I guess I didn't make it clear in my OP... however this game does NOT appear to have more depth than a standard RTS. Now don't get me wrong... I bought this game knowing what it was and enjoyed the first several hours of it!

I'm not trying to say one game is better or worse than it. I'm not trying to trash talk Sins. I'm just trying to help people see "the light" and possibly the develpers... If nothing else maybe gather some groups for mods to fix the short-comings.

Yes, there is a plent mod... but aside from the HORRID nature of having to copy files into some stupid folder burried deep in "user settings"... You have to copy ANY, ALL, and EVERY texture file into the mod folder to run them. Yes, I hear they are making a patch to fix this... But, my guess is they want 1.03 to be some major HUGE update... Rathher than giving us features as they become available.

Take WC3 for example.

WC3: 4 Races - VERY different in style and play
Sins: 3 Races - Different Style and very similar play

WC3: 4 (or so) weapon upgrades per race
Sins: 3-4 Weapon upgrades (Beam, Missile, Bullet... and Siege)

WC3: Unit Research (Some just require the building while others require research)
Sins: Basically exactly the same... Some you can just build, others require research.

WC3: Usually have 1-2 bases... with lots of building variety.
Sins: Have LOTS and LOTS of bases... With very little building variety.

WC3: You have 3 Resources - Gold, Woot, Food
Sins: You have 4 Resources - Gold, Metal, Crystal, Food

Research: If you look at the research tree for WC3 (I think collectors addition came with one... and some sites have them posted)... It looks basically the same as sins... only vertical.

I won't comment on diplomacy or anything of the sort as I strongly believe its not finished. I think they shipped the game and threw it in as a side thought, rather than any in-depth testing and development involved.

So what about things like the pirates, the black market, culture? Where do those things fit into warcraft 3?

And how does Warcraft have any more building variety? it has 12-17 buildings per race, and that's including upgrades to the main building. Each Sins race has 8 logistics structures, 6 tactical structures, and 2 extractors, so they've got 16 building types per race. seems pretty even to me.

If you look at the WC3 research tree, it looks like the warfare/military/hostility tree. Sins still has the entire empire/civilian/harmony trees which warcraft has no real answer to.

There's a lot more depth to Sins than there is to any other RTS out there, and a lot less than the best 4X games out there, but some sacrifices have to be made to merge the two.

I gotta agree with Painlezz. Ive had a struggle clicking the game icon because it feels so boring. Its more like clock work then enjoyment, heck, even less thinking involved as well. Depth is a problem. There is really only one option for doing everything and thats filling it with a lot of laser fire. I'd love to see ship-to-ship boarding (siezing/destroying ships from within), planeteray invasions, more planetary upgrade options, additional planetary defenses both space and surface borne, espionage: stealing technology to unlock new types of weapons and ships and so forth. And more stuff to make the game enjoyable because it really boils down to massing ships and hoping you have more than the enemy. As a side note why don't planets have any moons (so far as Ive seen at least)? Here's hoping for a big expansion.

This is the kind of problem that happens with all hybrid games. In the end if you're looking for a pure 4x game then there are other games out there with a lot more depth, and if you're looking for an RTS there are other games with much better tactical combat, better pacing and balance.

That said, I think sins has much more potential to be a great RTS game, things like balance and pacing can be achieved with patches. Certainly when I play sins I'm most definitely in RTS mode, I'll sit upright in the chair, trying to get things done as quickly and efficiently as possible, when I'm playing 4x games I'm much more relaxed take my time making decisions and will often just sit back for a few minutes and admire my empire. The key to a good 4x game is giving the player as much room to exercise his or her creativity as possible and I just can't see that happening with Sins, the depth just isn't there. I think sins has more potential to be a great RTS than a great 4x game.

Thank you (wanted to leave it at that, but that might be confusing), someone here understands me without even knowing it. Not that SD (they doing the advertising I believe) will listen. Although, even knowing what it was, I probably still would have bought it, it is quite fun, if still quite buggy.

So what constructive criticism is not allowed? Oh ya Sins is perfect and shouldn't be improved..........give me a break. If I was a developer I would listen to my user base to see what I can improve. The OP does have a very good point and I would love to see Sins expanded. Don't get me wrong I haven't been hooked to a game like this in a long time but I can't wait to see what they have in store.

I'm glad to see this comminuty is a lot more mature than most. Rather than Bash what I say... or 100% agree with it.. everyone gives feedback based on their own opinions...

None replied with "Can I have your stuff?" yet... which is so nice!

