Dopubts about the game » Forum Post by RealDarko

This game is a cross between HW and Civilisation. It has the scope of Turn based strategy, operated in real time. The micromanagement has been mainly removed, which allows you to think about Strategy, and the empire as a whole.

It is my experience, that a fleet with a good balance of units, using Capital ship abilities can beat a much stronger numerically fleet of a single unit type.

The game can take place on upwards of 60 planets, numerous stars this is a large map, you are talking about dedicating some serious hours to getting this completed, probably about 2weeks game play, but don't worry you can save mid game and pick it up later, even online, or you could play a smaller map with 10 planets.

Hope this helps

Successfully updated karma reason!

You can DEFINITELY win over superior numbers with better strategy.
You can take out fleets double or even triple your size.

But.. it's not like homeworld or homeworld2 where how you position your ships matters alot.. It's pretty much just head on attacking, and the semi-newtonian physics are 1/10th as good.(meaning you don't have cool strafing, reversing, moving up and down. It happens sometimes randomly though, i don't get why)
That was my major major disappointment about this game is that you can only move on the XY axis, not the Z, and ships don't strafe or move backwards.
In homeworld2 you might send ships above someone to gain an advantage(like against hiiagaran bc so only 1 of it's ions can shoot you) but sadly you don't have that here.

I've heard people mention it's like homeworld+civilizations(like the above person) but that's total bullshit. The combat isn't as good as homeworlds, but it's better than other space games beside homeworld i guess.
As a game as a whole, however, it's just as good or better than homeworld.

Games are much longer than homeworlds. I have trouble getting games to end faster than 1:30 or 2 hours. Games can last 3-7 hours long. A lot of people like this, but not everyone has the time.

And I hear it's easy to mod. I dunno though.

Successfully updated karma reason!

This game is more like playing an RTS version of a fps space simulation where instead of flying a fighter or bomber, you are managing the empire's planets and fleet at the same time. The game doesn't rely exclusively on building factories or something and then spamming an enemy with it but rather managing the fleets, planetery population, economy, etc (though the economy model is very lite).

If you have ever played Galactic Civilizations, it would be like that but with real-time combat instead of turn-based and more combat oriented. There is diplomacy involved but it's not necessarily a major aspect in comparison to Sid Meier Civilization games.

Successfully updated karma reason!

RonLugge

Join Date 05/2004

+50

That was my major major disappointment about this game is that you can only move on the XY axis, not the Z, and ships don't strafe or move backwards.

You can move on the Z axis. I don't remember the control -- I never use it -- but you can move on the Z axis.

(though the economy model is very lite).

Only by 4X standards

Edit:

To the OP: Please buy this game. If nothing else, it gives you a chance to get in on the "ground floor" of what some of us are calling the "Starcraft Killer".

Successfully updated karma reason!

That was my major major disappointment about this game is that you can only move on the XY axis, not the Z, and ships don't strafe or move backwards.
In homeworld2 you might send ships above someone to gain an advantage(like against hiiagaran bc so only 1 of it's ions can shoot you) but sadly you don't have that here.

I've wondered about the relative lack of tactics in the game I am playing.

My conclusion, and it may not be correct, is that the abstraction is designed so that, if necessary, players can fight multiple engagements simultaneously, allowing the AI to run their fleets with a modicum of efficiency.

It allows for a greater range of strategy at the expense of allowing more individual tactics.

Successfully updated karma reason!

Is possible to move in all the 3 dimensions or only in 2 ?? That's very important. I don't want a Starcraft with ships!! I need something with XY and Z axis.
Please confirm!

Successfully updated karma reason!

I believe z axis is the following key: '

Also if you consider yourself even remotely close to a strategic gamer then this title is a must have for your library. It is that simple.

Successfully updated karma reason!

This game is nothing like starcraft. Why don't you call it the "Quake Killer"?..

It's a great game though. And yeah it's not like hoemwrold where you build up a fleet and try to rock-paper-scissors and out-position and tactics your enemy.

With this it's like.. you'll send in a small force to a planet so the enemy goes to defend it, thinking it's weak and he'll crush it. Then when he jumps in and gets close to them you bring in twice as many ships and crush as much as you can before he can escape. Or you send out a diversion against a planet to pull his fleet far away and then you attack somewhere else.
Kinda like that book.. What was it called, "Forever War"? About fighting in space where people would spend so much time traveling to a fight and then when they return so much time has passed.

