The Push for a Supported Community Patch

from Sins Forums

This has already been somewhat talked about on several other threads, but I think it is time to centralize the promotional and administrative efforts of this project here. It is pretty clear that Sins is nearing the end of its supported patches (or is at the end), but that doesn't have to be a bad thing. In fact for active modders, this is the time for mods to truly be completed as we no longer have to worry about game updates making our work obsolete. But ask anyone who has played multiplayer and they will tell you there is still a long way to go.

Thus I think we need to plan, create, and push a patch, created by the community, but just as official as another update (likely meaning available via Impulse). This seems to already being done by another Stardock game, Demigod, but in fact our job is technically much easier. Virtually all the balance problems can be fixed with changes to the data files, which are substantially easier to modify and distribute than changing the source code.

So for the plan. First of all we need a system for deciding what needs to be fixed and how so. In other words, we need a form of showing consensus. I will post my ideas later, but this patch will never appear if we don't agree on something. We also need to find out if Ironclad is in fact planning another patch for the game, in which case we will simply hold our efforts until it is released and we undoubtedly find other things that should probably be changed.

The create part is already under way, with ideas for what a community patch might contain already being discussed here. The actual implementation will need volunteers to create a mod that makes the agreed on balance changes, as well as people to test them, but I doubt that will be all that difficult. We also need to decide if we will only make patches for Diplomacy (the final version of the game), or for all three versions of Sins, and get people to port changes for both where relevant.

The push part will need to involve promoting the patch to other members of the community and at least Stardock (preferably Ironclad as well, after we find out if they are done with official patches). I believe there is a decent chance of getting it accepted, given that Stardock has allowed it with Demigod, but we need to show that we are a dedicated and responsible enough community to handle it, given we are asking them to support changes to one of their most successful products.

I will edit this post as needed to handle any further needs that may arise.

83,926 views 38 replies
Reply #1 from Sins Forums Top

If a community mod is seriously going to happen, I think we should prioritize goals, and do one or 2 at a time....too many things in this game are interrelated, so I think we should have narrow, focused goals that build upon eachother (for example, balance caps, then frigates, then defenses, then factions, then pacts, etc ect)

I'm going to continue pursuing my mod, but I will happily contribute my ideas if another mod is started...I hope many of you are willing to contribute, I know some of you out there have good ideas...

Reply #2 from Sins Forums Top

Top priority is definitely testing, and getting lots of testers (particularly the top players) to run through with a fine-tooth comb.  I'm pretty good, but nowhere near the level of some of the great players out there, and we'll need them to see the full effect of these sorts of changes.

I suspect there probably will be at least one more patch, but we do need confirmation one way or another before we go through with this.  For the time being, I'm going on the presumption that the devs are reading these posts and jotting down notes for the patch (this is similar to the silence preceeding 1.18), and I personally don't want to go ahead with anything too comprehensive until we get some confirmation.

Other than that, I'd love to be a part of this and fully support the concept.

Galactic Civilizations IV
Reply #3 from Sins Forums Top

Quoting Seleuceia, reply 1
If a community mod is seriously going to happen, I think we should prioritize goals, and do one or 2 at a time....too many things in this game are interrelated, so I think we should have narrow, focused goals that build upon eachother (for example, balance caps, then frigates, then defenses, then factions, then pacts, etc ect)

I'm going to continue pursuing my mod, but I will happily contribute my ideas if another mod is started...I hope many of you are willing to contribute, I know some of you out there have good ideas...
End of Seleuceia's quote

I am not trying to start another mod here. This topic is solely for suggestions and discussion on A. Getting an official community patch formed (regardless of what is in it) B. Getting it supported by the necessary entities to make it official and C. Working out a system for dealing with disagreements that will inevitably appear in advanced. Anything dealing directly with game changes or the like should probably be dealt with else where.

Quoting Darvin3, reply 2
Top priority is definitely testing, and getting lots of testers (particularly the top players) to run through with a fine-tooth comb.  I'm pretty good, but nowhere near the level of some of the great players out there, and we'll need them to see the full effect of these sorts of changes.

