HWR Patch Bugs and Issues

The problem is that, in HW1RM, all ships cost more than their classic counterparts and research has a cost. HW1 Classic had the ships cost less and research was about time, not RU counts. The only way RU’s could be dropped is if the devs were able to find a way of making it possible for the HW1 RM aspect of the game engine to allow for research to progress based on time and not by RU counts.

Possible glitch on Gardens of Karesh. (Please note that I am only now playing homeworld for the first time and have thus no basis for comparion - I waited until this patch was out before I made a start!)

Fought off the swarm while the hyperdrive charged, attacked the aine mothership a couple of times and it appeared to flee and everything went quiet. I started to hyper out, then it said I couldn’t because of some inhibitor. “Righto, I thinks - i’ll just harvest everything first, so when the alien mothership and company pop back in, I’ll be ready!”

Then nothing happened. I spent, like forty minutes laboriously clearing the map, only to try to hyper out, fail (as expected)… and then be told that I could now hyperspace out.

And, on thnking this all seemed a bit strange, especially with the post-mission cutscene, I went back and found that I was supposed also to have been given Multigun Frigate technology, which was something that never occurred.

I am getting the sinking feeling I’m going to have to the mission all over again, though I’m not quite sure exactly what I did wrong, other than the logical step of actually attacking the alien mothership with my ion cannon frigates and destroyers, since it was RIGHT THERE and dropping off fuel pods and swarmers…

More general observation: I don’t know how much is HWRM or just HW, but some the strategy seems a bit counter-intutive. (Like having to retire everything at the end of mission 2 because if I didn’t, six frigate showed up and I was completely unable to complete the mission due to the cyro trays being destroyed because I simply couldn’t kill/capture the frigates fast enough. Fortunately, I had the good presence of mind to do a save just before I hit the hyperspace button on mission 2, so it was easy enough to go back again.) Having first played through Desert of Kharak, the thought of NOT keeping all of my fleet mission to mission never occurred to me, especially with the generous force limits…

(I am now also about to incur the wrath of everyone and heretically venture the opinion that I think I actually prefer the slight differences in DoK’s control system…!)

1 Like

You are not alone in the reactive fleet scaling issue. It’s more exaggerated than it was in HW1 Classic, and the issue is made worse by the larger availability of resources in the remastered campaign. Two issues I hope are adressed.

1 Like

As for the fleeing into the Hyperspace that works first once the enemy mothership has been badly damaged for like the third or fourth time. Once that happened it jumps out for good and the Inhibitor field is gone.

I had the exact same problem back in 1999 on my 1st run through the campaign. You think it ran but it just jumped somewhere else in the map. Go find it.

It definitely disappeared after I attacked it (I THINK it may have been the second time, but it could have been the third) before the 8-minute charging time. There was no opposition left on the map. I assumed there was and sent my destroyer squadron (fruitlessly) sweeping the map for them while my collectors started cautiously coming back out to work on the resources. Not knowing any better, assuming it was like those occasions in DoK where nothign would happen until I triggered the nxt event by trying to hyper out. So I cleared the map of resources and then tried to jump. It failed - but instead of a new wave of enemy attacks, it immediately said (like as soon as the “can’t jump” cutscene was done) “nope, field’s gone.”

Which was the point I suspected that something had Gone Wrong somewhere.

An insightful post found here in the forums, presented by Cloaked, touches on a few current issues. Feel free to read up on it, as he provides data and organization to thoughts and comments. Most of these ‘numbers’ highlight key issues in balance, and there are some other things in need to be note. I’ve heard (and played with or against) players pre and post patch, and many seem to be concerned with one or two of the following:

But first… do note that everything here is not in sour tongue or bitter offense, rather in for humorous constructive criticism and feedback, all only to help and inspire. Community, yup, that word, is what is meant to be accomplished.

  1. Hw1 production time for ion frigates is too slow. When pitted against a vaygr force, the vaygr can spam missile frigates at an alarming rate, allowing in many cases more frigates to be built then lost after that first initial clash of capital ships. There is little bounce back or strategy involved now, when all that can be done to stop spam is to spam. And spam is a trap, both the food (it is, it is!), and the misconception that it is a legit strategy.

Solutions include decreasing build time of ions cannon frigates, or decreasing heavy missile production rate, or rebalance frigate on frigate damage, armor, etc.

  1. The Vaygr, as a race, are able to mass produce much faster than the other races. A good amount of team games revolve around one tactic, involving one player spamming assault craft with several carriers and nothing else, and another player doing the same with frigates. This strategy is near impossible to beat, unless done in equal or greater measure the victimized team, thus eliminating micro strategies between individual fleet. When one or two units are spammed in such a way that cannot be competed with by other races, balance is slightly lopsided.

