Entrenchment Beta 2.5 Change Log

Huzzah!!!!!!

Looks good Scout minesweep fixes should help a great deal!

cool thing. I think the cost reduction for mines and the tweaks for the anti-structure ships are a good move.

what about the vasari SB's anti structure attack? was it not supposed to get a buff too or was that only under discussion?

I think Blair said it was an intended change they were going to make. Maybe it's one of those undocumented ones.

Nice!!! Presents!!!

ah. well I guess we'll see.

Does that include the fix to Sins and Entrenchment not being installed in the same place?  Unable to run Entrenchment since Beta 2.0.

Have you sent an email to support@ironcladgames.com or support@stardock.com ?? If its been a problem you should.

Personaly Ive not had 1 problem with install or any other hangup yet. Im sure I just jinked myself for the next update.

Impulse installs is a Stardock issue, don't send it to IC support

Well I figured give both. Better safe than sorry.

Can't wait!   Is Feb 11 still the planned final release day, unless something huge comes up?

The goal of 2.5 was to get the majority of the memory optimizations in. We included a number of other misc items that we felt relatively safe including. I know there are other issues and we are on them. We just felt it was important people were playing the game without crashing so we could get more gameplay/balance feedback. 

Thanks, Blair.

Yeah, thanks bunches!!!

P.F.E.T.O.M. is still supports the idea you sleep or something like that.

Sounds good, but staying off multiplayer 'til that dreaded desync is fixed. It just kills all the fun.

Overall this patch seems like it'd be an improvement, but I still have some issues.

> The Ruiner (Vasari minelayer) was made even worse, by removing its weapon.  Granted, said weapon got it into a lot of trouble, but the fundamental problem IMO was that having such a specialized ship made it nearly useless, since the very creation and movement of one would be an exercise in micromanagement.  At 7 points per it's not a huge investment, but the amount of time needed to get it into the right position would be high.  Also, the fact that the ship costs less than a single 6-mine field, of which it is expected to place dozens, seems a bit ridiculous.

What I'd really like to see is the Ruiner, Ogrov, and Adjudicator turned into true heavy cruisers, something in the 20-supply range that bridges the gap between the fighting cruisers and the capships.  Ships that have weapons on all sides, plus activated abilities (minelaying for the Ruiner, torpedoes for the other two, plus each should gain at least one more), and decent defenses.  And a 20-cost would keep you from stacking too many of them; ideally you'd have 1-2 per fleet, no more.  For the Ruiner, this'd make it a decent solitary minelayer ship while still motivating people to bring it along with the fleets; for the others, this'd prevent people from using dozens of them to overwhelm a starbase quickly (making the reduction in defenses irrelevant).

> Starbase phase gate ability (Vasari) uses antimatter to activate as originally intended: This one REALLY worries me.  If the phase gate ability is activated, then what's the point?  You only buy that one for neutral/enemy wells as it is, and with the recent improvement in the Kostura Cannon, it's not necessary for enemy wells.  Was it really overpowered in an always-on state?  (Same goes for the scout's detection ability; why was it changed from a passive to a fast-casting free ability?)  A starbase doesn't have to spend antimatter to duplicate the effects of a trade port or fighter hangars, so why do they need to do so for the phase stabilizer?

> Improving the scout frigates' mine-clearing abilities is all well and good, but I really think it'd be better to add a research upgrade to the game that improves them far more.  For instance, add a new tech at tier 4-5 with three ranks.  Rank 1 gives scouts the mine-detection ability they currently get for free, so that early-game mines actually become a decent investment.  Rank 2 adds 50% to the radius, while rank 3 doubles the base amount.  This'd make scouts far more useful as mine-spotters for a fleet or as part of a small dedicated minesweeping squadron.

You are frekn kiddin me!

IC ownz the world!

eeeeeeeeeeeeeeee

Thanks guys

If only that were true, then I'd actually be able to get a job with them.

2.5 is up and the new ICO is up.

I haven`t tried it myself yet, but I imagine the energy cost for Vasari Starbase Phase Gate utility is mindful of the ability to deploy a Starbase *inside* enemy territory and thereby use Phase Gates offensively... which unmitigated strikes me as potentially an unfair capacity of the Vasari (and I`m a Vasari!). Making it cost energy seems like an excellent balance of that potential.

by all appearances, you already have. you just don't get paid.

yippie, patch up.

Seconded.

The flip side of that is that it makes it far less useful in non-offensive situations.  One of the nicest thing about the phase stabilizer upgrade in Entrenchment was that it finally allowed me to put both a phase stabilizer AND a Kostura Cannon around a 25-point planet (asteroid, dead asteroid, pirate base).  If you make the starbase stabilizer erratic, then it's just not worth it for your own systems; build the stabilizer as a separate structure, and use the extra starbase slot to add more defenses (hangars, etc.) to counteract the 10 lost tactical points.

Personally, I think it'd be better if there were just more countermeasures involved.  For instance, just say that there's no using phase stabilizers (or the new Kostura effect) to travel into a system containing an enemy starbase or a Phase Jump Inhibitor.  (Or better yet, allow it, but give the same sort of damage/antimatter penalty going IN that starbases currently cause going OUT.)

Very nice.

Sweet nice suprise just in time for a couple days off