I suspect there probably will be at least one more patch, but we do need confirmation one way or another before we go through with this.  For the time being, I'm going on the presumption that the devs are reading these posts and jotting down notes for the patch (this is similar to the silence preceeding 1.18), and I personally don't want to go ahead with anything too comprehensive until we get some confirmation.

Other than that, I'd love to be a part of this and fully support the concept.
End of Darvin3's quote

Indeed, a system for testing the mod should also probably be on the to do list. But indeed not too many steps at a time.

I also suspect there will be one more patch, at least for Impulse::Reactor. Unfortunately, the first game that is supposed to use it is Elemental which will be released (hopefully) in August. But I wish for the community to have some idea of how we are going to go about with an official community patch some time before that happens.

Reply #4 from Sins Forums Top

:w00t: Include the optimization mod please.  :thumbsup:

Reply #5 from Sins Forums Top

We also need to decide if we will only make patches for Diplomacy (the final version of the game), or for all three versions of Sins, and get people to port changes for both where relevant.
End of quote

 Diplomacy, by comparison, doesn't have that many files to work with. So, say for instance you do want to change the Capitals then the frigates and so on. You will have to make changes to files that are in Entrenchment, possibly Vanilla anyway. So it would not be to much trouble to patch those versions also.

 You would also ensure you are helping the bulk of the community.

Just my 2 bobs. Best of luck with it.

Reply #6 from Sins Forums Top

Yes, please add the Sins Optimization Mod to it.

Unfortunately, even if a great patch is compiled I think it will be difficult to get the online multiplayer community to use it.  It would be like trying to herd cats.  They won't even get the Sins Optimization Mod.

Reply #7 from Sins Forums Top

They won't even get the Sins Optimization Mod.
End of quote

This is a good point...and that mod doesn't even change the game, you'd think everyone would use it...

But that is why I think GoaFan's thread here is important...if there is some "officialness" to any mod made, then it is much more likely to be universally supported...there are a lot of people who think 1.18 was more balanced, yet they still play 1.19 with everyone else...being "official" gives a huge amount of weight....

Reply #8 from Sins Forums Top

Definitely getting some official recognition/support will be key to this mod.

 

If we're going to compile it with the Sins Optimization Mod, we may want to also add in some other passive goodies, including perhaps some of the map packs out there.

Reply #9 from Stardock Forums Top

This seems to already being done by another Stardock game, Demigod
End of quote

Just fyi regarding Demigod - we have a community patch, called uberfix, that was built for the purpose of bug fixes, but there has been no official support from SD to have this hosted via impulse as an update etc.  As a result, very few people use the patch because its not mandatory and actually hinders getting people to join games (if the community members don't have the patch, they can't join your game).  We were able to get widespread usage of the uberfix mod as a result of a recent tournament, but usage has tapered off ever since.

I will add that including patches like uberfix via impulse was briefly discussed by Brad as a good idea, but there hasn't been much discussion since (we're talking several months ago).  The ideal situation, at least in the case of Demigod, would be for the uberfix patch to be included directly as a mandatory update in impulse so that all players would be required to have it installed as a mod (but not enabled) and then the games host would simply have to enable it if they wanted to utilize it. 

I'm not sure precisely what the ideal setup would be for you guys (eg would this be a mandatory download, etc), but perhaps you can come up with a desired plan and pitch it to Brad to see if he's willing to include it in the game. 

Oh, and a final thought - the main reason we believe that uberfix is a mod that should be included as mandatory in Demigod is that it truly is bugfixes with no additional balancing or changes (it only makes the game work the way it should).  If this community mod of yours breaks off and includes lots of balance tweaks, etc, then it might not fly.

