Why are all the races the same?

The design is purposeful so that it's not overly complicated to pick up the game and get to playing. Sins was created with the "Easy to learn, difficult to master" philosophy - which means all the races have the same basic means of production/research/resource gathering, but they play differently. Even if some ships serve the same roles, they vary by stats and abilities, and use of abilities plays a huge part in the game.

To add, just because something works for one race doesn't mean it'll work for another A lot of strategies and tactics are race-specific because of reliance on some key abilities.

That MOO3 sure was diverse!

I thought much the same after reading the manual, but having played the game a bit, I think the variety is there - it's just not obvious at first glance.

I've actually been surprised by how differently each race plays. The nature of the game is such that relatively subtle differences in stats and abilities have much more significant impact than I expected.

I disagree with the OP, it seems pretty clear to me that the three races are geared towards different styles of play.

TEC - Well suited for economic style of play and turtling, weak on cultural play

Vasari - Well suited for offensive ship play, weak on economic play

Advent - Well suited for cultural play, weak on offensive ship play

Yes the building and ship progression look similar, but look at where the races get the different techs, especially ones like trade hubs, cultural broadcasters, and phase technology. If you get cultural broadcasters as an early tech it means your much more suited to a cultural style of play than someone who doesn't get them till mid or late game.

I initially thought that as well, but after playing and reading some strategies I've noticed that they are quite different. I just started playing "Gateway", as the Advent, and already (time <30 min) my influence is spreading to hostile systems.

Get ready to eat some culture, you filthy brutes!

The Races are nearly identical. Sorry, having two different buildings after half the research tree is not "diverse" - it's asinine. The "always on the run" Vasari have credits, fixed buildings, colonize worlds and have the exact same economy as the Millenium old Capitalist Empire and the Hive-Mindish Psi-Commune. And that's just the tip of the iceberg. It makes no sense and is dumbed down for no reason but to make it easier for the devs.

That is insulting and not true.

The game does fail at being 4x enough for me, but overall it does other things ok that make up for the lack of options.

Agreed.

Thanks for that worthless post. Maybe you could have said you're sorry to the developer for waltzing into his forum, squatting, and defecating all over his nice new game that has won praise from pretty much everybody except the people who post here?

I have seen lots of strats for only having the game for a couple days. My brother and I play on LAN. I play Vasari while he plays Advent and our approaches to our economy and to hostile forces are totally different. Also there are those strengths that each race has, that as a team, can compliment the other very well. (Advent culture allows you to see the forces of hostile worlds, Vasari can see any ship in phase space no matter where the jump is made).

My initial impression was that the Vasari had more recon than the other races and were made more for quick mobility. That aspect really appealed to me for this game. I can say that being able to have a one-jump MAXIMUM to any planet I own is awesome for moving the fleet in an emergency.

I'd say the differences between races is more apparent than in most 4X games, but on the other hand, doesn't compare to most RTS games. Which is fine, because Sins is supposed to straddle the two genres.

Sure, all the races have much the same units and structures. Name me an RTS that doesnt.
Except at the high end of the game almost every RTS has the same units and structures in one form or another. Most 4x games only fare better because of the customisability.

Sins is more about the intrinsic differences between races than having vastly differing units (which, by the way, makes balancing a hellish job to do). That suits the game quite well, because it's possible to pick up and play any race, but once you know the strengths/weaknesses of that race, not the individual ships of the race (fitting once more into the whole getting away from micro thing) you can exploit them.

oh, and DatonKallandor, do you buy games to play them or to better insult the Devs?

It actually makes perfect sense -- don't forget the Vasari have been bogged down in this war for years! In order to fuel their war efforts, they had to co-opt the existing trader economy. I'd go into more detail, but the fact is your just not worth the effort.

I'm sorry to the dev for waltzing into his forum, squatting, and defecating over his new game that has won praise from pretty much everybody except the people who post here.

Why exactly am I saying this?

Annatar pretty much put it the way I would. On the surface, all the races are the same. They have ships, they have colonies, they have guns that go bang, etc. But they play differently. Sure, the idea is to go out and take planets in order to take more and kill the opposition. This isn't a sandbox game with no goal. The path to winning is different for all three and I'm merely rambling on what's already been said.

Please don't listen to Daton. He is a troll nothing more. He finds joy in making pepole frustrated.



