I agree with a most of the changes listed in the OP.

That's a fair point. This would especially be good early game. My idea centered around making GRG better late game.

 

True, Hardened Defenses won't be a game changer but at least this change will give SB compartmentalization no prerequisites.

War Measures Act gives a 25% tax income boost. I think that that is enough for tier 3. Trade income quickly becomes far more dominant than tax as a source of income but this tech can be researched before very long trade routes can be established.

I like this. It would definitely help against rushes.

If a unit is a failed concept, then it shouldn't remain that way just for the sake of uniqueness. The Ankylon isn't quite that bad but it requires hitting power. With this change the Ankylon would remain a fleet support titan but it would be able to level up faster.

Allure of the Unity is already higher tier than Global Unity and has less impact. If Global Unity isn't incentive enough to reach tier 5 than Allure of the Unity wouldn't be much incentive either. Allure has fewer effects than Global Unity and so Allure should be lower in the tech tree.

At a planet with only one phase lane accessible by the enemy, such a range buff might make it impossible for carriers to escape undamaged, but yeah you are right, most carriers should escape anyway.

 

If Cleanse and Renew granted its buff as soon as the enemy planet took damage, than the AM regen buff would be useful  in the initial assault of enemy fleet.

Making it grant the buff when the enemy colony has been destroyed means that the buff doesn't apply during the decisive first engagement. It would still be very useful if you launch another attack fairly soon afterwards. This would also be beneficial if the enemy decided to quickly counter attack.

Each buff has slightly different benefits but I think that a simple duration increase is more likely to be implemented.

That is a really good point. Added to the OP.

Remove the pirate base from all competitive maps. It doesn't take any skill to throw a titan at the base and level it to 3 or even higher if you take out the turrets.

I'd rather all titans start at level 1 in competitive games. As it stands now at-least ONE titan will start at level 3 without even fighting an enemy.

Also while we're at it I'd love to have a game option wherein there are no guaranteed periodic pirate rates BUT you can still commission pirate raids via missions.

Yeah.  Pretty much like disabled pirates, but players can still offer them missions.

-Huzzah!

I dont think you understand. Obviously if both sides have high-level titans, they kinda cancel each other. The point is to get one before your enemy does. It is the same as with superweapons/nukes with other games, the first side to get them has major advantage. 

@Valkya> 

Yes, Vorastra could perhaps hypothetically kill even 2000 fleet supply fleet, if they clusterfucked enough... the thing is, the chance of happening that is about zero. So why nerf something based on possible situations, which are highly unlikely to happen. 

Regarding stalemates, clearly if there were no stalemates, there would be no topics like these:

https://forums.sinsofasolarempire.com/378975

https://forums.sinsofasolarempire.com/411726

so yeah, i am pretty sure, stalemates happen in this game...and if they are less frequent in Rebellion than they were before, its only because of Titans and "ridiculous late game techs". Without them breaking heavily fortified worlds with dual SBs protected by a fleet would be basically impossible.

Stalemates occur frequently in unskilled games and in smaller games (1v1s or 2v2s)....in large skilled games they rarely do....it is true that there may be times where "anyone could win", but the game is by no means a stalemate...

Now, a particularly front in a large team game may be a stalemate, and those can sometimes be broken with the introduction of feed to one side (and possibly titan) or a lvl 6 marza...

Titans though, and superweapons for that matter, generally do not break stalemates...you'd think they would (and superweapons certainly should) but they just don't...VL titan is about the only consistent exception to this rule since they are so powerful...

My point is just that you have to balance at the skilled level.  And at the skilled level stalemates do not exist, so using them as justification for some radical weapons or tech that allow dramatic, uncounterable shifts in the flow of the game is both pointless and *bad design*.  I've played a lot of multiplayer matches in sins, large team games, FFA and even a lot of small games and 1v1s.  Never have I seen what I would consider a stalemate.  Yes sometimes a certain front can be so powerfully entrenched that it's not really viable to attack it, but there's always been another option, particularly for vasari that can backdoor to anywhere with Kosturas.  And I would argue that superweapons are typically more than enough to break any stalemate.  Kostura allows an attack anywhere, and somewhere the defense will be weak enough.  Novalith can do enough economic damage to attrition kill an entrenched enemy.  The deliverance engine, while definitely the weakest of the 3 can still put enough culture push on an opponent to either break their economy or outright deny a colony (though it's a slow process).

