sareth01

[quote who="Volt_Cruelerz" reply="83" id="3477017"] Quoting sareth01, reply 82 Who says there only needs to be one player per starting position in an RTS game? Imagine matchmaking where you have teams of players performing specialty roles micromanaging their own part of the fight, something like individual admirals to a fleet admiral's command. Lets make them battles bigger, better and more awesome. Honestly, what's the difference b

Double post, hit the wrong button :)

Responses to some interesting points in this thread. [quote who="Stilat" reply="2" id="3472119"] Literally no one who understands the game agrees with you siddy...[/quote] They have always needed supply costs, the vasari starbase more than any other. [quote] Yes, lets nerf the vasari to the ground... Surely they didnt get enough nerfs the last five patches right?[/quote] The purpose of balance is to balance, with a game like sins

[quote] MEANWHILE Advent are pushing their culture and the Vasari are losing planets, even if the starbase is holding the planet from being colonized the Vasari can't keep up the trades and they can't attack the Advent because this is before they have their mega-death-fleet-starbase-combo[/quote] The advent fleet/starbase combo only works effectively with repulse. getting repulse and a mega fleet starbase death combo is so resource inefficient as to ens

[quote] I've been thinking about it and I think there's something else worth mentioning regarding the future of RTS gaming... Take a look at Sins of a Solar Empire. With its high unit count numbers, it would be very cumbersome to try to manage them using only the map. Luckily you have fleets and the Empire Tree which is an amazing UI innovation for the RTS genre. As unit counts continue to increase (realistically, I don't think it'll ever go above

[quote who="Stilat" reply="312" id="3476972"] Can we just let this thread die already? Its an obvious troll post.[/quote] I see a mod that has been made over this post. Potentially room for even more awesome improvements to the game, demonstrated clearly for all to see, or the actual end of this thread if the idea itself is without merit via testing. Perhaps you will get your wish stilat.

@ Fury Thank you!

[quote who="RespawnedTitanL10" reply="28" id="3476765"] And come think on the topic of this thread, what Sins:R could have benefited from (but two years ago) is a review like this: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=P_QK-lcW8a8 [/quote] Good review, nailed the issues I had with the game at release. I'll venture a guess and say that Creative Assembly was told to start "preparing" their game for eventual console release. All these game c

[quote]@sareth, yeah, there looks to be an approval process. I'll keep an eye on it and post once they've been approved. If by EoD Monday they still haven't been approved, I'll contact them to figure out what's going on.[/quote] Thank you fury! [quote]I realize this mod was proposed in 2012, but with the nerfs that the Vasari got along the way, if you want to have a semblance of balance with this mod in 1.82, you need a few extra things: <u

Wow! Thank you so much! I'm going to test it this weekend. The links are not working. What is the name of the mod?

[quote] What you broke down was completely pointless. You do realize this don't you? Think about it. If you have to go to such lengths to explain what you meant then you are failing at communicating your point. [/quote] Actually it makes perfect logical sense, even using appropriate definitions and everything. Your emotional rant is not very persuasive. I don't see anything in your post aside from character assassination, which in the

@furyofthestars Hey thank you fury for testing it out. Have you tried the 25% for TEC and 50% movement for advent, just to see? If you do could you link the mod? I hope the mod uses rebellion + the DLC's. I would greatly enjoy testing it out. Any change that doesn't impact strategy to a point of significance really doesn't belong in the game. thanks! @ wetdelicious If I recall correctly (its been a while since I hav

Not a troll post... This issue does impact a players online game play experience significantly! The only person I have on ignore is Huy Mac. Even if he is on my team, I don't need to know what he is saying, ever. Sleeper isn't so bad, there have been far worse ICO trolls for longer periods of time than him.

[quote] THESE WOULD MEAN LOTS OF BALANCING BUT ARE ALTERNATIVE OPTIONS -phew all caps cause its yelled loudly [/quote] Took the first response right out of my mouth. :) Lots of balancing on this kind of game can mean a lot of work, potential screw ups...probably not worth the risk. I wanted to have a streamlined solution so that there would be a chance that it would be adopted by the development team. Since there are no mods to test on this,

That does sound like her starkers

@frogboy Hey frogboy, thanks for the response. In your first response we are pretty much in agreement. Your response does support the core point that there is a lack of good modern RTS in the market today. Taking on harder projects legitimizes you as a serious developer in the eyes of many kinds of gamers. [quote]There are forums (rpgcodex being the epitome of this) where clueless gamers talk about how crappy this game or that game is and how this game or that should hav

@Uberlicker [quote]No, if you read critically you will notice that you claimed: [quote] Any serious developer, who has the money, the capability, should make an RTS because this is the time for them to make a come back.[/quote][/quote] Okay time for a reading lesson. Lets break it down in steps. [quote]Any serious developer[/quote] Obviously stardock is a serious developer, they make RTS. That is the only reason I spend more than 2 seconds carin

Hmm my girlfriend and I both scored the same, 67%

[quote who="Ryat" reply="11" id="3475032"] Quoting sareth01, reply 10The developers shot themselves in the foot by forcing themselves to limit the game engine to 32 bit requirements. You know why they did it that way sareth01. An engine built in 2006 (game released in 2008) by an indie company would never have been built with 64 bit in mind. I think they are still in shock about how popular this game continues to be.[/quote] True, its not a surprise why they did

[quote] It is kind of sad because the game has literally around 200 players online. Looking at the devs viewpoint we are actually a "Negative income" source, but they should at least try making some community based support money giveaways. I would gladly give 5 dollars per month to play Sins.[/quote] I would not pay 5 dollars for sins per month. The developers shot themselves in the foot by forcing themselves to limit the game engine to 32 bit requirements. The

[quote who="Leo in WI" reply="41" id="3474799"] Quoting sareth01, reply 39 Turn based games are a game design short cut to make game design easier(because good game design is really HARD). That's similar to me saying something like... "RTS games are for people with no thought process, and can't handle in-depth strategy." Do I really think that, no, but it is just as insulting as the crap you are spewing. Do you seriously believe that crap, or are you just trolli

[quote]Indy game makers make turn based games, serious developers make real time strategy. Is simply an incorrect statement. Saying ridiculous things like that does disservice to the point you are trying to make.[/quote] This statement is not ridiculous when you know how it is meant. I am setting a standard of thought here. Taken by itself you can say it is imperfect in many ways. But that is not how this is meant at all. Further explanat

If logic is applied, within the scope of life, turn based games are themselves real time strategy. They feel different from other games, no argument there. They are easier to play, especially after a long day of work. Yet, they are a dime a dozen because they are so easy to develop. As far as the market is concerned, Turn based games are over represented, real time strategy games are the minority and therefore need to be made(they are the current business opportunity).

[quote who="uberlicker" reply="29" id="3473674"] It might be what you want, but I honestly wouldn't touch that. RTS, no matter the implementation, just leaves me cold [/quote] Then you should buy a sweater, life is an RTS.

Fallen enchantress, Sins of a Solar Empire, Civ 5 Brave New World(way better than the basic game), Warlock 2, Mount and Blade. Technically mount and blade isn't fantasy, yet its attempts at realism could and should be implemented into a fantasy game. Real time game play or bust, I always discredit all turn based games as second rate to well designed real time mechanics(thank you Sins for showing me this). A game with a cor