Pretty much my point. THis pre-order is the same as for any other game but with an added extra that may appeal. If you never pre-order anything why bash this particular pre-order? I also don't think its on to slag off something you've never tried, not going to stop people from doing it I know. Kiron and myself have not slagged Sins, if any
All 3 of those 'major' titles are unknowns and any of them could fall off the back of the development wagon as a steaming pile of broken...ahem. Yet thousands of people are quite happy to stump up their cash on pre-orders for equally untried, untested and as-yet unfinished games as Sins. No-one says a word. Err... Maybe because th
Not to toot any competators horns here... But, Sword of the Stars is only $30 and seems similar enough to Sins... Well other than that SotS is actually by the guys who made Homeworld... Sins sounds interesting though, but like many others here, I've learned the hard way not to preorder anything. And that means *anything* to me.
I'm currently playing as the Altarian Republic, and when scrolling in the diplomacy screen there are two instances of 'Alan Bradley: Terran Alliance'. I'm playing with all races (no minors have shown up), and the extra is between the Iconians (last on the list) and the real Terran Alliance (first). It has the same technologies as the real TA, but no ships or planets.
I don't usually mind bad spelling, but usually I have some vague idea of what was meant. In this case did you mean "indelibly" or "inedibly"? In either case I still have no clue as to what you meant. I dropped the 'd' in the word, call it a typo. If you don't get it, then you don't get it, no sweat off of my back.
If anything, the polls OVER represented people who want multiplayer. So true, so incredibly inelibly true. You go Brad, keep on fighting the good fight, don't let these pests slow you down There are seemingly scads of new space4x games com
Having said that, my faith in the Stardock team remains unabated, and maybe, just maybe, you will succeed in getting me into RTS - thats a tall mountain to climb because I hate the damn things, Well SD isn't involved in the design of this one right? They are the publisher I believe. How much input/impact they have on the actual game might be qu
I lost interest in RTS games long time ago but this one seems quite interesting. I agree, with the first part. I'm not clear on whether or not this one will be able to break that chain. If the AI is a mess like alot of RTSs seem to get into, and no matter how much people say its not going to be a twitchfest they still seem to wind up that way.<
"Out in the fog of war, the Akilians had a ship. A ship that is now rampaging. It destroyed all 5 of my transports! Ack! One freaking ship. Just didn't see it parked out there." Well that explains it doesn't it? Perhaps its no wonder the AIs do the same You always leave your transports covered, or out of range (that is within your sensor area). You never leave them unprotected
So is Dominions III just a bunch of planning or are there battles like in Age of Wonders in which you move your troops? No tactical control of battles. You set your orders for your armies and script your spells and whatnot, then its just watch and hope <br
I hear y'alls points about Dom3, hell I played alot of Dom2 (even some MP with you PDF...), and its fine for MP. My point is that for many people who do not have the time or inclination for MP (which seemingly would be many GC2 players, else why does MP always get voted down?) Dom is a fun 2 months before it gets far far too tedious or boring to be played SP. Nothing against people touting the game for what it does well, nothing against people pointing out what it does horribly either.
Why? In a recent stardock poll, a 4xfantasy strategy game was the most requested game to be developed next. Alot of sci-fi strategy fans r civ strategy fans and fantasy strategy fans. Perhaps the keyword is strategy? Sure, but Dom is absolutely balls for SP. Alot of GC fans might be interested in it, but in the end I think they'll tire of its t
I would find it hard to believe that there is a large crossover between GC2 fans and Dom2/3 fans. Dom is basically MP only since the AI has always sucked. More because of all the useless junk they keep on throwing in with little mind to balance or entertainment. Then there's the price tag... completely unreasonable for a MP only niche game in my opinion, but hey, it's their baby. That said I like the developers at Illwinter, and I like the Dom community, I just don't
GalCiv2 Forums
Stardock has said future expansions for GC 2 depend on the sales of Dark Avatar. If the original poster does not buy Dark Avatar and enough owners of GC2 do not either then there will be no future expansions for GC2. Will this make them satisfied and happy with themselves? I would imagine it would, as it would mean that the SD was listening to th
GalCiv2 Forums
FYI, you can get a galaxy with more strategic features (insomuch as is currently possible, anyway) by playing on big maps with tight clusters and normal or lower star-count. This should create large voids that cannot be crossed without building starbases to extend your range through the empty expanses. This doesn't really solve the problem though
I agree 100%. I also don't understand why the reviewers are raving. Games like Civilization 4 or even the ancient StarCraft - most RTS games, in fact - have much better AI. I don't think much better is fair at all. They have different AIs, and different game mechanisms to allow the AIs to be more competative. Well SC isn't even a rational compa
but the Yor were very quick to actually invade planets once they cleared the way to them. Maybe I'm just (un)lucky that way. Well maybe its a Yor AI thing then? I don't think the Yor have ever really been in any kind of position to do much of anything in the game I remember. Continuing with my game from the other day I got the Arceans
The starbase stuff is trickier than one thinks. When I code that stuff, I know exactly what I want. The code appears to do what I want. And yet I will often see the same thing you do - a lot of wimpy little starbases right next to each other. It's frustrating. Hehe, well so long as you are seeing it too <img src="http://images.stardock.com/gc2
1.3 is still in beta. The ship building part hasn't been touched. Only diplomacy and planetary management. Well those parts I find to be much better than previous builds so kudos to you and the team for a job well done there! However, the transport thing is really bugging me. I started another game on crippleing and semi-handicapped my
GalCiv2 Forums
1.3 is still in beta. The ship building part hasn't been touched. Only diplomacy and planetary management. Well those parts I find to be much better than previous builds so kudos to you and the team for a job well done there! However, the transport thing is really bugging me. I started another game on crippleing and semi-handicapped my
Heh, wow, I was the master? I don't play metaverse, but glad my thoughts worked for you Master U. For what you are doing early speed is certainly going to be needed, but on the maps I play normally it isn't needed that much, so the extra pop growth is where I put the points.
I took a decently long break from GC2 since I was finding the AI annoyingly unable to manage its troop transports and star bases. When 1.3 came out and was mostly about the AI (or so it seemed) I dove back in again. Yuck. The AI still cannot handle its transports or starbases. I think its more a question of focus though than anything else. I've been playing at crippling which should have all AI features on, if not then please advise as to the change. The bas
Doubtful. GC2 is rapidly losing its luster as the same type of issues as were found in GC1 begin to show through. Adding more nonsense for the AI to not be good at just doesn't sound like it will make for a better game. Its still an OK game, but ehh...
I've been campaigning for tactical combat ever since I started playing the game and one of the things which truly amazed me was the abitlity of some people to make comments such as 'there must only be a few very vocal supporters of tactical combat, because look at all us people arguing against it'. Ha! I'm afraid its completely the other way round gentlemen and (and the ha
Unless there are many other changes to the game mechanics tactical combat would be more of a time sink with little payoff than anything else. That's assuming GC2 mechanics. If more design/tech options are added to differentiate ships in more areas than just the 6 we have right now and if the strategic movement system is changed to remove the 'open space' problem of zillions (potentially) of combats per turn then tac combat becomes more appealing. I'm thinking though that a