2 threads from 2-3 years ago by noname players hardly constitutes proof.  Stalemates are pretty damn rare in Sins- offense does and always has outscaled defense in the long run, and superweapons have always contributed to ending long games.  In team games stalmates are even rarer as they require a stalemate on all fronts-otherwise when one player wins against their neighbor they can join a stalemated ally creating a domino-effect(ans that's assuming no one just got doubledteamed right from the get-go).

And all that said, abstract points about titans ending the game does not excuse one faction's titan beign a huge leg up on any other faction in that regard. If titans role is to end the game every titan should have equal propensity in that regard- and at present the Vorastra is a leg up on every other titan.

Honestly though I think Micro-phase jump is as much the problem if not more-so then The Maw it's self.  Other titans can also spell death for frigate fleets, but at least you can kite them more or less indefinitely.  

Well regardless, first steps are to make desperation not hit corvettes and make The Maw a channel so the Ankylon can interrupt it.  I suppose we can assess whether the Vorastra still needs work after those changes play out.

Kosturas are indeed nice thing to have to break a stalemate, yet what if theyre useless, as you have to take out heavy fortified world with dual SB and lot of stuff anyway? Let me guess, the skilled games are Capital Planet victory only, therefore such situation cant even come up, so it should be ignored?

I understand what you say, about balancing at the "skilled" level. I disagree. The "skilled" level is perhaps 5 percent of the entire playerbase, why should this minority dictate the "content" of the patch, which affects everyone else? They are not the only ones, who cares. 

@Bilun> if you feel Vorastra is too strong, buff the other titans    seriously, no issue with Desperation nerf regarding Corvettes, if the other Titan AoEs dont affect Corvettes there is no reason why Vorastra should. I just dont think the Maw ability to kill bigger number of units than other Titan AoEs should be nerfed, simply cause it actually requires timing, bit of skill and most importantly lot of luck to get desired effect, its simply more random than things like Dissever or Chastic Burst, which give you results every battle. Those results are indeed not as spectatular as the Maw ones, but there is no risk with them that you basically "miss" and waste your activation, as you failed to micromanage it properly.

Here's how I look at it.

True Stalemates, that is between two equally powerful opponents/teams in which neither can keep momentum for long, are rare. What you do see somewhat often, especially against harder AIs, is a Grind where one player/team has achieved a clear advantage over the other, but it still takes a long time to mop up and take every planet in the other's Empire. This is made worse if no other victory conditions are enabled, if certain game settings (particulary high income/production speeds but slow move speed) are chosen, and/or by the inherently slow nature of combat in Sins.

In multiplayer, this is mostly avoided because the losing team quits well before the other team has to kill every one of their planets. Sometimes they'll refuse to quit until you defeat them in a giant fleet battle, or you'll run into trolls who refuse to do so at all, but usually people want to play another game so they quit soon after the game becomes a grind.

In single player, on the otherhand, the AIs don not usually surrender as quickly as human players, which results in the much longer matches we see, even when using the exact same settings and format as multiplayer. It also is why titans keeping their levels is particularly maddening, because if titan levels were reset eventually the winning (probably human) player would have a far higher level titan than everyone one else and the mop up would be far easier because of it. Instead it just always come back and is a challenge to defeat every time (I don't want this changed, but it is a big part of why Grinds feel like stalemates).

This is false. Standard Competitive multiplayer does not use any of the extra victory conditions. I personally think it is a shame, as it would end games much faster, and one of the funnest matches I've ever played was a flagship multiplayer game. That said, the critics are right in that it is not uncommon for a player to lose his homeworld early, but still have a colony cap survive, allowing him to come back and contribute in a meaningful way for his team.

There are three reasons why balancing should largely be but not exclusively be about skilled games.

1. If you're not playing serious games, it is hard to know what strategies are really good and which are not, as the AI makes a poor test subject.

2. Single players, while not the same as "Unskilled", have access to mods to change their game experience. It is likely impossible that the multiplayer community would ever agree on a mod to use, even if its own members were to make it, so they are in fact stuck with Vanilla, not matter how poorly balanced it maybe.