While the races' ships and structures all have the same roles, they are very different. A Abrams and a Challenger are both main battle tanks but both are quite different machines. A Kol, a Radiance, and a Kortul all are battleships, but preform very differently.

If this wasn't true, it would take me forever to bounce between races. And noobs would probably quit before they got started.

I can name many RTS's with different units and structures for the teams: Warcraft, Command & Conquer, Rise of Nations: Rise of Legends, Age of Mythology, Age of Empires 3, Empire Earth 3, Starcraft, Company of Heroes... the list goes on. In fact I would bet that MOST RTS games that feature multiple teams make sure the teams are VASTLY unique from one another.
Sure, every team is going to need a "scout" ship other basic units. And certain buildings are going to overlap in functionality. But I do agree with the OP. Other than having one team "have better shields" an another "cost more but more attack and armor" really isn't that special.

the game already has a steep enough learning curve without making each race radically different.

take a word from someone who has played the game for nearly a year (not a fanboy, thank you, I have my own issues with how the devs treat things) the races are very very different, if you try and play the vasari the way you play the advent you will end up screwed and then some. compare the supposedly feable advent to the powerhouse TEC and you will see what I'm talking about: the advent are quite weak until you get your culture spread out, then each of those little shield-heavy swarm units becomes just that little bit stronger, turning a torrent of exploding lights into a powerhouse fleet.

I have played all but Earth Empire and Company of heros and i have to say Sins units is just diverse as any of them(on the rare occansion 1/3 of Races are diffent in units and building). they all are fairly similar.

Other than Starcraft, I found that most of these games just mentioned had very similar setups between the factions. Command and Conquer 3, for example, has near total correspondence between structures that can be built for each team. The three (coming soon 9) teams do have some different units, but they each have a basic rifleman, a basic rocket troop, a basic grenadier, a basic scout vehicle, and light tank, and medium tank, a heavy tank-like unit, etc., etc., etc.

Just because a unit or building is in the same spot on the UI and the same general role does not mean that they are equivalent.

Some of you need some reflection. People complaining that Sins does not have diverse enough races (even though there is no game on the market that has diverse races) need to give some more thought before they start stabbing in the dark. Somebody said COH has diversity as far as different countries (races)go. That is not true and COG is the best RTS I have played. In fact, Sins has more diversity then COH in that aspect.

For those looking for a quick answer on the diversity topic, it is called balance plain and simple.

Now that we got our little knee jerk emo fit out of the way, lets hear your opinions on how you would like the other races more diverse then they already are.

Yes the races are similar at first, but their tech trees, cap ship and cruiser abilities and thus play styles are varied.

Oh, and for the info of people on these forums - Daton Kallandor is a notorious troll in a number of other strategy forums. Relic forums for one. So don't get worked up about anything he says - it's hard to work out if he is a deliberate troll, or just really messed up.

I don't want to side track too much but come on. How can it be said that C&C: Generals or Company of Heroes has the same units? Someone playing the USA compared to the GLA which doesn't even have say, aircraft units, in C&C:Generals is like in a different world. Obviously each team is going to have soldiers with rockets as a base unit as that is within the theme of the game. And the same with Company of Heroes. I mean sure each team has tanks and soldiers with guns but thats a given. It's like saying the teams of SoaSE shouldn't have space ships as units to add variety to the teams. I agree that every time is going to need some sort of basic unit.. a scout, your first cheap warship, a colony ship, etc.
What I'm getting at through diversity and unique-ness is full on seperation. The TEC are meant to be a trade empire right? Why is their end tech a super death ray and not some sort of galactic stock exchange? Why don't they have unique trade ports that go above and beyond Advent or Vasari trade ports? The TEC should say... be able to buy mercenary ships at their trade port (just making this up as example) or outfit trade vessels as frigates (aka: purchase emergency ships) at their trade ports in a pinch.
Why do the Advent have the same class of warships as the Vasari? They should have a ship that converts other ships to the Unity ala the Monk unit in Age of Empires games.

In fact coming back to your point Schod, I'd argue that the way the ships and teams are set up now I'm having a harder time learning the game because the obvious choices I should be making with a team are not there. Right now the only advice I see to suggest what a team is "good at" is if their

Relax. Something you must learn (something that SD already has) is that not everyone will like every aspect of your game. You don't need to respond with displeasure every time someone doesn't agree with you.