Sins of a Solar Empire : Real-Time Strategy. Unrivalled Scale.
© 2003-2016 Ironclad Games Corporation Vancouver, BC. All rights reserved.
© 2006-2016 Stardock Entertainment

Will there be a Sins 2?

By on November 19, 2012 11:29:23 PM from Sins of a Solar Empire Forums Sins of a Solar Empire Forums

givemesomep...

Join Date 03/2012
+4

I know Rebellion came out 5 months ago, but do you think there will be a Sins 2? What would you want to see in the new game?

Locked Post 62 Replies
Search this post
Subscription Options


Reason for Karma (Optional)
Successfully updated karma reason!
November 24, 2012 6:47:07 PM from Sins of a Solar Empire Forums Sins of a Solar Empire Forums

Quoting Protoplazm,
Oh, and did I mention multi-monitor support?

I think strategy games in general will be moving that direction...

Reason for Karma (Optional)
Successfully updated karma reason!
November 24, 2012 11:59:02 PM from Sins of a Solar Empire Forums Sins of a Solar Empire Forums

Quoting Crazie_Guy,
Just an engine upgrade would be enough for me. That the original was made before multicore and 64bit is nothing short of a tragedy.

It's not a Tragedy. It is just how things were in 2006/2007 when the game was first designed. I am sure if 64 bit was the big thing then. Then Sins would have been written in 64 bit.

Reason for Karma (Optional)
Successfully updated karma reason!
November 28, 2012 6:26:41 PM from Sins of a Solar Empire Forums Sins of a Solar Empire Forums

Sins 2 already has my money if it has a place in existence in the next few years. One suggestion I would like to add to this thread is the inclusion of ships between capital ships and titans. Right now the game is centered around leveling your titan for no fleet can stand against the might of a fully armed and operational level 10 ass ripper. 

I see the disparity between titan and every other ship as a problem (or maybe the whole leveling system itself is the problem [possibly change to module system?]). In homeworld 1 a heavy cruiser was the toughest ship hands down but three destroyers (the number 2 ship) could tame the beast. I know this isn't homeworld but I see a possible enhancement to game play by simply have tier 2 ships that bridge the gap. Thoughts?

Reason for Karma (Optional)
Successfully updated karma reason!
November 28, 2012 6:51:38 PM from Sins of a Solar Empire Forums Sins of a Solar Empire Forums

Quoting Grzzly1V,
(or maybe the whole leveling system itself is the problem [possibly change to module system?])

I think this is it. If titans did not level up from experience, then the game won't turn into a "don't feed the titan" contest, so mass frigates may take heavy loses but they'll get the job done.

Reason for Karma (Optional)
Successfully updated karma reason!
November 29, 2012 6:37:45 PM from Sins of a Solar Empire Forums Sins of a Solar Empire Forums

I kinda like the titans being end-all ships. Then again I'm used to the idea of titan class ship ripping fleets apart being eve-player m'self. Especially Ragnarov matches my ideal perfectly, decimating stacked fleets with ease or just being a royal pain in the rear for non-titan targets that attempt to close in.

If I could have one thing, it'd be an engine at least on-par with HW2's. Sorry but I need to say that the ship models in this game are my biggest turnoff, and rotating turrets that I'm used on getting from older game(HW2's from 2003 after all!) is one of the causes. I know I know, playing games for graphics is like watching porn for plot and I'll admit - Sins is a terribly good game as it is. I just wish it'd be prettier. Having said that, I'll keep playing even if it looks like it does. Mainly because game-play is up to where I want it to be. Still man has right to dream and I dream of prettier things.

And if the engine were to take benefit from modern hardware (64, ram issues, whatnot) I suspect lag would be eliminated.  Then again I kinda prioritize computer upgrades over... ehm, a lot of things, so I'm not exactly short on hardware. Would be nice to disable the lot of stuff much like in eve-online (Starting from turrets into lower res models maybe?).