That's what makes the game so good. Traveling isn't insanely long, but it's enough.

I've wondered about the relative lack of tactics in the game I am playing.

My conclusion, and it may not be correct, is that the abstraction is designed so that, if necessary, players can fight multiple engagements simultaneously, allowing the AI to run their fleets with a modicum of efficiency.

It allows for a greater range of strategy at the expense of allowing more individual tactics.

Yeah I understand. Like I said, it's still as good or better than homeworld/homeworld2 due to other areas of the game, despite being far behind homeworld/homeworld2 in that one area.

Is possible to move in all the 3 dimensions or only in 2 ?? That's very important. I don't want a Starcraft with ships!! I need something with XY and Z axis.
Please confirm.

Well the first thing i said when i played this game was "WHAT THE FUCK? THIS GAME IS 2D".(3d graphics of course, but it's not like actual space.) But when i actually played through the game, and another, i put that behind me because the game makes up for it in other areas.

I haven't found anyone that's said something bad about this game. I saw the 9 and higher scores on reviews, great things said about it. I went on IRC and asked about it, kept seeing posts on forums. No one said bad things about it. My only disappointment is that the game doesn't really have much 3d.

Ships WILL stack on ontop of the other SOME. But if one ship is in the way of another it won't like go overtop of it, it'll go around and stuff, or with two ships making a turn one will turn along the outside of the other one instead of simply stack ontop or underneith to turn more effeciently.
These two things annoy me quite a bit because this is a SPACE GAME. But.. it's a really really really pheonominal strategy game that will go down in history.

Successfully updated karma reason!

That was my major major disappointment about this game is that you can only move on the XY axis, not the Z, and ships don't strafe or move backwards.
In homeworld2 you might send ships above someone to gain an advantage(like against hiiagaran bc so only 1 of it's ions can shoot you) but sadly you don't have that here.

Erm, as others have said, you can move on the Z axis. I forget the key, but it'll be on the bindings screen.

Some capital ships have a small amount of 'lateral' movement (they can move sideways slightly), but for the most part, the ships follow the 'cinematic' tradition of only flying in the direction they're facing.

I've heard people mention it's like homeworld+civilizations(like the above person) but that's total bullshit.

We are all entitled to our opinions, but combining RTS with 4X was the goal of the developers, and I personally think they've done an astonishingly good job.

Games are much longer than homeworlds. I have trouble getting games to end faster than 1:30 or 2 hours. Games can last 3-7 hours long.

They can be a lot longer than that, in some cases.

Successfully updated karma reason!

Well seems that I need to try it. Shame a demo is not available yet.
What about mods? Will be cool If I can import my own ships!

Successfully updated karma reason!

The devs seem keen to support modders - there's a map designer in the game, many of the data files are in a simple-to-edit text format, and I believe that proper mod tools are due to be released.

Successfully updated karma reason!

Z axis demo:

http://www.dailymotion.com/cluster/videogames/video/x4alwu_zaxis-yakety-saxing_videogames

Successfully updated karma reason!

RonLugge

Join Date 05/2004

+50

This game is nothing like starcraft. Why don't you call it the "Quake Killer"?..

Because Starcraft is so-highly touted as "the" RTS of all time -- and it isn't (anymore). This game will smash the upcoming Starcraft II.

I've wondered about the relative lack of tactics in the game I am playing.

My conclusion, and it may not be correct, is that the abstraction is designed so that, if necessary, players can fight multiple engagements simultaneously, allowing the AI to run their fleets with a modicum of efficiency.

It allows for a greater range of strategy at the expense of allowing more individual tactics.

There are tactics, its just that they're hidden rather subtlety

I can't tell you how often I've had to drag my ships back to the prepared defensive positions I wanted them at (i. e. in range of the repair centers / turrets I have defending my hangars).

Well seems that I need to try it. Shame a demo is not available yet.
What about mods? Will be cool If I can import my own ships!

This game is highly moddable -- they just released a "basic" modding pack even!

Successfully updated karma reason!

Thank's for the video! Just what I need to help me in the decision

Successfully updated karma reason!

I've heard people mention it's like homeworld+civilizations(like the above person) but that's total bullshit.

We are all entitled to our opinions, but combining RTS with 4X was the goal of the developers, and I personally think they've done an astonishingly good job.

Quite, Without wanting to trash the original quoter's opinion here, but still defend my sense of honour.

