dthif1980

make it sexy ;)

[quote]I don't get how they could've made it better :/ [/quote] Because it's the new generation of LucasArts. Adios the incredible games like the X-Wing serie, Dark Force serie (including Jedi Knight), Rebellion. Now let's make games quickly and without deepness. Ok ok, enough whining on the SW subject :)

Space combat was indeed entertaining. Ground combat sucked, travelling between planets sucked, construction time sucked. It was SO arcade, so on "surface". Nothing deep in that game. The RTS community did love the game, but I'm not part of it hehe. I was hoping for a Rebellion 2 and did not read a lot on it before buying it. I was just too excited to think before act ;) [quote]Really? Shouldn't that be something more substantial, like I dunno, your first Marriage?[/quote] <

[quote]Some may say Empire at War.[/quote] This game was the biggest disappointment in my life I think.

[quote]Slated for release in February 2008, Sins of a Solar Empire is definitely high on our most-anticipated list at Plain Games, as it promises to be one of the best space RTSs to date.[/quote] This is the end of the Plain Games review. It speaks for itself I think.

No need to say more. It's just that this game has been announced as an RTS-4X blend. Having that in mind and knowing that right now Sins is really more RTS than 4X, I'm just surprised to see that the RTS community isn't satisfied with the actual RTS dose of Sins (knowing that it's supposed to be a mix).

I'm really wondering why some people did vote for "More RTS" in the poll. Can it be more RTS? I mean, go wait for StarCraft 2 if you want an RTS game. Could one of them explain us why more RTS and how?

What about an option, in the game creation screen that would change the research speed ? Like GalCiv 2. Everybody wins on that point hhehe.

[quote]do you think a "search for jump lanes" function would aid that exploration part?[/quote] I really like that. In fact, I did propose something like some weeks ago, but it was for new lanes (additional lanes discovered as the game advances, to make it more strategic) I really think that could be one of the way to help.

Since day 1 (where day 1 for me is when I joined the beta), I'm asking for more 4x and I've answered in the pools that way. But I guess the RTS community is bigger than the 4x one and Sins is becoming more and more RTS. Don't get me wrong, I'm happy to see IronClad and Stardock answering the community with what it ask for (even if the changes are not the one I voted for). I have no comments on how the game could be modified to be more 4x, because I haven't had the time to play

I must say I'm happy to see people voting for 4x :) Like said in this post, I also do have games filling the RTS spot quite good, when I need an RTS game. Kryo (or any other dev), do you have some action plans depending on the results of the pool? I mean, throwing out this question in a pool suggest it. If 95% of people wants it more 4x...

Nice question on the main page pool. I definatly voted for [B]4x[/B] and invite people to go vote, whatever your opinion is. I'm just curious about the results with many votes and how the results will change the game, if it will.

[quote]psy's idea: be able to have training exercises or be able to build training ships in order to level your ships past four without fighting or something like fleet practive , which would mean your ships cant be used , but they are training up so you can get caught offguard and you cant stop training halfway[/quote] I really like that. An asteroid type could be used to establish a training center. Would have the same logistic as if the asteroid would have been populated, so your cou

yes, no, maybe? any thoughts on my proposition of having a Asteroid Field type of planet with the pirate base in the middle instead of just one rock?

oh well, I haven't searched before posting, I should have. Anyway, it was just an idea

Hey, small thought I had today for an expansion maybe? Boarding ships using Ion canons to disable enemy ship and board them, of course capturing the ships. Could be vastly used by pirates, especially because that's what they do!

Speaking of the pirate base, I would definitly add the same "Asteroid field" type of sector to theirs. They have a base built on an asteroid, with nothing else in their sector. Eye-candy for sure, but it makes sense, me thinks. And, any chance to have a pirate base randomly placed? EDIT: or an option to make the pirate base random? Just a thought

would a distance factor be of any help? Like the Embargo ability would be more effective the closer to the planet you are, and less effective if you remain at the edge of the gravity well? Just a though. For my problem (discussion with Ron), I'll try to record my next game and identify the moment I see what I'm describing, if I can reproduce it. I ask without having investigated in the game: how do I record a game? Thanks.

[quote]Some capitols -- for example, the sova -- want to be broadside-on to the target, is that the case? [/quote] Nah. I know how it works. Forget the Capitol ships. Let's say I had only Skirmishers. I clicked once on the LAB, no impact, they were still attacking a mine some distance away. No movement even after some time. Clicked again, same result. After a few clicks on the same LAB, they decided to turn around and move towards my target. But you mentionned that the pathfind

Thanks Ron. Well, my capital ships did fire on multiple targets because of their weapons, but they were moving and orienting the nose of the ship towards another target. The most obvious were my skirmishers. They were litterally far form the target I did choose, oriented in another target direction and firing on it. But, with ALT, I was seeing red lines between them and the target I chose. I had to click multiple times on my designated target to make the skirmishers move toward

Some comments: - It's probable that hardcore gamers won't need that, but an Encyclopedia would be nice. Some thing really basic. I have in mind the Information or Intelligence Reports of Star Wars Rebellion. When you press the [U]I[/U] icon, you get a list of all the ships, buildings, etc. with a small picture and a description: fire-power, armor, Good against, Weak against, Provide... etc. Would be nice to have that or something like this for people like me who don't have a lot of time

Personally, I do approuve Annatar about the fact that pure randomness would often result in unbalanced games. That is why "probabilities" are more interesting I think. For example, a Ice planet could have: - 1% chance to have nothing - 10% chance to have 1 metal only - 20% chance to have 1 metal + 1 crystal - bla bla So, you take a random number between 1 and 100 and you have your result. Balancing the percentages would balance the game, but add a little randomness

essential in my mind. Randomness or static probabilities for each type of planets.

could we get back to [U][I][B]SINS BETA 4 GAMEPLAY FEEDBACK[/B][/I][/U] dammit, go start another thread and stop wasting people's time (people who actually want to read this thread FOR GAMING FEEDBACK). Thank you.

[quote]I'm sorry if everyone got the wrong impression for how the game was going to be, but it wasn't ever planned to be designed as some of you thought.[/quote] This has been taken from the Gameplay description: "Sins of a Solar Empire is a "RT4X" game, blending the epic strategy and empire management of the 4x genre with the fast-paced and tactical elements of a real-time strategy title." I think that many people complaining about the Vasari did notice this sentence also