I just hope SoaSE2 is as set in stone as you make it sound since I'm really looking forward. Im getting sick of playing older games. And don't get me wrong but I count SoaSE as old. After all Rebellion, where it did add new features, is in essence '06 or '07 game thanks to its engine. I'm not sure if iron 2 could be used for space-game, but still I feel its not quite up-to-snuff when compared to likes of Homeworld-engine, in its 2003 modified state.

Of course I understand the vast difference of scope in games I'm trying to compare, one has a set area and 2nd has multiple solar systems, but I still feel that considering the amount of computing power that we've gained, something like that should be feasible. Then again I don't know much about designing these things so I can be terribly mistaken.

 

 

 

Reason for Karma (Optional)
Successfully updated karma reason!
November 29, 2012 8:08:01 PM from Sins of a Solar Empire Forums Sins of a Solar Empire Forums

I'd definitely like formation settings, turreted warships, proper z-axis implementation, control over firing and ability arcs, and combat that doesn't resemble Napoleonic firing lines.  I'd love to see Sins 2 copy some of the tactical movement mechanics from the first Sword of the Stars while not copying everything else (and nothing from Sword of the Stars 2!) since that would just make combat not very fun.  If Sins 2 has to reduce the number of ships available to a player to do the increased fidelity, that's fine as long as long as I don't feel like my fleet took a firepower reduction in the process.

Reason for Karma (Optional)
Successfully updated karma reason!
November 29, 2012 9:49:18 PM from Sins of a Solar Empire Forums Sins of a Solar Empire Forums

Hmmm.. Doubt it.

 

Dont get me wrong. I would like it and likely purchase it. But my thoughts are simple.

 

Why make a Sins 2?

 

Any answer you can provide can also be given with a completely different game but with a SoaSE attitude and angle. And why not take that approach?

For the barely existing story line it is easier to start clean.

They may be sitting on numerous "should have done" ideas but the tech and abilities are already expected they could not go back.

 

Soooo much more can be done with a game title <Insert new kewl name> from the makers of Sins of a Solar Empire. ANd give some nice pretty screen shots and vids that remind the core Sins players of the game.

 

Doing so they can take everything they (the devs) and the fan base love about the game and tweak what was not.

 

So one could call it Sins 2 as it would be. But IMO it should not. For then we get what we really want.

Reason for Karma (Optional)
Successfully updated karma reason!
November 29, 2012 11:56:50 PM from Sins of a Solar Empire Forums Sins of a Solar Empire Forums

I think we're all wanting Sins 2 to be Sins just with better tactical combat, 64-bit capability, and multithreading.  We don't want Ironclad and Stardock to reinvent the wheel because then we get Sword of the Stars 2.

Reason for Karma (Optional)
Successfully updated karma reason!
November 30, 2012 1:02:39 AM from Sins of a Solar Empire Forums Sins of a Solar Empire Forums

Quoting SpardaSon21,
I'd definitely like formation settings, turreted warships, proper z-axis implementation, control over firing and ability arcs, and combat that doesn't resemble Napoleonic firing lines. I'd love to see Sins 2 copy some of the tactical movement mechanics from the first Sword of the Stars while not copying everything else (and nothing from Sword of the Stars 2!) since that would just make combat not very fun. If Sins 2 has to reduce the number of ships available to a player to do the increased fidelity, that's fine as long as long as I don't feel like my fleet took a firepower reduction in the process.

Quoting SpardaSon21,
I think we're all wanting Sins 2 to be Sins just with better tactical combat, 64-bit capability, and multithreading.  We don't want Ironclad and Stardock to reinvent the wheel because then we get Sword of the Stars 2.

Given the choice, I'd rather Stardock add better 4X and strategy elements rather than focus on tactical combat. It could be better balanced but Sins has the mechanics for a good combat system. I'd rather not see things like hardpoints get involved, Sins is too large scale for that. A bit more dynamism would be nice, but things like turrets I totally don't care about. Firing arcs I only care about from a modding angle, if they design the ships in Sins 2 as they did in Sins they really don't matter.

Better unit behavior and AI on the other hand I totally agree with.

Quoting Deroven,
(HW2's from 2003 after all!)