I did not mean it is both homeworld and civilisation. It is simply a cross or a merge between the two. The reality is, Homeworld is 3D RTS (that is what is printed on the Original Homeworld box) and Civilisation is a 4x game meaning to say (explore, expand, exploit & exterminate Turn based stratgy).

Sins at least I believe is a very good attempt at Real time 4x Strategy, obviously it is real time, it has large open maps which is loosely broken into the 4x phases, you need to think about the strategic positions of you're fleets, and are rewarded for pincer movements, good fleet management/mixes providing the strategy.

Point I'm trying to make is, when posting your opinions please show the same courtesy you would like others extend to you, or at least give constructive reasons for disagreeing rather then just saying its BS.

Successfully updated karma reason!

I just downloaded it through Stardock Friday afternoon.
So far, I'm hooked.
I was a huge fan of Master of Orion I & II (not MOO3), a Civ Series fan, a Starcraft fan, a homeworld fan, and a Freelancer fan. The game has flashes that remind me of all of them.
Here's what I like about Sins:
- The interface is intriging and unique to my experience. If you hover over a planet, ship, etc. and then wheel-zoom, it "Zoom-Centers" toward the object under your cursor.
If you zoom out to find out where the battles are, the contested planets flash red so it's easy to locate the action. Also, if you zoom out and see enough to see the info bars, it's simple to see what's in a system with the info bars, plus it's easy to see what each colony is producing or has already produced.
- I started playing around with the map editor, and once I got the hang of it, I find I can better tailor the game to my style.
- The visuals, when close-up, are wonderful. When I first zoomed into a massive fleet's phase jump, or when I zoomed all the way into a blue star, my brain rewarded me with a nice blast of endorphins.

Here's where I can see it improving:
- The AI's diplomacy needs to be tweaked. One empire, for example, had just started pounding one of my colonies, and then they have the nerve to ask for credits (I suppose it's a minor gripe as it's happened in our own history). I'd like to see the AI's "Missions" have a third, more neutral option that; perhaps I have not learned all the tricks of the game's diplomacy.
- Finding certain buildings and structures within a particularly busy system can get to be overwhelming, which is why, I suppose the overview was so nicely streamlined.

Overall, I'm finding myself pre-occupied with playing this, and am looking forward to checking out the Mods, updates, and even future expansions.

Successfully updated karma reason!

RealDarko:

I actually think the lack of worrying about a z-axis is a good thing, and is one of the things the developers did right (although people here are saying you can move on the z-axis, so check it out).

As far as the physical game itself - the "technicals" of the game if you will - it's an A+. The developers are highly talented, and knew what they were doing. My hat is off to them in that area. Where they went wrong is that the balance and game play dynamic is one of the worst mistakes I've seen in a game like this. They either had bizarre or exotic tastes in what constitutes a good game play dynamic, or they catered to a select group of people in the beta tests who did not represent what the normal strategy gamer wants. Bottom line, you won't be able to control phase lanes (basically highways) and star systems strategically AT ALL, defense in this game is non-existant (either the beta-testers or the devs themselves frowned on defense, and on so-called "turtling" strats), and there are some rather bizarre unit balances in the case of the siege frigate.

Personally, I don't like how this game plays. If you are a casual gamer, you probably won't notice what I'm talking about either way, so go buy it, and chances are you'll like it. If you like tactical clickfest games more than strategy games, you'll probably like this game because even though it was billed as strategy, it plays tactical because of the bizarre dynamic I described. However, if you think defense should play some role in the game, if you like the idea of trying to defend and hold on to your planets, if you hate harassment tactics, if your idea of a strategy game is to control points on a map (star systems, planets, phase lanes, whatever) - DON'T buy this game.

Successfully updated karma reason!

Starcraft killer? Oh brother. Look, I like the game, but saying that is a bit absurd on a whole bunch of levels. The main one being that I consider the games to be quite different. Starcraft (and undoubtedly Starcraft 2) are much more action oriented. Starcraft also doesn't have the same focus on the traditional 4X theme (all RTS games are 4X in my opinion, but I'm going with the general belief that a 4X game has an extra bit of strategy gameplay that isn't in the traditional RTS).

I love Stardock to death, but it won't dethrone Starcraft (which is still so beyond popular in other countries it's staggering) from its place in gaming history, and I suspect SC2 will be more popular than this game. Why?

1. Blizzard has tons more cash to throw at the game. So it'll be close to bug-free on release, and it'll have a huge marketing budget. Blizzard continues to impress me with how solid their games are on release.