3. A relatively small number of Sins buyers may play multiplayer, but a much higher percentage of the posters of this forum and of those who really know the game well enough to give credible balance advice do play multiplayer. As much of a shame as it is, most people who bought Sins probably have less than 20 hours on it, maybe three games at first, then they occasionally play another isolated game for the heck of it every few months, if that. It's not to say these people shouldn't count, but they really don't know enough to contribute well to balance discussion, and honestly these people probably don't care about the details of balance anyways, so long as the game remains fun to them. And I think 90% of the time, balance changes suggested with multiplayer in mind are good for single player as well.

That's the thing though: late game is generally about massing carriers and microing them so they never stop kiting..  other titans can't catch them to use their AoEs effectively most fights, and when they occasionally do other titans need more then a single AoE to kill carriers.

Late game the Vorastra is not only the most spectacular as you put it, but because of micro-phase jump is actually also the most consistent.  If the Maw were unreliable or hard to set up I doubt anyone would have complaints-and in all fairness it would be if not for the Vorastra's ability to teleport.  

moreover, regardless of whether something takes some experience to use right, if there's no counterplay it usually isn't balanced.  At present the Maw+microjump combo doesn't really have any counterplay as it hits both frigates and corvettes, can't be interrupted and most notably you can't even use kiting to keep all your frigates out of range.

Again I don't really think any nerfs to Vorastra besides the corvette bit and The Maw being interruptable by Disruption Matrix should be done immediately- best to let those changes shake out first in the next patch and make an evaluation then.  But the way i see it, there's a reasonable chance that some change to the Maw+microphase jump combo will be necessary.  AT present though understand I'm not committing my opinion to anything beyond "it might still be necessary after the next patch"

Frankly, i dont think avoiding Vorastra with carriers is such a big issue - just divide them into several smaller groups and let them move constantly all around the gravity well. There is no way Vorastra could kill any significant number of them in such case. Teleporting or not, the thing with the Maw is, if the target moves, the Titan somehow has the urge to correct its position before the activation and surely it happened to you too, that it failed to activate at all, as it screwed around so long, that the targets just jumped away... and you have no control over this, you pick a target and nothing happens for a half minute and when it finally happens, the 3/4 of potential targets are gone, because the only right moment was the moment, when you issued the order...

Anyway, regarding the last paragraph, about corvettes and Disruption Matrix, well, we are basically in agreement then. I just dont wish any nerfs beyond that, and if they were about to happen, the most acceptable would be increasing the cooldown of the Maw. But please no adjustment to the effectivness of the ability/how many ships can it kill... its brutal potential combined with the skill/luck factor when used is what makes it so fun to use. Generally i dont like the approach something is OP, lets tone it down - before you know, all the cool stuff and fun-to-use things are gone, either made incredibly cost-ineffective, or available once per half hour...and what is left is just a bland game with basic units. I have utmost respect for the multiplayer community, but IMHO their issue is, that while the Sins is rapidly different game to the likes of StarCraft, their mindset is basically the same, as if it was StarCraft - play aggressively and win as fast as possible. So many cool things and possible scenarios only rarely see the action/light of the day because of this approach, because the games would end long before that...

Agreed.

-Huzzah!

So you like exploiting things that you know are unfair and the AI can't throw back at you? Wail, Starbase Mobilization and (probably) Maw all fit in the category. And while I totally understand how the play to win mentality isn't fun for Empire builders, I don't see how that fits in with wanting to keep things OP. If you like playing longer games, I would think making the "I win" buttons harder to use/get would be a good thing.

Nope, however in games against people who play multiplayer regularly you rarely survive long enough to get one starbase up, let alone two. Especially not on every planet.

The Vasari will just fly by your heavily fortified world and nuke everything else effortlessly Besides even twin fortresses dies within less tahn 2 minutes against holy op phase missile bomber swarms. 

You are right about them being a minority. And of course we should not forget about the more casual players.

However in most cases the balancing that is fine for the MP crowd is fine for the single player crowd.

The opposite is not true however. Many things that are bearable in single player are unbearable in MP, because humans use them more smartly most of the time.

No, most certainly not. The game would not not became better by making all Titans OP.