A solution to this would be to increase carrier build time and availability, but not dramatically, while decreasing heavy missile production rate, while raising the assault craft build cost to 480-500 with a build time drop of 2-5 seconds.

  1. Fighter battles last very long. Now, personally, I like the length and the expanse of the battles, it feels nice. The problem is, as many have mentioned and ranted about online, fighter battles that last long tend to have fighters producing faster than being lost. Those last few squads after a grand or minuscule fighter brawl seem not to die, despite having over five times the enemy squads on you.

There isn’t a whole lot that needs to be changed, however the concern has been mentioned enough to look into. Perhaps faster ballistic weapon velocities to improve targeting would ‘speed’ up the battle? Expert opinions, tests, and solutions here are needed, as there has been little suggested on this. Moving on.

  1. Fighter docking and regeneration may need attention. Now, I know the pros and cons of the hw1 unit and hw2 squad based mechanics. And a lot online know that the debate around this mechanic has been going on for centuries it seem. Not much needs to be changed here, however, piggy-backing from ‘Concern 3’, the ability to dock fighters and regenerate them, in ways only die hard physicists could theorize, could cause a slight ru balance issue between the races. With fighter battles as long as they are (and it saddens me to say this), hw2 have an advantage of ru and fighter superiority as they could dock when left with one or two fighters left in a squad, thus eliminating ru expense to resupply the fleet, as the ships can escape practically untouched, and birth new ones faster than mice under an old, broken freezer.

Solutions to this could include decreasing cost of hw1 interceptors by 15, and bomber by 5 ru count, or increase time to heal and/or dock for hw2 squads, to prevent the immediate reinforcements.

  1. Frigate walls behave in the domination role that battlecruisers in pre-2.0 did. Now, this was more or less intentional, and welcome at the same time. But, as with all things balance-minded, the destroyers and cruisers don’t quite measure up. Strictly speaking of ions and missiles frigates, battles amongst these warlords are almost balanced, despite the vaygr having an advantage in kill ratios, damage, speed, reproduction rate, etc…yet when against destroyers and cruisers, they melt these larger, bulkier ice-cubes faster than a child’s mind staring into a tv… er, somewhat.

Solutions to this could be to up the health or firepower of destroyers, slow down ion and missile frigate production time, AND lower frigate damage to destroyers and cruisers, and motherships.

For Vaygr missile frigates specifically, the target range after the initial target is killed has been discussed as too large. With ions, they shoot their target, kill or not, and recharge. Vaygr can fire and fire, but have a huge advantage because practically no ‘waste’ occurs, because of the retargeting. If every left over ion time was immediately utilized and not wasted, it would be different.

A solution here would be to limit the auto target range, or possibly add frigates with limited explosive damage that would blast down left over missiles? That way not all missiles are wasted into thin air, as seen in pre-2.0, yet some was taken down. Some one be awesome here and try to find a way to mod this in and test it, please!

  1. Battlecruisers are the old battle cruisers, but lost all their teeth. Balance between cruiser and cruiser is exceptional, and many are glad about that. Those many, and many more, however, are eager to jump to the conclusion that cruisers don’t do enough. Cruiser take a while to eliminate frigates, and are decent at destroyer wipe-outs. That’s it. They don’t serve a strong role, take a while to get, and are so easily harassed by frigates such that many in the community easily, and understandably, forget their improvements. They now function as slightly heavier destroyers, and are easily countered with that menacing Vaygr missile spam. Many a game have I seen cruisers waltz up with destroyers, only to be laughed at, insulted, and flogged by those frigates. Frigates!

Solutions to this would be to increase damage to frigates, about 1/3 the way from as is to pre-patch, re-implement the 3 cruiser limit (this I don’t care for too much, but I’ve heard the folk in game suggest it, so I relay that here), or decrease build and research time, with the cost slightly lowered.

The most popular, and agreeable fix would be to increase armor value. Teeth or no teeth, these light tanks need heavy armor.

  1. Destroyers lack a shell… or armor. Cloaked had a good analysis, while short and sweet, with numbers to assist. There isn’t much I need to add, except that in gameplay, when 20 or so frigates swoop in, destroyers become sponges. Dead sponges.

A solution would be to increase the armor another frigates value or so. The damage could use a slight buff, yet this might be unnecessary. Best offense is a good offense, no defense, er… (debatable quote for debatable time), so armor should suffice.

  1. Missile destroyers are destroyers at heart, and that’s it. I add this because it was suggested to me that their armor be brought up another 10k or so, which makes sense. Fighters and bombers will diminish these four-eyed beauties, unfortunate as it is.

