Sins of a Solar Empire

[Crandaeolon]

I do find the zoom levels a bit too pre-described for my taste. It's not progressive, it's in stages, and I couldn't always get the distance I wanted.

Hold SHIFT to get a finer-grained zoom.

Admittedly most of the RTS games I've played appear to have plenty of options. It's the fact they don't truly which causes me to dislike the genre.

The real-time nature of RTS games as well as the possibility of gaining a decisive material advantage by efficient building tend to blind people to the available options. For example, Starcraft's combat is actually technically more complex than that of Total War games, with more rock-paper-scissors relationships, more units to manage at once and more meaningful micromanagement. But it doesn't matter much if your opponent turtles, techs up, and lets you build a huge force of Hydralisks.

The correct response against a teching-up turtler is to rush them. This is also the case in Sins, and the computer can do this against you as well. You'll need to balance teching up and force building to get a meaningful game. Fortunately in Sins, you can control the AI's playstyles to more closely match your own.

Battles are visually boring. The ships sit still and shoot thin red lines at each other. I'd expected some manoeuvring, different types of weapons firing.

Real battles are better than the very limited stuff in the tutorials, though the criticism is definitely justified.

[Mikeus Caesar]

After reading the positive reviews and reading this thread, i'm definitely going to get this once i have the money. Unfortunately, i won't be able to play it until the second week of March, as my computer still hasn't arrived...

I want this game so bad.

[frogbeastegg]

Hold SHIFT to get a finer-grained zoom.

Thanks. I'd done a quick browse of the hotkey screen and completely missed that one.

The real-time nature of RTS games as well as the possibility of gaining a decisive material advantage by efficient building tend to blind people to the available options. For example, Starcraft's combat is actually technically more complex than that of Total War games, with more rock-paper-scissors relationships, more units to manage at once and more meaningful micromanagement. But it doesn't matter much if your opponent turtles, techs up, and lets you build a huge force of Hydralisks.

In my experience it's all limited by the AI. Against humans I can see how it would be more varied, however I don't do MP.

I started a proper game last night, a 1v1 on a small map with no pirates. I suppose I'm playing on easy; I didn't see an option for difficulty anywhere. I hope I'm playing on easy, because when I saved and quit after half an hour I was ahead of or tied with the AI in every respect and I have no idea what I'm doing in the game.

Leaving the difficulty aside, I liked my 30 minutes. The default pace is nice and slow, I only needed to pause so I had time to hunt through the tooltips and find the best selection. Had a few tiny battles, colonised two asteroid planets, did a bit of research, built a lot of space stations and gun platforms, and dithered about being confused.

This game looks well suited to one of those versus maps with a resource rich choke point in the middle. I'll have to give the map maker a whirl.

[Crandaeolon]

I suppose I'm playing on easy; I didn't see an option for difficulty anywhere. I hope I'm playing on easy, because when I saved and quit after half an hour I was ahead of or tied with the AI in every respect and I have no idea what I'm doing in the game.

The default difficulty is normal. It's adjustable at the screen where you pick your race, team and so forth - it's the last icon in the row.

AI personality also affects difficulty (it's next to the difficulty icon.) Defensive and Researcher are probably easiest, Economist is middle ground and Aggressive is hardest for most, I believe.

This game looks well suited to one of those versus maps with a resource rich choke point in the middle. I'll have to give the map maker a whirl.

Ah, yes. I meant to mention about that, but forgot. Anyways, be careful when using the map maker - at least for me it tended to generate maps with agonizingly long phase lanes. Better keep the distances relatively short at first.

I don't do MP.

Sins MP is quite fun, and the community is way more courteous and mature than usually. Actually, a lot of it reminds me of the TW community when I used to play MTW.

[frogbeastegg]

Played another 1/4 of an hour. Things are heating up.

I researched the techs which allowed me to colonise ice and lava planets, and snagged the two planets I'd found of that type. A bit more military research gained me missile frigates, so I expanded my light frigate forces to include them.The usual building up of economy and whathaveyou continued. Got lots of cash, metal and crystal coming in thanks to my building up, and so spending was a smooth process.

Scout ships have an auto-explore option. Having discovered this I took advantage, and bing, I found the enemy ... and the enemy ... and the enemy ... and the enemy holding a single choke point which controls access into and out of my half of the map. That choke point must be wrested from the AI ASAP! To this end I built a second capital ship to head the fleet in the sector which links to the choke point. Points of interest: 1. I can't tell what faction the AI are playing as. 2. Their faction colour is a light green shade which is very difficult to differentiate from the forest green I chose.

