between 4 and release (ignoring all the flashy add ons, talking pure mechanic) then maybe I'm overreacting, damn, I HOPE I'm overreacting. but no matter how I twist this in my head what I see are the figures, and they are not very reasuring.

i know that Schod appears a bit hostile in this topic but his key point cant be dismissed.
Give players with a good computer who want to play really huge and epic games the option to do so. Just a minor option to change a fleet cap multiplier would fix all problems and please both sides.
Sure you could change it all by urself but this will just result in a lot of technical problems and isnt really practical for use.
So why not add the additional option to maps what kind of limit u want to have.
This way every player can decide by himself how much his comp can handle.

That would be a very good idea, because then the fleet caps are set to where the players want them to be, and the decisions about whether or not to add to the fleet cap at the expense of your income would remain intact.

Well personally i thought this game was quite interesting till i heard about the cap. Yea, it slows down some peoples computers, we get it. maybe make the cap a custom thing to change when on the net, that way both parties are happy.

it supports the avg user, which if you wanna see from a sales person perspective, who are you gonna sell it mostly to? Putting the unit limit too high means people will complain like in supcom. Atleast that is what i would do.
But the devs did make it possible to mod so those who wish to they can change it. Also who says the devs wont change it abit in the future?


As said thats where the modding comes in. Also my testing took far longer then you prolly think, took me around almost of 2 full days to get a fleet of that size because my PC was not powerful enough.


^^ i think your confusing me with Schod


Then i got a challange for you, once the game is out, mod a file to your liking play that with someone and tell me the fun of the lag
Try even modding as said above 300 ships in 3 systems, and let me know how it plays for you. I bet on your 1,5 grand machine it wont be fun when it starts to lag or studder.

Im just saying try the final game before becoming concerned, and then start to mod and let the devs know


Thats a matter of opinion. Have you played eve online? well one of the biggest alliances im in dont even have the manpower to secure every system. We conquer and have more space, but we really dont have the manpower to control it all.
Thats also the way i see it in Sins (when we are not talking about hardware limitations), its a choice, do you wanna expand so much and can only defend some worlds really good and some planets that are far out which of course will be harder to protect.
Like in Star Trek did they have a fleet big enough to protect all there outer worlds? no, they have a few ships around to scout around and the main fleet somewhere else.


they all are just look at lordkosc, Annatar, Yarlen, Zoomba and Kryo and the Precious Blair shall soon be mine!!! ALL MINE MUUAAHAHA

Assuming he knew anything more than the rest of us.



Your joking, right?

yeah 20k ships sitting. Thats not the same as 20k ships firing.



I hope he is. Cause there is no way the game would go on for ever. You can't rebuild a fleet of 300 ships after losing a battle in time to save the next bunch of your colonies from being destroyed.

and that's a very powerful computer pleading for mercy, so when you factor in camera movement, motion, effects, and all the other aspects, the actual verge of playability is much lower than that, and on larger maps will often be split among ten players, and although I agree that multipliers are a good idea, there needs to be a limit, or the spam attack against the other guy's computer is still possible, and that isn't strategy, it's just cheap.

I, The Great Mighty and All Benevolent Emperor of All Things Great and Awesome, don't really see the issue in this thread.

In my personal opinion, the facts presented contradict most of schem's spewings, stinky, slanderous fumes. The cap is modable, the research tree is modable, and the amount each ship costs is modable. Not to mention the fact that the game is not going to be completely perfect when it comes out. SD and IC have stated that they will continue to improve and refine the game.

None of us here can say, anything at all about how this system works. All we've seen is the bare bones. Maybe what you should've done Schem, is ask about how it worked, instead of being concerned as to the reasons of why it was included. Now you come in here and fume, that is fine by me, but please don't be such a diva. Wait for release, see what the game is like with this new system, and then come in here and scream your head off.

I am quite certain that if the system is widely unsupported IC and SD will work their hardest at having it fixed, or replaced. I myself am skeptical, but that skepticism is based on just a few facts, and a few screenshots.

In the end, I don't think anyone here would particularly want you to leave the community. You have contributed a lot, and I believe you should continue to contribute. You don't like to be wrong, you don't like to be contradicted, most of us get that. So you dont like the system, well do something about it. Don't just be like "this sucks, i quit". Wait for the release, test it out, and if you don't like it still, then please go ahead and yell your head off again.

In the end, be reasonable, this isn't really the best way to go about things.

While I do think limits are practical, they do need to at least be a sever-side option. I know its been mentioned here before, but I just want to chip in my two cents. I know a lot of people complained about SupCom's army sizes, but it had the option for unit limits, something like 500, 1000, 1500, 2000, and something simple like that would make just about everyone happy. I still remember the burn on loading up Empire at War and finding out the battle limit was 20, woohoo for four star destroyers, the last thing I want is to be unable to play a massive map, and be unable to produce enough vessels to even defend my borders or go on the offensive. Of course, I haven't seen the final product, so I could be panicing over nothing and the devs already have something in place for larger maps.

Oh, on the 20,000 ship picture, that is one epic blob!

Actually, i'll have you know, I got 2000 ships myself, with no lag, with 6 AI players, totaling near 4000 ships total, my FPS dropped, but only by about 10 taking it to 50fps total.
And my system isn't even good (except the graphics card)
1.5GB Ram
Xpert Vision 8800GT 512MB
AMD Athlon 64 3200+ 2.0GHZ~

This game is only graphically intensive, my CPU idle'd at 80% usage while running Sins, Music (Winamp), and encoding a movie. (I love my system!)
And that is no bullsh*t either, I can play Oblivion and Sin's on my rig, and Oblivion is the biggest hog by far (obviously though, dif engine, and everything)

yeah, testing now, i've got 1.5k arcovas on a planet, 15 frames per second (highest, 1400x900, 4x aa)

It's definitely not limited by video card, because turning all the options didn't help, but i'm only using about half my cpu power (running firefox, itunes, half the openoffice suite and flash) and 1.75 out of 4 gigs of ram. Odd.

Your running a Beta, keep that in mind.

Right, and I expect improvement, but not miracles. I also wonder where the heck the performance drain is coming from. I guess it's a bus, seeing as none of the actual parts were strained.