Just remembered to add this in Bombardment: - Automatic bounty on your head and for each time a planet is exterminated. So that a player would get penalized for that evil quicker option...
Like others that have been expressing their dislike in total extermination of a planet, I too feel a bit uncomfortable with that. But hey, this is just a game, so how about try to come up with useful ways to add more flavor and depth into everyone's favorite game? Here are my ideas on the matter: [B]1) Plain old Bombardment[/B] - Faster method. - Planet needs to be recolonized (faster pop growth for Vasari) and upgraded. - Cultural impact: same
@Uranium - 235 Not having to pay any copy protection fee crap and us not to endure it, was one big smart move. Period. And yes, I do remember Starcraft of old and feel a similar, better refined commitment with this company. But there's an eye-candy approach in Blizzard's games that I don't see fully with this one. Sins is very well coded, similarly polished in gameplay, beautiful graphics, but the old-school interface could use some improvement. Those big rectangular
No copy protection is kind of relative. Stardock, being the publisher, has a good infrastructure in place that allows for a certain leeway against illegal distribution. You need to have proper access in order to get the additional good stuff that gets developed - which is based on player feedback. But the end result is the same if an SOB player gets the additional patches into the web. At any rate, this kind of proactive and friendly stance towards players - when the exact opposite happ
Huge battles, non stop thrill and you actually get to use your brain.
[quote] Craig, The interface takes a lot of room on the screen and there is a lot of information. It may simply be a case of my play style over another's that's making me feel this way. The information is good I think the way it's presented is what's mostly annoying. The left bar can eventually become extraordinarily long. I know you can customize what you want pinned on it but there is some information you want quick access to. Also, aLap may have a bit of a point i
A good, unbiased review. Keep it coming! W00t!
I can just picture... Legions of Koreans competing in multiplayer. Sponsored championships, live broadcasts...
The only thing we don't know yet is how PJI's are going to be changed. There's been a lot of interesting proposals, including yours, and we're all hoping for the best on the final decision. :)
[quote] Bottom line - don't get your hopes up and expect too much in terms of radical gameplay changes. The game is essentially playing the way they intended it to play, and any changes are going to be small superficial tweaks (did you see the so-called "nerf" they put on the siege frigate? RIDICULOUS! LMAO!) Good luck guys, personally I'm waiting for SCII, but really I wanted to play *this* game, not *that* one (grand strategy and all of that) <img id="ImageResize_Image_5" onloa
[quote]I don't think Superweapons need a nerf. They are part of every RTS because there are stalemates and each race or faction needs an end to stalemates. [/quote] I agree. And in a way it's defenses that need to be buffed up a bit. I mentioned in a PJI related thread the inclusion of a countermeasure for the superweapon: SDS - Superweapon Defense Structure The SDS would be fallible: 50% chance to intercept an incoming attack altogether, 70% chance to minimize damag
AragFore03 might be referring to the game interface buttons, for example. In a way, they could be more eye-candy and appealing, in a smooth, sleek and futuristic kind of way. Right now they seem kind of plain and devoid of frills...
[quote] About the fleet logistics It doesnt even has to be in relation to planets or stars. Just make it unlimited/ but negative rate. Means when you go over your max fleet supply you have overproduction, means neg economy. Means you start to pay for every ship that is over limit. Means you need a good economy to support it. If your economy isnt stable or rich enough than you have to get rid of them again. [/quote]Actually have your economic might make up for excess fleet po
...and you have reps like kryo trying to help users at this very moment... What a service! :CONGRAT: :HOT:
I never had a problem by using the credit card with Stardock, and I've been purchasing things there since 2003. It's secure and easy to use IMO. :)
For people who played other games like GalCiv, Homeworld, Hegemonia, Nexus or is used to MMO's buffs and synergies, this game is rather quick to understand - it's all connected and it gets pretty intuitive as you go along. There's people who just started to play the game, like me, but already engaging in the forums, already with ideas and likes and dislikes. As long as its civil and constructive, I don't see the problem on engaging in the forums whether within months or days.
[I]Humility, using paragraphs is a good thing. A soup of words doesn't help reading a bit. [/I] Yes, I agree that there must be some sort of leeway for big empires, especially in large maps. Yes, diplomacy sucks right now. It only makes sense that they'll improve it in the meantime.
Increasing the standard jump delay time for the PJI would be more straightforward and simple. [B]Variations:[/B] 1) The PJI is upgraded for additional time delay. 2) The delay time is increased automatically in outlying planets and to standard in inner planets (where all phase lanes are connected to owned planets - [B]no micromanagement[/B]). 3) The delay time is increased automatically the further you are closer to the capital planet (working more or less li
Diplomacy needs improvement, especially in single-player. Giving resources to AI players should affect their stance on us, although only up to a point. The amount of power one has should influence diplomatic outcomes. There should be more PROACTIVE options: - Request "Attack", "Make peace", "Break trade alliance". - Option to trade Artifacts with allies. - Make agreement in exchange of... (whatever the AI requests). - Others?
The ideas here are bound to be implemented in the game. They make sense and there's a whole background of gaming experience that supports its use.
mmm... Do you have enough support frigates? Have you a balanced set of upgraded capitol ships. An overall balanced fleet with ships that provide bonuses for armor, shields and weaponry? Hope it helps :)
Another high-score review. I love it! :CONGRAT: Funny that reviewers keep indicating the lack of heart in the game: "Lack of a single-player story campaign". I really love all the brains and brawn though! But I'll be looking forward for that awesome campaign and cinematics that I know you guys will be able to pull through. ;) [quote]What is up with this learning curve assumption? It seems like every review tacks it on trying to find something bad about the game. When I
[quote]What a diffent that make? if IronClad give more fleet to you so they will get more fleet. I guess no one is Invincible alone but God is, get allies if you can get if able.[/quote] Trying to get allies in single-player? Good luck with that. The only thing diplomacy allows is to do the AI bidding. It's not as if you can bribe them with resources, technology or ships. As for pirates, I bribed them all the way to go for the other races but it didn't seem to work that much in the later par
I'm starting to think that playing in larger maps is near impractical given certain circumstances like the one in my example... I'd better be sure to start at the edge of a galaxy so that I can work my way through the other star systems! X-(
That's true. But there should be some kind of leeway when you expand that much and have to fend off from other star systems...