I haven't played Homeworld 2, but if its anything like other Homeworld games you have much fewer ships flying around. Sins engine is good, but its meant to have as many things in the game as possible. And for that you need to make some sacrifices, from fighters not having shields to static turrets. And I'm totally happy with that trade off. From the screenshots I've seen I don't think HW2 looks that good compared to Sins, at least just from the models. It just seems to have the edge in that the ships feel more real because of details like turret movement.

Reason for Karma (Optional)
Successfully updated karma reason!
November 30, 2012 3:39:19 PM from Sins of a Solar Empire Forums Sins of a Solar Empire Forums

Quoting GoaFan77,
Given the choice, I'd rather Stardock add better 4X and strategy elements rather than focus on tactical combat. It could be better balanced but Sins has the mechanics for a good combat system. I'd rather not see things like hardpoints get involved, Sins is too large scale for that. A bit more dynamism would be nice, but things like turrets I totally don't care about. Firing arcs I only care about from a modding angle, if they design the ships in Sins 2 as they did in Sins they really don't matter.

Sins 2 definitely could use more 4X stuff like an expanded tech tree and more planet types and bonuses, but if you go too deep with 4X elements in a real-time game you end up with a long slog until fleets start exploding, and that's going to make Sins boring.  I also don't want destroyable hardpoints in Sins, since that's too deep in the tactical scale and will bog it down.  Tactical combat with a bit more maneuvering by ships and turreted weapons is what I'm looking for, and they can and should keep the rest of Sins combat such as 100% accuracy for weapons and and the currently existing hull and shield system.  I don't want to have to roll my ships to present an undamaged armor section or non-depleted shield quadrant since I do want Sins to keep a lot of its scale and not get horribly involved in micromanagement.

Reason for Karma (Optional)
Successfully updated karma reason!
December 1, 2012 8:43:17 AM from Sins of a Solar Empire Forums Sins of a Solar Empire Forums

Quoting Deroven,

 Still man has right to dream and I dream of prettier things. 
 

...cause life is only valuable as an aesthetic phenomenon...

 

 

Reason for Karma (Optional)
Successfully updated karma reason!
December 1, 2012 9:58:17 AM from Sins of a Solar Empire Forums Sins of a Solar Empire Forums

Quoting GoaFan77,
I haven't played Homeworld 2, but if its anything like other Homeworld games you have much fewer ships flying around. Sins engine is good, but its meant to have as many things in the game as possible. And for that you need to make some sacrifices, from fighters not having shields to static turrets. And I'm totally happy with that trade off. From the screenshots I've seen I don't think HW2 looks that good compared to Sins, at least just from the models. It just seems to have the edge in that the ships feel more real because of details like turret movement.
Graphics were great for the time, but the real appeal of HW, Cata, and HW2 was the (again, at the time) unique approach to the integration of different elements, along with the campaign, and story line.

Hardpoints were very dynamic because of the challenges they posed to not only selection, acquisition, and tactical implementation, but the targets they represented relative to their function.  For instance, only capitol ships could have hyperspace modules, and a favorite tactic was to jump a carrier loaded with docked bombers high above (on the Z axis) to a distant enemy formation, launch bombers to cripple their anti-jump hardpoints, then jump in your main force directly into their fleet while you disabled any hyperspace modules on their remaining caps to prevent escape.  Of course, this all took place in a huge 3D arena instead of a grav well, but the best thing about the game lobby was the host could assign which players went where so you could position players that had better strengths at different points on your teams lineup.  This would be an outstanding feature to see in any upcoming versions.

Also, I think SoSE would get a lot of mileage from fleshing out the storyline along with a campaign that included tutorials because that would elevate the overall gameplay for multiplayer since players would have an improved baseline of skill sets once they ventured into online PvP games.

Reason for Karma (Optional)
Successfully updated karma reason!
December 1, 2012 9:11:36 PM from Sins of a Solar Empire Forums Sins of a Solar Empire Forums

A lot of good ideas here.  As a general observation, I think that the independent players will have a different "short list" vs. the multiplayer community, and based on total sales vs. online multi-playership their requests should probably take precedence if a Sins 2 is ever contemplated/released.