Reply #10 from Sins Forums Top

The ideal situation, at least in the case of Demigod, would be for the uberfix patch to be included directly as a mandatory update in impulse so that all players would be required to have it installed as a mod
End of quote

This is a good idea...if this idea was proposed to SD instead of a straight up patch, then they are much more likely to go for it...they made this game and they own it, I don't think they're going to let us patch it for them unless the community makes compromises on making it mandatory...

Reply #11 from Stardock Forums Top

Well. Some of the changes from Uberfix WERE merged into the 1.3 release. Not all of them, mind you, but some of the larger and not as controversial ones (minion hp bug, Wings of Seraphim bug and Heart of Life bug). 

Demigod is also unlike Sins because you don't have to enable the mod in order to use it in MP. You just have to have it sitting in your mod folder and if you join a game using that mod, it'll be loaded when the game starts. This was what I was hoping Frogboy would do, because they wouldn't have to support it or do any Q&A on it but it would let us get Uberfix games going up really easily. 

 

Reply #12 from Sins Forums Top

Demigod... many players have made the observation that since our developers were yanked to work on Demigod last year there have been three patches, whereas the year before there were sixteen, and much more developer activity on the forums and in multiplayer.  It might be Demigod envy, as there has been an entire series of patches promised for Demigod and nothing at all for Trinity.  Promise us some patches!  However more radical theories have been proposed, such as that Stardock only pretend to work with different developers for tax reasons, and in fact there is only one full development team, with different departments 'hiring' themselves out to other departments as necessary.  This would mean that the pre-Demigod activity was only due to all the 'companies' working on this game at the same time...  Though then we might ask why Demigod can be patched while everyone should be working on the new turn-based game?

Also, Demigod is another game that suffers from balance issues and a small community as a result, so that even for Demigod just fixing the bugs- and it may have more remaining 'bugs' than Trinity- won't take the game to the level that it can achieve.  Trinity is also far more complex a game than Demigod, and contains much more mechanics that aren't bugged but are broken in terms of their effect on the game.  The vaunted AI relations expansion has led to AI that are continually at war with each other, for instance.  Demigod only has two sides in any one game.

As to how to proceed, I'm not keen on the thread linked in the first post, much of which has been taken up with a detailed discussion on how to buff the Sova, based on opinions only- like any number of other threads.  The Sova would not be on my top ten list of fixes that are needed, nor my top twenty.  The ship is already strong enough for good players.

What I have suggested before is that any community patch needs to start with a committed group of players who are capable of playing regularly, testing the current balance and posting their replays, to demonstrate what they have discovered.  To start with changes would just be repeating the original error of insufficient playtesting, which is how the game has ended up as it is.  That and Demigod.

The create part should be be the second part of the process, not the first.  If the current game isn't playtested enough and with replays to show for it, then any community patch has no credibility.  So form a regular multiplayer group first of all.  The next step is deciding how to test.  I'd go for the same set maps to take out the random element, and 1v1- though you'd also need some 2s and 3s to test the effect of pacts.  Then play for a couple of months with the same group of players, no new players or smurfs, so that the strengths and weaknesses of each player can be taken into account.  Post replays for discussion, rather than opinions.  The original 1.18 'buff the Skirantra' thread, bewailing the invincibility of the Sova- where another player posted the replay of the game mentioned, showing conclusively that it did not demonstrate any need for a buff at all- should be an example of the superiority of proof over opinion.  Just a pity that the developers ignored it.. 

Reply #13 from Sins Forums Top

much of which has been taken up with a detailed discussion on how to buff the Sova
End of quote

The thread is not about the Sova, it is about ALL the capital ships...the Sova was done first because it required the least work of all the ships...changes were also made to the Skirantra, Jarrasul, and are now being made to the Radiance and Kortul...I can understand if you don't like the thread, but don't mislead on what it is about...

Once all 15 capital ships are equalized (only 12 of which will be changed at all) they will be play tested...you can't test first, then create, there would be nothing to test...

The game has already been played extensively by players of all skill levels...people know what is imbalanced in this game and are looking for solutions...it is time to propose changes, then test them...