You drastically overestimate the ammount of skill required to use the Maw effectivly. Yes, the AI isnt to good with it, but in the hands of a halfway good human enemy... say goodbye to your fleet. Dont let Maws rather poor performance against the AI fool you. The AI is capable of doing a few things now human can do, like giving 500 orders a second. It also sends his ships to very odd directions all the time and so it is indeed difficult to catch a larger AI fleet with it.

In human VS human games however you will not face a lone Vorastra. You will face an entire Vasari assault fleet.... that can moop the floor with both TEC and Advent just fine without Maw in the first place.  Or your enemy will send indeed just the Vorastra in... with Kostura. By the time you note it is approaching your staging area/building planet it is usually far to late to retreat anything. Expect your newly build fleet to join their fallen comrades in the Maw.

Speaking of retreat, you have to realize that the Vasari are most mobile faction. They can outrun anyone and they can catch anyone they wish. You dont fight a late game Vasari fleet on your terms. You fight it when he decides that you are allowed to.

Chastic Burst may not require skill to use, but it requires to be close to the target. Which may prove very difficult for a slow moving Titan. But the Vorastra has Micro Phase Jump for that.

Even if you waste your activation once, it is not a big issue. It usually takes far longer to destroy the Vorastra then it needs to recharge. Not to mention that with good pre positioning your hit change easily is 90 %.

The lone Vorastra with a large gravity well is doable. However when it comes with its fleet things go down quickly. Same thing for a smaller gravity well.

A cooldown increase has been done in the latest patch already. It just doesnt help very much. Mostly because once the large majority of your fleet has been eaten, the remaining Vasari ships will easily deal with the pity remains of your fleet.

First of all it needs to be slower (I always thought it was sucking them in to fast) and it needs to be channeling and with that interruptable.

Then it needs a target cap. It can be a high one, but it shouldnt be capable of eating 300 ships like nothing.

As compensation we could make it a bit easier to use.

For your "fun" to use point:

Yes, of course it is fun. It occurs to me however that your favourite faction is Vasari - which happens to be the most powerful faction by a wide margin already. Even without any Titan or Orkulus..... the Vasari are already extremely difficult to defeat.

And that makes it NOT fun to play against them. Because they can hard counter every of the other factions tricks with ease. Now, if you give them one more OP toy, you are just asking that everyone plays Vasari, which cant be the point of the game. Already we have a worrying tendency in MP.... play TEC or Advent for fun... play Vasari to win.

I haven't touched Vas hardly at all since rebellion, so what exactly does the Maw do?  Is that the one that "eats" your fleet?

-Huzzah!

https://www.sinsofasolarempire.wikia.com/wiki/The_Maw

You can look at it that way  , but here is how i see it>

Starbase Mobilization - is indeed a cool tech, great idea, prime reason to play Vas Rebels. It was just implemented poorly, although to be fair to the devs, i am not sure if it was technically possible to do it completely right...but they could at least try to make the whole situation better by applying some deeper changes - i like for example the idea with SB mobilization being possible only between phasegates, or phase engines as one of the SB upgrades...instead they just tweak the numbers and try to nerf it that way, which is shame. The suggested ideas are IMHO better ways to do it, but i suppose more work to be done as well. BTW do the Vasari Rebels have Rapid SB deployment tech? If yes, i think they shouldnt.

Wail of the Sacrificed - is in my view terrible. Not because of what it does, but because of the way, how it does its thing. Clicking the button to kill the planet and in process enemy fleet in adjacent gravwell is just plain boring. Even if it requires bit of skill/luck like the Maw, its still not the same, as no ship is involved. Its really the same like SttC, that one would be so much better, as i believe we previously agreed, if it was a Vorastra ability (be it first/second level Maw or Desperation replacement). 

BTW SttC, prime example of toning the things to the point, where they become useless and you are most of the times better keeping the planet. I realize it had to be nerfed from its initial form, as it allowed VL to go even 1v2, but surely there was some middleground between OP - pointless, as far as balance is concerned. Now as i see it, its just situational gimmick, you shall do it, only if you are unable to keep the planet, or in general you have no reason to go fully mobile, unless you are forced to, in which case you probably lost anyway. I assume in multiplayer match, if you are unlikely to win, like under this circumstance, you are expected to surrender, right?

Finally, the Maw. I have seen AI on hard using it. It actually caught me on surprise and killed large chunk of my Enforcers, which i carelessly left to group in front of the Titan. Obviously, the AI is still limited, so I would prefer better AI instead of nerfing "unfair" things to make up for the AI´s incapability to use these unfair things themselves.