My own personal desire would be to see greater grand tactical control at the fleet level, to the point where battles would require less real time management but would conform to an overall strategy or engagement philosophy without immediate supervision.  Being able to customize initial deployment and engagement parameters (minimum distance, targeting parameters, etc.) either by ship class, or by division/wing, or for a fleet as a whole would be very interesting.  You can try and do that now by grouping ships in separate fleets and then fiddling with them constantly during an engagement, but it's a little clumsy. 

In a game where everything happens simultaneously, it would be useful to be able to order some fleets to fight a more defensive engagement, so that you don't need to flip back to keep them out of trouble while fighting a critical battle somewhere else.

Along similar lines, some sort of prioritization of messaging would be useful.  News of an attack on an important system could be preceded by some sort of a tone to set it apart from the system upgrade announcements.  And messages could be added to announce fleet status deterioration, just to make sure you can keep an eye (or rather, an ear) on multiple systems simultaneously.

Anyway, those are my additions to the other good ideas put forward here.

 

 

Reason for Karma (Optional)
Successfully updated karma reason!
December 1, 2012 9:56:10 PM from Sins of a Solar Empire Forums Sins of a Solar Empire Forums

Watch they do what Relic did with Homeworld. Everyone and their mother is still clamoring for Homeworld 3, but still no word on it. Sins of a Solar Empire 2 will be just like that....lol

Reason for Karma (Optional)
Successfully updated karma reason!
December 1, 2012 10:14:09 PM from Sins of a Solar Empire Forums Sins of a Solar Empire Forums

I don't really like the idea of hardpoints, that is ones that you could target, like on bigger ships in SW:EaW. Those lead to far too much micro management. For the most part, as we have 5 total weapon slots now, that is sufficient when it comes to weaponry IMO. I think that turrets would be a really good addition, not as mere visual eye candy, but as actual turrets; something that bypasses the FRONT/LEFT/RIGHT/BACK bank system entirely. Further, allowing ships to move to ANY bank depending on their total damage in that direction (versus only the front or right), would be nice.

Reason for Karma (Optional)
Successfully updated karma reason!
December 3, 2012 1:16:41 AM from Sins of a Solar Empire Forums Sins of a Solar Empire Forums

I've got to get in my two bits here.

 

I'd love to see a Sins2. I've been here from the beginning and before and have said it all along. When rebellion came out I peed my pants and I will again.

 

Main thing: Campaign. 

This would be awesome. I'm torn between the two ideas here: show the alien race chasing the Vasari or not. If you do show the race, then I think it should be pretty epic. If you don't show the race, I don't know what the campaign is going to be about, but I almost think it should be character driven.

 

Another main thing: Multicore, 64 bit, and memory upgrades.

This would make the game able to run on a much larger scale. Which is the whole idea of sins, huge scale.

 

Orbiting planets and moons would be sweet, and maybe more "solar system like" systems (i.e. only 5-15 planets in a system with lots of suns being in a single map) The phase lanes could change when the planets moved.

 

MORE SHIPS.

 

Titans? Multiple for each faction? No. Unless they got a nerf or you could research so that frigates could withstand some of a Titan's fury, it would be no fun. Maybe a heavy capitol ship. Balance needs to be achieved.

 

MORE RESEARCH TIERS.

Kinda like Galactic Civilizations II where the tree is so extensive you have to specialize and choose your path.

 

A fancy ship designer.

I would love to see a ship designer with base hulls, extras, weapons, defenses, modules, the whole lot (also kinda like Galactic Civilizations II)(Yes I still play that game, sometimes). Being that this is a real time strategy, that could be hard but maybe you could partion off the screen and control units while taking some time to build your custom ships.

 

Ability to create custom fleet formations.

With new ships, maybe some are long range and some have very heavy defenses and very little firepower. You could tell the long range ships to always line up further back, while the heavy defense ships would take the brunt of the damage. This could involve a change in the game engine where ships that are "behind" other ships cannot be fired upon until the closer ships are taken out.

I like HLT's idea of not having to micromanage fleets as much. This ability to have fleets to disengage and retreat after achieving 25% losses (defensive posture), say, they would automatically retreat. If a capitol ship got to a certain damage percentage, it would automatically retreat. In an offensive posture, they would have to achieve 75% losses to retreat. Or you could tell them to "fight to the death".

