Sins of a Solar Empire

[Starbuck1975]

Starbuck1975, I don't care how you feel about the tutorial. Until you play a round your opinion is meaningless

It's...just...a...game.

 

[ZzZGuy]

Originally posted by: Starbuck1975

Starbuck1975, I don't care how you feel about the tutorial. Until you play a round your opinion is meaningless

It's...just...a...game.

Yes, and i hate people (more so then usual) that look at a tutorial and go "screw this" and proceed to demand info contained in said tutorial, or in your case seem to know what the game is like.

Yes you have stated that you intend to try the whole game, but come back AFTER you finish it, not before thinking you somehow know how the game plays out.

PS, i know I'm bing a AO, but anyone who has played EvE and viewed the wookie chat will understand where i'm coming from.

 

[Starbuck1975]

Well I played through a single player campaign in the demo last night, and can't say it changed my mind about the game.

What I didn't like.

- Like Supreme Commander, the zoom out to infinity function does increase the scope of the game beyond a traditional RTS...and granted, most RTS fans complain about the artificial level of zoom that has plagued the genre since Dune 2, so being able to zoom out is a nice feature...but the problem I have with zooming out is that you almost have to remain at this elevation to manage the game, at which point you end up watching icons move across the screen...not my idea of fun...this was why I never got into Supreme Commander. I think Company of Heroes does a better job of this...a traditional RTS screen from which you can elevate the view to adequately manage combat, and an icon based map from which you can conduct more strategic planning.

- The jump lanes between planets create artificial chokepoints through which enemy forces can enter your system...which places a huge limitation on the gameplay...as I said previously, it makes Sins just a basic RTS on a starfield background, not a true 3D space sim. If you are going to set artificial chokepoints that define the entry and exit point for combat scenarios, why not design the game like the Total War series...an empire view with icons and tech trees and all that jazz...one icon to represent a fleet, with information in the icon of the unit breakdown...and then when combat initiates, give the player an option to auto resolve, or manage the combat real time in a true 3D environment? By having every ship in play represented by its own icon, I found it very easy to lose track of my capabilities...where in Total War, you create armies represented by ONE icon, and you can view the breakdown of that army to ensure it remains balanced, manage attrition, etc.

- The combat is essentially on auto-pilot...build a bunch of defensive structures at the system node chokepoints, have enough rock/paper/scissor ships available as your reserve, and let the game manage combat...I never had a need to zoom in and manage the combat, as capital ships are really the only unit requiring much micro management.

- The research system is cumbersome...I got to one point in the game where I managed to rid a planet of enemy ships, and went to colonize...but it was an ice planet...which meant I had to research ice planet colonization...which meant I had to go back to my base planet and build not one, not two but three research facilities first and THEN research arctic colonization...I understand that research trees are designed to add a strategic element to pacing the arms race of a game, but I get frustrated by non-intuitive research trees where I have to bounce all over the place to unlock what should be fairly intuitive capabilities.

I can see why some people would like this game...it definitely appeals to a certain niche market of the RTS 4x genre...as I have said before, I was hoping for Homeworld with a 4x component, not a traditional 4x game designed by former members of the Homeworld design team...oh well/

 

[ZzZGuy]

I was writing a detailed reply right up until you mention "research system is cumbersome", at which point I can tell you have no idea what you are talking about.

You play a game for the first time and find out something you didn't know, OMGWTFBBQ this game is crap!

It can not be made any more simple without insulting the intelligence of players. First you have all the tech divided into military/civilian/fleet logistics (fleet size) each in a different window then sub devided again (eg, civilian tech tree Resource/Planet/Culture) but with everything visible at a glance, then tiers of research for the same item (blasters for example) are linked to the same button (up to 3 tiers per button), hovering the mouse over the button will list the recourse costs/research station requirements/number of levels/current level. IIRC the research tree is shown in the first youtube link in my OP for those who would like to see it (can't find a pic of it on the net).
The fire/ice planet colonizing tech is listed in the CIVILIAN tech tree with A BIG RED/BLUEish WHITE PLANET icon under the PLANET upgrades!!! Once you realize you need this tech it's not like you have to hunt for it every time.