As far as keeping things OP, i would rather call it keeping things powerful/potentially game-changing. Personally it motivates me to keep playing the game toward its late stages, cause i know, there are some super cool things for me to use. I dont want to give up on them in favor of perfect balance, which is IMHO superficial thing anyway.

EDIT:

@ Aresiv>  the thing with things like dual SBs seen in multiplayer rarely just reinforces my point about multiplayer being generally too narrow minded about how the game should be played. The whole issue with TEC Loyalists is directly connected to this, the devs wanted them to be late-game strong economic/defensive faction, winning the games by the means of attrition. Too bad the multiplayer crowd does not like that, as it can take bit too long. So what to do with them now? Should they be completely scrapped/rebalanced, as being defensive does not cut with multiplayer crowd?

What i am trying to say, TEC Loyalists are fine for games against AIs/ LAN games. Their design makes them different to other faction and makes the game more diverse, which for me means better, even if they are not so viable to use in multiplayer environment. They may use some buffs, but IMHO nothing bar major redesign is going to help them, as their strengths are incompatible with how competitive multiplayer is being played. 

BTW, yesterday i saw my bud´s lvl3 Ankylon going against lvl4 Ragnarov... the Ragnarov had half of the hull, Ankylon had full hitpoints, but no shields at the start of the battle....and Ragnarov narrowly won. No surprise though, i checked the Ragnarovs damage output and it was like 196 for one set of weapons, 150 for other one etc...i would say together it could be about 500-700, while Ankylon 200 at best. That kinda suprised me, did not expect the difference to be that big. Perhaps Ankylon could use some buff (notice how i dont suggest nerfing Ragnarov )

Further regarding Vorastra, i was comparing lone Titan vs carriers situation. Clearly there is plethora of more likely situations to occur, and if the gravity well is full of enemy ships, its not that easy to set up you carriers to move unharmed overall the whole gravwell. But if there are other enemy ships than Vorastra, chances are there are other your ships beyond your carriers as well. Perhaps even the Titan of your own. That may again change the situation quite a bit.

The other thing, yes, my fav faction are Vasari Loyalists. I cant really compare them to other factions, as i did not play other factions enough to do that comparison. All i know, they are cooler for me than the other factions, as the mobility theme just floats my boat. Still, if the others feel, they are stronger than the other factions, i would prefer the others to be buffed in some meaningful way. Look at Advent Loyalists for example, they have cool Titan in Coronata, all what it takes to make them competitive is (from what i could gather) is improvement to their lousy economy and making culture bit more prominent. So repossesing enemy world and spreading culture from it right away becomes a viable tactic, which only prepared enemy can deal with.

 Addendum: Something is wrong with this forum lately. At least with Opera browser, it creates horrible empty part under the posts and now even Bold does not work for me. Not to mention updating the main thread overview with recent posts does not happen instantly - as on every other forum i saw.

Is there any patch on way anytime soon?

no phase jumping starbases period -just a crap idea with no true way to balance except by removal.  Give all starbases movement within gravity well.  velocities: 150 for vasari, 75 for advent/tec.

Tec Loyalists: 10% shield ignoring autocannons.
Kol Railgun: Affects only Hull please

Advent Repossession -destroys all enemy structures (not starbases, nor mines) or flips them to your faction.

UberInvincible Advent Titan on death -reduce invincibility time and disable ability to phase jump.  Does killing player get the XP before or after the invulnerability?  Not much of an advent player, but I thought someone mentioned players jumping out their titan to deny enemy the xp.

If we have to have jumping orkies, you don't want them to be able to move between phase stabilizer nodes.  Player then will be able to fire their Kost at your planet, which opens a PSN and blam, you've got a starbase or two next to your homeworld.

just my 2cents

Well, nothing stops them from doing this anyways. And it requires them to have maxed out labs to get both the Kostura and the Jumping Orky, so that should buy some more time before it can be used offensively. And it will be totally impossible for eco players to do that starbase spam on every planet, since they won't have enough Kostura's to be able to do it (well, only very slowly).

It was often suggested to change it that way. The developers decided to find other ways to nerf it.

