[quote who="-Ue_Carbon" reply="12" id="2191897"][snipped] EDIT: I do agree the Novalith needs some kind buff, maybe something to support fleets like both the Advent and Vasari superweapon does. I would trade in my big planet boom for a fleet supporting buff! [/quote] ...How about something completely unintuitive yet funky - the Novaliths radiation wipes out all shields in the area for its duration, friend and foe alike. "...But how on earth is this a bu
ReiverTA
... That's an interesting idea, actually. Also lets you get the most 'bang for your buck' on the weapon, given if it fires before shield mitigation is up too high, it deals more damage. And would justify the absurd AM cost, and make it a little more 'unique'. I had meant making the laser cannons on the side of it into a guass gun (Just to help make the Kol a little bit 'different' in its armaments, as the TEC's first purpose-built battleship), but as far as 'minimalist' changes go, &n
That is just too awesome. Looking forward to it, DANMAN - and I'll pause my own futile efforts to update the blasted stuff myself. :) (Man, trying to bugfix without developer.exe... how did you do it? I'm clearly made of softer stuff. :P)
I realise a lot of these changes could never happen in Core, given that 'what's written in the manual can't be changed', but my thoughts on the railgun is that it's the wrong ability . Thematically, I would actually fiddle the Marza and the Kol's abilities together. - The Marza loses Radiation Bomb, gains a modified Railgun ability. Why? Because it's got a sodding great spinal mounted mass driver - it's u
I'd suggest you try emailing them anyway - I rather suspect they'd be happy to help.
Ooh. That would be nice. Not so urgent now, but once there are no less than three different expansions running... it might not be a bad idea to have a single .exe, and have the different expansions on toggles. Else multiplayer is gonna suffer given the possibility of 8 different combinations of expansions (Core, Core+1, Core+2, Core+3, Core+1+2, Core+1+3, Core+2+3, Core+1+2+3...) means a rather heavily fragmented playerbase... nevermind code maintinence. >.></p
[quote who="DANMAN3712" reply="18" id="2188524"][...] I'd hate to go back to the "stone age" of this time last year with no developer at all. That was when we did it all IN CODE. DANMAN [/quote] Uphill! Both ways! In the snow! ;) (A new set of mod tools would be lovely .)
Try emailing Stardock - I'm sure they;ll be happy to help you out. If you registered the game when you first bought it (Or have it with you), all you need is the CD key.
Hey, really excited about the prospect of 7 Deadly Sins updating to Entrenchment/1.16 :) Just a quick question, given this means you'll have updated Sins Plus and the like to modern compatability, would you be able to release the updated files as well? 7DS is fun, but occasionally you feel like a taste of vanilla - but not too vanilla. ;)
That's an interesting thought - though it leaves a capital ship as being more 'super cruiser' and less 'pride of the fleet' by dint of being a specialist rather than a versatile platform. At the same time, this is perhaps not all bad, but does make balancing abilities harder - you have to make sure that all three abilities really are worth it, or only two will ever be touched till past 7th.
[quote who="FrznMD" reply="21" id="2184544"]- Custom Start positions (should be pretty easy to implement). - More network improvements (mainly lag times on lans, during the start of the game). Are my only request for Entrechment right now. [/quote] Custom start positions would not be easy to implement at all, I think - it would involve telling you just what the planet layout was to begin with; I think this rather ruins the point on some map
[quote who="Blair Fraser" reply="12" id="2180935"]We just finished Sins 1.17 and Entrenchment 1.03. We'll post the patch notes early next week and release when the testing is done (probably later that week or early the following week). Sorry I haven't been posting much, we are crazy busy on lots of new stuff. Thanks for your patience [/quote] Hooray! [e digicons]:D[/e] If I may ask, just how much work does it take in releasing the updated
[quote who="harpo99999" reply="8" id="2182096"]teal the problem with your suggestion for miltiplayer is the differing checksums for differing entitys harpo [/quote] Precisely. Multiplayer requires both players to have absolutely identical files on each copy of the game, otherwise different computers would be calculating different things with the same information... and that would be, y'know, a wee tad catastrophic. :)
That's an... interesting concept. Hmn. It could also be done, if one programmed a parser to edit .entity files and the like. It'd be a completely different style of game, rather than a reworked version, and balance would be exceedingly hard, however. Worst of all, you'd be completely unable to play Multiplayer with it, because two different ability sets would show up as incompatable files. :( So an interesting idea, but probably not a very viable one.
