The PHC strategic bomber is pretty tough so may still be useful with those AA buffs. But the Harbinger gets fried even with the current AA, at least the Substrate AA anyway. I watched some of the streamed game last night with Creature and rrfarmer. Rrfarmer's aa tore Creature's Harbingers up and talking to Creature about it later he said he had 19 levels into his unit HP upgrade...

Otherwise, very nice to to see bug and crash fixes with some UI improvements. Good to see new languages starting to appear, long may that continue.

i gotta agree on this one. we still have the issues that irritated people the most about the cronus and artemis (that they moved away just as fast as advancing units, while firing on them) so the balance was to weaken these two units so that they are almost useless, but they still move away just as quickly, so the actual annoyance still exists..

while we have new issues (that never existed) like the OP athena spam. i still dont get the justification on the mauler not damaging buildings while the OP athena can? SS HAS to build destructors while PHC has a number of anti building options, like the stationary artillery..

i appreciate the improvements to the game, but there are still seemingly simple things that could be fixed. we know its easy to change balance, so why not do it? the patch is tiny, the files are simple number changes, yall could release a patch every day until the balance becomes fair..

pretty please

It can't. That was an issue when Maulers and to a slightly lesser extent Athenas, tore through everything, units, T3 and buildings. Now they can only use their secondary fire vs buildings.

(Sorry, I didn't mean to thumb up your comment, was just trying to quote the above line and hit the wrong button, but er, have it on the house I guess . Though I agree balance stuff takes too long to come down the line, and I did like your suggestion about slowing down when firing the big guns on T3, so the like can be for that )

Please do not do this is wrong.
Let it be the player that decide that.

Imagine that during the destiny there are several attacks on these units, who manages or controls them?

Must be the player ,the player may not want to lose these units if they reach this destination .

Ah ok cool ,then thats a really a great way to make the units think ,for some moments i was scary when i read ( Units will longer not stop moving ) they could say if you capture a region the units that have not yet arrived stop...

But i might want that they dont stop unless i give that order !

What seems to be said, is that units will not stop if the region is captured but by who?

I think i wasnt the only that get confused....

RE: If i want that in 5 diferent places units captured a region and keep to a diferent location ,half of them will stop?

It is an old issue, since forever really. If you grab a bunch of units (group A)to capture a node and then grab another bunch of units (group B ) and also send them to that node, then at the moment, if group A captures the node before group B gets there then Group B will just stop, where ever they are at that time. So when you go looking for them, expecting them to have joined up with group A they are not there and you have to backtrack to find them sitting around somewhere else and not where they should be. This is also the case that if you have one Army meta unit but it is a bit split up, then if the front runners capture the node the rest of the army will just stop where they are, strung out behind.

No need to worry, it is a welcome fix.

As I kind of explained on Steam, that is not going to happen. I guess you have not followed other RTS games before but balancing can be a long process. There are a lot of things to consider and not everyone will agree on everything. With all the new content from Escalation balancing coming to the fore again is natural. I certainly agree they can be very slow with changes coming through though, and some explanation behind the changes would be appreciated too. 

If you are only playing the AI the balance issues are less impinging as AI plays a certain way each time and won't change strategies to better utilize OP units, or ignore under powered units.

This looks like an interim patch between the current one and 2.1 so I expect you will see a more significant patch with 2.1, which was said to be coming Jan or Feb. I'd guess the latter.

I think we'll disagree on this one. I also play against friends so whether I play mostly against the AI should not really matter, we see players who like the quick game that mainly use T2 units and hardly ever use dreadnaughts but yet offer up suggestions to nerf/buff them. Balance changes I understand, why it's taking so long when the suggestions are in by players and it takes minutes to input those values. Obviously if a unit is bugged that takes longer to fix but from what I understand the constant balance changes are drawn out and tedious when they really don't have to be. It's mainly taking time because each person disagrees with another what those values will be something that they will never agree on which is something I've been saying a couple of times on steam forums. 

What's stopping anyone from creating a skype call and bringing all the active players to collaborate together and come to a solution with the devs that makes people satisfied, making everyone 100% happy with balance changes will never make them happy there's just too many differing opinions and getting those values added? 

I read member "never" post in the update equivalent topic on steam and apparently there's loads of units out of balance, then the post reply afterwards that it's a response disagreeing with his requested balance changes. Can you see where I'm coming from with this "people will never be 100% happy". the balance changes can only be as good as they'll ever be when they make the majority happy, there will always be some that will never be happy with the changes. 

I understand how it works, the way the ashes devs can alter the balance is a quick and easy process (not like in other games) so I'm not understanding why it's taking so long in getting changes that are making the majority satisfied. 

attached link will you show you that was not my idea, however as far as i know stardocks promised to change the instant heal -> take it out or something else...

https://forums.ashesofthesingularity.com/478732/page/1/#3644466

besides new dreadnough abillties are promised and should be released in winter

Brad, I don't know if you realized this or not, but some of us purchased the DLC maps once Escalation was announced with no intention of ever playing them in Ashes Vanilla.  Personally I just wanted them for Escalation.  I'm beginning to wonder if that was a dumb thing to do?  I wonder if I miscalculated what this was all about and the goals of the new game.  Is there even an ETA on any of the paid maps being available in Escalation?  Please don't be afraid of updating the DLC map one at a time instead of all at once if it means we'd get them quicker.  Also please consider making them single player only for the time being in beta so we can start having fun and providing feedback.

Thanks.

they already said like 2 weeks ago (or more) that those DLC's are carrying across... and they are busy working on it.. if u did some research u wouldnt need so much venom

There was no vemon intended in my post, so I apologize if it came across that way.  I guess it's easy on the Internet to misinterept posts when the poster himself doesn't use a bunch of emoticons to reinforce no ill will.  BTW, I was calling myself dumb as I thought maybe I had misunderstood how Escalation stood in the grand scheme of things.  ie.  I thought Escalation was supposed to replace Vanilla, not be an optional playstyle until I was in the middle of writing the post and read some more devlogs  and saw it is like "advanced" vanilla.

So that made me think there was maybe more I didn't understand about what Escalation was all about.