Wait... you complain about Wail but you love The Maw? Who is far more dangerous? Who kills entire fleets with the hit of one button? Sounds hypocritical to me.

STTC balancing is perfectly fine right now. The idea of STTC was NEVER that you could streamroll 1v3 because you received a huge income boost. The idea was always more a weapon of denial. And it is still one of the most powerful things in the game. No other faction can PERMANENTLY DENY anyone a planet... STTC can. Add kostura to the picture and you understand why Vasari can let terror reign. They will jump to your capital and bomb in into oblivion in no time. Then they will trigger STTC. Which means you have exactly 5 minutes to:

• Destroy the Vasari fleet or force it into retreat (good luck with that, Vasari are already the most powerful faction military wise)
• Bomb the planet (and beg for mercy that he did not buy any fortifications upgrades for it
• Recolonize it.

If you dont make it.... your capital is gone.

Likely your fleet will be far away when he jumps in.... expect your capital and 1 or 2 adjacent planets to be stripped. Once your fleet is there, he will just drop a stabilizer node and jumping out... without you getting off as much as a shoot.

The AI uses Maw. Just not remotly as deadly as an human player.

Things rarely need a nerf because the AI uses them. They need a nerf because a human uses them smartly.

I think that Wail is not used by the AI only for one reason: The developers have - justified - concerns that new players who dont know the ability would scream bloody murder when their fleet dissapears without reason. That could lead to bad mouth marketing of the game, and they understandably want to avoid that.

All things are still game changing enough, even after the hardest of nerfs.

Yes, I have no doubt it motivates YOU. But it utterly DEMOTIVATES the people who want to play TEC or Advent. Because their powerful toys are more balanced and as such dont stand a change against the Vasari ones.

Balancing is not superficial. It is imperative for the games long time enjoyment, both in SP and in MP. And you dont have to give them up. You just will have to live with them being not an

I WIN BUTTON

anymore.

You like Vasari... thats fine. But 66 % of all players likely favour TEC or Advent. Should their enjoyment of the game suffer for yours?

Besides, if there is no challenge at all, where is the long term fun?

Multiplayer is quite varied, if you just look arround a bit. There are plently of longer games running. Yes, there is a "pro" scene here that rarely gets above using 3 Labs. But they are not the only ones playing in MP.

As for Twin Fortresses, the ability has one major flaw.

Things that are capable of killing one starbase can usually kill 2 starbases just as easily.

As for the late game strong economic side of the TEC Loyalists, it is not existant. Because their late game is not strong, in fact it is the weakest of all late games. They cannot win wars of attrition... not against TEC Rebel and Advent and most certainly not against Vasari.

The bottom line is:

Having two starbases, maxed out defenses and a fleet at EVERY world.. (which cost a fortune to build) and as many novalith as possible wont win you the game. Not even against the AI. Against even a LAN buddy... forget it.

Yes, thats right. Even in late game and with enemies that allowed your to build up such mighty defenses, even then... they fail.

The game could last for one week of real time... and you still could not win with TEC Loyalist. They dont do enough damage to the enemy to put him out of business.

TEC Loyalists are my favourite faction..... I love the Anklyon..... you just should not expect to win anything with them. And that is bad.... against the AI... against an LAN buddy and against human players in online multiplayer.

So it needs be adressed.

Actually this is the most likely situation to occur. Because anything but carriers does not stand a remote change against a mid level and above Titan.

Your logic works in theory but not in practise. And having your Titan and other ships there wont help you a bit against the Maw.

• When your carriers die, the Vasari ones are still alive. That means you will have a full Vasari fleet against your few remaining ships that were not eaten.
• That does probably include carriers
• But even without carriers the full Vasari fleet will destroy your fleet - effortlessy. Because they are OP.
• Your Titan - should it be still alive - cant do a thing against that.
• It needs to retreat at once, or it will be phased missiled into oblivion.

It is cool if you love Vasari Loyalists. It really is. But this does not justify them being unstoppable for all other factions.

Ahh... so to stand a change against the Maw, for example Wail would need to do the following:

50000 damage to all adjacent planets

25000 damage to all adjacent + 1 planets

cultural domination of all affected planets for 1 hour

kills all affected planets

Doesnt sound fun? Well, guess how much fun it is to loose against vasari with Advent, because you dont stand a chance. 

