all wrong, with the exception of all the goddamn strikecraft.

you read my mind... except that I got to reading yours first, dont make a comment that is inherently shot down.

fine then, explain to me *how* you intend to micro ships that dont stay within your dragbox?

with accelerations like these ships deal with it would take you ages just to drag click what you want.

ECM? for the emission of light in space? how exactly do you intend to carry that one through? its not like infrared guided missiles...

now if ANY of you can find me a prolific game where all of the units move around sporadically for no other reason than to dodge fire, I'll bow down and kiss the floor. until then this thread is full of a bunch of trollmongering and name calling.

the idea isnt feasible which is why its not implemented
strike craft make an exception (ignoring for now that sins has them) because in all games any one side only as a few types, so double-clicking them is an easy solution.

The aesthetics of this game are perfect. the only thing that it has that is inferior to homeworld is unarticulated turrets on cap ships. The tradeoff is that this game will run great on my pc as opposed to supcom, a great game that through necessity is a bit demanding on the old single core.

The ships move when they need to. The universe of SINS is one in where shields and armour can take a hammering and weapons are super accurate regardless of speed of target. It is not based on relativistic And, you can move your ships if you really want to and witness the consequences. Some turrets will still have a target but you will die. Maybe thats why they don't do it. I thought it looked crap as well the first few games. Once I got into some REAL battles and toggled the cinematic mode it looked great. This request is stupid and playing on the fact that ironclad take their fans seriously. I feel that they are smarter than this which is why the ships don't move about and wont move about for anything other than good, tactical reasons (which you can give them!)

Schod is entirely correct, to my knowledge.

As I said before, the games that I played (the majority of those listed) just don't feature dodging non-strikecraft units. They JUST DON'T. Hell, not even the extremely tactical Massive Entertainment games do this.

other than LOOKING COOL there is NO valid reason that the ship should move

the counter to look cool is simple it would be havoc to try control your fleet of 200+ ships if it is in a fur ball with 200+ enemy vessels
that said

NOW DIE THREAD DIE  

die thread die. . i still want moving ships damn it

LOL  

Maybe you want it spelled out?
Homeworld 2: Everything up to destroyers moves around a lot in combat, made even more prononced with the PDS mod.
ORB: see Homeworld
Nexus: The entire game centered around tactical starship combat. Anyone claiming capital ships don't move around in this one is simply blind, even battleships constantly roll and wave to bring weapons to bear and dodge fire. All done automatically, off course.
Company of Heroes: Don't know which game you are playing, but in my copy of COH infantry constantly moves around to find better cover and firing positions. Which is the land combat equivalent of dodging manouvers in space, perfectly implemented.
C&C: Start up the game, and build a couple of Orca's. When attacking a target they circle around it while firing. This helps them evade enemy rockets. How is that not exactly what people are asking for here?
Supreme Commander: Same thing as C&C, with aircraft constantly evading fire and making attack runs.
Sword of the Stars: Doesn't even feature strikecraft, so here is the proof you're simply making this up as you go. Every destroyer and cruiser dodges and waves around in combat, while the big dreadnoughts just plow through fleets of smaller craft.

Come on guys, this blind loyalty to Ironclad just makes you look sad. Anyone with access to these games or youtube can clearly see how wrong you are.

Let the floor kissing begin.

well thats good for homworld guss what this IS NOT homeworld it is sins
tha computers in this game DONT miss therfor manuvering is USELESS
and if they do miss manuvering aint gonna help sh&*
also conseder THERE IS NO COVER to move TO

ps im not ablinde suporter of ironclad or stardock iand have made sugestions in other threads
including the addition of marien frigats
the changing of the pji
nerf of superwepons

now go away  
just my 2 cents  

Why do posters on this forum insist on making comments like that? His post has just as much right to be here as yours

Anyway, I think it would be nice to have some moving bigger ships. Even if it is only aesthetic, so what? If the devs make it an Option! As a graphic options "turn on/off ship animation" then everyone wins. If they don't like it turn it off. Since if it makes no real difference apart from aesthetic.

BUT if it does make a difference and ships can dodge some fire or move to better positions, well that is even better and I don't see what would be wrong with that, so long as it does not make the game performance slow to a crawl.

It could be called "tactical manouevres" and maybe be toggleable too so again if not liked then it could be turned off. Win win again for everyone.

well then if they do enjoy controling a fleet of 200+ ships going all over the place   
me personally IF the devs put that in ill be swiching it off

No, ship should not move so I 1/2 fleet moves into a 6x turret zone while I zoom out to build something on another planet, enough said!

