WarlokLord

[quote who="Marlowe Lawbringer" reply="3" id="1859726"]Lets see, 9.99 for about 1/3 of what we get in a 29.99 expansion pack at retailWell, that's where we disagree. I don't see the tiny amount of announced content as equal to one third of the content of a quality $30 expansion. This is, obviously, a matter of opinion. Compare it to a very good recent expansion--Civ 4's Beyond the Sword. For $30 you got new units, new buildings, new civs, new leaders, new wonders, major new gameplay conc

Lets see, 9.99 for about 1/3 of what we get in a 29.99 expansion pack at retail... continued support and revamping of the code we currently enjoy... 3 mini expansions in total, each focussing on a few specific mechanics... a larger expansion and/or a full-fledged sequel in the future... a good company whose continued activities I wish to support... responsive developers to even the most negatively positted concerns... one Hell of a fun game... potential future subjects of single-player campai

McAfee VirusScan My group swears by it, including a professional network admin. . Avoid Norton: it corrupts your network dlls which can and reliably causes rafts of problems gaming (from first-hand experience).

Pre-ordered some time ago. This before I read about this unique single-player design - I have an inkling as to what sort of experience it might be. I have a good feeling about this. Looking forward to trying the beta...

[font="arial,helvetica,sans-serif"]Greater randomization in combat, less accenting of ship special abilities. I want the *chance* of a single capital ship scoring lucky hits that cripple or destroy elements of an enemy fleet. I enjoy Sins as is, but I regret that such randomization does not exist... 'X' number of 'Y' ships always trump a lesser number of others. Also, of course, more faction types. An idea for new factions - sub-categories of the existing ones. Perhaps this is similar t

[quote]How about just giving the ability to the other races[/quote] [font="arial,helvetica,sans-serif"]Helioforge, You`re fired. ;) [/font]

[font="arial,helvetica,sans-serif"]But its not *completely* random - my solution is dependable [I]enough[/I] to be of use. The additional opportunity is also an additional activity and welcome challenge for the Vasari player: to keep up with and take advantage of his Dark Fleet ally. And that would not be an entirely impossible thing to do - just follow the leader, or use him as a distraction. [I]Any[/I] kind of failed attack can simply provide your enemy with experience. I suggest ther

[quote]@WarlokLordI like this idea alot. Effectively RA is like having your own personal pirate army. Why spend 4k on bounty when you can have own come through a gate.What I like about pirates is that they are gung-ho attackers, but this throws up the question , are you capable of taking advantage of the situation. Most nubs will just let the pirates attack whilst they watch. Good players will exploit , and use the pirate attack as a decoy to follow in with their own attack.RA could be like this

[font="arial,helvetica,sans-serif"]6. Tie the tech level of Dark Fleets to the level of [B][I]Returning Armada [/I][/B]research. Dark Fleet technology is therefore independent of player technical development (beyond [I][B]Returning Armada [/B][/I]level).[/font]

I have a proper solution for balancing the Vasari Returning Armada capability. 1. All ships that are to arrive via nodes arrive at the same node, together. The number of nodes, the level of Returning Armada research (extend the level gradation?), and the player`s current fleet cap. limit influence the general range of numbers of ships to arrive. <FONT

[font="arial,helvetica,sans-serif"]I can understand your point, although I disagree with you that Civilian research is so minor as to be of no consequence to a game, and I do speak of early projects as much as of late ones. I know for example (speaking as the Vasari tyrant that I am) that reducing attacking Pirate forces by 10% to 20% is a tremendous help. Reducing fortification costs ditto, Scavenging wrecks for resources ditto, unlocking Trade Stations ditto. Not to mention the critic

[font="arial,helvetica,sans-serif"]I would argue that truncation of game session lengths is unimportant in the face of the save game facility. Slower research isn`t the same as a mono-pathed decision.[/font]

[font="arial,helvetica,sans-serif"]EA already decides when *YOU* have had enough of a game - search for lists of games whose support is shut down. In the case of server-dependant titles like various EA sports games (particularly with those) the game stops working because it cannot authenticate with the central EA server... it has been taken offline. Wait for this to happen with Battlefield 2. Only a matter of time. The whole point here is that *[size="5"]I[/size]* decide when *

