© 2003-2024 Ironclad Games Corporation Vancouver, BC. All rights reserved.
© 2006-2024 Stardock Entertainment
Search
Forum Home | Login

Sins of a Solar Empire: Rebellion 1.50 BETA Change Log

19 Pages1 2 3 4  Last
Yarlen
GoaFan77
Join Date 10/2008
+629 moderator
Reply #26 May 4, 2013 2:28:29 PM
from Sins of a Solar Empire ForumsSins of a Solar Empire Forums

Quoting sulley1,
reply 24

I have to wonder though, where's SINS 2?

I think the decision to do Sins 2 will be decided by Ironclad games, not Stardock, since they were the ones that first made it.

Reason for Karma (Optional)
Successfully updated karma reason!
Yarlen
Major Stress
Join Date 05/2006
+161
Reply #27 May 4, 2013 2:29:16 PM
from Sins of a Solar Empire ForumsSins of a Solar Empire Forums

Perhaps with the new optimizations, and memory room they made they will look over all effects, and fix, and/or create new effects.

Reason for Karma (Optional)
Successfully updated karma reason!
Yarlen
WHIPperSNAPper2008
Join Date 03/2008
+126
Reply #28 May 4, 2013 3:22:42 PM
from Sins of a Solar Empire ForumsSins of a Solar Empire Forums

It sounds pretty good.  But what does this mean?  What is an "active phase node"?  Do you mean phase gate?

"Starbase Mobilization now only allows Starbases to phase jump between active phase node"

 

 

Reason for Karma (Optional)
Successfully updated karma reason!
Yarlen
SpardaSon21
Join Date 04/2008
+67
Reply #29 May 4, 2013 3:51:10 PM
from Sins of a Solar Empire ForumsSins of a Solar Empire Forums

Phase gates and and the Antorak's Stabilize Phase Space ability, most likely.

Reason for Karma (Optional)
Successfully updated karma reason!
Yarlen
Seleuceia
Join Date 01/2008
+240
Reply #30 May 4, 2013 4:02:30 PM
from Sins of a Solar Empire ForumsSins of a Solar Empire Forums

Phase nodes are created by buffs...doesn't matter what the source of the buff is (phase stabilizer ability, kostura cannon buff, orky ability buff, marauder ultimate buff), it's still a phase node...

Reason for Karma (Optional)
Successfully updated karma reason!
Yarlen
XATHOS
Join Date 02/2002
+16
Reply #31 May 4, 2013 4:26:14 PM
from Sins of a Solar Empire ForumsSins of a Solar Empire Forums

Quoting GoaFan77,
reply 26

I think the decision to do Sins 2 will be decided by Ironclad games, not Stardock, since they were the ones that first made it.

According to the "State of Stardock" report, they financed and helped co-develop Rebellion.  So, yes, they do have a stake on the decision.  If Stardock wanted it, Ironclad would make it.

Reason for Karma (Optional)
Successfully updated karma reason!
Yarlen
myfist0
Join Date 01/2010
+319
Reply #32 May 4, 2013 4:46:49 PM
from Sins of a Solar Empire ForumsSins of a Solar Empire Forums

Quoting XATHOS,
reply 31
If Stardock wanted it, Ironclad would make it.

Not quite that simple, IC is not SD's 'employee'. While collaboration on a big project is beneficial for capital, the game is made with the IRON ENGINE and the boys at IC will need to put a big load of time and effort in a new engine.

Reason for Karma (Optional)
Successfully updated karma reason!
Yarlen
GoaFan77
Join Date 10/2008
+629 moderator
Reply #33 May 4, 2013 5:08:50 PM
from Sins of a Solar Empire ForumsSins of a Solar Empire Forums

Quoting XATHOS,
reply 31

According to the "State of Stardock" report, they financed and helped co-develop Rebellion.  So, yes, they do have a stake on the decision.  If Stardock wanted it, Ironclad would make it.

But Stardock does not own the Sins of a Solar Empire IP. They cannot make a new game without Ironclad's permission, and Ironclad is already busy with Sins of a Dark Age. I'm pretty certain there will be no Sins 2 until Dark Age is released.

Reason for Karma (Optional)
Successfully updated karma reason!
Yarlen
Lavo_2
Join Date 05/2010
+112
Reply #34 May 4, 2013 9:49:13 PM
from Sins of a Solar Empire ForumsSins of a Solar Empire Forums

Yarlen, could we possibly get something regarding this thread? It has been seemingly ignored for nearly one full year now.

Reason for Karma (Optional)
Successfully updated karma reason!
Yarlen
Makon86
Join Date 06/2010
+8
Reply #35 May 5, 2013 12:03:27 AM
from Sins of a Solar Empire ForumsSins of a Solar Empire Forums

Quoting Yarlen,
reply 18

Quoting Makon86, reply 15Hoping to hell it is a new modifier! I'll certainly be making use of it, if it is

Sorry, it's not - I typo'd. It's fixed above now.

Quoting Seleuceia, reply 9I suppose it is possible you could grant immunity to PJIs through the same modifier as phasic strike, though that would be a crude method of doing that and would have a loophole for ships currently in wells with PJIs....

This is a new modifier.

 

Noo! LOL, but thank you for the clarification!

Reason for Karma (Optional)
Successfully updated karma reason!
Yarlen
Timmaigh
Join Date 05/2009
+76
Reply #36 May 5, 2013 5:32:41 PM
from Sins of a Solar Empire ForumsSins of a Solar Empire Forums

 Just an addendum to my post on previous page regarding visual representation of Desperation in effect...

i actually found a video displaying what i meant, how it used to look pre-final release, but was dropped for some reason... it can be seen 3 minutes into the video...

I would love to see those weapon hardpoints to glow again that way in addition to the current glowing of circular shapes.

Thanks

 

Reason for Karma (Optional)
Successfully updated karma reason!
Yarlen
XATHOS
Join Date 02/2002
+16
Reply #37 May 6, 2013 4:40:58 AM
from Sins of a Solar Empire ForumsSins of a Solar Empire Forums

Quoting myfist0,
reply 32

Not quite that simple, IC is not SD's 'employee'. While collaboration on a big project is beneficial for capital, the game is made with the IRON ENGINE and the boys at IC will need to put a big load of time and effort in a new engine.


Quoting GoaFan77,
reply 33

But Stardock does not own the Sins of a Solar Empire IP. They cannot make a new game without Ironclad's permission, and Ironclad is already busy with Sins of a Dark Age. I'm pretty certain there will be no Sins 2 until Dark Age is released.


Gentlemen, I am aware of who develops the game, but you need to keep in mind who/what pays the bills. 

IC is hoping to hop into the MOBA market (despite what I say, good luck to them with that), and I know Stardock isn't publishing it (IGP is), but it's saturated with DOTA clones right now.  I don't see it bringing about the same level of success that Sins did (hence the attempt to capitalize with the namesake) nor do I see it as a productive use of time.  That's my opinion, but that won't sway the Canucks from that path.

I believe this to be the simple case of "the publisher has the money and manpower to aid in the development of another iteration of a successful product".  It's a common sense route nobody would say "no" to.  Sins was very good for both companies.  Another iteration would only be a positive thing.  They'd be incredibly stupid to not to try. 

Honestly, I think they're already in the dev. cycle of a Sins 2 (or likewise iteration), and have been for years (methinks 2010).  I think Rebellion was used to keep interest in the IP alive in the mean time (that, and the fans wanted MOAR).  I think we're still a good few years out from a release (methinks 2015), but that's my speculation.

Bottomline: wheels are in motion, we just can't hear them yet.

