Timmaigh

[quote who="Valkyrie8053" reply="7" id="3876462"] This is funny to me. Anyone who actively engaged with the ironclad team in steams forums, the old site forum, and social media before sins 2 was annouced has always asked for them to just upgrade the engine but leave the core gameplay relatively untouched. Now that its been announced, to see people asking for a change to the core gameplay is funny to me. Here my 2 cents. Sins lived as long as it did

Spirituals would PRAY on you :-D

[quote who="Norska" reply="3" id="3876063"] I wonder if traders are taking the goods or ore the planet produces. This an ice planet with a lot of crystal would trade crystal and load trade ships with them. of course their is no real demand or supply so I imagine they are just dropping them off for money at some random location? I agree I don’t know enough about trade yet either. But you made me think of something else I have wanted in game from conquest frontier war

Thanks! Regarding speed of the game, i absolutely played Sins on the fastest (purple) setting since my first game of Rebellion beta, would not have it any other way. Well, i suppose i did set culture speed and one of those alternate victory speed of point accumulation to one of the slower levels than fastest, as i prefer the military ways to win. Anyway, i was under impression multiplayer games are being by consensus played at fastest as well, so i dont think i am that muc

So i finally found some time and will to play my first prolonged session of Sins II and while i think i see and understand most of the changes that have been done, i am still unclear about some things, thus i am seeking some explanation here. First and foremost, what is the speed level of the current game? Compared to Rebellion? I am used to play all at fastest, even for single-player games, and this feels kinda on the slow end. I played the random map maybe for 2 hours against singe

[quote who="Solanus Adjudicator" reply="5" id="3875944"] I agree, and I think it is a matter of whether rather than how that sse2 should be changed. Right now sse2 has a far more batter appearance and engine, but the core gameplay rules are kept unchanged compared with sse1. It is necessary to make changes to how to play the game in addition to what the game looks like, otherwise, the game would just be a remaster edition instead of a whole new episode. [/quote]

[quote who="WHIPperSNAPer2008x" reply="1" id="3875811"] "Sir, this is a Wendy's." If you want really fancy stuff and a game that no longer bares any resemblance to the original game that earned a fanbase, you might be better served with mods. That's what mods are for. If the game loses its balance of RTS elements relative to 4X elements and becomes "Sins of Stellaris" then people might just simply purchase Stellaris and avoid this title. [/quote]

I barely played the game yet, aside of an hour at the release. I recall very fondly playing through Rebellion betas back in 2012 and discovering whats new, but IIRC it felt way more more finished already by the first beta with just TEC factions available than current game is. Thats understandable given it was built on top of polished vanilla game, which is not the case now. Anyway, i realized in need certain level of polish for me to enjoy - i would say i would require mostly finished

Now show me Kortul

[quote who="Yarlen" reply="9" id="3871855"] Quoting Smarti12, reply 7 Quoting Yarlen, reply 6 re: Corsev - It has been d

Agreed with this, sort of... i would like to see something inbetween capital ships and Titans, lets call it super-capital class. It can be capped in numbers just like Titans, except not to just one, but say 5 or 10 (this assuming you can build now more than 16 capships). Would be say twice the size of capital ship, obviously significantly stronger and perhaps instead of chargeable abilities you would upgrade it same way as starbases. When i think of it, i picture the Lucifer cla

I am in favor of current solution, the lanes. It helps to create the feeling of "strategic terrain" which IMO is vital for the gameplay. Additionally, it adds to the faction diversity, since Vasari´s main strength is ability to bypass it to certain level. Not saying that a game with different mechanic wont be good or that one could not adjust Vasari´s mobility advantage to no-lane system, but why change something that works? The increased freedom would not make the game fe

[quote who="wbino3556" reply="11" id="3869498"] Quoting Timmaigh, reply 10 Just wanted to say, i feel quite opposite to OP. I barely played the game so far, cause the changes and additions available in the playable game currently, as compared to Rebellion, are not big enough or deep enough to make the game feel distinct en

Just wanted to say, i feel quite opposite to OP. I barely played the game so far, cause the changes and additions available in the playable game currently, as compared to Rebellion, are not big enough or deep enough to make the game feel distinct enough, all of the stuff is mostly cosmetic (like 16 research bases instead of 8 civic + 8 military, and stuff like this)...and to see the probably most major change, the orbiting bodies, one can only see after playing the game for longer period of t

How come its both reddish and turquoise? Can you pick 2 colors for your color scheme ala Homeworld now? Or is the reddish hull just reflecting red color from nebula or sun?

[quote who="DivineWrath" reply="1" id="3868573"] I played a game where I didn't build any trade ports. I got high infrastructure costs anyways. I now suspect this expense is tied to planet development, not buildings I built. Next I'll try to keep my planet development to a minimum to see if there is any impact. [/quote] Well, i have played the game only very little so far, so i would not know, but it would be rather weird, if tradeports, which are supposed to generate you cr

[quote who="DerekPaxton" reply="9" id="3867940"] The current version is super placeholder. It's why we put the "Under Construction" space pony there. We discussed cutting techs entirely from the Tech Preview just because this screen is so bad. But decided that it was needed to make the game at all playable. We didn't want to have the team spending any real time "cleaning up" this screen because it's going to be replaced entirely. So instead we provided a very placeh

[quote who="All4not1608" reply="4" id="3867797"] They are changing it at a later date per their discord channel. They had to make it basic as it wasn't ready for the tech preview launch. There will probably be a lot of UI changes before the game is released. [/quote] Good to hear, thanks for info. I thought it would be the case, just a placeholder, but voiced my opinion on the matter just in case.

[quote who="synchrotron" reply="1" id="3867732"] Actually I like this interface better, the old one had picture ladder in each category and you had to hover over the pic to read the research this one it is all lay out better with sub categories at first it seems like a lot but once you navigate it a bit it is real easy. I would rather read a research than have to put a research to a picture. [/quote] This could be resolved by adding text/name of the research topic to the pic

100 percent agree about the research part. It needs to be done as in previous game, stuff that has some connection or logical progression needs to be obvious from the tree, grouped together and separated from the rest, as it is it looks chaotic, its difficult to read, its simply not good enough. When you think about it, research trees are key component of the first game, its where all the difference between the factions lies, and its current form, i could not even tell i

Finally preordered - only now, cant wait to play it.

[quote who="exodus_x" reply="2" id="3867184"] Threads a bit moot now it's coming out tomorrow. [/quote] Thats still another day away. Meanwhile, my body is ready for bunch of new screenshots already, in fact it has been this way since the reveal. Granted, by tomorrow, it will become somewhat moot.

[quote who="Yarlen" reply="22" id="3867041"] We have updated the textures to fix the cartoony ships (there was an error in how they were being applied). For those who still want less color, we've added an option for minimal team color which makes them more like Sins 1 style. [/quote] Show not tell :-P

[quote who="Frogboy" reply="5" id="3867057"] Quoting Timmaigh, reply 4 One more technical question: Do you know whether that new Iron Engine does benefit from larger L3 cache, or more precisely from AMD V-cache? Did you test new Sins the performance with AMD 5800X3D CPU? I have no idea.

[quote who="Frogboy" reply="2" id="3867044"] That is a very good question. The short version is that Ironclad is the lead development studio on the game and they preferred to use an engine they wrote rather than learn NitrousCider. As for UI, the UI in Sins I worked well but there were a lot of players who felt like it broke down in late game. As for visuals, obviously, we plan to have all the ships look like cartoons from the 70s.. <img src="htt