Blog: Skirmish galaxy: we have a winner!

#1

Hi everyone,

Congratulations again to Pepelekus on winning the Skirmish galaxy!

We’ve posted the final standings and details regarding what happens now to the Skirmish galaxy:

2 Likes

#2

Extra resources not found. haha

0 Likes

#3

Evolvians are absolutely OP. Between their growth rate and reduction in overhead, their planets are to be prized over everything else.

1 Like

#4

Devs really need a way to add new content to existing galaxy’s.

0 Likes

#5

Evo’s are disproportunatly powerful I agree. Simple fixes would be to limit them to sub 10 Kkm planets or radically up thier sensitivity to Taxes or a mix of both perhaps

0 Likes

#6

Imho, just make their growth rate tragically poor, this would leave the race vulnerable to orbital strikes and the potential loss of the race if you could target that race.

0 Likes

#7

Evo’s growth rate is what makes them Evo lol, that and their lack of need for farms, if it were only the lack of need for farms that made them unique they wouldn’t be useful for much of anything. However they do not like to be taxed, Perhaps a stronger penalty is needed when they are taxed at 100% even for short periods of time, this would reduce the temptation for using them to build credits (or be like Syntis and have a fixed maximum tax rate). Also in the skirmish galaxy they were way to easy to find and take advantage of, I found 3 in my area alone. They should be prized planets/systems worth fighting over, so fewer of them more scattered in the galaxy might lead to some confrontations.

1 Like

#8

Another option is to up the value of other native species, entice people to fight over ALL native populations for one purpose or another. Just a thought. I dislike the thought that i look at some of them and just go MEH not even remotely interested.

1 Like

#9

I believe they all do have a useful purpose, it would be good if the Akkor would retain it’s high lab points (similar to skirmish) to make them more valuable given they are normally on less than useful planets (but in skirmish 4 lab points were nice to have vs the 1 on main(I ignore them on main mostly). Harpy are valuable for strategic purposes, I could see everything going on in my area when I had 3 of them and if I’d continued and upgraded them, seen even more lol) (less useful in skirmish due to it’s temporary nature, but extremely valuable in a permanent galaxy). Pepe took advantage of how useful the Mountain Giants are for all construction related bonus (another contribution to his success in skirmish). Probably the least valuable in skirmish and in early game are the Skreggs, as they do the deep mining, but would be valuable in later game with the right resource combination.

0 Likes

#10

I really liked the Skirmish as we could get to know another races , both minor and major. The planets containing the other races where closer and easier accessible. I didn’t fight anyone else to fight than pirates in Skirmish. I got in to late to really test all the lab researches. As i got access at the same time for Alpha 3 and Skirmish, i could compare the 2, and the most fun is the skirmish. I really liked the game, this kind of strategy is my kind of game. Thank you to the devs to make such a nice game. I’m looking forward to see the further development of the game. Not to many bugs either.

0 Likes

#11

Nope. This is impossible. 1) Skreggs bonus is constant. It don’t grow with time - it’s only 5deep mines per each of deposit. Time to build 5 deep mines is a bit more than 30hours. That means it’s have value in first weeks and became insighnificant after month of playing… Moreover scregons prefer -10 C.and 70% landmass which makes them good only for Syntis. But even like this for the late development the best 2nd race for Syntis and Humans are still the Ripchee because of their x1 multiplier.

I’m agree with that. Current evo and mountain giants were a good reason for fight in skirmish. The problem lays in players. They understimate the value of such a planets they don’t understand that it’s the thing much u must to take control. Most of players were too passive. In a lot of RTS there are such a things. Probably the biggest attention to this concept paying w40k DoW series. And that works good. I’m shure it’s will be great to make other natives, akorokken. scregons and harpy (and probably new ones) to be of high strategic value too. Than it’s would be better to add in education guide and in annoncement (when new galaxy starts) the statement how imporatant to control planets with natives.

But if importance of natives will be just reduced then player’s macro strategies will be all about passive farming. Simple game like outscape when without PvP cann’t be successfull. If IDA whants to make outscape a piecefull farmland than it’s must be as complex as Stellaris or else it’s can’t be interesting to play. I don’t wish to say that farming-trading is bad and can’t be interesting. No sometimes it’s much more interesting than battles, but only in cases when process of parming-trading is complicated and captivating. And current Outscape have nothing even lookes like this.

P.S. Bonus of Harpy is nothing too. Really, why u guys think that inner planetary scanner so important? Outer one have much more importance. Without detector modules u can’t see all the treats wich coming to u. And that means ur true eyes r corvettes with detecting and the most vital thing is t3 ships scanner and scout engine but planetary scanners can only show what other players wish to show u or pirates.

0 Likes

#12

Short term galaxies hold no interest for me. My opinion not looking for replies

1 Like

#13

I was Syntis in skirmish, I had a couple of skregg planets. They were good if the deposit was good, so the deep mines were an early boost. Adding regular mines with the existing deep mines proved useful and if I hadn’t gotten distracted by the main galaxy and our war there would have proved useful. But I wouldn’t fight over them, they aren’t that good.

0 Likes

#14

I ran the numbers on my scanned A3 information (129 planets) instead of the skirmish server (less than 50 lol) due to the number of scanned planets i have. if i had evo on every planet (including the ones that evo cant survive on for kicks) i would save an average of 121k population due to lack of farms, which nets 31 more mines and enough population to support the buildings they require without having to have the tech for the bio farms or having to build normal farms at all.

Evo dont need massive growth rates in addition to the above.

0 Likes

#15

That might be true if Evo were on EVERY planet, but they aren’t, so that isn’t a valid comparison. They are unique because of both their fast growth AND the lack of need for a farm.

As I said they shouldn’t be so close together and they should be prize planets that are worth fighting over because of their value. I wouldn’t want the “few” that do exist (3 in my case out of 16 planets at one point in skirmish) for merely the lack of needing a farm, unless their resources were extremely good, which they all aren’t.

0 Likes

#16

Your right, they aren’t, I used my data to form averages. The odds they might show up on an average planet is???

Without data of the specific planets they are on, primarily size, its impossible to know their specific worth and for that reason, I just plugged it into the planetary data I do have, unless you’d like players to self report data or conduct the research yourself.

0 Likes

#17

There is no point in that. I like Evo the way they are, just fewer and further between and with possibly some dis-incentive for over taxing them.

So we should just agree to disagree on whether they should keep the current design (high growth/no farms) or be just no farms.

0 Likes