Reason for Karma (Optional)
Successfully updated karma reason!
Yarlen
Timmaigh
Join Date 05/2009
+76
Reply #38 May 6, 2013 5:40:53 AM
from Sins of a Solar Empire ForumsSins of a Solar Empire Forums

Quoting XATHOS,
reply 37


Quoting myfist0, reply 32
Not quite that simple, IC is not SD's 'employee'. While collaboration on a big project is beneficial for capital, the game is made with the IRON ENGINE and the boys at IC will need to put a big load of time and effort in a new engine.

Quoting GoaFan77, reply 33
But Stardock does not own the Sins of a Solar Empire IP. They cannot make a new game without Ironclad's permission, and Ironclad is already busy with Sins of a Dark Age. I'm pretty certain there will be no Sins 2 until Dark Age is released.

Gentlemen, I am aware of who develops the game, but you need to keep in mind who/what pays the bills. 

IC is hoping to hop into the MOBA market (despite what I say, good luck to them with that), and I know Stardock isn't publishing it (IGP is), but it's saturated with DOTA clones right now.  I don't see it bringing about the same level of success that Sins did (hence the attempt to capitalize with the namesake) nor do I see it as a productive use of time.  That's my opinion, but that won't sway the Canucks from that path.

I believe this to be the simple case of "the publisher has the money and manpower to aid in the development of another iteration of a successful product".  It's a common sense route nobody would say "no" to.  Sins was very good for both companies.  Another iteration would only be a positive thing.  They'd be incredibly stupid to not to try. 

Honestly, I think they're already in the dev. cycle of a Sins 2 (or likewise iteration), and have been for years (methinks 2010).  I think Rebellion was used to keep interest in the IP alive in the mean time (that, and the fans wanted MOAR).  I think we're still a good few years out from a release (methinks 2015), but that's my speculation.

Bottomline: wheels are in motion, we just can't hear them yet.

I am not sold on Sins of a Dark Age either. Then again, i am not a fan of MOBA games, so that is probably the main reason. Still, i dont think its going to have the success Sins had, as unlike Sins, it has quite a competition. But maybe i am wrong and it will be a game of its own kind, not really directly comparable to likes of DotA and LoL, the way Sins is not directly comparable to other RTS/4X games currently on the market and will find its niche...we shall see...

Anyway, while i understand that perhaps people at Ironclad wanted to try something new and different instead of doing Sins 2 right away, i would prefer if that new game was in a Sins mould, just in a different setting. You know, like historical/fantasy Sins on solid ground instead of sci-fi one in outer space. Castles instead of planets, mines instead of asteroids, armies instead of fleets, big strategic map...you get the point... as a fan of Sins i would be way more interested in such game than MOBA clone.

Reason for Karma (Optional)
Successfully updated karma reason!
Yarlen
XATHOS
Join Date 02/2002
+16
Reply #39 May 6, 2013 12:13:56 PM
from Sins of a Solar Empire ForumsSins of a Solar Empire Forums

Quoting Timmaigh,
reply 38

Anyway, while i understand that perhaps people at Ironclad wanted to try something new and different instead of doing Sins 2 right away, i would prefer if that new game was in a Sins mould, just in a different setting. You know, like historical/fantasy Sins on solid ground instead of sci-fi one in outer space. Castles instead of planets, mines instead of asteroids, armies instead of fleets, big strategic map...you get the point... as a fan of Sins i would be way more interested in such game than MOBA clone.

That sounds like Dark Age's setting.  The only thing you're missing is the MOBA part.

Reason for Karma (Optional)
Successfully updated karma reason!
Yarlen
GoaFan77
Join Date 10/2008
+629 moderator
Reply #40 May 6, 2013 1:37:42 PM
from Sins of a Solar Empire ForumsSins of a Solar Empire Forums

Quoting XATHOS,
reply 37
I believe this to be the simple case of "the publisher has the money and manpower to aid in the development of another iteration of a successful product".  It's a common sense route nobody would say "no" to.  Sins was very good for both companies.  Another iteration would only be a positive thing.  They'd be incredibly stupid to not to try. 

We are not saying there will not be a Sins II. We're saying Stardock cannot make it unilaterally, for the very reason that it was so successful for IC that I doubt they would just license it for another studio to make. And Ironclad is probably to small to handle two games at once. My bet is that it will be released 2 or 3 years after Sins of a Dark Age.

Reason for Karma (Optional)
Successfully updated karma reason!
Yarlen
XATHOS
Join Date 02/2002
+16
Reply #41 May 6, 2013 1:51:58 PM
from Sins of a Solar Empire ForumsSins of a Solar Empire Forums

Quoting GoaFan77,
reply 40

We are not saying there will not be a Sins II. We're saying Stardock cannot make it unilaterally,

And I never said they would.  That's a given.  What were you guys trying to counterpoint over to begin with?

Reason for Karma (Optional)
Successfully updated karma reason!
Yarlen
GoaFan77
Join Date 10/2008
+629 moderator
Reply #42 May 6, 2013 2:44:31 PM
from Sins of a Solar Empire ForumsSins of a Solar Empire Forums

Quoting XATHOS,
reply 41


Quoting GoaFan77, reply 40
We are not saying there will not be a Sins II. We're saying Stardock cannot make it unilaterally,
And I never said they would.  That's a given.  What were you guys trying to counterpoint over to begin with?

I said I thought Sins II would be decided by Ironclad, you said Stardock had a role in that decision. I still think Stardock is just going to have to wait until Ironclad is ready.

Reason for Karma (Optional)
Successfully updated karma reason!
Yarlen
XATHOS
Join Date 02/2002
+16
Reply #43 May 6, 2013 3:30:34 PM
from Sins of a Solar Empire ForumsSins of a Solar Empire Forums

Quoting GoaFan77,
reply 42

I said I thought Sins II would be decided by Ironclad, you said Stardock had a role in that decision. I still think Stardock is just going to have to wait until Ironclad is ready.

Ah, gotcha.  I'm not sure how much you are aware of the publisher/developer dynamic, but publishers usually provide the financing needed for the development.  In this case, they help with both.  As said before, they probable are working on both, but I don't see a case of them saying "no" when asked to work on it (despite the workload).  Hell, check the IC website.  Many of the links lead off to Stardock sites.  It's very doubtful they'd shop it to another company (plus Stardock might even own part of IC.  Who knows?).

I hate the role the majority of publishers are in.  MANY of them are dicks to small developers, and jiff on royalties and other payments.  The only noteworthy bad press I've seen from Stardock is Brad Wardell's personnel issues.  That's it.  I don't think they'd be in the AAA category of asshole publisher to them.

Reason for Karma (Optional)
Successfully updated karma reason!
Yarlen
Iashar
Join Date 01/2010
0
Reply #44 May 6, 2013 3:36:13 PM
from Sins of a Solar Empire ForumsSins of a Solar Empire Forums

"Deliverance Engine will no longer target Friendly planets"   

Um....what?! On that note, I strongly recommend against any Advent advocates getting this update. 

This removes its tactical defensive capacity.

It does no direct damage unlike the Novalith which can be built more than once by the TEC, that pretty much obliterates planets. 

I'd say ok to this on only one condition, making it able to limit other superweapons ability to be built or to target. 

If the Advents Deliverance Engine were able to make a planet imprinted when fired upon such that it was untargetable by any of the superweapons or made it so they could not be built at the targeted planet, I'd be ok with removing the "targets friendly" status.

Since it does not cause adverse affects on the scale of Novalithing or a Kostua Warhead on a planet which are overwhelmingly powerful in comparison, that makes this a pretty unbalancing move from my view.

I may be new here, but as an avid Advent player, and noticing lack of concern on this issue, I felt I had to speak up. 

Sorry if I come off a bit mean, but this nerf seems like a BB-gun to the Eye of the Advent.

Reason for Karma (Optional)
Successfully updated karma reason!
Yarlen
Major Stress
Join Date 05/2006
+161
Reply #45 May 6, 2013 3:51:18 PM
from Sins of a Solar Empire ForumsSins of a Solar Empire Forums

We will have to look at this when the update is released. I am a big advocate for buffing the advent since they were the weakest link in Rebellions early days (especially the loyalist). The advent DE got huge buffs in past updates. So this may be to prevent them from being OP.

Reason for Karma (Optional)
Successfully updated karma reason!
Yarlen
BellGoRiiing
Join Date 03/2008
+2
Reply #46 May 6, 2013 3:53:35 PM
from Sins of a Solar Empire ForumsSins of a Solar Empire Forums

Woah...was wondering what happened with you people...lol. Anyways is BETA out yet? I checked the BETAs tab and didn't see anything. :/ (I have "Internal -" and "MVP" or something...)

Reason for Karma (Optional)
Successfully updated karma reason!
Yarlen
Seleuceia
Join Date 01/2008
+240
Reply #47 May 6, 2013 4:46:21 PM
from Sins of a Solar Empire ForumsSins of a Solar Empire Forums

Advent need better protection against PMs....otherwise, they are fine, they do just great against TEC and against early game Vasari....

Reason for Karma (Optional)
Successfully updated karma reason!
Yarlen
GoaFan77
Join Date 10/2008
+629 moderator
Reply #48 May 6, 2013 5:13:16 PM
from Sins of a Solar Empire ForumsSins of a Solar Empire Forums

Quoting XATHOS,
reply 43
Ah, gotcha.  I'm not sure how much you are aware of the publisher/developer dynamic, but publishers usually provide the financing needed for the development.  In this case, they help with both.  As said before, they probable are working on both, but I don't see a case of them saying "no" when asked to work on it (despite the workload).  Hell, check the IC website.  Many of the links lead off to Stardock sites.  It's very doubtful they'd shop it to another company (plus Stardock might even own part of IC.  Who knows?).

I am very much aware of it. But in Sins' case I do not see a studio besides Ironclad making Sins 2. Stardock will provide the funding sure but if Ironclad is mainly working on the other game then at best they are just messing with some internal prototypes. I think it will very much be Ironclad that says to Stardock they are ready to focus on Sins 2. And I don't see Stardock as the type to order IC to do something even if they could.

 

Quoting BellGoRiiing,
reply 46
Woah...was wondering what happened with you people...lol. Anyways is BETA out yet? I checked the BETAs tab and didn't see anything. :/ (I have "Internal -" and "MVP" or something...)

tentative on afternoon of 5/9

I do not believe it is the 9th yet. 

Reason for Karma (Optional)
Successfully updated karma reason!
Yarlen
BellGoRiiing
Join Date 03/2008
+2
Reply #49 May 6, 2013 5:17:37 PM
from Sins of a Solar Empire ForumsSins of a Solar Empire Forums

Didn't see the date until now....

Reason for Karma (Optional)
Successfully updated karma reason!
Yarlen
XATHOS
Join Date 02/2002
+16
Reply #50 May 6, 2013 5:31:22 PM
from Sins of a Solar Empire ForumsSins of a Solar Empire Forums

Quoting GoaFan77,
reply 48

I am very much aware of it. But in Sins' case I do not see a studio besides Ironclad making Sins 2.

Another studio already has with Rebellion. 

https://www.stardock.com/press/CustomerReports/Stardock2012.pdf
Page 8
 
"Last year, we released Sins of a Solar Empire: Rebellion (82 Metacritic) which was co-developed by one of Stardock’s internal game teams while Ironclad has focused on its much anticipated Sins of a Dark Age MOBA style game. Sins: Rebellion was immensely successful – far more successful than either Stardock or Ironclad had projected. I suspect there will be more news on this front as we go forward."

Why wouldn't they do the same thing with Sins 2?  I also base my predictions, in part, on that last statement by Stardock's CEO.

Reason for Karma (Optional)
Successfully updated karma reason!
19 Pages1 2 3 4  Last
View all recent posts
Mark all posts as read Delete cookies created by the forum Return to Top
Stardock Forums v        Server Load Time:   Page Render Time: