Messages

1

Discussion, Suggestions & Feedback / Era 4, Daala and Knight Hammer

« on: February 09, 2020, 07:43:10 AM »

How do you get Daala on the Knight Hammer in Era 4?  I got Byss, built a Dreadnought shipyard, built the Knight Hammer, and it's just hanging out.  Daala's still over in the Maw with the Gorgon.

Do you have to build the Knight Hammer at Daala's location?  Move her to it after it's built?  Does she not actually get to command it anymore?

• Reply
• Quote

2

News & Updates / Re: [ICW 2.2] Era Progression Overhaul

« on: May 01, 2018, 04:49:41 PM »

You don't miss out on Isard. Quite frankly, none of the timed event downsides are especially punishing.

I got the message that Isard was ready to take control, and the research option for her appeared.  I didn't work on it, because I couldn't afford it and was too busy securing my boarders, getting my defenses set, working on connecting (or sacrificing) isolated planets, and so on.  Time passed, and I got the message that Isard had taken over and the Empire was now under her control, then the message that Thrawn was ready to return.  Isard's research option vanished and Thrawn's appeared, but no Isard or Lusankya anywhere in my territory.

3

News & Updates / Re: [ICW 2.2] Era Progression Overhaul

« on: April 30, 2018, 08:27:32 PM »

So, now that people have had a chance to play it, what do they think?

Personally, I'm still not a fan.  Knowing there's a time limit makes the Remnant really unfun to play, since I'm feeling pressured to try and make gains before everything changes.  Also, knowing there are penalties to letting the timer run out (missing out on Isard, losing planets as Thrawn, etc.) pressures you into doing the voluntary progression, which is. . . wow, not cheap.  Got to week 255, twenty or so weeks before I need to make Palpatine or lose Thrawn and Ciutric (and however many planets it takes with), and I keep losing defensive fleets because the NR zerg rushes me with Home Ones, forcing me to completely rebuild defensive fleets every so often, making it extremely difficult to save up for Palpatine.

It also rather bothers me that this increases the chances of advancing eras as other factions without actually doing anything.  A few games I've played in earlier versions, I had to fight and kill the Imperial leader, which could be quite difficult, and had a sense of reward to it.  Other times, the leader would die to another AI faction, and I get new units without having done anything at all.  Still cool, but kinda strange.  Now, all you have to do is run out the clock.  You could be just ready to start your offensive, with solid defense fleets on your chokepoints and a good offensive fleet to start taking territory, and boom. . . new units, lose some heroes, gain new ones, and probably have to redefine your fleet compositions to accomodate.  That last may just be my very low-grade OCD, but once I moved to Thrawn, the game got more pressure-filled than I generally like, crunched between only having 100 weeks, restructuring my defense fleets to use Allegiances, and having fewer credits coming in than were going out to that shipbuilding effort, to say nothing of actually finally building a decent attack fleet and army.

I get why it's there, but an option to turn off the timed part would be really nice.

4

News & Updates / Re: [ICW 2.2] Era Progression Overhaul

« on: February 15, 2018, 08:03:22 PM »

That explains things very well, thank you.

Still not sure I like it, but I understand it.  But since I haven't played it, I'll withhold judgement for now.

5

News & Updates / Re: [ICW 2.2] Era Progression Overhaul

« on: February 15, 2018, 07:45:59 PM »

It's 100 weeks per leader. Some eras have 2 leaders, so up to 200 weeks in a single era.

True.  Though my favorite leaders (Thrawn and Daala, though not sure why since I hated the Jedi Academy Trilogy) aren't among those.

Also, the size of some of the single-era GCs is comparable to Art of War in 2.15.

Are the single-eras being expanded?  Sweet.

If it turns out to actually be a problem we can change it, but these GCs are era progressive, and what people are asking for the Remnant has never been an option for the other factions to begin with.

I'm not sure what you mean by this.  Do you mean that every faction except the IR has to advance in era in era-progressive GCs, because they have to kill the Imperial leader as the conquer or someone else does it for them?  The IR does, in older versions, have the option of winning the game just with Isard, since she's the starting leader and pretty hard to kill (what with the SSD and all), and that's arguably the easiest option since the IR is still at it's "height."

6

News & Updates / Re: [ICW 2.2] Era Progression Overhaul

« on: February 15, 2018, 06:48:10 PM »

Yes, but those tend to be fairly limited in scope, which is understandable for what they represent.  I like taking a single Imperial leader through as much of an era-progressive GC as a I can, and was actually VERY excited for the older idea of basically skipping straight to my preferred leader and playing them the whole way.  Adding a timer feels like a step backward.

7

News & Updates / Re: [ICW 2.2] Era Progression Overhaul

« on: February 14, 2018, 04:15:30 PM »

Understandable, but if that leader is Palpatine, where the IR is the strongest in their progression, then One could just use this to stomp everyone.

In single player games, is this a problem?

8

News & Updates / Re: [ICW 2.2] Era Progression Overhaul

« on: February 14, 2018, 05:14:19 AM »

I'm. . . hesitant on this.  I liked the system that was shown earlier, the ability to basically pick one leader and play them for an entire GC, unless you messed up and got them killed.  While I appreciate the added depth here, being forced to lose a leader after a certain amount of time doesn't really sit well with me.  I kinda like to get to one of my favorite leaders, and then try and play them for the whole campaign.

9

News & Updates / Re: [ICW] Testing Process & Release Date

« on: February 02, 2018, 08:47:41 PM »

Still on track for that February 15th, I presume?  I noticed it said "subject to change," which is understandable, but no mention of a change thus far, so I gather everything is proceeding as foreseen?