Pirates? Those are the same as "neutrals or creeps" in wc3. However WC3 has a FAR greater variety.. in fact pirates are just re-done tech units far as I can tell.

Black Market? Sure the prices adjust based on demand... But honestly thats such a small feature (but heavily used) that I didn't want to include it... I didn't include how the 2 games both have hero units.. and such because its so similar there is little point to mention it.

Culture? Maybe i'me a huge noob... but it seems like a nearly meaningless part of Sins... I've spread my culture over an entire system... and not had any plants "rebel" and join my side... In fact the only thing culture has ever done for/against me in a game is prevent me from colonizing an enemy world.

You are also right, WC3 and Sins both have equal numbers (or close enough) buildings. I won't argue about which game has more "useful" buildings as both have ones you rarely use.

I'm VERY confused about the "research" argument you made? My guess is you're talking about how both games share the "offencive" research... Well in WC3 you can research faster lumber harvesting... Stronger buildings... Bla Bla Bla

Honestly the only "extra" research in Sins comes from the pretend 4x factor that this whole thread started on. I don't recall each and every little research option; and i'll agree sins has more. But more isn't always better. Someone could mod sins to have 100 extra research options for reach Race... each of which adding .05% damage/sheild/armor... But what would be the point? A large number of research options in sins aren't really useful in the long haul. I find myself rushing for a select few important ones, and only when i have nothing else to go for do I spend the rest of my research on the misc techs.

Realistically if Sins has done anything is make me thirsty for more! Its either that, or I really need a beer, its been a very sober week.

Sins may have 16 buildings, but each race has essentially the same 16 buildings (sans superweapons). In WC3, all of the races buildings are entirely different, and often there is no direct equivalent between races.

I started to go into a huge rant but I realized it would not be well received, so I'll stop there.

I think with Warcraft3 you've gotta remember you're comparing a game that's been out for years to a game that's been out for weeks. When War3 first game out it probably had less strategic depth than Sins has now, there were only one or two viable tactics for each race, and you would typically just mass one type of unit. The game has evolved a LOT over the course of many patches and an expansion and developed from good game to a great game.

I'm hoping that Sins does that too, it's very hard when you don't have a massive community of fans like Blizzard does to keep people interested in your game and I just hope Sins fixes it's major issues before everyone loses interest.

You can't compare pirates with creeps. Their functions are totally different. Totally different. Totally... oh, never mind.

Wait....


Sins when are we comparing Sins to WC3? I think WC3 Sucked....

EDIT: You know you play to much Sins when you start replacing since with sins.

Well, sins did borrow a ton of gameplay mechanics from WC3, so it only makes sense to compare them.

I'm sorry, having not played the game I'm at a bit of a loss here.
Could I ask what some of these mechanics are? Just curious, is all.

Well, here's a list of the similarities, covering heroes alone.

-Heroes Become capital ships (I'm just going to use those words interchangably)
-Capital ships use the same xp value for the first several level ups
-Level cap is 10
-Level 10 heroes still eat experience
-Armor damage reduction = ((armor)*0.06)/(1+0.06*(armor)) replace the 6 with 5 for sins
-First Hero is free
-Neutral units around for you to level up your capital ship on.
-Heroes start with a free ability, get the ability to put 2 points in any ability at level 3, 3 points at level 5, and an 'ultimate' ability at level 6
-Heroes have their own armor type and attack type on the damage modifier tables.
-Heroes/Capital ships attack an average of 3% faster for every level.

I'm not accusing them of stealing, but there's no denying that they are similar.

Here is an example of tactical combat I microed almost the entire fights myself, took a good 40 minutes of micro.

Combat Replay

I could not micro this well in Warcraft 3, hell none could minimize losses like this. I played enough of WarCraft 3 to know this game does borrow some, but the gameplay is totally different. I enjoy it more, as I enjoy the game. I am not against change, I just do not like the idea of any fundamental change to a game I enjoy to bring it more in-line with another game already out there!

As far is having fundamental differences between factions, there are reasons not to go that route. Sure it can be fun and exciting, but it would also be very hard to balance. On a scale of a game where a match can take couple of hours, it would take endless energy to balance the factions. Many players would also not like to play a game where there is a perception of imbalance amongst the factions, especially if each match lasts an hour or 2.

How many strategy games out there, real time or turn based, lack any kind of balance between factions/races? It's the kind of stuff that isn't so apparent in single player, where you win 100% of the time, but totally destroys multiplayer. I think the choice to go with fairly similar factions was a right one. Easier to balance, and easier to make transition from one faction to the next.