Reply #14 from Sins Forums Top

The Sova would not be on my top ten list of fixes that are needed, nor my top twenty.  The ship is already strong enough for good players.
End of quote

We essentially were going through the capital ships, starting from the strongest (which need the fewest changes) and working our way to the weakest (which need the most).  We're in the middle right now, talking about battleships, the Kol in particular.

 

If the current game isn't playtested enough and with replays to show for it
End of quote

The current patch has been out for months; we have a pretty good idea of the current issues.  I say we make some ballpark changes across the board and test them, then iterate to find the sweet spot.

The first version would be a trial, with no pretense of being precisely balanced.  We'd take some feedback, make some changes, and keep iterating.  Each iteration would get longer (with hopefully fewer and more subtle issues) until we could finally work towards a final version.

 

Reply #15 from Sins Forums Top

At the start of your thread you even state that you will leave discussion on capital ships for a later thread?  Is that more or less misleading than mentioning the extensive discussion on the Sova?

Your point seems to be that you can't test first then change, as there would be nothing to change?  Yet there is no such general agreement on the current balance, only a majority opinion on Scramble Bombers having been boosted too much in the last patch.

I can understand early frustration with the game, but perhaps you need to play more before making so many changes?  I can play some 1v1 with you, if you tell me when you're online. 

Reply #16 from Sins Forums Top

Demigod... many players have made the observation that since our developers were yanked to work on Demigod last year there have been three patches, whereas the year before there were sixteen, and much more developer activity on the forums and in multiplayer. It might be Demigod envy, as there has been an entire series of patches promised for Demigod and nothing at all for Trinity. Promise us some patches! However more radical theories have been proposed, such as that Stardock only pretend to work with different developers for tax reasons, and in fact there is only one full development team, with different departments 'hiring' themselves out to other departments as necessary. This would mean that the pre-Demigod activity was only due to all the 'companies' working on this game at the same time... Though then we might ask why Demigod can be patched while everyone should be working on the new turn-based game?
End of quote

I feel that it's worth pointing out that at no point were the developers of Sins pulled to work on Demigod. Ironclad was left to work on whatever thye wanted. However, the people at Stardock responsible for uploading patches and such to Impulse were pulled, which is why there was a long period of no patches. Also, Ironclad is not working on Elemental, only Stardock is.

And the reason Demigod got so many patches was because at release multiplayer was a mess, and a lot of stuff needed to be fixed. Since those problems were more or less fixed, much fewer patches have been released, and many planned future updates have apparently been scrapped (Clan Wars, for one), although a lot of the blame for that can be laid on GPG.

Reply #17 from Sins Forums Top

Your point seems to be that you can't test first then change, as there would be nothing to change?
End of quote

No, the point is that the current patch has already been tested thoroughly over the past few months, and many things continue to hold true from earlier versions which have been played even longer.

Yet there is no such general agreement on the current balance
End of quote

Look online and see what units are built in what proportions.  This is a very definitive statement about balance.

but perhaps you need to play more before making so many changes?
End of quote

This is why I think we need to have as many voices as possible.  I'm a bit rusty because I've been sitting out the current patch for the past few months, but otherwise quite experienced.  However, I know that my perspective is in only one and any discussion can benefit from multiple voices.  Currently that thread is primarily Seleuceia and me, so I think it's important that once we come to some conclusions we open a new thread for further discussion.

Reply #18 from Sins Forums Top

At the start of your thread you even state that you will leave discussion on capital ships for a later thread? Is that more or less misleading than mentioning the extensive discussion on the Sova?
End of quote

I stated that in the thread because I didn't know players like Darvin, Cykur, and GoaFan (and there are others I can't think of at the moment) would be dedicated enough to carry the thread on (balancing 15 caps takes a while)...I figured the best I would get from the discussion would be suggestions for one or two simple but sweeping changes that would help balance the game...instead, there is great discussion and a lot of contributions from several people...

