Sounds great! I was actually just thinking about doing this when I saw your post! I will definitly love to see the results of your efforts. As far as suggestions, I have not yet played around with the Galaxy Forge. I'll check it out over the weekend and let you know if I have any suggestions.
I definitly agree on a link between fleets and command groups, and I would like to see some type of auto retreat function for higher level capital ships(say auto phase jump to the nearest friendly system at 25% health.). :CONGRAT:
I give my support for actual research to get the benefits of an artifact. And if the same person has already researched one artifact, research on each additional artifact should cost more.
[quote] you beat a campaign once and you're done with it. Features extend the replayablility, a campaign is only good for however many hours it lasts. Unless the campaigns were DYNAMIC/RANDOM in some respects... [/quote] Hmm, well that wouldn't be bad, but how about this, a persistant dynamic battle map of sorts, like there was in Star Trek: Starfleet Command or Chromehounds. Players would play multiplayer games with one another or single player
[quote]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=j-SKublpoV4 [/quote] Checked out your vid, it's great hahaha!
This might be a controversial idea for this game where some people are considered, but I would like Stardock to consider NOT adding a single player campaign to this game. If players want a way to get into the game, expand the tutorials and use additional resources to provide more in-game content. More options when playing others or against the AI along with more abilities, ships, and techs etc. Tribes 3 is a prime example. Instead of focusing on what was some of the greatest FPS gameplay eve
Interesting conecept. I for one wouldn't mind seeing what others think of this as well. Maybe as an additional cost for this you might have to actually activate an ability up front using antimatter to initiate the chain jump. This ability would be unlocked on capital ships when you build your first Phase relay. NOTE: There's a potential good name for the bases on the planets. Phase relays.
[quote]Slower speed makes no sense; slow acceleration would be fine, but slower max speed would become a logistic hassle and makes no scientific sense[/quote] I respectfully disagree. You will not see something the size or scale of the death star moving at the speed of a capital ship. The bigger the ship the bigger the guns and other support provided. Also the bigger the mass of the object the more energy it takes to move it. It's safe to assume that something the size of the Death
If I remember correctly Gal Civ 2 had something similar to this with mobile space stations that had to be built in stages. I could be wrong, but I know I've played a game with this concept before and I quite enjoed it. I would love to see that added in a future expansion! You have my vote! Of course to balance all that power they would have to take of a lot of fleet capacity and I would think they would have to be very slow moving, not only in real space, but phase space as well. Perhaps ev
[quote]Why? There's no logical reason why it should be completely immune. [/quote] Well how about we look at it this way. If you are playing and you subvert every one of your enemies planets except for their capital, and you still can't defeat them, then something is wrong. So why not, if not for balance's sake in a multiplayer game. That of course is just my opinion. Take it for what it is.
[quote]It's also a prerequisite for Insurgency, one of the best TEC research options in the end-game. They really need to make your capital planet immune from cultural subversion, however. -Tom [/quote] It's not? I haven't played enough to see this happen, though it seems to me that whatever planet has your capital should be immune to subversion.
What a great article! Word of this game is definitly getting out.
Out of curiosity I would like to know the answer to this question as well. That being said I really have no complaints about how the game plays, though I find the ability to lock down jump lanes to be an interesting concept.
I for one love persistant worlds in games. I loved the old Starfleet Command persistant worlds, buggy though they may have been. A persistant world for Sins would compeltely rock!
My gamestop got in one copy of this game. Mine, becuase I reserved it.
This game is definitly awesome! Great top ten list!
Awesome glad to see you guys giving the game the famous stardock treatment. You guys are my new favorite developer! :CONGRAT:
Great job guys, because of this I'm definitly picking up Gal Civ 2 and the expansions.
There is a known issue with the tutorials that prevent them from running correctly unless your screen resolution is set to 1024x768. It will be fixed in the next patch that will hopefully be out on this Friday. Before that switch your res just to do the tutorial and you'll be fine.
[quote] Unfortunely, due to the recent advertising scandal and the firing and resignations of editors and writers, I can't take Gamespy as a legitimate review source anymore. I'm pretty sure you're thinking GameSpot. [/quote] What happened with them?
I agree I do like this soundtrack alot. Is anyone from Stardock willing to comment if this soundtrack will be available to those who just bought the boxed retail copy and not the collectors edition?
[quote]@ Xenpo Regardless, this game stands diametrically opposed to the rushing, micro, APM that is Starcraft and all other mindless RTS's that follow that formula. Blizzard came to be known as the best at balancing because the game got overrated quickly, by Koreans mainly. The ironic thing is Schod was using Blizzard in the context of not pandering when I don't doubt for a second Blizzard were guilty of pandering to extremists button mashers to mold that game, exactly like what these devs
[quote]Eh did you even read my post? Let me give you the gist of it, Sins should remain it's own game, end of story. Starcraft is still played close to ten years later because it was [B]well balanced[/B]. Balance in any game should be strived for.[/quote] Eh did you even read my post? Let me give you the gist of it, Sins should remain it's own game, end of story. Starcraft is still played close to ten years later because it was [B]well balanced[/B]. Balance in any game should be str
[quote] "make this another starcraft, not another supreme commander." I must admit, that was one of the oddest comments I've read in the past few weeks. Really. [/quote] The one thing I will say in regards to this comment is that I do not want this game to play like starcraft. I'll play starcraft 2 for that. However, Blizzard is known to be one of the best in the industry when it comes to game balance between sides. That's why it is still played in w
[quote] However, as a point of principle, seige units shouldn't be very tough. I'm fine with points of principle, but dont let it ruin gameplay. of all the things said on this thread I do agree with this. just I'm concerned that in making them potent enough to handle sneak attacks we may end up with a more severly exacerbated situation. [/quote] The whole point of a sneak attack is not getting caught. If you play well enough and don't get caug