A minute or two later a massive AI fleet warps in. After a brief but messy fight the survivors retreated. Ha ha! Time for a swift counter strike. My fleet jumped, reinforced my some posh new anti-fighter frigates. One messy fracas later and I couldn't tell who was winning due to the AI's foul tactic of choosing a colour which is much too similar to my own. I suspected I was losing (there were a lot of enemy ships in the sector when I arrived) and enemy ships had warped in to the barely defended sector I'd launched the attack from. This time it was my turn to retreat.

If I can take and hold that choke point I'll be able to control half the map without danger of attack excedpt in that one predictable location. If I can't then the AI will be able to strike at 3 of my sectors directly, and the other 2 by jumping straight through the outlying sectors. The gun turret platforms don't seem to do much. I do have other fleets; I'm not fully confident in them.

The plan is for a spurt of militarisation. I'll expand my force limit and increase the size of my key fleets. Some research has been done into military tech; I'll do more. Then I'll go back to that choke point and kick the mysterious enemy out.

The default difficulty is normal. It's adjustable at the screen where you pick your race, team and so forth - it's the last icon in the row.

:wants her chunky paper manual now!: I guess this is normal then. Disappointing - my struggles all stem from my being clueless about how to play. With hindsight I can see how this map would have been far easier, and I'm not struggling for survivial now. Larger maps, higher difficulties and more factions in play could make a difference?

Sins MP is quite fun, and the community is way more courteous and mature than usually.

MP is incompatible with the way I play PC games, and it's not what I really want from them either


I'm going to break my eyes with the PDf manual.

[Crandaeolon]

1. I can't tell what faction the AI are playing as.

Open diplomacy screen, look at the portraits. Human (males) are TEC, chicks with weird eyes are Advent and uglies are Vasari.

2. Their faction colour is a light green shade which is very difficult to differentiate from the forest green I chose.

Try turning on Team Colors option at the Interface tab; it makes you green, allies blue and enemies red.

The gun turret platforms don't seem to do much.

This is a question of some debate, the static defenses are somewhat weak by design to discourage turtling. They'll stop small raiding parties and pirates, but not a determined force.

Larger maps, higher difficulties and more factions in play could make a difference?

Yeah, they do. Try playing around with AI personalities too.

EDIT: Found a helpful chart about damage types. I'd been looking for this info for a loooong time, so I thought I should share it ~:p

SHIP CLASS...........ARMOR TYPE..........DAMAGE TYPE
Scout................Light...............Antilight
Light Frigate........Medium..............Antiheavy
LRM Frigate..........Light...............Antimedium
Flak Frigate.........Heavy...............Antiverylight
Siege Frigate........Light...............Antiheavy
Trade Ship...........Light...............N/A
Utility Frigate......Heavy...............Antiheavy
Carrier..............Heavy...............N/A
Heavy Cruiser........VeryHeavy...........Composite
Capital Ship.........Capital.............Capital
Structures...........VeryHeavy...........Antimedium (for turrets)
Bomber...............Light...............Antiveryheavy
Fighter..............Verylight...........Antilight


Damage percent bonus by damage type vs. armor type

DAMAGE TYPE......VS.....CAPITAL...VERYLIGHT...LIGHT...MEDIUM...HEAVY...VERYHEAVY
Antiverylight...........25%.......150%........100%....25%......25%.....25%
Antilight...............25%.......100%........200%....25%......25%.....25%
Antimedium..............75%.......100%........100%....150%.....75%.....75%
Antiheavy...............50%.......100%........75%.....100%.....125%....50%
Antiveryheavy...........75%.......50%.........50%.....50%......50%.....100%
Composite...............75%.......100%........150%....100%.....125%....125%
Capital.................100%......25%.........75%.....100%.....100%....100%
Capital Ability.........75%.......100%........100%....100%.....100%....100%

Chance to hit by damage type
DAMAGE TYPE.........BOMBER....INTERCEPTOR
Antiverylight.......85%.......70%
Antilight...........75%.......65%
Antimedium..........10%.......10%
Antiheavy...........10%.......10%
Antiveryheavy.......20%.......10%
Composite...........10%.......10%
Capital.............10%.......10%
Capital Ability.....100%......100%

The only exception so far is Advent's long range attack frigate (Illuminator?), it does "anticapital" damage.

[Papewaio]

This game looks good.

Seems to be some base damage synergies.

So a mix of Heavy Cruisers and Capital ships gives you a 100%+ damage in all categories.

OR A carrier fleet (bombers and interceptors methinks) supported by LRM Frigates will take on anything sub-capital with glee. Add a Heavy Cruiser and you have all bases covered.

