Durikkan

Why did you resurrect this thread instead of starting a new one? The OP is 7 months ago.

The way I look at it, $40 is pretty cheap. $40 for something that would likely give at least 20 hours of entertainment. Compare that to going to an amusement park, $20 for 3-5 hours of fun. Go bowling, that's around what, $20 for 2 hours these days? Relatively speaking, games are pretty inexpensive.

[quote]Personally I think that by the end of a normal game you have probably earned yourself "Butcher of Worlds, Slaughterer of Trillions, Blight of the System, etc..."[/quote] That sounds like it could be a little segment on the end game stats panel "This game, you killed 173 billion people." "173? Damn! I was hoping for at least 200 billion people; how am I supposed to get that achievement!?" :P

It increases at a constant rate (not exponential like pop growth would in reality), and I seem to remember the devs likening it to the amount of tax infrastructure, you destroy it and it lowers the income, but the people are still alive, and over time the links are reestablished. They also used this to explain why culture flipping 'kills all of the population on the planet', it's just the other civ's government collapses, so there are no taxes being collected until you move in and re

[quote]So I was playing, but I didnt see a line of trade route. Am I missing something?[/quote] If you hover over your credits at the top of the screen I think it will show a white line of trade between systems, but that may have changed, I'm not sure.

[quote]Not all reviewers are so ego driven that they only rate in the 6-10 range.Ego driven? Maybe it's more fanboy pandering / advertiser pleasing / status quo driven.[/quote] That works better than what I said. :P I was just thinking of the games that get 90% on the review scores and then the average gamer rates it a 70%.

[quote]RoN was a straight-up tech-spam-click wizardry-style RTS. The furious pace of it doesn't let it come even close to being 4Xish at all.[/quote] That sounds like just a function of what game speed you have it on, you could always lower the game speed until you're hardly pressured at all. That's sort of how I view sins in my mind, it's like the maximum game speed has been set really low, so that you have plenty of time (too much time) to make decisions. I always feel like

If you going to compare it to wc3 you should just use this quote [quote]Here's how heroes worked in WC3: You have a hero, they have four skills unique to them, one of which they can't level in until level 6 (that's their super ability). Their maximum level in the others is one half the current level of the hero rounded down, which means you can't just level in the same skill every time. There are neutral enemies scattered around the map, and in the early game its important to travel aro

You can just as easily discredit several of the 9/10 reviews by pointing out factual inaccuracies in them as well, does that mean that they are worthless reviews that should be discarded as well? [quote] Every game has "legitimate" elements to criticize. But in order to justify a 6/10, you have to also argue that Sins is about the worst game that's come out in the last couple of years. [/quote] There are still a few reviewers that actually rate the game on the 1 to 10 s

After searching about 40 planets, I didn't find a single artifact, and only 1 special. I've never bothered to search a single planet since then. Edit: this in the prefab universes, maybe they're more common in the random universes?

[quote]See, I'm amused that they gave it 60%, and yet the review factors add up to give 72.5%.(See the bottom of the page)[/quote] Some factors are probably weighted more heavily than others. Gameplay makes sense to be the most heavily weighted. If there is an example game with no gameplay at all, but excellent sound and music, it doesn't deserve to get a 7/10 as a game on the mere basis of averages. (a 1, a 10 and a 10). Plus, I don't know about you, but to me, gameplay is far far m

[quote]The phase missiles DO/DON'T ignore "shield mitigation" on hull damage. Lots of contradicting statements with no proof.[/quote] Gameplay tests show this to be true. You can test yourself because when the shields are all the way down, every once in a while, the shot will hit for seemingly triple damage, because it's bypassing all of the mitigation. There's no way to really prove this without video capturing in game footage.

[quote]I might not fault a critic who goes into the 70's because of the lack of polish in graphics and sound, and no single player campaign, and IF they fail to notice the advances that have been made in RTS gameplay, and IF they don't like RTSs so they don't notice how fun it is. But most reviews seem to be above 80%, which seems right.[/quote] Actually, if you read the review, he praised the graphics and sound, he felt it was the gameplay that was sorely lacking, because he felt this

I've also heard them referred to as sound libraries.

[quote]Hamlet actually means a village surrounded by orchards, but it's commonly (and incorrectly) used as a small village. Get your fantasy terms right or don't post.[/quote] All the dictionaries I looked at simply say small village with no reference to orchards at all. *shrug* The actual meaning of the word is just 'village' or 'home', so unless the meaning of a 700 year old word changed in the past 10 years...

Actually for the most part, the review seems extremely accurate. If you want me to elaborate, bring up a point from it. [quote] As for the popularity/notoriety of the site, didn't one of the devs just post a link yesterday to a site that no one had ever heard of that gave the game a glowing review? How is this review or this site any less valid- because it's negative? [/quote] It's entirely because it's negative. If it was a positive review they'd be celebrating it to

[quote]I wish there could be a deep and complex RTS or TBS(I prefer RTS) where the smallest maps would be like one galaxy. Every player picks from several races and would start out on their own planet and be able to explore the planet, mine its resources, build small villages (hamlets) that with money and population will grow slowly into metropolis, and that you can do research to eventually be able to build space stations to go off into space and explore. From there you can continue teching up

It's called the first RT4X game simply because that's what the devs decided to market it as, not because of any gameplay reason, or at least, that's the consensus from the people I've talked to.

[quote] 36 Advent Defense Vessels annihilated 50 TEC Javelis LRM Frigates. So LRMs are not a problem 70 TEC Cobalt Light Frigates annihilated 36 Advent Defense Vessels. Massacred them! 70 TEC Cobalt Light Frigates defeated 80 Advent Disciple Vessels. About 7 Cobalts remained 70 TEC Cobalt Light Frigates annihilated 20 Advent Aeria Drone Hosts with bombers. Massacred them! 70 TEC Cobalt Light Frigates annihilated 35 Advent Illuminators. Massacred them!

He's a very very annoying troll. Actually, with him spreading lies faster than I can spread correct information, it's not worth my time here. Someone should repost and update https://forums.sinsofasolarempire.com/post.aspx?postid=302204 , Because I'm done here.

[quote]Mar 18; Kruelgor: I tell you what. Here's what I will do. The next time I stop an LRM spammer I will save the replay and show it to you.[/quote] [quote]Mar 21; Kruelgor: What I've been saying is that Disciple SPAMMING can neutralized LRM spamming. I did it again last night.[/quote] So, where's the replay you said you would post?

I just hope that the expansion causes this game to cover new ground. Part of the reason master of orion 3 failed is it tried to cover mainstream and a tiny market at the same time, and ended up alienating both sides and landing somewhere in the abyss in between, with lots of cool features cut but still complicated enough to keep the mainstream players away. I still like moo3, but it would be so much more if it had stayed true to its course. I fear this game will suffer the same fate.

[quote]Blair Fraser : Of everything mentionned here the point I agree most strongly with is: yes, Sins diplomacy needs serious work and we will be re-doing it (probably for the expansion). [/quote] [quote]Blair Fraser : Diplomacy went out the way it is because we liked it and hardly anyone complained about it - it is NOT broken, it is working as intended.[/quote] Aren't these two statements contradictory? If it's working exactly as intended, why does it 'need serious work'?

[quote]there's an option go go online. I really never thought anyone ever bought an RTS for its single player.[/quote] Wha? The vast majority of the RTS's I own I bought for their single player only. Conquest, Homeworld, Homeworld 2, Supreme Commander, Star Trek Armada II, Hegemonia, Total Annihilation, Red Alert, etc. etc. Out of maybe 25 or 30, the only two I really played online really are Starcraft and Warcraft 3, and those mainly with friends not against other players.

[quote]Do a 3v1 or 4v1 (with all aggressive unfair AI in one team)...If thats too easy, add more =D If you win 9v1, well...Lets cross that bridge when we get to it.[/quote] The thing is, once you get past 1 to 3 odds against computers, it doesn't become challenging, it just becomes tedious you have to spend hours fighting deadlocks and not making any real progress.