A solution: offense, defense ,debate, nonsense… armor. Yes, armor increase.

  1. Corvettes. Cloaked is great at diving into minds I think, because I in my trials and use of corvettes, I find nearly all to be sub-par to their role. Opinion aside, feedback in place, I’ll touch on the ‘specialty’ corvettes, as again, you can read about the inability to anti-fighter fighters (verb, yes?) in his post.

Lasers could use a slight increase against subsystems and heavy capital ships, from what has been noticed. Pulsars I find a little inaccurate against corvettes, and darn good against carriers and cruisers. Tweak here, tweak there, done.

Missiles corvettes seem to be okay, I haven’t heard any comment on them one way or another, except they are a decent threat against fighters. I mention them because if corvettes are getting an overhaul, they should be accommodated for change across the board.

Minelayers. Very few use minelayers, and to this day, in the limited testing of them for hw1, I have been unable to replicate the beloved wall I see the hw2 create. If this is operator error, please someone let me know, otherwise, if a mechanical hiccup is in play, I don’t know how to suggest a fix. To the devs hands it goes.

  1. Hw1 resource collectors have docking issues. This is both a bug and issue, in two different instances. Allow me to tackle. When hyper spacing with a carrier, occasionally a collector will be catapulted across the map, and then no control can be done to that collector until it docks with that carrier. Its been here since day one, and it needs to go.

Bug Solution: allow full control of collectors even when docking, such that cancel, move, and hyperspace from collectors can be committed during any point on the drop of dock pattern.

Issue One includes building a carrier and having collectors chase that carrier to dock instead of ms or refineries, etc. Now, this happens out of the logic of the collectors ( I think) such that not all are docking only at one spot, but go to available docking spots. With hw2, not an issue, because they move so darn quick. Hw1, collectors move in harmony with carriers, so that no docking takes place if said carrier is moved across the map, and, even if the carrier is halted, precious time is lost due to speed problems. Bummer. Big bummer if a teammate decides to bother and harass you by moving a refinery in, getting two collectors targeted at it, then run to the opposite side of the map, or into battle.

Issue two include, as mentioned, hyperspace ability during docking. The ms and carrier are unable to hyperspace until collectors complete their drop off. Why I don’t know, as this kills time and survival odds in key moment.s

Issue solutions: Collector ‘control’ during drop off, as mentioned above, and… I don’t know about that free spot docking problem. Maybe allow a closing of a resource drop off spot subsystem as a toggle? New features are tough, so perhaps the logic has to be looked into.

  1. Let’s see, um, where is it… oh, cloaked fighters! They are great, truly. At being normal fighters, they are great. At being ‘heavy fighters’, it hasn’t quite been seen. Many players avoid them, and so, having an itch, interest, and favoritism over them, I tested and tried them. These fighters have several problems that explains their apparent extinction online. For one, they don’t cloak long. For two, they don’t cloak in combat, but fire and remain sightly. And three, the don’t perform too much better than normal interceptors, even with the upped armor. These reasons stacked on top of each other has raised a question as to why the twenty unit limit is, well, so limiting? Their damage is slightly buffed, but not significant enough to call them a heavy fighter.

Solutions (hopefully) are a matter of tweaks to stats. The speed is good, the armor is good, but almost everything else needs a look. Cloaking time should be increased by about 10-15 seconds, as well as restored battle cloaking. Damage could increase slightly against collectors and frigates, slightly. With these changes, the twenty cap should remain, as their weakness (proxies!) will be necessary for fighting them.

Feedback, ideas, concerns, issues, bugs, and more are welcome! Please post what you find out there, and what you hear may be something worth noted. More importantly, keep playing the game and enjoy it. Thanks!

1 Like

Well, most of that last post was a work in progress. All of that might need to be reworded or scratch, as good news appeared to the forums today…

I see a serious problem with the approach to balance. Asymmetry should require an asymmetric balance strategy. Balance is looked at and achieved individually, ship by ship. Ships should be balanced one by one to the role it plays and not to a set of undefined rules which change depending on how other ships are tweaked. “All” factors should be weighed and given worth. Each factor has a formula and is an individual trait and should carry either a positive scale or a negative scale. Every aspect should have worth. In other words, spend more time dissecting traits and applying value and less time randomly tweaking against a constantly changing background. Every unit needs an absolute formula to balance against.

There are still broken traits that need fixing which can’t be given worth yet. In order to balance you have to have an absolute value to balance to otherwise you never achieve it and if all units are not working correctly you can’t even begin to balance.

Are Taiidan Destroyers supposed to be able to move backwards?
In the HW1R campaign, my captured one is firing at enemies while moving backwards towards a location I sent it to. The engines aren’t lit up.

