Four Game Mechanics that Need Help in order to Enhance Variety in Strategies
Sins Forums
While the other threads have been about adjustments to specific techs and abilities, there are also problems with the more general mechanics of the game. One of the most basic problems is that there doesn't seem to be the same level of interest as there was in Entrenchment, so that issues with the new expansion aren't being highlighted as much. Also, players who dislike the new features are simply turning them off in the game options screen!
The issues with organisation- the split lobbies with the redundant TEC Town lobbies, and the lack of any ladder or other matchmaking system, as well as the difficulties with custom map downloads- I've left for a separate thread.
Long Ranged Frigates- One constant theme of the game has been LRF spam. Many players were concerned about the recent general nerf to scouts to prevent them having an anti-LRF role (so they're not supposed to be anti-siege either?) where what was asked for was a nerf to Seekers to prevent them being easily the best scout. It's also claimed that LRF are not vulnerable enough to fighters because of flak, and that they snipe capitals too easily, so that capitals need buffs just to protect them from LRF packs. Also, when the carriers were slowed this reduced the specialist role of light frigates, as it became far less possible to kite LRF.
It seems to me that the basic problem with LRF is that they don't have any class of ships that their weapons are ineffective against, even heavy cruisers- while the LRF might suffer losses to heavies, they still deal out 75% damage to them- and LRF tend to be nearly twice as cheap as heavies, so that even with the heavies damage multiplier against light armour the ratio is not nearly as much in their favour as their damage bonus suggests. Without scouts and heavies, the best frigate counter to LRF is the flak frigate- but flak frigates also counter the other threat to LRF, the fighter.
It is a basic issue with the game that LRF effectively get escorts- the flak frigate and bombers based on carriers- while capitals do not, or at least their only escort- carrier based fighters- is more vulnerable to flak and antimatter depletion. The focus on carrier capitals is because carriers can keep up their fighter replenishment rates. Scouts were a type of escort for capitals as dedicated anti-LRF, but it seems that this role is to be denied them.
Unless there are changes to the damage tables LRF spam won't go away. My best suggestion is that if scouts aren't intended to be fast short-ranged LRF suppressors then light frigates should be. I'd alter the balance so that LRF were less effective against LF- 75%- and more effective against support and carriers- 133%. The LF would lose their attack on support- down to 75%- but gain 100% damage against light armour. This would mean that LF could become effective escorts for capitals, protecting them against LRF.
It has been claimed that this would drive LRF out of the game entirely, but a 75%-100% margin against LF doesn't seem that considerable given the range advantages, and the extra firepower of the LRF. LRF would also gain a role against support and carriers. If this would marginalise LRF then its hardly surprising that LF are marginalised at present. It would help capitals.
Culture- Culture advantages don't seem to be very effective in cultural warfare. I'm not sure why it would be useful to go up the Culture tech tree for extra 5% increments when basically one culture centre is all it takes to protect a planet. Perhaps these should also be regarded as useless civilian techs? If the game allowed a culture war, so that 2 centres against one had almost the same effect as one against none, then there might be more variety of approach.
Perhaps it would be fun to allow one of the specials- the wrongly derided magnetic cloud perhaps, or an entirely new one- to enhance culture effects rather than have them degrade in the grav well? That could be fun... anything to get away from you build one I build one we both stop system...
Pirates- Having the ability to dispatch pirates on missions will be fun once the pirates are made more reasonable and fun. I made this mod to show what can be done: http://datafilehost.com/download-448aad49.html The bidding system remains slightly problematic, I'd prefer a system of 'protection' money in the bidding wars, so that you would pay them to stay away- but as it stands then you would be placing bounty on yourself..! How about adding more gameplay, so that there was also a multiplier to bounty placed based on the relative trade income standing of the target. You might get 1.5x the value of your bounty against the leading trading power, and only 0.5x versus the least merchantile..?
Just making the pirates more sensible, like just making the mines more explosive, would be a major improvement on the current version though.
Last I've gone for Relationship Points- Unless as a method of speeding up the end of a game, in which case there should be another criteria such as owning 50% of the colonisables or having peace treaties with all the other factions, I'm not sure how to interpret a points victory. As it is, in single player you can simply turtle up, research three tech levels for the +3.0 bonus and win.... The simple solution would seem to be to apply a greater xeno penalty and add another one for other factions of the same type (they might have different customs). With a two-point greater penalty the victory wouldn't be as easy, and you could balance it by enhancing the higher tech xeno relations improvement. However, without some other criteria that just switches the easy win to a later stage, where you have more civilian labs than three. Perhaps this simple change might be enough in itself, as three or four civilian labs is a favoured point at which to stop building civilian labs, and the later civilian tech is much ignored?
Pacts isn't a problem that I've looked at, simply because I haven't explored team games with the expansion and I'd won my single player games on relationship points before pacts began to become an option. With the xeno change I've recommended I'd decrease the points required for pacts. However the problems with what they do haven't occurred in my games- are there one-sided pacts that just don't make sense for one of the partners, as has been suggested? Also, I agree with the requirement for feed research, whatever the consequences for random 5v5s with their smurfs and specialists 'spots'. There have to be better ways to play the game than random 5v5s...
So there it is, with the usual disclaimers on lack of experience and knowledge especially with the new stuff, however there needed to be a thread like this one to go with the others. Has anyone tried FFA multiplayer with a no allied victory relations points win active yet? I would imagine that it could get complicated..?
).