This sounds like hugely cool... IMO it would be best if inhibitors weren't able to be built around a star (in it's gravity well) at all. Let's just say that it's gravity is far too strong for any inhibitor to be built...
its not as quick as you expect, the game cycles in a very bust-boom fashion. unless you have a massive and agile force you boom until you reach other players, then there is a bust period as you duke it out, then you sit around until the border stabalizes or you beat him into a pulp and then you "boom" outwards again. So there is no time and no point to think at all... No real strategy. Clicking faster means a lot in these circumstances and that was exactly w
The easy way would of course be to increase ship speed and make gravity wells smaller. Unfortunately for, it looks like ALL the beta players (myself included) want much bigger gravity wells and quite of few of us want slower ship speeds (but if the gravity well is bigger, we probably would be fine with ship speed remaining the same). Ships speeds can remain the same if the distances between planets etc. are made much longer... But that's just my opinion.
I've finally taken the time and wathed in-game movies made by Multianna. Ehm, it all happens SO FAST! Travelling, research... everything is so fast it is definitely more RTS than 4X... I know it's a beta but I really hope this will change.
yes space, in order for you to even give me or any of my clanmates any kind of decent challenge (meaning killing more than a dozen ships b4 losing) you would have to practice your little heart out for a year I hope so! It just means that there is tactics and that it can be perfected. I wouldn't like to see Sins become a game where it wouldn't matter whether
I'm pretty sure the limits will be VERY quickly be found by the modders... Not that I'm against Ironclad giving a few pointers, naturally. But modders test the limits in any case.
So, I guess we can stop arguing about open connection and semi-open connection maps. Yup. Now you need to figure out is how to prevent the "deep behind the frontline" jumps. This could be annoying, Star Wars or no Star Wars. Actually I don't think the saga deals with the supply problem so I guess anything one comes up with is ok as long as the map is open. Perhaps there could be a way to link the length of the phase lane with the quantity of the AM b
Anyway this topic seems to be pretty much discussed out, stop beating a dead horse... Why, it can't complain... Joking. I'm sure the devs have a clear picture on this by now so I agree with you.
There are features present in the game that are turned off due to their heavy reliance on CPU/GPU/Memory/Whatever... These features should be an option once the game comes out. For those with the PC that can run them. There is no alienation of any one group, as it is then YOUR choice if you want to have all the bells and whistles running or not. Ok, but that is how scalable the game is, not minimal requirements. It's not like the AI is scalable, more or less
I definitely can NOT agree with the OP. Surely a lot of upgrades will be happening by the "I must have the latest even if my kids will have nothing to wear" and "my daddy is rich" kind of people. All others will stick with our computers. I understand that some may feel that their recent buy isn't paying itself out because they would be able to play all the games with previous one as well. But I really hate to see them calling for measures that would disable others to play. If a
So, my absolute pile of junk computer (about 1.8gHz, less than a gigabyte of RAM, a Radeon 9600) Now, would you please talk a bit nicer about my computer?!
Excellent point. The only reason I don't do this now is because I get experience points for killing their stuff and can be stealing 300% of their income while I'm killing their stuff This is not an argument at all. When you will want to get rid of someone fast you will go around these defensive instalations. This game can only be fully 3D or 2D. Everything "in between" is not an option. And we already have plnety of 2D games...
Then why do you want it so badly? Bacause it's COOL. Let the ones who are unable or unwilling to learn the use of the third dimension make it up with numbers. Is it really so bad to see the better man win - speaking about MP - because he was able to maneuvre his fleet better?
As I see it, if you add even the option of 3D movement and building placement to the game, the AI would have to be able to account for it, counter it, and even manage to do it on its own. As soon as you have the AI utilising 3D space like that (like in Homeworld), even the average gamer has to learn how to use it. It's one of those things where if you include the option, everyone will HAVE to use it since the AI will have to handle it as well. As it was alr
rather than making you go to each individual building to research them. Yes, i remember now! Sorry, it's been a looong while since I was even somewhat interested in RTS... The phase lane system makes sense from a gameplay perspective, although I'm sure there are other ways to achieve the same effect that fit in better with sins, however, they would most likely be more complicated, and as IC has stated in other posts, they a
I completely agree with Wedge. I'd just like to add that since point A is anywhere on the starting gravity well, it's not a cone but a cylinder of possibilities. With half-sphere-dents on each side. I had to say it or Schem would. This is definitely a hugely great idea.
As they have there own kind of tech, and wont be able to use it. Ouch, that sadly means trading (or promising as a reward) tech as well...
Mostly plays as a rts right now ... the little research in the game is only slightly larger then some rts's, the phase lane system makes the big "universe" feel very limited and gives you the feeling your running over bridges from island to island. AFAIK RTS games have NO research. You can only upgrade buildings depending on other built buildings. The lane system (which I also would don't like fully) is implemented to prevent the "anything can be at
A year of learning curve for HW:C?! Were we playing the same game? No game that is out today had a year long learning curve unless you play a game three times a year. IMO this discussion is going in a direction of "why bother if people are too stupid anyway". Which is a huge underestimation of space strategy players. Give us the options and most will use them. Don't give them and the game will lack the most "spacy" features.
I like your idea. Mafia on the other hand could take over your planet out of the blue if you didn't keep any ships around it (no police)... The longer the more likely? I don't know how this would fit into the always present fighters... Probalby not.
I'm not sure making pirates too strong is ok... Perhaps a rogue criminal organization (mafia) could spam a fleet at times, but pirates (not acting as an organization) aren't usually capable of amassing huge fleets.
The only problem with your bowl formation, Thrawn, is that it just makes it easier to pick away at the ships on the edges. (And yes, I know that wasn't the point of your post, I wholeheartedly agree with having better formations) Actually this bowl (half-sphere) could work as a close-in formation. I guess a half-bubble would be even better from a concentrate-fire-in-focus point of view ("the claw" fighter formation from HW is somewhat like that), but still. T
The additions to the strategy (trade, more diplomacy, POLITICAL map) are definitely very appealing. I hope I get to do the BoB review as well.
Sins Forums
How about comets and asteroids to make the game universe come alive. AFAIK asteriods are already in the game. I don't know about comets though. Oh yeah, and increased solar activity could increase AM recharge rate...
Sins Forums
Increased solar activity? Perhaps it would lower the planets' production (power disruption) for a while.