The engines aren’t lit.

But the pilot is!

…I’ll show myself out


Actually, a big strategy to using capital ships is to move them around in the heat of battle.

Cruisers you can move back if they are about to die, frigates you can fly forward to harass… the possibilities are endless!

I don’t know about the engines as to whether they should or shouldn’t be lit… I’d figure they would not be when moving anywhere except backwards.



Sorry for that. I don’t remember any of the capital ships having engines on in reverse.

Ok, so you’re saying it’s normal for Destroyers to fly backwards. Odd, but ok, not a bug. :slight_smile:

That’s always been the case. It adds depth and like CryCoh suggested, it adds strategy.

Gardens of Kadesh mission is definitely a bit buggy. I got through it by NOT attacking the enemy capital ship. One VERY annoying thing was that, after you trigger the first hyperspace jump, all your ships launch, even if you have the on “stay docked.” I’d just finished when something went odd as I went to save and it ended up restarting the level. (sigh)

The enemy fighter behavior is odd, I don’t know if there’s something about loading a save refreshes their endurance, since I had to abort trying to reload part way through since either a) the enemy fighters now killed all my ships that wouldn’t stay out of the fighting (immediately targeting and destroying my salvage corvettes) or b) if I left the hyperspace, the enemy ship jumped out preventing me from getting the multicun corvette trigger. I had to go back and do the mission for a THIRD time…

Having got the multigun corvettes… They seem to be largely useless, dying horribly to the enemy fighters in the next mission. My drone frigates were far more use!

I was also unable to salvage any multibeam corvettes, as once more, if my salvage corvettes so much as showed their noses, they were wiped out by the enemy fighters jumping on them to the exclusion of anything else.

Ya, I didn’t get the trigger to research multi-gun corvettes either.
Edit: Thankfully, adding that research to the persist file isn’t very difficult.

1 Like

I posted this to a private thread. I thought it might be useful here:

Balancing with absolutes:

We start with an absolute that never changes. Pick a unit in the middle that is working correctly. ie. ‘Assault Frigate’. Determine every aspect of this unit (armor, cost, time, weapons, effectiveness, ineffectiveness, speed, maneuverability… and assign a numeric value to every aspect. Since every aspect has a set value you know exactly how to tweak other units without over complicating the process. You now have a single balanced unit to use for an absolute reference.

We can start simply by using the dimensions of each unit as a base line value ie: LxW. Everything is built on this reference. As you scale the ship up or down for other units such as cruisers or fighters you also scale similar values (mass, armor). Each gun, turret, weapon is worth something and that worth translates into cost. Each different race weapon has its own different signature and each signature is identical to all other like weapons. In other words, every similar weapon, regardless of the unit it’s on, has the same values. Many units will not be weapon tweakable without tweaking all other like weapons on other ships. Since these weapons are set in their values other changes will need to be done to balance units and the more values we lock into place like this, the easier it gets.

Some units will have values that cannot be duplicated on other units ie: EMP or cloak. These values also need their worth calculated. Once the system is established balancing is completely focused and purposeful.

Now we have absolute values we can build upon. Never change a single units numeric values without compensating other numeric values. The more absolutes we lock in (turrets, size, etc) the less there is to do.

This example is similar to the tuning sheet used for Star Trek Continuum.

There’s a 20 unit limit for cloaked fighters because they are superior to regular interceptors. If one player built 70 cloaked fighters and another non-kushan built 70 interceptors, the interceptors would always lose.

The original game was also not designed with auto harvesting in mind, among other things. I think what we can safely say is that the resource amounts need to be looked at and reduced to fit the spirit of the original game better.


I’m not arguing the 20 unit limit, but rather support it (last line in the cloaked fighter segment). Rather, not many seem to find significance to them as a unit, and they (fighters) don’t play their role quite right… yet. In ten or so tests I’ve done against opposing interceptors, personally I found there not the be an upper hand for these guys, as even numbers or losses, with maybe one fighter or two being left over from either faction, were a common trend. The battle cloak function as seen in the original is not present, which could very well ‘fix’ or ruin balance, so tests do need to be conducted. To claim they are “superior” does not seem fit based on personal tests, however, it is worth noting that a first strike is possible, though the speed of the interceptors allow them to bounce back quickly. If any are willing, do look into the cloaked fighters and post some results! I’d rather know by evidence that they do or do not fulfill their role.

Jake5, is there any specific way that cloaked fighters excel at that you’ve found, so they I can have a look and see if I’m missing something? Thanks for the input.

Calling somebody to support or discredit these results/thoughts otherwise!