 

Critical systems on frigates, cruisers, and capitol ships.

Engines, weapons, defensive suites, bridge, fighter/bomber bay, power plant, etc. These systems could be targeted (by the user/computer telling ships to target these systems in order to cripple ships) and could damage them so as to cripple the ship, i.e. if engines/propulsion were hit, then the ship would loose considerable speed and maneuvering capabilities. If the bridge were hit, the ship is no longer directly controlled by the user (i.e. it will auto attack) unless a retreat is ordered. If the fighter/bomber bay is hit, then fighter and bomber construction is stopped. If the power plant is hit, then hull regen, sheild regen, and antimatter regen is slowed. Certain weapons and defenses could be damaged and disabled in much the same fashion. Perhaps these "critical" hits could only be achieved after shields were brought down.

 

More races? Sure, as long as it doesn't get in front of any of this other stuff.

 

MOVING TURRETS.

HOLY COW. IF TITANS HAD THIS. The Ragnarov would be freaking sick. The opening cinematic. Those railguns moving was awesome. HW2 thing, but good thing none the less.

 

Active destruction.

Much also like the opening cinematic, if a piece of a ship gets cut off by a stray laser, then it floats away. Ok, maybe not that much, but more than just sparks and smoke. Please, come on here.

 

I'm sure I'll think of more, but either way. Sins2. Please. I beg of you.

Reason for Karma (Optional)
Successfully updated karma reason!
December 3, 2012 1:24:51 AM from Sins of a Solar Empire Forums Sins of a Solar Empire Forums

Quoting sulley1,
I'm sure I'll think of more, but either way. Sins2. Please. I beg of you.

The interesting thing about this post is you don't have to read many posts above yours to see some posts that actively say they do not want some of the things you're hoping for. Ironclad will have a heck of a time deciding where to take Sins II, because us the fans clearly can't agree either...

Reason for Karma (Optional)
Successfully updated karma reason!
December 3, 2012 2:03:27 AM from Sins of a Solar Empire Forums Sins of a Solar Empire Forums

Quoting GoaFan77,

The interesting thing about this post is you don't have to read many posts above yours to see some posts that actively say they do not want some of the things you're hoping for. Ironclad will have a heck of a time deciding where to take Sins II, because us the fans clearly can't agree either...

 

I haven't thought this through super well. Some of this will be too much. I do agree with some replies above where having the critical hull parts and stuff could be too involved. I almost like Sins now for how simplistic it is, but I want more depth. In ships, research, and story mostly. I just listed what comes to my mind when I think of something that I would want in Sins2, whether these things are practical or not will decide if they are included. Or they could be thrown out if they're just stupid.

 

EDIT:

I already thought of another thing that is plausible. 3 part campaign. First from the standpoint of the TEC, after that's completed, from the Advent, and then the Vasari. This could have interesting implications.

Reason for Karma (Optional)
Successfully updated karma reason!
December 3, 2012 2:16:35 AM from Sins of a Solar Empire Forums Sins of a Solar Empire Forums

multiplayer that doesnt suck

Reason for Karma (Optional)
Successfully updated karma reason!
December 4, 2012 12:57:40 PM from Sins of a Solar Empire Forums Sins of a Solar Empire Forums

The past few years there seems to be a flood of space strategy hybrids. Star Drive will have moving orbits, ship design, even taking control of ships and manually piloting them. I am not saying any of these games are or will be better. SOSE has been in my library for a very long time. Longer than many other games. For me, SOSE 2 would really need to bring something new, not just a graphics update or a few new features. Don't change what is great about the game but it needs some innovation, otherwise I'd just continue to play the original.

 

Reason for Karma (Optional)
Successfully updated karma reason!
December 4, 2012 3:09:51 PM from Sins of a Solar Empire Forums Sins of a Solar Empire Forums

It needs a lot more 4X, and a little more Tactical Gameplay. If Sins was to take anything from Homeworld i would take from Homeworld 1. Not from Homeworld 2. I would take Homeworld 1's Tactics, Formations, and 3D movement. Add rotating turrets, ship animations, and firing arcs that were specific, and not general 180 degree arcs. I would make Shields, and Armor weaker in the rear of ships to utilize those features. I would NOT add any subsystems or hardpoints. That would over complicate a game of this scale, and turn it into micro manage hell.

There are not many "new" things left that can be done with a game like this. Original Sins was supposed to have orbiting planets, and an open universe travel system (aka no phase lanes). However the dev's felt it hurt gameplay more than it helped. They can keep the phase lane system, but only to stars, and each gravity well can have a true "solar system" in it. Something like what Sword of the Stars 2 has. Or what Original Sins was intended to be, but in a "Local Scale".

I think more focus should be on the 4X element. We have plenty of "Expand, and Exterminate". There needs to be much more "Explore, and Exploit". More Diplomacy. Espionage. Etc. The Defenders can use to be revamped a little. Perhaps into full blown NPC factions in themselves. That have their own unique traits, or ability's. That you can negotiate treaty's with, Ally, or Conquer if you wish. Random space events (Monsters, Menaces, or Environment hazards) would add a lot to Sins. Along with the Pirates. Dealing with all can give experience to ships.

Ground Warfare can consist of specific troop transports that you must use to take over a world. Along with planet bombers, and colony ships The planet bombing is only effective to a point, but you must bring in ground forces in to "mop up", and garrison. This can be shown as an ability similar to Planet Mania (animations of ground troops fighting above the planet). Once won the planet is yours, but you cant do a damn thing with it until you bring a colony ship. The colonizers bring in civilians for building new infrastructure.

Reason for Karma (Optional)
Successfully updated karma reason!
December 4, 2012 3:33:53 PM from Sins of a Solar Empire Forums Sins of a Solar Empire Forums

Quoting Major Stress,
Ground Warfare can consist of specific troop transports that you must use to take over a world. Along with planet bombers, and colony ships The planet bombing is only effective to a point, but you must bring in ground forces in to "mop up", and garrison. This can be shown as an ability similar to Planet Mania (animations of ground troops fighting above the planet). Once won the planet is yours, but you cant do a damn thing with it until you bring a colony ship. The colonizers bring in civilians for building new infrastructure.

Forgot about this. That would be a big one.

 

Another idea with the campaign:

If the devs do decide to show the "enemy" chasing the Vasari, then the three civs (TEC, Advent, Vasari) could unite near the end (maybe the campaign could be a lot about getting the three to work together) and defeat this "enemy". After that, they're like, "What the hey? Look at all this tech and ships the enemy left behind. I want it." So they all go back to fighting or whatever. This could lead to new player going online or skirmish to play with the three civs. Maybe after completing the campaign you unlock some new ships and research or something. Just an idea.

Reason for Karma (Optional)
Successfully updated karma reason!
December 4, 2012 3:35:26 PM from Sins of a Solar Empire Forums Sins of a Solar Empire Forums

 

an

 

Quoting Major Stress,
It needs a lot more 4X, and a little more Tactical Gameplay. If Sins was to take anything from Homeworld i would take from Homeworld 1. Not from Homeworld 2. I would take Homeworld 1's Tactics, Formations, and 3D movement. Add rotating turrets, ship animations, and firing arcs that were specific, and not general 180 degree arcs. I would make Shields, and Armor weaker in the rear of ships to utilize those features. I would NOT add any subsystems or hardpoints. That would over complicate a game of this scale, and turn it into micro manage hell.

There are not many "new" things left that can be done with a game like this. Original Sins was supposed to have orbiting planets, and an open universe travel system (aka no phase lanes). However the dev's felt it hurt gameplay more than it helped. They can keep the phase lane system, but only to stars, and each gravity well can have a true "solar system" in it. Something like what Sword of the Stars 2 has. Or what Original Sins was intended to be, but in a "Local Scale".

I think more focus should be on the 4X element. We have plenty of "Expand, and Exterminate". There needs to be much more "Explore, and Exploit". More Diplomacy. Espionage. Etc. The Defenders can use to be revamped a little. Perhaps into full blown NPC factions in themselves. That have their own unique traits, or ability's. That you can negotiate treaty's with, Ally, or Conquer if you wish. Random space events (Monsters, Menaces, or Environment hazards) would add a lot to Sins. Along with the Pirates. Dealing with all can give experience to ships.

Ground Warfare can consist of specific troop transports that you must use to take over a world. Along with planet bombers, and colony ships The planet bombing is only effective to a point, but you must bring in ground forces in to "mop up", and garrison. This can be shown as an ability similar to Planet Mania (animations of ground troops fighting above the planet). Once won the planet is yours, but you cant do a damn thing with it until you bring a colony ship. The colonizers bring in civilians for building new infrastructure.

 

I completely agree with all of this, especially the parts about Homeworldesque tactical gameplay, as ship movement and general micromanagement of larger group of ships can get really messy sometimes (i always felt way more under control of battles on HW, the units, even while moving more than on Sins, were easier to recognize and select, on SoaSE its sometimes incredible clusterfuck...) and then the 4X part (yay for NPC minor races and all those menaces,  monsters and old left-over tech kind of stuff... but please, do not overcomplicate it to become way too management-like, i would prefer Sins with more content, not Sins with more gameplay mechanics...)

Just one thing, i would keep the current phase-lane system, as its IMHO working very well, i would just make the gravwells bigger to allow for that tactical combat. 

The other things, i always felt it would be cool, if you could zoom onto the planet so close, that at the maximum it would kinda automatically "flip" and move the camera through the clouds and show you nicely animated city/colony. You know, like in the old 4X games, Pax Imperia Eminent Domain comes to mind.

Something looking like this, just in motion:

and you could watch it turning into this during bombardment:

 This would have basically no influence on actual gameplay, just pure eye candy. The city could perhaps change/grow as the population will grow and it would be great to watch it especially during orbital bombarding - to see it burning and going down, and then see those planetary invasion dropships to land etc... then zooming back would take you back to orbit/actual gameplay area... while technically pointless, it would IMHO add lot of character to the game. How many times are just bored during bombardment phase, waiting for it to be finished, so you can proceed with next steps - this could shorten the waiting and give you at least bit of that feeling, you are actually conquering unique world, not 15th generic planet. 

 

 

 

Reason for Karma (Optional)
Successfully updated karma reason!
December 4, 2012 5:44:02 PM from Sins of a Solar Empire Forums Sins of a Solar Empire Forums

Quoting sulley1,
Another idea with the campaign:

If the devs do decide to show the "enemy" chasing the Vasari, then the three civs (TEC, Advent, Vasari) could unite near the end (maybe the campaign could be a lot about getting the three to work together) and defeat this "enemy". After that, they're like, "What the hey? Look at all this tech and ships the enemy left behind. I want it." So they all go back to fighting or whatever. This could lead to new player going online or skirmish to play with the three civs. Maybe after completing the campaign you unlock some new ships and research or something. Just an idea.

Good stuff!  Had virtually the same notions.

 

Oh, and also;

  • Unlocks. 

A race specific shield or buff of some type for "winning" or successfully completing the campaign(s).

  • Player insignias.

A small ship graphic that you could personalize your fleets or capital ships with.

Reason for Karma (Optional)
Successfully updated karma reason!
December 4, 2012 6:10:27 PM from Sins of a Solar Empire Forums Sins of a Solar Empire Forums

Like visible achievements for defeating this "Unknown Enemy" that buff your faction. Kinda like kill marks on a fighter. Sounds good.

I think the goal is to add on to Sins without over doing it, or going way over the top. Sword of the Stars 2 is the shining example of over doing, and over complicating things that we need to avoid at all costs. SoTS 2 is the extreme opposite of Sins. It has a lot more, and very complex 4X, but very little tactical gameplay.

It is the Little things that can add a great deal to the game without turning it into a "Chore, or Grind" to play. The most important thing is to keep it Fun.

Reason for Karma (Optional)
Successfully updated karma reason!
Stardock Forums v1.0.0.0    #108432  walnut2   Server Load Time: 00:00:00.0000422   Page Render Time: