RonLugge

Yeah, SD or IC should probably snap him up.

Woohoo! Now I have my volumetric mod back!

[quote]thats still alot but if you cluster them all by hangers and so they get max synergy its hard to get them to sufficantly cover a gravity well[/quote] [i]So[/i]? All you have to do is cover the starbase, which will keep the planet 'colonized' despite bombardment.

Woohoo, another udpate!

It's not like anyone could shoot off like that [i]accidentally[/i], Annatar!

[quote who="LordAlthalus" reply="10" id="2085727"]Oh my god. I thought I'd heard the end of the phase-jumping starbases.[/quote] Yeah, but think of how [i]useful[/i] they be for the Vasari, who are stuck with their starbase as the only possible 'anti-structure' unit available! :D

[quote]Where exactly did you get this info? I would like to see the official line on what to expect for the next ex pack.[/quote] He got it here and there by reading the forums. A lot. (check his Karma for an idea of how much is a lot) It's good info.

Oh god that one is bad Annatar!

I'd go straight to Entrenchment -- the extra units don't make things that much more complex, and the new features are [i]nice[/i]. And starbases will be great for a defensive strategy, which may be easier to play than an offensive one.

[quote who="InfiniteVoid" reply="12" id="2085483"] Quoting Ron Lugge, reply 10Er, I don't think that's right. You can claim bounty you placed on your opponent. Try it in a 1v1 and dump some bounty on your enemy. Bounty should never drop provided pirates or militia forces do not claim it.[/quote] I did in a recent game -- the pirates never claimed the bounty because they were always coming for me (and not killing anything). I stayed at a constant ~500, the A

[quote]Not true. You cannot claim bounty you placed on a player: you can only claim bounty that other players placed.[/quote] Er, I don't think that's right. You [i]can[/i] claim bounty you placed on your opponent.

[quote]IE7 is not a necessary part of the operating system and is not - despite your claims - part of an initial install (depending upon the disc you received and its manufacturing date and which if any service pack is included - mine with sp2 did not)[/quote] Except IE7 [i]is[/i] a necessary part of the OS.

PCI-Ex1? Dang, that's... highly unusual. I know there are [i]some[/i] PCI-E x 1 cards out, or were. You could look at this, but I don't know how well it will run, or even how much of an upgrade it will be: http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16814161197

They've already said, the next expansion is diplomacy focused. They've also stated that 'pirates are getting love'.

[quote who="Annatar11" reply="5" id="2083838"]They are welcome to try [/quote] Well, they might attempt to cite evidence like other games (Space Empires comes to mind) including version info at the top of data files, and 'remembering' how to read old version info from patch to patch...

[quote]Mabey the race that forced the vas out of there home system.[/quote] Who says it was a race? [quote]3rd Expansion seems to be airy fairy but I'm sure I read something, somewhere that it'd be single player focused. But don't quote me.[/quote]The [i]hope[/i] is for a campaign, but I don't think I've seen any promises.

I believe current plans include releasing the three micro-expansions as a single 'full' expansion via box.

[quote]We should definitely archive this discussion as normally these kinds of threads just become horrible. [/quote] Agreed; it's actually rather amazing. [quote]I should also note that Half Life 3 was one of the most anticipated games of it's year[/quote] Oh my god! When did [i]that[/i] come out?! WOOOHOO! :P :P :P

[quote]2) Isn't going to happen because it's physically impossible.[/quote] While it might be true (read: almost certainly), you [i]do[/i] realize people are going to argue that point?

I had the same problem with the 1.5 version (except it happened a lot faster), but updating to 2.0 seemed to fix it. Now I just have to put in volumetric and bail knights at the same time.

[quote]They're hardly idiots. If you'd have read the post more closely you'd see there are alternatives. There's Autopatcher and at least two other programs that compete with it that will download the stuff without the annoyance of having to use Windows Update. Every computer I've worked on for others I disable Automatic Updates unless those folks are nearly computer illiterate. I get the "I don't know what it was doing but it was updating something then it crashed and xyz" complaint routinel

[quote]The day will come when CPUs are so fast that developers won't be forced into C or C++. But you are right, that day isn't here at the moment.[/quote] But wouldn't they still use them because you'll still get increased efficiency? From what I've seen, when more resources become available, programmers just find ways to [i]use[/i] those resources.

[quote]Not a bad idea... but people will only trust big game business... Stardock is growing fast but is enough new in the game sector... Who know what will happen with Stardock tomorrow... I don't wish a game today with Stardock being dead tomorrow and not be able to use a game that i have pay for... More, can you certify that the server will always be running in 10 year when i wish game again ?[/quote] Given SD's track record, [i]that[/i] is a bet I'd be (more) than willing to take.

[quote]What is it about Sins? These other games don't have dsync issues? Under my hypothetical, the game would simply pause, while the actual 'save' is transferred. Not sure how that involves dsync issues.[/quote] If you re-read, I negated myself :P I was basing my comment on the fact that you can't do that with desyncs, then I realized that the reason you can't do that with desyncs is there's no way to tell who was right / wrong, and worse yet if it happe

[quote]Anny other suggestions just post them here and i guess wait until Stardock replies.[/quote]Why would you want to wait for [i]Stardock[/i] to reply? Anyway, it really helps if you don't just say 'that map problem' and actually explain what the problem [i]is[/i]; as far as I know the only 'problem' is that new maps have to be added to the manifest file which is actually an aspect of a new feature that allows (hopefully) for mod-merges to be handled user-end, rather