Concrats to Blair and the crew! I've been very glad to see this winning the awards it deserves. Noticed the GOTY just now, and I had to grin. [e digicons]:beer:[/e] Cheers! Stardock wins by proxy and not through direct effort. Ironclad did most the work with Stardock supporting them. But hey, Stardock helped make the game a victory. Congrats to all involved!
Ironclad has stated, pretty officially, that they are considering creating and releasing a campaign as/in an expansion pack. Don't forget that the tutorials use a trigger system to walk you through learning, a system modular enough to expand into a campaign. There is also something to be said for no campaign. Games like Star Wars Rebellion didn't have this, partly because you were expected to know what you were supposed to do: kill the Rebel scum! In Sins' case, this is a huge sandbo
I like the Advent. :CONGRAT:
There is NOTHING keeping your opponent at your "fortress world" so why would he stay there and get torn apart? Logically the AI does the smart stuff: hit what it can and then get out. You don't have to have a [I]ton[/I] of defenses, but you need them on every world. You also need ships. The earliest tier frigates will do fine! Fortify your world's by increasing their infrastructure. This gives your defenses, which hopefully include a hanger, and ships time to hammer the sie
We don't have this because it is on a smaller scale is why. You play between several stars with a large amount of planets. It doesn't work to say each planet would instead be a star, because not every star has planets. So, leave that to GalCiv and let SoaSE stick with it's more limited arrangement of stars. Arguably the amount of space on a galactic scale that this game uses is quite small, so to scale it upwards and still handle anything on a planetary scale would be quite messy. IIRC, the
First! Talk about stirring the pot, guys. I think everyone will be driven absolutely mad until right before release. :D
[quote] "give to all, expect nothing back!" yes, burning in hell if you dont isnt anything at all![/quote]You two, Schod and eetmuffins, are so ignorant it's almost funny. Christianity is not about money, contribution, or compulsory giving. If it were how could the second letter to the Corinthians say, chapter 9 verse 7, "Let each man do according as he hath purposed in his heart: not grudgingly, or of necessity: for God loveth a cheerful giver." Doesn't lo
[quote]Sounds like "persecution mania"[/quote]Not really. More like concern over GPS equipped, open source phones such as the gPhone. There is already opt-in technology that uses IM clients to share positional locations to a buddy group. Doubtless with the opensource initiative getting started in phones, the GPS powered "bye, 'buddy'" IED will appear. No proof whom did it either, just transfer the software to a new phone with the same virtual identity. No offense meant, but I am hardly the
[quote]I'm just waiting patiently for when the worlds governments start using tracking technology to make sure of our 'safety'[/quote]Mmmmm... start using? As in they aren't? Almost every single modern phone, bar none, contains a GPS unit. You don't think they can't and don't track you? And don't forget about OnStar, the helpfully intrusive trackers. (Whether the national government or global tracks you I don't think it matters which, just that either does.) You aren't the only cyn
We need the ability to mark the maps with a version tag, that way folks can update their maps and it be found out by those with the maps. ;) This'd make editing and updating so much simpler. When a map is recently downloaded and installed with the "Hide availible/installed maps" option checked the list of downloadable maps isn't updated; might wanna make the list update after downloading. Otherwise, nice application!
Sorry to step on toes Aldarian, it wasn't my intent. [quote]Try to use Google Maps or Goggle Earh. Germany is in the middle Europe. I dont know exactly which country you mean, but that isnt germany at all.[/quote]I'm sorry, I don't seem to see what this has to do outside an inaccuracy or bug in those software packages. I'm not referring to old Germany, in case that's what you infer. [quote]Ah and how it is going in Guantanamo? ('guilty unless proven' ha!)[/quote]I'll s
[quote]Yes but how does limiting the number of images advance that cause? What power does a picture have that the rest of the information in the article doesn't? I don't look at a swastika and have a sudden urge to kill Jews or conquer Europe or bleach my hair and goose step around the block. Would you rather have someone come across this kind of content on a site like wikipedia which is going to give some fairly objective analysis of the subject or stumble across it for the first time
Actually, part of this is reasonable: In Germany you cannot display those images. In fact, your website will be forcefully closed and the viewer, even if surprised or ignorant (the latter is unlikely), could potentially get into trouble. Assuming either the host or viewer were in Germany. Don't forget Germany is a police state, and you are guilty unless proven innocent. In a way it is justifiable for them to take offense, just look at what Nazism and WWII did to them! But, taking it
Cobolts with the anti-matter sabotage. :D Betcha can't hit 15 at once, Multi.
Wow, I take it back. I'm never touching another Eidos game again ever! That's false advertising right there, which is [I]very illegal[/I].
[quote]Torment me, why don'tcha?[/quote]Sure! Thanks for the free license, Ron! :LOL: I have got to set aside a little time today or tomorrow and try the multiplayer side out.
Listen, makwu, this isn't worth arguing about. Please be less defensive. We're both right. I've made no argument for realism or for gameplay. My point has been, all along, that this is a complex simulation in the package of a game. A simulation that is already difficult enough to maintain and complete prior to release. Just because you think the ships should be reorganized, which has been explained by many as immaterial, doesn't mean they have the manhours left to do such a thing.
ROFL. You guys are going nuts, both positively and negatively, over a [I]render[/I]. This render qualifies as "concept art" and not the final, or even beta, appearance of teh game, races, or even ships. It's too slick to be a real-time render. Take a second and look for all the little graphic quirks that should be present, even in a limited sense, in a real-time game--they aren't there. I repeat, all images are either CONCEPT ART or very alpha-level work in progress engine "stills".
[quote]so... no story mode?[/quote]Big assumption there. The devs said it wouldn't be a campaign in a traditional sense, so maybe we should wait for the big unveiling to know for certain if there will, or won't, be a story mode. ;)
That's part of the point Annatar11, either make them selectable so that the person who is the strategist can control them easily enough, or automate them with ways to control them. Only carrier capitals have multiple squadrons though, so you could just have two ... one for fighters and one for bombers. :D
Don't care about point 3 or 1. Sometimes the only ship I've got in the sector is a colony ship, and if it isn't a combat ship there's no selecting it that way. I kinda agree with point 2. Fighters and bombers shouldn't be drag selected unless they are the only thing in the region selected. If they're autonomous, the craft must be ordered to focus fire upon the host's target--unless it is a hanger. This way we can tell a carrier to attack something specific and still get our fighters
[quote]Movement[/quote]Lots of disagreement here, so hang tight as I address points of it. [quote]As stated, the fact that my ships engage at full distance means I have to zoom out further to manage them, and makes for a generic feel, and makes for very unbalanced gameplay.[/quote]The only problem is you managing them, however, this is how they would realistically fight. Lasers, missiles, and autocannons all have [B]NO[/B] range limits in space. You want to talk about balancing, the b
[quote]Its about time for some new journals, what the heck is everyone doing ? [/quote]Working? ;p Though a new entry now and then would be nice.
[quote]Crap, I was gonna preorder this week. >_ [/quote]It doesn't look like it, however, if you buy it through a TotalGaming subscription you do get into the current beta version regardless. AFAIK the only update coming is a Beta4 update that fixes some stuff and adds diplomacy in.
[quote]exactly, I don't want the old one back either, but rather a hybrid of what we have now and what we did have, i am sick and tired of enemies retreating their whole fleets as soon as they lose a capital ship...[/quote]I don't honestly see why you'd [i]ever[/i] throw an inadequate fleet into the teeth of someone else's defenses. Obviously if they're losing ships, capitals at that, either their tactics or fleet were flawed. Or your defenses just too strong. Retreat is a perfectly valid opt