10

Discussion, Suggestions & Feedback / Re: Imperial Civil War 2.2 Tester Signup Thread

« on: May 20, 2017, 01:14:30 PM »

Still looking for testers?  I'd love to help.

• Reply
• Quote

11

Ascendancy Discussion / Re: Fighting against New Republic impossible?

« on: December 05, 2016, 10:05:49 AM »

Hmm, sounds good.

I have been doing better. . . I think if the NR is "Aggressor" personality they get a lot tougher.  I've set them as "Economist" two games now, and seem to be dealing with them fairly well.

• Reply
• Quote

12

Ascendancy Discussion / Fighting against New Republic impossible?

« on: December 04, 2016, 12:18:36 PM »

Okay, I've played a few games, at seems like fighting the New Republic is almost impossible.  They field such HUGE fleets, dish out MASSIVE damage, and are tough to destroy.  Seems like the best I can do is drive away their fleet temporarily, with significant losses, only to have them come back with just as much firepower as before while I'm still rebuilding.  Most recently, playing Empire of the Hand, I had a two-to-one planet advantage (still developing them, though) and the NR was still sending absolutely insane fleets against me.  Watching my just-built offensive fleet (once I built up some more ships for it) evaporate guarding a planet convinced me I was in an untenable situation.  And I set the difficulty at Beginner to boot.

What am I doing wrong?

• Reply
• Quote

13

Ascendancy Discussion / Re: Executors fragile?

« on: December 03, 2016, 12:11:13 AM »

After some experimenting, my main offensive fleet wound up being:

1 SSD
5 ISDII
5 Altor
5 Torpedo Sphere
10 VSDII
10 Dread
10 Strike
10 Lancer
10 MTC

I think I upped that to 10 of everything for what turned out to be the final battle of that game, where my SSD died right before I won a Military victory (not sure how that happened, but hey).  VSDs make Scimitars, ISDs go 50/50 Interceptors/Defenders, everything else is straight Interceptors (I think), to counter NR fighter spam.

• Reply
• Quote

14

Ascendancy Discussion / Executors fragile?

« on: December 02, 2016, 11:53:34 AM »

Now, I've only played a little bit of the game and mod, but to Executor Super Star Destroyers seem rather fragile to anyone else?  Mine keep getting blown up with relative ease by enemy fleets (even with lots of other ships to support them), and it just seems like they should be able to take a bit more punishment than that.  Or am I being stupid and playing the game wrong somehow?

• Reply
• Quote

15

Ascendancy Discussion / Dreadnought thought

« on: December 02, 2016, 10:22:42 AM »

So, just recently picked up Sins of a Solar Empire:  Rebellion, and tried out the Ascendancy mod.

Excellent work.  Been a HUGE fan of Thrawn's Revenge for Empire At War, and Ascendancy is just as good.

Anyway, only been playing briefly, but I've had a thought about the Dreadnought.

Strike Cruisers have the "Denting Strike" research, which makes them much more valuable as a component of a fleet (and boy oh boy, do  you need to build big fleets in this!)  In the Thrawn Trilogy, much was made of Dreadnoughts using their ion cannons.  In Dark Force Rising, when Bel Iblis is helping Han and Lando escape New Cov, the Dreadnoughts bombard an ISD with ion cannon fire, keeping it off-balance long enough for them to escape.  Later, Garm uses them to try and capture some of Thrawn's cloaked asteroids, but to no avail.

Anyway, what about a research like "Denting Strike," except debuffing attack instead of damage, representing Dreadnought ion cannon fire knocking offensive systems offline temporarily?

• Reply
• Quote

16

Imperial Civil War Tech Support / Re: Lusankya hard to beat....obviously...but...

« on: November 27, 2016, 11:04:45 AM »

Do concussion missiles penetrate shields?

Short answer:  Nope.

Long answer:  Star Wars actually has two kinds of shields, ray shields and particle shields.  Ray shields protect from energy, particle shields from matter.  All ships have at least low-grade particle shields (since a speck of dust hitting your hull at a substantial fraction of the speed of light will ruin your day), and almost all ships have heavier particle shields and ray shields.  "Shields up" is shorthand for reinforcing the particle shields to withstand matter weapon attacks, and activating ray shields to protect from energy weapon attacks.  Most games (and in-universe fiction) abstract this to just "shields" that do both, and multiple references to single shield generators indicate that the two systems can be combined into one unit.

• Reply
• Quote

17

Imperial Civil War Tech Support / Re: Missing save files

« on: August 11, 2015, 01:48:05 PM »

...is your computer evil?  I'm seriously out of ideas.

There are days. . .

• Reply
• Quote

18

Imperial Civil War Tech Support / Re: Missing save files

« on: August 10, 2015, 09:58:05 PM »

Okay, just had the exact opposite problem.  Was playing earlier this morning, and everything was fine.  Saved, quit for awhile, just came back. . . and now my old saves are gone in the Load menu, even though they're still in the folder.  Started a new game to test, saved, and it appeared just fine, and is in the same save folder with the others. . . why the heck is my game suddenly flaking out on me like this?

• Reply
• Quote

19

Imperial Civil War Community Mods / Re: Editing unit info

« on: August 08, 2015, 09:49:18 PM »

Found one, thanks!

• Reply
• Quote

20

Imperial Civil War Community Mods / Re: Editing unit info

« on: August 08, 2015, 12:09:27 PM »

Thanks!

EDIT:  Uh, so, where can I find a DAT editor that makes sense of the gobbledegook?

• Reply
• Quote