[/quote][quote who="Chris122990" reply="22" id="2174346"]How about the ability to include Colony Frigates in a fleet of Capital Ships and other various battle based ships. [/quote] That omission was deliberate, as it means you don't hurredly click+drag a battlegroup from the whole gravwell, and accidentally send your colony ships to their doom in a firefight. What I'd like to see are a couple UI and modding enhancements: The ability to alt+click on abilities
If a campaign didn't eventuate, it'll be a real shame - it would have been nice to had the Lore specified in more evocative, less painfully generic terms. I mean, one can reverse engineer a lot of it, but it felt like it hurt matters a bit to have had it quite so vague. A good story can do wonders. :)
Ah, but does the computer find the longest route? Or does it in fact go for the shortest that crosses space stations? I'd kind of prefer it if the trade network was more reliant on the size of the network than the specific length involved. I dunno, it's a good idea, but a little flawed at the moment. Hopefully the Diplomacy expansion includes an improved trade mechanic too. :)
My feelings are kinda mixed. The Advent have the best sounding voices of the lot, though they're not really my playstyle, they're the least offensive one aurally. The TEC, on the other hand, have the 'worst' voice acting, in that it sounds a little inconsistent. Most egarious of which is probably the Cobalt frigates excessive... eheh, enthusiasm , followed very closely by the Marza - it's just too loud and brash compared to the others. The scout frigate also annoys me a little
Howdy! Just a couple questions relating to Tricky Quirks of the game engine I'm hoping you might be able to shed light on. Apologies if this is asking a lot, but I figure my odds are better here than anywhere else (short of a developer) :) 1. Is it possible to modify what buttons appear on the Tactics Management menu? Could you put an ability there, for example, and thus fake a new 'setting' with the right .entity tricks? 2. Are you able to make an ability/buff change a
[quote who="darth-plaigus" reply="19" id="2178622"]Thus, if the third expansion was "Dreadnaughts", this would leave you in the situation of being able to buy and install Dreadnaughts without having bought Entrenchment. Given this meant you had massive offensive power and nothing at all to counter it defensively... yeah, a small problem. I sujested that each player get 1 and only one. unlike the starbases which max number is equal to the amount of planets on the map plus four
No, no. I'm not saying it would be "Entrenchment vs Diplomacy: Pick one to play", I'm saying that you'll be able to buy and play Diplomacy without having bought Entrenchment to start with. Thus, if the third expansion was "Dreadnaughts", this would leave you in the situation of being able to buy and install Dreadnaughts without having bought Entrenchment . Given this meant you had massive offensive power and nothing at all to counter it defensively... yeah, a small proble
[quote who="traukanshaku" reply="2" id="2177295"]Based on your classifications, currently the abilities of capships fall under a mix of all three categories, which ( as you pointed out, of course ), leads to some being leveled as quickly as possible ( Progen. Mothership Colonize is one of the most obvious to me ) and others being either ignored because of opportunity costs or taken at level 1. What I'd really like to see is for cap ships to become like starbases,
The SoaSE Wikia article explains it better than I could. It's a wonderful resource - just a pity it's not been updated for Entrenchment (yet?).
Yes, and they will remain viable without needing the second or third expansions. My point is that they want each expansion to not require the previous ones, so there's no gurantee that someone that buys the third expansion will have the first.
That's the problem with spectator modes in general - either they tie the observer to one side, or they let them do godmode. Watching recordings technically solves this, but it'd be nice to watch actual multi games, absolutely.