I play random faction almost 100% of the time. I enjoy all 3, and each one is different enough to offer it's own strategy, yet similar enough for me to apply my basic knowledge and play all 3 effectively. I never had confidence like this in WarCraft 3. I just stuck to one race because of the differences. I would like to try other races, but I knew it was a totally different ballpark. And once I started another race and stunk at it, I might not be able to return. I could easily forget how to play the previous race effectively.

If you wish a game more like WarCraft 3, then by all means play WarCraft 3. At a time where game industry is plagued by lack of innovation and sequel syndrome, I would think people would like the idea of a game that's a bit different. Even if you do not like the game itself.

Rise of Nations is a better analogy than Warcraft 3 (being something of a TBS/RTS "hybrid" that's mostly an RTS itself), actually, though the cap ship system is straight out of WC3 so I understand the comparison. There's nothing in this game, at least nothing good, that hasn't been done at least as well in RoN, WC3, or both. Over all I tend to think RoN does far more justice by the Civ series than Sins does by Gal Civ. I know which one I'll still be playing a year from now, and it's not Sins.

I get that, and it makes sense - but if these similarities are exemplary of other gameplay similarities, then wouldn't Sins just end up as WC3 anyway, except in space?
Thanks for the response - but I somehow don't get the impression that all the similarities are as obvious as the heroes.
Could you enlighten me if I'm wrong?

Re: the topic,

I would LOVE to see Sins plus something like Independence Wars 2. Maybe with a little Freelancer (trade) thrown in. Here's hoping we - and game developers - live a long time!   

I'm the kind of gamer who likes RTS games where I can build up my empire with a LOT of options, and be peacefull. Like Sim City type shit, but then at the same time have the ability to amass a giant military and wage war on my enemies. I'd LOVE to see the peacefull sides in Sins be able to win the day over pure military might. I want to see trade lanes be important, I want to see culture steal worlds from your enemies. I want to see more options for managing your empire. I wanna see more civic buildings. It'd be nice to have more peace oriented buildings, like residential stations in orbit and the like. Just generally more options to win the game other then 'lol I massed 100 LRM's and rushed you so I win'.

A couple things Sins needs:

-Some more variance among the races and all their units (and even more units and specialized units too) while maintaining balance first and foremost.

-The research system needs a bit of tweaking and needs to become more in depth, forcing players to really really choose what path to take besides super weapons. (raising costs won't change this much, it just will slow down games. Gmaes like civ4 force you to take routes and such where you can't get everything you want in a period of time.

-Diomplomacy system needs to be overhauled, it is really weak at the moment.

-Not so much random events but less inconsistency with artifacts or other "cool" things like that. Right now exploring planets is a waste of money most of the time.

Other then that everything else is gravy, like different planet types etc.... And all of these listed are pretty fixabvle and patchable as well.

Oh ok...

and I am guessing there were never Hero units before wc3? I played it for about hour before I got bored.

Anyway, I might as well say wc3 copied starcraft because it has 3 races and then starcraft copied Dune because it also has 3 races.

Now as idiotic as the above statement is, can you see how I look at your posts right now? Can we please stop these kind of pointless debates and discuss the actualy game instead trying to find similarities between other games.

Believe it or not... people are actually trying to compare WC3 with Starcraft 2... >.>

Sins has a great core gameplay mechanic, great UI, and pretty good strategic depth (though admittedly familiar if you've played a few RTSs)-- but more story, video cuts, and that sort of thing would be nice. It's not like we wouldn't have the time to opt to watch a 1 minute video about a cool ancient artifact that was just dug up, or something.

I figure Sins was something of a risky venture since it involves a style of RTS not seen before so some sacrifices had to be made-- and the choice was made to focus attention on gameplay and stability, which indeed was time well spent. Hopefully as Sins becomes popular some of its narrative potential can be added to in patches, and maybe some strategic content expanded a little. I'll be patient.

Of course there were, but that's really beside the point. Here's how heroes worked in WC3: You have a hero, they have four skills unique to them, one of which they can't level in until level 6 (that's their super ability). Their maximum level in the others is one half the current level of the hero rounded down, which means you can't just level in the same skill every time. There are neutral enemies scattered around the map, and in the early game its important to travel around and kill or "creep" these enemies to level up the hero so its more competitive when you finally meet the enemy.

Hell, the buttons for the skills are even in the same place. It's a good hero system, I see why they "borrowed" it, but it's more than a little flagrant and obvious to anyone that's ever played WC3 considering that the system isn't merely similar it's identical.