The very first post suggested to do the capital ships first, and other people agreed, so I changed the direction of the thread...there are 4 pages on that thread to read, the Sova is intermittently talked about on only a few of them...I may have made that statement when I created the thread (before there were any posts) but I don't describe the thread anymore in the same manner...the point isn't "let's play semantics, you are wrong I am right"...the thread is changing and hopefully will continue to change as time goes on...just because someone isn't interested on the current focus of the thread doesn't mean they shouldn't pop back in later, the thread may be on an entirely new topic...

I can understand early frustration with the game, but perhaps you need to play more before making so many changes?
End of quote

This isn't early frustration, this is a sincere attempt to balance the game...I am not an amazing player, and I know that, but I'm not the only person contributing ideas here either, several experienced players are and anyone can contribute ideas...this is not "let's play nerf the faction you hate" because I suck and hate PMs and poor me, I lose every time to Vasari...I want the game to be better...action gets done by those who act, not those who should act...

I can play some 1v1 with you, if you tell me when you're online.
End of quote

If you're looking for an easy win, they yeah, we could play a 1v1...but honestly, coming up with ideas to balance the game does not require being amazing it at...it requires dedication, a willingness to compromise, and a sincere effort in balancing the game, not just changing it the way you like it...one can have a good grasp of the game and how the elements are balanced without being a pro...

I know you have ideas on how to improve the game (especially with non-military aspects)...please don't avoid the thread forever just because right now it is focused on capital ships...

I think it's important that once we come to some conclusions we open a new thread for further discussion.
End of quote

I agree...in fact once the caps are balanced we should probably start getting that tested, and move on to a new thread to address the next focus...

 

Reply #19 from Stardock Forums Top

It might be Demigod envy, as there has been an entire series of patches promised for Demigod and nothing at all for Trinity. Promise us some patches!
End of quote

I wouldn't envy us dg folks too much.  And fyi in case you don't know - GPG develops Demigod.  SD publishes it and handles QA.  They did get pulled into that huge mess at launch and pulled alot of their devs to make things work then, but they really don't do much more than request patch changes from GPG and then do QA for GPG at this point.  Anyway, all we are expecting in the form or patches is some sort of future release from GPG at some unknown time that will change ???.  Progress is progress anyway. 

I'll shut up about dg now as I'm sure I could easily go way off topic here.  Hope you guys can get organized and get something going for your community patch and get SD to back you up!  Best wishes!

Reply #20 from Sins Forums Top

Demigod has so much potential, you've got a limited number of maps and demigods with a variety of combinations that should make for great play, it's just a pity that the game has remained so skewed for so long and some of the stuff available is so poor compared to the items taken by experienced players.  It's my big problem with Stardock, they can produce games that seem interesting and look good and then suffer from some really crass balance issues, for far too long.  Perhaps its a playtest problem.  One aspect of Demigod that stuck out, though, is that there was a list of proposed changes before the 1.2(?) offered for discussion so that the community had a say, and the patch was then extensively revised to take account of what was said.  That's true community involvement. 

Online, the majority are of the opinion that Scramble Bombers was boosted too much and that the phase missile upgrade is easily the best.  Also, many players are reluctant to build LF as they are considered ineffective- and often won't build them even in the face of heavy flak or carrier spams.  More importantly, there is a huge list of techs that are never used or almost never used. 

The point is that I shouldn't get an easy win from someone who has a good grasp of the game.  Also, to become better at the game only requires the qualities you list- some dedication, a willingness to accept defeat by better players to learn from them, and an element of sincerity, not blaming your own poor play on poor balance.  Also, you needn't fear another loss to Vasari, as I don't play Vasari in 1.19/1.05/1.01.

By playing 1v1 you will gain new insight into balance, and become aware of new strategies, and old supposedly nerfed ones.  Here's a fairly straightforward balance question- are Advent considered weak only if they don't use Repulse, or are they still weak even with Repulse?  To answer it you would need to have seen a good player handle a 'battleball'.  Then you might want to amplify your comments on Illuminators from the experience.  Have you experienced much starbase play?  Pacts?  A focus on capital ships is typical of newer players.