It's called LEARNING! And it's very easy in this game!


I'm sorry but i just can't take you seriously, first judging the game after not even finishing the tutorial and now this.

I am amazed you learned how to play total war, it seems that somewhere between then and now you lost the will to learn new games with new things and expect all other games to be a copy of what you already know or it is crap.

You want more of the same and have no interest in learning anything new.

For anyone reading this and looking to try the game, look at the first youtube link i posted as it gives a damn good impression of what the game is like. If you like what you see then try the demo.

I wouldn't mind if you just didn't like the damn game, but you expect sins to be a copy of what you already know and are upset that it is something different.

And with me now flaming you, this will be the last reply to your opinions as I have made my point and any further discussion will just be pure flaming. I will however gladly answer any gameplay/technical question that i can answer that you may have should you decide to try the game.

 

[SunnyD]

Originally posted by: Starbuck1975
... snip ...
- Like Supreme Commander, the zoom out to infinity function does increase the scope of the game beyond a traditional RTS...

Zooming doesn't increase the scope of anything.

but the problem I have with zooming out is that you almost have to remain at this elevation to manage the game, at which point you end up watching icons move across the screen...not my idea of fun...

Common complaint, even by people who like the game. Big deal.

- The jump lanes between planets create artificial chokepoints through which enemy forces can enter your system...which places a huge limitation on the gameplay...

Uh, it does? I believe just about every RTS out there (aside from Civ) has this limitation... it's called terrain. Starcraft, Warcraft, even Company of Heroes all have limited ways to get from point A to point B.

as I said previously, it makes Sins just a basic RTS on a starfield background, not a true 3D space sim.

If you want a 3D space sim, you should have been looking at Freespace or Freelancer... NOT AN RTS GAME. You've just gone and compared apples to oranges.

...snip...
- The combat is essentially on auto-pilot...build a bunch of defensive structures at the system node chokepoints, have enough rock/paper/scissor ships available as your reserve, and let the game manage combat...I never had a need to zoom in and manage the combat, as capital ships are really the only unit requiring much micro management.

As is the combat in any RTS on auto-pilot. Move units to location A, engage target B, relocate to location B... etc.

- The research system is cumbersome...I got to one point in the game where I managed to rid a planet of enemy ships, and went to colonize...but it was an ice planet...which meant I had to research ice planet colonization...which meant I had to go back to my base planet and build not one, not two but three research facilities first and THEN research arctic colonization...I understand that research trees are designed to add a strategic element to pacing the arms race of a game, but I get frustrated by non-intuitive research trees where I have to bounce all over the place to unlock what should be fairly intuitive capabilities.

So you're the instant gratification kind of person? Games like Quake and Doom probably suit you more.

I can see why some people would like this game...it definitely appeals to a certain niche market of the RTS 4x genre...as I have said before, I was hoping for Homeworld with a 4x component, not a traditional 4x game designed by former members of the Homeworld design team...oh well

The only thing that's not in Sins that's missing is a campaign/story. If those were there when it were released, people would likely bash it for being too much like a Homeworld ripoff (which isn't a bad thing either). And they're coming anyway, so it's moot.

All in all, you're entitled to your opinion though. I think it would be nice to see a freespace-esque MMO/FPS/RTS. Basically through every game together in one box, but the scope of that is so huge that it's not likely to happen in our lifetime. In the meantime, Sins rocks.

 

[ZzZGuy]

Originally posted by: Dman877
Anyone know how to set games to high resources with the 1.3 patch? They seem to have removed that option...

Never heard of this issue, best bet is to either email support or post on the technical forums
http://forums.sinsofasolarempire.com/forum/408

 

[stumben32]

Hey all.

