Sounds like you lack patience a flaw more and more common.

It's realtime and it's strategic... ergo it's a realtime strategy... It's a very complex one that isn't just a click fest- If that's what you *define* an RTS as, then this game is most certainly not an RTS... I've been pleased with it so far, I don't feel gypped- but I was expecting a long game

Don't forget that you can modify their attack times, among other things. Search the "I hate pirates!" threads if you're interested. I don't recall the file and variables off the top of my head.

Considering that its been spoken about and marketed as a game that has elements of both RTS and 4x strategy games, I can't really fathom how someone would feel tricked/misled ('gypped' is racial slur btw, not many seem to know) that it's not a typical rts game. You'd have to have literally had no idea about the game and bought it blindfolded to be surprised by this.

wrong post.

No, this

is what I was responding to.

Well really RTS and 4X are just terms that describe characteristics of the game - we've just come to associate genres with them - ie. traditional RTS are typical fast paced, finite resource games that have rock, paper, scissor relationships between the various units etc and are generally intended for multi-player. Tradition 4X games are turn based, feature extensive technology trees and require a high level of micromanagement which often means the games are very long and slower paced.

Many games have already challenged the typical RTS models like Company of Heroes, World in Conflict or even aspects of Supreme Commander. 4X games have remained more traditional in a lot of respects but multiplayer is more standard even in those games, simultaneous turns are becoming a common feature and even RPG aspects of improving your units (typically seen more in RTS games) have been used in 4X games.

If one is looking for an iconic RTS like Starcraft or Command and Conquer you are quite right - someone that purchases SoaSE will probably be 'disappointed' if those are the only qualities they were looking for. Similarly, people who enjoy the complexity and pacing of 4X games could find SoaSE too fast paced even on slow settings since the RTS qualities means time management is always somewhat of a factor.

As I said originally though, considering how much this game has been spoken about as a merging of these styles, I think that anyone who buys it with the expectation that it should fit neatly into a traditional mold deserves their disappointment. Perhaps though they will just enjoy it for its unique qualities!



And to answer:



Yes in fact. Gypsy itself is a misnomer given around the 16th century to the "Rom" or "Romany". Europeans mistook their origins as Egyptian and called them Gypsies. Over time, the fact that they roamed led to them being labeled as thieves and cheats (people were typically afraid of strangers/foreigners after all). Hence when you say "gypped" you are invoking a slur.

Wasn't really trying to make a big deal of it I just tend to point it out when people say it because so few seem to know. It's actually even in a number of dictionaries


KNOWLEDGE IS POWER!

You pretty much have it right there.  We set out to create an 'RT4X' game right from the start. Recognizing that most people wouldn't have a clue what 'RT4X' meant, much less '4X' on its own, we decided to use a representative tagline

No big deal; remember - I asked you

Very interesting - and I thought I was good at etymology

If you play a 7 planet 1v1 map with speed on fast and resources set to high it's pretty much a RTS. On slow speed on a 100 planet map it certainly plays more like 4X.

here's the values to be modded for attack times i posted in another i hate pirates thread.


goto your sins of the solar empire/gameinfo folder, open the file called gameplay.constants and search for these lines

firstWarningTime 900
normalWarningTime 720

Change values to whatever you want, but make a backup copy just incase

I've been playing strategy games since discovering the Avalon Hill board games at university in the early 1970's. The games have always required a lot of micromanagement - that's part of the fun for those of us who enjoy them - and it wasn't unusual for games to last several days. Most of the time would be spent jockeying for position - trying to achieve a decisive advantage before committing forces to battle. With a human opponent, this was challenging and a lot of fun because humans are very good at pattern recognition - they can watch your plans unfold and take steps to foil them.

When strategy games moved to the computer, the turn based nature made it difficult to structure a game between human opponents. Computer AI is very good at micromanagement, probably better than a human player - most of us lack the patience to optimize our resources each turn. The computer is not very good at pattern recognition and the brute force look-ahead algorithms that have allowed computers to excel in chess don't scale easily to the hundreds of units you'll find on the board of most strategic simulations. Instead most developers strengthen the AI by giving it an economic advantage - it wins by out producing you, not by outwitting you - not nearly as much fun.

Sins is an effort to create a multi-player strategy game. Reintroducing the human opponent that made the genre so enjoyable in the board game era. Achieving this meant getting rid of the turn button which automatically makes it "real time". Because strategy games require a lot of micromanagement the pacing becomes critical. You need enough time to manage your economy, maneuver your fleets and plan your strategy but not so much time that the game gets boring.

Sins is also the first game in a new genre so it isn't surprising that people are having trouble fitting it into the old categories. It also means the developers are trail blazing in uncharted territory with no history to guide them. I expect there will be some balance and pacing issues that need to be adjusted over the next few months.