2. SC2 will have a campaign. I don't care whether you think Sins should or shouldn't, but the fact that SC2 will have both skirmish mode AND a campaign will make it look better to reviewers and the average joe. Whether the game is in fact better or not, or whether Sins's skirmish mode is more robust, will be irrelevant in the eyes of most.

3. Its multiplayer, because they have lots of cash to throw at it, will probably be really easy to start and get into interface-wise. Stardock tends to sacrifice some niceties with presentation and interface due to lower funding.

My point here is not to take anything away from Sins. I believe it's a good game and worth one's $40. But to pit it against Starcraft is just nutty on too many levels for me to get across in a small posting (and yes, I know I'm going to be the minority in this due to exactly who visits these forums, i.e. Sins fans). Let's just leave it at "they're different" and go from there (it's like getting the average Sins and GalCiv2 person to like Quake 3).

-HM

Successfully updated karma reason!

...if you hate harassment tactics, if your idea of a strategy game is to control points on a map (star systems, planets, phase lanes, whatever) - DON'T buy this game.

You're still here? Don't you have other games to go complain about?

Successfully updated karma reason!

You're still here? Don't you have other games to go complain about?

Yeah, I'm still here, and I might just stay a while. You got a problem with that?

Successfully updated karma reason!

RealDarko:

I actually think the lack of worrying about a z-axis is a good thing, and is one of the things the developers did right (although people here are saying you can move on the z-axis, so check it out).

As far as the physical game itself - the "technicals" of the game if you will - it's an A+. The developers are highly talented, and knew what they were doing. My hat is off to them in that area. Where they went wrong is that the balance and game play dynamic is one of the worst mistakes I've seen in a game like this. They either had bizarre or exotic tastes in what constitutes a good game play dynamic, or they catered to a select group of people in the beta tests who did not represent what the normal strategy gamer wants. Bottom line, you won't be able to control phase lanes (basically highways) and star systems strategically AT ALL, defense in this game is non-existant (either the beta-testers or the devs themselves frowned on defense, and on so-called "turtling" strats), and there are some rather bizarre unit balances in the case of the siege frigate.

Personally, I don't like how this game plays. If you are a casual gamer, you probably won't notice what I'm talking about either way, so go buy it, and chances are you'll like it. If you like tactical clickfest games more than strategy games, you'll probably like this game because even though it was billed as strategy, it plays tactical because of the bizarre dynamic I described. However, if you think defense should play some role in the game, if you like the idea of trying to defend and hold on to your planets, if you hate harassment tactics, if your idea of a strategy game is to control points on a map (star systems, planets, phase lanes, whatever) - DON'T buy this game.

Agent of Kharma, not sure if you have had prior StarDock games (or even ones published by them - IronClad is the maker and they share many ideals with StarDock) but they have great post-launch support. I fully expect Phase Jump Inhibitors will be buffed a lot in the coming weeks as many want them to be stronger.

Speaking as a beta tester who started at the beginning of Beta 3 and played in Beta 4 as well, Phase Jump Inhibitors have behaved differently in each phase (beta 3, Beta 4, release). In Beta 3, PJIs blocked all phase jump travel by enemies away from your planets. Was overpowered so in beta 4, they made it where PJIs stopped enemy phase jump travel to planets under your control. Basically, you could setup a PJI and make an outer planet a choke point where they couldn't get past it into your inner worlds unless they took out the PJIs. Now they just add 250% to phase jump time. My favorite implementation was that of Beta 4, and I think they will do something to buff them around one of these ideas.

The beta testers represented a wide array of people, including those who like to turtle a lot (such as myself) but good reasons were given by the devs on why they don't want this to be a turtling game. If you like base defenses i'd advise going with the TEC as in my experience, fully upgraded gauss cannons with fire rate, range upgrades, and damage upgrades are very potent when you have 25-35 of those taking out ships (such as siege frigates). Balance is an ongoing concern and we will see tweaks just about every patch to it based on my past experience with StarDock with GalCiv 2.

Successfully updated karma reason!

Agent of Kharma, not sure if you have had prior StarDock games (or even ones published by them....

Hey, thanks for the input - seriously. But I don't want this thread to get wrapped up in all of that (don't want to make it off topic). This guy asked for an opinion on the game (it seemed to me as if he was asking if he should buy it or not) so I gave it to him. If you have your own review or recommendation, please feel welcome to give it (perhaps you already did).

Successfully updated karma reason!