Yes, the Advent in general have several underlying issues. The Advent Rebels are only competivly because they have Wail and the Eradica as compensation.Take that away and they are actually worse than the Advent Loyalists, who dont happen to be particularly powerful either.

Currently the power ranking goes like

1. Vasari Loyalist - Best general fleet, unrivaled mobility, good Titan below Level 6 and OP Titan above. 
2. Vasari Rebels - best general fleet best starbase, excellent Titan on all levels. 
3. Advent Rebels - Wail only reason for rank 3.... Eradica awesome and above level 6 more deadly than Ragnarov but extremely vulnerable against Phase Missiles and so poor performance against Vasari. Very good fleet... until it gets eaten.
4. TEC Rebels: Very powerful titan without any major flaws, best economy to support said Titan with a large fleet.
5. Advent Loyalists: Best Titan killing Titan. Some nasty late game buffs. However poor AOE abilities and highly vulnerable against phase missiles.
6. TEC Loyalists: Defense only slightly better than TEC Rebel defense. Economic advantage minor and not relevant in late game. Worse late game performance than TEC Rebels, mostly because of the Anklyon. Worst Titan, subpar abilities and no tech that is worthwile.

As for preperations, many thing can kill you if you are not prepared and if they are used by a smart human. However against the Maw the only preperation is to never let the Vorastra reach level 6. Which is usually impossible. Once it has Level 6, they only thing you are preparing is your ragequit.

Last but not least, if you dont regularly play all factions, I would ask that you exercise restraint about the game balancing. Only if you play all factions regularly you can make good jugdements about what is to strong and what is to weak.

As it is one of the Vasari Rebels primary factional things, It most likely wont go.

Its balancing at least has come down to halfway bearable levels by now.

Moving starbases for all factions has been suggested countless times. It is clear by now, that it wont happen.

What could however happen and what would be a very good idea is a speed nerf of the Orky. It should move at a third of its current speed.

• Doesnt fit the lore very well.
• Doesnt help very much, because neither the Anklyon nor the starbase has ACs.

Better ideas imho:

• Beam weapon upgrade: 30 % range increase, 50 % firepower increase.
• Beams on the Kodiak Heavy cruiser. 

Kol Railgun = nice idea.

Nice idea, however it would make the faction absolutly OP against TEC Loyalists.

• Invincible time is fine. Because the only things that can kill a level 6 Eradica is a starbase or kiting carriers. The carriers are unaffected by Unyielding will. And the starbase god damm needs to die if I loose my Titan. The Eradica doesnt perform very well against starbases. 
• The XP loss is acceptable. Please consider that once it runs out of targets (maybe 30 seconds usually) the invulnerable Eradica adds a further delay to the rebuild phase. That is a disadvantage.

The big exception was superweapons, which FEI the Devs did nerf by limiting their number. Multiplayer never pushed for that one.

Don't know about that. The AI doesn't usually build auxiliary government, a pair of Novaliths might be able to take them out one world at a time.

You seem to be the only one that holds that extreme of an opinion.

And I don't think it's gotten popular support any of those times. 

I disagree, and I'm an AR player. Now that Unyielding will starts giving the bonus before the titan dies, there is no reason for the invincibility time to last that long. It should go back to its prebuff state.

@ Aresiv>

 "Because their powerful toys are more balanced and as such dont stand a change against the Vasari ones"

Do you realize how bad that sounds? What exactly makes the TEC/Advent "balanced" and Vasari not? The balance here comes out clearly from their direct comparison, in which case, who decides, which side is the balanced one and which side is not? 

I like how you substitute your preference for less deadly and game-changing end-game stuff for better balance. From my POV, more deadly stuff (the I WIN button) very late game is perfectly fine, cause you fully deserve it, if the enemy let you to gain it in the first place. Obviously, under condition, that other factions have their own win buttons late game and as i see it, things like the BRB or Wail, are technically exactly that. And no, i am not complaining about them, i just said the Wail is bit boring in comparison to the Maw. What i think is understandable.

Anyway, as you clearly prefer to finish the games using the conventional means instead of I WIN buttons, i would suggest you ask the devs for the ON/OFF switch regarding Superweapons/Titans instead of trying to nerf these things to the point, where getting them or not becomes all the same to you.