I have been playing sins full version since release. I enjoy all types of RTSs, but one thing I never got into was online play and I think that might be the only thing holding me back from Giving Sins super high rating. In saying that, I am still enjoying it! I have been slowly playing single player games - each time cranking up the game size/#of AIs. Last one I beat was 3 AIs and me.

I loved Galactic CIV II and Stardock is a great company - they really listen to the players and they put out quality patch after patch and add content! Point being , I think that one of the reasons to give Sins a try is because of the level of support you will get. They WILL keep adding to and tweaking the game. I Would not be surprised if they give us new ships and abilities at some point.

Getting to the root of the game, really just from my personal enjoyment factor I would give it a solid 8.5 / 10. If I had time for multiplay - who knows that rating could go up or down.

This is still first and foremost a 4x game - but I like how they melded it with RTS elements. 4x are usually turn based and this is not. Yet the pace is very slow in the early goings. I could imagine how frantic it can get with many AIs as you progress.

On the surface - things start to look a bit simple and the Races seem a bit too similar. Each Race gets the exact same ship types ( in the same slots ) which from a broad standpoint do the same thing ( scout, long range, support cap ships.... ). But their abilities along with the tech tree really do create some interesting Strategical differences - they just dont jump out at you like Starcraft. ( Try pumping out Drone Hosts and researching fighter techs with the Advent! Fun stuff ).

On one hand, the battles could be more enjoyable to watch - but yet if you were like me and played Galactic Civ 2 - the fact that they have this many 4x elements with battles as good as they do is a treat.

I hope the game improves - I think it has potential. Some will like it, some wont.

 

[QuantumPion]

The game was really fun for me at first,k but once I learned how stupid the AI was and how easy it was to beat, I got to the point where I could take on 1v4 unfair AI's with no trouble. After the first 30 minutes of hectic combat, it was just a matter of building a big fleet and slowly crawling over the AI's planets, which I usually do at 8x time compression.

Competitive multiplayer might be fun, except there are only two categories of opponents online:
1) the experts that have been playing the beta for the past year, whom will wipe the floor with you, and
2) the total noobs that quit after the first 15 minutes because they don't know what they are doing.

 

[Starbuck1975]

Zooming doesn't increase the scope of anything.

Well it does to a certain extent...compare Supreme Commander to say Dawn of War...there is quite a difference in terms of the amount of real estate and units on any given map...so having a strategic zoom capability does increase the scope.

Common complaint, even by people who like the game. Big deal.

Well it is a big deal if you don't want to manage icons against a space backdrop.

Uh, it does? I believe just about every RTS out there (aside from Civ) has this limitation... it's called terrain. Starcraft, Warcraft, even Company of Heroes all have limited ways to get from point A to point B

Homeworld had no barriers...it was pure 3D space combat...and better RTS games have very few limitations, or rather craft their maps such that the barriers are transparent...CoH and Dawn of War are often hailed for removing many of these artificial barriers, creating a very challenging and dynamic tactical environment.

If you want a 3D space sim, you should have been looking at Freespace or Freelancer... NOT AN RTS GAME. You've just gone and compared apples to oranges.

Homeworld was a 3D space RTS.

As is the combat in any RTS on auto-pilot. Move units to location A, engage target B, relocate to location B... etc.

Not entirely true...sure the RTS games of old were all about massing forces and letting the game do the fighting, but the Total War series, CoH, and even Dawn of War have unit special abilities or tactical decision making requirements.

So you're the instant gratification kind of person? Games like Quake and Doom probably suit you more.

No, I just prefer intuitive tech trees.

The only thing that's not in Sins that's missing is a campaign/story. If those were there when it were released, people would likely bash it for being too much like a Homeworld ripoff (which isn't a bad thing either). And they're coming anyway, so it's moot.

I actually prefer sandbox games...even RTS games, with the exception of Homeworld, I will just play random maps against the AI.