I'm not looking for an easy win, I play to discover whether other players have any strategies or ideas to contribute, that I could add to my game.  I play pros when they let me.  I also watch and comment on replays, for the same reason.  If you decide you want a game, just tell me when you're available.   

Reply #21 from Sins Forums Top

I'm sorry you don't think I'm qualified to work on balancing the game...but I'm doing it anyway, and I'm going to do the best job I can...I appreciate all the help I can get, and if you want to contribute, please do...

 

Reply #22 from Sins Forums Top

I will contribute anything I can.

I specialize in particle effects and gameinfo files. I can also do manual mesh point editing (Not really so useful).

I have no idea how much my few skills can be utilized, but just wanted to throw out the fact that I have a little experience and a willingness to assist.

I have an almost 0 skill level in playing sins. I can crush a hard computer in 1v1, but have a hard time with an unfair. No help in that area from me.

Reply #23 from Sins Forums Top

I'm sorry you don't think I'm qualified to work on balancing the game...but I'm doing it anyway, and I'm going to do the best job I can...I appreciate all the help I can get, and if you want to contribute, please do...
End of quote

The most important qualification is keeping an open mind and fostering discussion.  You're doing a good job there so far.

I can crush a hard computer in 1v1, but have a hard time with an unfair. No help in that area from me.
End of quote

An unfair (and hard for that matter) is just the same idiot with a resource cheat.  A different set of skills (and a different approach) is used to cream them as opposed to a human player.

I can personally cream unfairs, but haven't bothered to master beating the higher difficulty levels (not that I can't, but I usually end up taking the easy way out and starbasing a nice choke point and building up a swarm of carriers that they have no hope of beating)

Reply #24 from Sins Forums Top

Woah guys, first of all I didn't want this to turn to game specifics. I don't care whose "mod" we use for the basis of an official patch, in fact we might use several, but that is to be decided later.

That is unfortunate news from the demigod players, but I think we can still work with it. The fact that community fixes were included at all is a sign that stardock is at least willing to explore this direction, and I would say balance changes are easier to implement than bug changes. IF the community strongly supports them, that is, which is the point of this thread. There is no doubt that we will have an a lot an arguments about what constitutes as a balance, but when it comes time to truly push these changes to be an official patch, we all need to put our differences aside a support it as a whole. To do that we need a system to decide on changes, which is something we need to at least start discussing.

We have some options for deciding on how best to accomplish this. The most obvious is simple direct democracy where everyone has one vote and the option that has the most votes wins. However, that could lead to a lot of people voting who don't really care about balance. On the other extreme we could choose an oligarchy of qualified Sins players who clearly know the game decide everything, but that risks the community patch not being a true product of the entire "community". Or there could be an intermediate option, where respected players and people who have shown dedication by volunteering to test potential patches and things can vote or otherwise come up with a consensus. Which one we do I don't care, but I think we need to establish some way of determining what the community consensus is that will be respectable to the entities we will be trying to persuade.

As to the optimization mod, I was not planing on including it as an official patch (meaning having it supported by impulse) as some of its changes may hinder the game experience in single player or for players who prefer small maps. Though some of its features that truly have no effect on how the game looks may be worth to include.

Reply #25 from Sins Forums Top

I'm liking the volunteer idea, at least for now...

We get some ideas, throw together a mod that implements them, and test it...all of that is done by volunteering...

Now, once testing results come out (and those who made the mod may or may not be part of the heavy testing) and those that tested it start recommending changes, I still think the mod can be reworked on a volunteer basis (the people who volunteered to make it in the first place and the testers)...but, some more structure may need to be added to the decision making process...

Now after that, the mod needs to be looked at with a fine tooth comb...that part, well, I don't know, because that will be the part where the community will have to embrace the mod, or it dies...

Volunteer basis doesn't keep people out who want to help, but it self filters, because volunteers obviously are going to have some level of dedication if they are volunteering...