I think perhaps stealing general technology, like the ability to go through wormholes, or faster mineral processing, would be awesome. It'd be like how the Russians stole secrets about American nuclear weapons to produce their own. But specific ship research stealing sounds a little silly to me. - PR-0927
The front page announced it today. - PR-0927
[quote who="Darvin3" reply="22" id="2449344"]Wow, just read what I wrote. My cynicism levels really do go overboard after 2:00 AM... [/quote] Yes, quite frankly, you sound like one hell of a douche. Sorry to let you know. I'm not just saying that because you disagree with me. Your tone is not conducive to agreement. That being said, I cannot say anything but that I disagree with your presumptions. The "logical fallacy" you stated above makes little to no s
That's a LOT of assumptions. It could be that you do lose that kind of money, or more, or less. I'm not sure you can even conclude some of those costs from backwater, un-focused upon planets. Also, that much money lost may be concerning for a super weak empire, but in the long-term point-of-view on cash/resource inflows and outflows, it really isn't that much - you're exaggerating the effect, IMHO. Anyways, that's not the point - it adds a unique component to SoaSE. So yes, it is more
They could limit it to less planets. Also, it is balanced if everyone is susceptible to this. Were it a specific race's weapon, it'd be unfair. It could also be limited to happen only after a certain amount of planets, to ensure that the player isn't so crippled that he/she finds no fun in the game. There are many easy solutions to the points you brought up. - PR-0927
LOL, what? Man, I was hoping some developer might say something, as they have answered plenty of questions in other threads. :( - PR-0927
I'm curious as to whether a developer has even glanced at this thread, and what he/she thinks about this idea in usefulness and possibility of implementation. - PR-0927
The only problem is that you'd never be able to conquer a neighboring planet with a starbase, since you couldn't build more than a capital shp and some frigates from the start of the game, with only your capital planet. I think gradually throughout the game the neutral militia folk could get more difficut, but from the beginning, it sounds like it wouldn't work. - PR-0927
Agreed. I'd be ecstatic if Stardock implemented my idea. It'd be badass to send in supportive fleet to assist in a rebellion, and eventually establish a new, independent empire in the game. Basically the rival faction would form up together as their own entity in the game - just like any other player, and it could be given all the resources, military entities, and structures belonging to the planets that were part of the rebellion (maybe even a donated fleet from a sympathetic empire?
Now I know this is probably easier said than done, and might not be possible at all. But, if there was a way to allow for low-alliegiance planets in one's empire to bail said empire and join together in their own, the dynamics of the game would be changed, amazingly. I think it'd be pretty awesome. Perhaps only one "civil war" per empire could be allowed, or perhaps make it so there could be a segmentation of the empire into three (you, and two splintered factions) at most, as more wo
So I thought this thread was hilarious. I find Advent and TEC to be my favorite races, but I love some of the Vasari voices - "...entering phaaaase space." The TEC colony frigate has some very cowardly phrases, and just seems uncertain overall. I can't remember which ship says it, but one of the TEC say "Uhh, where to commander?" as if the guy is stoned off his ass. Oh, and the Advent voices are a mix of hot and maniacal-religious-nonsensical. I mean all their talk abou
[quote]true, i just think that honorable game companies like bungie wouldn't copy better companies like blizzard but still alls fair in love and war[/quote] Can companies be honorable? Maybe so, but the only ones I see at the moment (that come to mind) are Stardock and Crytek. As for Blizzard being "better," it's not. I find Blizzard worse, easily, as I don't find any interest in their games (at all), while I tend to find intense interest in Bungie's. Therefore, Bungie is
Why does it matter? So what, they copied. Life goes on, no one cares. Might as well throw in Star Wars for being inspired by Flash Gordon and many elements in Halo being based off Star Wars. Copying ideas and tweaking them is not a bad thing. - PR-0927
I welcome carrier/squadron spam. Being a huge SW nut, I feel there needs to be more importance on fighters/bombers/squadrons/carriers. They really can influence battle. - PR-0927
Nice setup. Unlike everyone else, I gotta' say I like the cleanliness and neatness of it. Much better than a chaotic and dirty mess. We have a 19" monitor for our four-year-old computer which I don't use anymore (1280x1024). My laptop screen is 15.4" (1680x1050) and we just built a new home media computer with a 24" monitor (1920x1200). We just keep getting more and more in resolution - I find it difficult to go to lower resolutions after using the higher ones. Oh, and I have a
Read: http://starwars.wikia.com/wiki/Byss Looks like Derek06 got it right. - PR-0927
Makes sense, however I'm not sure you could call a 2D image a "model." And while I understand you're sticking in the past by using the word "pixel" instead of "poly," it doesn't make it correct. I'm just pretty picky, and I felt that this thread was proliferated by noobs who wanted to keep saying pixel. - PR-0927
Why would you limit the amount though? There should be an unlimited amount, but perhaps make a LOT of deterrents from being able to get more. Perhaps the credits, metal, and crystal needed could doubled for each one, along with an increase in fleet capacity (twice, then four times, etc.), and fleet supply (twice as well, then four times, etc.). Keep in mind that there can be multiple flagships, perhaps one for one fleet and another for another fleet. I think it could also just
Probably [i]Halo 3[/i], [i]Crysis[/i], and [i]Battlefield 2142[/i] for me. [i]Battlefield: Bad Company[/i] is looking mighty kickass too - I really enjoyed the SP demo - wasn't a big fan of MP really - it was alright. However, [i]Halo 3[/i]'s MP can get dull if played too much (and I don't have XBL). [i]Crysis[/i] is a work of God's art, however, I'd like a computer that could handle it on the highest settings with a reasonable framerate. [i]Battlefield 2142[/i] is nice, but it didn't l
[quote]sorry but I am old school when it comes to those termswhether a model is mad from pixels in 2d or polygons in 3d matters not to me.[/quote] That has nothing to do with "old school." Pixels are what "make up" the resolution of a screen, if you will (very generalized statement, I know), and polygons are the "faces" of the 3D model (in real life or virtual). - PR-0927
I'm sorry but I must say - can we stop saying pixels here? I believe the right word is "poly." But, I agree. I find the textures to be rather low in resolution for the TEC as well. - PR-0927
In honesty, I don't think it would really help Stardock sales to put it on the PS3. There are like only two PS3 RTS games currently released. Plus, I think if they were to do it, going Xbox 360 would make most sense - biggest online community, console-wise. Not to mention the Xbox 360 outsells the PS3 in the U.S. at least. But, IMO, it should stay a PC exclusive, simply because it is an RTS. RTS on console sounds yucky. - PR-0927
I feel your pain man, and am 100% behind you. However, posting in all caps does not help in releasing the patch any sooner. And consider it good that they are taking their time - the patch must really be having some worthwhile improvements. I to am squirming. - PR-0927
And 24 inches isn't small BTW. - PR-0927
I must say, this looks to be amongst the most promising mods. I wish you good luck, I know how difficult it is to sustain a mod. - PR-0927