 

[SunnyD]

Originally posted by: Starbuck1975

Homeworld had no barriers...it was pure 3D space combat...and better RTS games have very few limitations, or rather craft their maps such that the barriers are transparent...CoH and Dawn of War are often hailed for removing many of these artificial barriers, creating a very challenging and dynamic tactical environment.

Okay, I'll give you that somewhat (with homeworld). But it wasn't space combat - it was RTS space combat. Absolutely no difference, aside from the "scope" of your battlefield.

Homeworld was a 3D space RTS.

Again, the only difference with Homeworld and Sins is that in Homeworld you had more control over the Z-Axis. Big deal. An RTS is an RTS, the only difference is the "board" you play it on.

Not entirely true...sure the RTS games of old were all about massing forces and letting the game do the fighting, but the Total War series, CoH, and even Dawn of War have unit special abilities or tactical decision making requirements.

Many units in Sins have various tactical abilities, and I'm not just talking about capships. The main difference was the conscious decision the devs made in removing much of the tedium of micromanaging. I thank them for this, especially when you're looking at fleet battles consisting of hundreds of units at the same time. I personally don't want to have to click on my mothership's shield ability, 6 cruisers' special attack ability, my support cruisers' damage mitigation ability, etc., every 10 seconds.

I actually prefer sandbox games...even RTS games, with the exception of Homeworld, I will just play random maps against the AI.

Then I fail to see why Sins is such a failure in your eyes. But again, to each their own.

 

[Starbuck1975]

I wouldn't mind if you just didn't like the damn game, but you expect sins to be a copy of what you already know and are upset that it is something different.

No. I disagree with a few design decisions, that, IMO, take away from the gameplay experience.

I am amazed you learned how to play total war, it seems that somewhere between then and now you lost the will to learn new games with new things and expect all other games to be a copy of what you already know or it is crap. You want more of the same and have no interest in learning anything new.

It is not a question of learning something new...there is a learning curve with every game...the question remains, does the gameplay experience compel you to continue through the learning curve or bore/frustrate you to the extent that you stop playing?

And with me now flaming you, this will be the last reply to your opinions as I have made my point and any further discussion will just be pure flaming.

As I mentioned earlier, it is just a game...I really don't understand why some gamers get so defensive about criticisms against their personal favorite. But I think my disappointments with the gameplay are legitimate.

 

[ZzZGuy]

@QuantumPion

Sounds like you should join a clan or simply try and organize a match through the Multiplayer board on the sins forums. There is also a IRC chat that has some people in it form time to time that you can see about getting together with people with the same skill level as you.

 

[Malladine]

Originally posted by: Starbuck1975

I wouldn't mind if you just didn't like the damn game, but you expect sins to be a copy of what you already know and are upset that it is something different.

No. I disagree with a few design decisions, that, IMO, take away from the gameplay experience.

I am amazed you learned how to play total war, it seems that somewhere between then and now you lost the will to learn new games with new things and expect all other games to be a copy of what you already know or it is crap. You want more of the same and have no interest in learning anything new.

It is not a question of learning something new...there is a learning curve with every game...the question remains, does the gameplay experience compel you to continue through the learning curve or bore/frustrate you to the extent that you stop playing?

And with me now flaming you, this will be the last reply to your opinions as I have made my point and any further discussion will just be pure flaming.

As I mentioned earlier, it is just a game...I really don't understand why some gamers get so defensive about criticisms against their personal favorite. But I think my disappointments with the gameplay are legitimate.

good responses man, each to his own

 

[SunnyD]

Incoming expansion! Campaign mode! More Races! YAY!

 

[BladeVenom]

That's good news, although it would be nice if they included some more info.

 

[Dman877]

This game needs some multi-threaded love. Huge game = chugage.

 

[SunnyD]

Originally posted by: Dman877
This game needs some multi-threaded love. Huge game = chugage.

You need more RAM if you're playing on your sig-rig. Possibly a slightly better video card too.