[font="arial,helvetica,sans-serif"]I was completely uninterested in similar schemes before this announcement and I remain uninterested and committed to avoidance after this announcement. I do not and will not file a report to a corporate server about my activities; there is enough of this garbage in society as it is, this is a step in the wrong direction. The last time I bought a Bioware game was with KotOR II (a mistake...). I was toying around with the idea of purchasing Mass Effect,

A fleet`s default behaviour caused my ships to fly towards an enemy group of Siege Frigates pounding my colonized planet with warheads. I overrode the default behaviour by commanding them to attack a specific capital ship of the enemy`s that was on the opposite side of the planet. After destroying that ship, the fleet resumed course for the Siege Frigates... straight through the colony planet. They *did

[font="arial,helvetica,sans-serif"][B]Demigod[/B] *may* be only the second game I ever preorder... must acquire more information. Supreme Commander beside Sins - a natural pairing as I`ve said before. Thumbs up.[/font]

Greetings, Researching a single project at a time is a facet of pre-patch Sins that holds great appeal for many - I would very much like to see Sins return to such a state of affairs, or at least allow one to toggle between simultaneous and singular research pursuit. Simultaneous research paths dramatically shorten that facet of the game. The critical

[quote]Forgive me if I`ve posted to this point already, but the poster within this thread who claims that a multi-core cpu is a waste of time is full of shit.hi you might want to read the post you're referring to before posting a diatribe on how games use two cores, when I specifically stated that a quadcore CPU is a waste of money and a dualcore CPU has been standard for the last 4 years or so.[/quote] [font="arial,helvetica,sans-serif"]Forgive me if I jumble about a bit. You

[font="arial,helvetica,sans-serif"]I would think its some kind of sum made available when the enemy ship is destroyed; you can`t collect raw materials while those raw materials are in use by the enemy (!). This isn`t a scientific evaluation to any degree, but I think I have noticed a tremendous influx of ore after a large battle in which I was victorious. It would seem to be instantaneous at the moment or near the moment of destruction. I think also *you* have to be the one to have caus

[font="arial,helvetica,sans-serif"]Forgive me if I`ve posted to this point already, but the poster within this thread who claims that a multi-core cpu is a waste of time is full of shit. [B]Supreme Commander[/B], [B]Supreme Commander: Forged Alliance[/B], [B]World In Conflict[/B], [B]Unreal Tournament III[/B], [B]Company Of Heroes[/B], [B]Crysis[/B], [B]Call Of Duty 4[/B], and (as has already been declared) [B]Sins Of A Solar Empire[/B] use multiple cores. In the case of the last game,

I believe it is too easy for opponents to defeat me utilizing star fleets. I think star fleets need to be nerfed. Every game, my opponent fields *ships* that *fire* upon me, doing *damage*. The only way I can possibly counter this tactic - which the computer is so very fond of - is to build *my own* star fleets, and who wants to do that? Then I would have to *play*, exerting *effort*. <FO

Some good points regarding relative contexts i.e. Frigates to Cruisers in cost & power. I think all ship costs and Siege Frigate statistics should be reverted back to what they were when Sins hit retail. Some tinkering does threaten to blur the difference between the ship categories.

Returning Armada may be an ability of the Vasari that is in need of adjustment. 1. Randomization & Frequency -introduce randomized arrival times for returning elements of the Dark Fleet -decrease the frequency of such arrivals You should not be able to rely

[quote]One comment I have on the "auto surrender". While it is a welcome addition, perhaps it could be toggleable. I like to role play my games and I enjoy the clean up phase. Thats why I would like to be able to disable that feature when I play.Thanks again for a great game![/quote] [font="arial,helvetica,sans-serif"]I second this opinion - having an A.I. player automatically and *always* surrender rather than sticking it out can rob a human player of the satisfaction of victory.

[font="arial,helvetica,sans-serif"]Some of the good & solid *FREE* download sites, like [I]Fileshack[/I] and [I]GamersHell[/I]. I generally judge quality of such sites by the degree to which they toss extracurricular html at me and by the ease with which I can get a fast reliable download. I tend to frown on any sites that want registration before you download free demos, although I did follow through with that for the high-speed public server access at Fileshack. KISS. (Keep I