Heres a question...

During a large tank battles, do all the tanks roll around in circles around eachother? or sit still?

How about this. We have a check box in the game play options. If you click it on, then frigates and larger ships will move around and dogfight in their respective speeds. If you uncheck it, they don't. Then everybody is happy and we don't have to hear people explain why ship movement during combat is unrealistic, absurd, and I can't believe I read this earlier, but "against the lore".

Totally agree. In fact it would be nice if the devs add many things with OPTION to turn them on or off. It sure avoids all the arguing. Then if people don't like something they can just turn it off.

If they still disagree with it, then really they are arguing just for the sake of arguing.

The move around in circles of course! That way they can dodge the shells other tanks shoot.

Here's a real question: why do all modern tanks have very complex and expensive targetting stabilizers? Because if they have to stop each time they want to fire, they are an easy target. Read up on the tank warfare in Desert Storm, and the way the Iraqi tanks gave the US a real turkey shoot due to being unable to fire on the move. You're thinking in terms of WW2. Sitting still is the worst thing you can do in a combat zone. Stationary tanks disappeared with the advent of modern electronics.

Edit: Oh, and talking about circling other tanks: standard allied operational procedure for taking down a Tiger or Konigstiger was for tanks to circle around the Tiger and hit him in the weaker armoured engine compartment. But hey, such tactics are clearly far too advanced for the space navies of the far future.

IMHO, the only movement capital ships should do in combat is based on inertia. In space, ships with a huge mass shouldn't stop on a dime, nor should they be dogfighting.

The problem is that the "physics" in the game doesn't really represent the mass of large vessels properly. The larger the vessel, that more it should drift.

For a capital ship to come to a dead stop would require an immense amount of energy, which would be better spent on shields and weapons. So that's why drifting would more realistic. Cut the engines, power to shields and weapons array.

Conversely, a capital ship doing dogfight maneuvers would also be inappropriate, as again, it is a waste of energy to power engines and thrusters when there is almost *zero* chance of avoiding damage. So again, cut the engines, power to shields and weapons.

Just by accurately representing mass, inertia and momentum would be enough to get the realistic feel.

some how i think with the current turning circles fights will take about a day and the entire Grav well. if the frigates move like the fighters   

If you want the real reason why ships are static in Sins do the following:

www.pcgamerpodcast.com
Download episode 118: "Blair Fraser, Producer of Sins of a Solar Empire, discusses the upcoming real-time strategy game with 4-X qualities."

He explains why ships are relatively static in the game. The two reasons are:
1) The ships are HUGE and don't maneuver like fighters (he said zoom into the smallest frigate and look at the windows and then extrapolate the size of the ship from there).
2) It becomes a huge mess if you have multiple battles going on simultaneous and you have to switch between said battles. You quickly lose track of what is going on.

homeworld: wrong, the frigates do not move dynamically in battle
and when capital ships do move (like they do in sins) its just to bring weapons to bear, no different here.
CoH: 1) there is no "cover" in space, 2) they usually sit behind static cover and fire on one another, they dont consistantly move around 3) why are you comparing infantry to the combat of great big ships carrying upwards of half a thousand people? its just not a good comparison on ANY level.
Supreme commander: yeah, strike craft. just like sins's bombers and fighters
SotS: ok fine, but I have two points I can remain standing on in this one 1) not a prolific game, many people hated the combat, that includes me, poorly designed system. cant hold it against them though, its a turn based game. 2) you dont have much micro in it unless you chose to and 3, just for kickers) you dont deal with tenths of the ammounts of ships you have in sins.
again bad bad bad terrible comparison.

SotS ships didn't move if you didn't order them to. It was actually bad to have them move about because of the Newton physics. Ships would end up flopping about and you would be unable to get them where you wanted them to be in a reasonably quick fashion.

Dear Schod,

Your posts have irked me enough to make me come on down, register for an account and post. I don't have much to say here:

You must have sucked at Homeworld.

Any ship which wasn't a strike craft, including frigates, could be issued a "move while attacking" order. This was incredibly useful as you could keep firing at a target while physically moving your ships away from harm.

In SoaSE, I would have loved a 'move while attacking' order as it makes combat more tactical and interesting. On the other hand, these ships are supposed to be huge and most of their big f-off engines are on the back, meaning that this kind of strafing would be incredibly slow.

You still had to order the the frigates to move though. Most of the pepole here want the Victory Class Star Destroyer size frigates to wosh about the gravity well doing barrel rolls and loop de loops to doge phase missiles and auto cannon rounds.