Seems the composite damage makes the HC the most damaging (much like STW )

So I assume other fleet compositions come to the fore with other items taken into account (cost of deployement, you might only do 25% damage but if you field enough of them it makes up for that price).

[Crandaeolon]

RPS relations in the game work like this (and I'm approximating here, there are lots of "soft" and tactical counters too):

Light frigates are good vs support vessels (carriers, utility and flak frigates)
Long-range frigates are good vs light frigates (Advent is a special case, see below)
Fighters are good vs long-range frigates, bombers and siege vessels
Flak frigates are good vs fighters, long-range frigates and siege vessels
Siege frigates kill planets (duh)
Bombers are good vs heavy cruisers and capital ships
Heavy cruisers are good vs pretty much everything
Capital ships are good vs pretty much everything
Utility frigates are good vs heavy cruisers and capital ships (primary weakness of heavies is lack of numbers; utility vessels with various debilitating abilities are more effective against smaller numbers)

Advent is a special case, since it doesn't really have long-range frigates at all. The equivalent ship deals anticapital damage, which is effective against everything. Advent's Achilles heel is their reliance on shields and antimatter, which means that disruption ships are particularly useful against Advent.

I hope I'm not spoiling too much...

And yes, research and deployment costs muddle the waters even more. The factions research ships in a different order and generally stress different aspects of the fleet.

[Veho Nex]

Picked it up, now this game is like Space empires but not as confusing in your first match, (me i never play tutorial), but I was incredibly confused and note that playing on hardest insures your doom with in the first hour, no matter how powerful you think your armada is.

[Louis de la Ferte Ste Colombe]

Since I'll be travelling around a bit, I have not bothered to pick it up yet, but I seriously consider it.

I'd like to see a demo, but none is available, correct?

Also, I read that the min requirement for video card is Radeon 9600 and recommended is Radeon X1600.

I got a Radeon X800SE: how does that compare? Is it good enough?

I meet other requirement, so let's hope I meet that one

Louis,

[Crandaeolon]

I think Ironclad is working on a demo, might be out in a month or so.

The game is mostly CPU intensive, i think that display card will be fine.

[Louis de la Ferte Ste Colombe]

Thanks,

Then, I'll get it when I'll be back from central europe.

Louis,

[sapi]

I found SoaSE quite an interesting game, especially since I haven't really played and 4x games before.

The general idea works great, however it does have a few problems, the main one being that unit spam works far too well

The AI, at least on normal, doesn't push things nearly hard enough, so you have plenty of time to build, say, two or three dozen light carriers. Once you've got those, jumping into a system will trigger a mass retreat on the part of the AI, as ~25 bombers can take out most capital ships in two or three passes, and nothing can really kill them. Of course, since the AI is running, it isn't targeting the carriers, allowing free reinforcement

[Martok]

Yeah, there's been a fair number of complaints that the AI retreats far too easily & often, particularly when it's defending. Most people there agree it's one thing to withdraw an invasion fleet if you discover the defenders are stronger than you initially estimated, but it's quite another to abandon your planet(s) just because the attacker's fleet is slightly stronger than yours.

Ironclad's said they were going to take a look at the problem, so hopefully they can stiffen the AI's spine a little.

[sapi]

Yeah, that'd be nice if they could

The main problem I have with the AI now isn't really that it decides to retreat so often; it's that it decides to retreat its capital ships when under attack from faster craft. It really needs to be able to recognise when it can't retreat (because it will lose those ships before they jump anyway), and just stay to fight as long as it can

[Louis de la Ferte Ste Colombe]

Ok, I got the game, did the tutorial, and started a SP game...

3 hours later, I can at least say that it keeps entertained for 3 hours and that time fly. I was a bit lost at start about what to do, it took me quite some times before figuring out to make a capital ship (I am that noob) or how to find some specific ship in my fleet.

I am surprised noone post here anymore: is the charm of this game fading after a while? So far, it does look good, and fun, and has lot of potential!

Louis,

[Crandaeolon]

Hey Louis,

I'm still playing, mostly MP like always. If you've got the time (a couple hours per game), mid-large free-for-alls can be quite fun affairs with nice Machiavellian plotting, lying and backstabbing. However, Sins needs some additional tweaking to be a viable competitive game for 1vs1 or small-scale fixed teams games.

You'll get over the initial confusion soon enough, fortunately Sins is a pretty simple game at its core.

Some starting tips:

- Buy some crystal at black market right away, about 200 units is good
- Build a couple of scouts and set them to auto-explore
- Get a capship ASAP (3 hours is maybe a tad long... )
- It'll probably be a long time before you can afford another capital ship. Consider scuttling the capship factory once your first cap is built. This gives you back some resources and frees up logistics slots.

- Remember to build extractors (I _still_ sometimes forget to build those damn things...)

- Asteroids are good first colonies, since they are lightly defended and their underdevelopment penalty can be paid off with just one upgrade.

- Expanding and teching up is expensive. On very small maps it's usually better to focus on fleet production after snagging that initial asteroid.

- Neutral extractors (extractors without a colonizable planet in the same gravity well) can be a very nice economy boost; all they cost is a bit of antimatter to capture. They're particularly useful to Vasari, since Vasari scouts can capture them as opposed to colony ships for other races.

- For chokepoint defense, a couple of repair stations and a few turrets should be able to repel early pirate raids easily and even stall a larger force for a surprisingly long time.

I hope to see you online sometime!

[Martok]

I am surprised noone post here anymore: is the charm of this game fading after a while? So far, it does look good, and fun, and has lot of potential!

Louis,

I suspect the more likely answer is that everyone's too busy playing the game to post.

Now if only they would come out with that demo so I can try it out....

[frogbeastegg]

Not had chance to play since my last post

My boxed copy has arrived. The paper manual is identical to the PDF included with the download; it's far easier to reference and I feel I have a better grip of what the game's about now I've browsed through it.

My feeling at present is that GalCiv2 + Sins = pure awesome on a CD. Sins fills GalCiv2's main lack: combat. GalCiv2 fills Sins obvious lacks: diplomacy and worthwhile non-conquest victories.

[frogbeastegg]

Gametrailers.com have put up a video review. 8 minutes of video explain how the game works better than a ream of text.

[Crandaeolon]

Good review, and certainly gets the gist across better than text.

One thing I've noticed after getting more accustomed to the game is that it appears a lot more complex and intimidating at first glance than it actually is. Most of the reviews seem to echo that Sins is a deep game with a relatively steep learning curve, but after a bit more playing you'll notice that some of the depth is only superficial - the tech tree and unit variety, for example, are comparable to traditional RTS games, including Starcraft. It's the scope and pace that distinguish Sins from the rest.

[Louis de la Ferte Ste Colombe]

Finished my first game, really nothing to be proud of, it took me 6 hours to win a 14 planets map , I guess I got scared by a massive AI raid in mid game (I was TEC, AI was Vasari with a lot of bombers / fighters), so I end up turtling in, making flaks and cruisers. Eventually, when I estimated I was good to go, AI was much easier than expected. End game was pretty much about cornering AI.
I probably could have done it in half the time.

I really like the very good interface that make it easy to give orders and manage an empire. The scope and pace of the game is also intereting, I feel like trying huge games, small games, etc... With different set up and strategy in mind. I don't know if replayability is really there, and if it is really interesting to play a slow research, huge maps, but hey, I'll give it a try!
I somehow wonder how game performance will scale with map size...
As far as pace is concerned, there is always something to do, even on a 14 planets system for 6 hours . I don't know how far down I can go in microing; my main issue in battle was that really, I had no idea what the other ships were doing, or were good against, so I gave up on targetting, and instead was trying to avoid problems. Once I'll know the ships and ability, it might prove fun!

Cranda, let me figure out which ships are what, and I'll join the lobby

Louis,

[Crandaeolon]

Huh, forum ate my post and left only the last line. Oh well.

Anyways, ships and technologies are sometimes indeed a pain to identify. TEC have nice, functional names but the other two factions are somewhat arcane. The various techs also have silly pseudo-scifi names instead of simple labels.

BTW, the AI does not "cheat" at any level - increasing difficulty only adds more tricks to its repertoire. Thus, Hard AI is the way to go.

[Louis de la Ferte Ste Colombe]

Well, 2nd game, same scenario (random small map, 14 planets), end up with advent against advent; victory in 3h40. I think I can go under 3h, spending less on research, making more ships... I research too much useless stuff. Or usefull stuff on large maps, but it's useless on those short scenario.
Less research, more agressivity: I'll make it under 3 hours .

Advent against advent was odd, since I failed to recognize ships I had and built the worng counter ships... Building defenders against purgers helps little ; the good news is that purgers help little, and that AI picked carrier cruiser to play with...
The Advent AI I played against failed to tech up enough and was a bit shy.

Still it was a good game. Resources balancing was fun; way too much cash (my fleet was quite small) and crystal, and starved on ore (I had arctic planets...). With more balanced resources, it would have gone faster...

Neat game overall!

[Crandaeolon]

Advent are pretty slow to get going, their strength is in the late game. Still, you should be able to cut that time to an hour or so, and halve that again to get the time that typical 1vs1 games take to figure out a clear winner. (In MP, opponents usually surrender at that point so you don't need to mop up.)

On small maps it's usually not worth it to research civic stuff at all, except maybe trade ports for TEC and even that puts you on the defensive. Vasari are probably the best faction for very small games because their scouts can capture neutral extractors and their "mainstay" combat ship (Assailant) is available very early.

edit: scratch that "hour or so." I played a similar game, Advent vs 1 hard AI, random small map, and finished it in 1h 50 mins. I made a couple of mistakes (had to defend against a pirate raid with main fleet, missed a colonizer which re-colonized already destroyed worlds), but in any case it'll be damned hard to get a victory within an hour. Hopefully, the oncoming 1.03 patch will make it easier to mop up vs the AI.

[Louis de la Ferte Ste Colombe]

Well, the last 1v1 on a small map was Vasari, 2hours, and I lost lot of time because I let one enemy settler wander around, and I had to hunt it before it rebuilt too many planets...
I guess I shall keep ennemy / neutral planet on closer watch
Sieging was a bit long, I shall have made more siege craft, well I would have needed to research it to start with

The only bad news about that Vasari games is that I barely scratched the Vasari tech trees, so I got very little idea what they really look like!

I probably got to play them again for educational value , otherwise, MP, here I come!
Mopping up vs AI is indeed a bit long, AI shall learn to surrender, chess AI can do it, why not Sins AI?

Louis,

[Crandaeolon]

I managed 58 minutes with Advent, 51 mins with TEC and 40 mins with Vasari. Not gonna play vs 1 AI again before they tweak it, it's far too timid now even on Aggressive/Hard. Not to mention that long range frigate rushing (or attack cruiser rushing) always beats the AI, since it tends to build lots of light frigates.

The 1.03 patch is due late this week or early next week, IIRC. Improved AI, AI surrender (yay!), tweaks to market system, long range frigates nerfed and more startup options.

Vasari are the most powerful faction in sheer military potential, with the most devastating weaponry in the game (phase missiles), best late game strikecraft, strong ship hulls and great support cruisers (Subverters.) Vasari also have the best mobility with Marauder capitals and Phase Gates. Economy-wise they're the weakest and have the most expensive ships to boot, so it's particularly important to conserve ships as Vasari. The "late game" tech Returning Armada is currently hideously overpowered (it can be rushed in 20-30 minutes), but that should be fixed in 1.03.

[Louis de la Ferte Ste Colombe]

I have no doubt that you can manage a lot better than I do, and I can easily see how I do not optimize my expenses and fleet movement to get to that kind of time-to-beat-AI. I probably could have done 1h30 as a noob, 40 min is an order of magnitude more impressive, congrat on that!
I started a large solo game, mainly to see the diplomacy game, and also to figure out if my computer can handle very large game (3 stars, 8 players).
Good news is that even a 3 years old puter can handle large game like that, and I have played 2 hours into it, so I am not worried that the world becoming much busier is going to have an impact.
That game is really low spec friendly!
On the bad side, I don't think it gets more difficult with larger game, maybe just longer. Diplomacy is not the game strongest point...

I somehow hope that MP is a bit more than second guessing what the opponent has rushed or maybe I'll turn to somehow slower larger game.

Speaking about that, Sins lobby was kind of unimpressive, either you try to join a game OR you talk? FFers know that gaming is a chatting business
I liked to see many untagged people, it feels like the beginning of the world

Louis,

[scottishranger]

Anybody wants to play, my name is Trajan.

[Crandaeolon]

40 min is an order of magnitude more impressive, congrat on that!

Memorizing a build order and exploiting AI weaknesses is not impressive, quite the opposite - an indication of too much time to waste. The random nature of, uh, _random_ maps also makes luck a pretty large factor.

1.03 unfortunately doesn't improve diplomacy AFAIK, but the AI does get a boost, thank goodness. Diplomacy improvements are coming in 1.04.

I somehow hope that MP is a bit more than second guessing what the opponent has rushed

No need to second guess when you can scout. The RPS system in Sins is not very strong, but after LRMs and Assailants get toned down in 1.03 it should be enough to promote diverse fleets.

MP is basically about the old stalwarts of getting intel, countering, positioning and coordination. Good microing helps too, but fortunately the pace is rather forgiving so you won't need the reflexes of a cockroach. Below MTW level even.

The lobby is indeed horrible in its current state, but 1.03 should already improve it somewhat.

Anybody wants to play, my name is Trajan.

Sure, let's catch a game sometime. My playername on ICO is the same as on these forums, timezone GMT +2.

Louis, I think I figured out your playername.