Sakhari

Right now, I prefer Sins simply because I haven't been playing it as long. They're both excellent but very different games. World in Conflict is a fast-paced tactial cluster#@!^ with emphasis solely on combat. No base building (technically, there's extremely limited use of static structures but they're more speedbumps than anything). 'Very' limited resource management. You simply put your units on the field, drop tactical aids like artillery and nukes where they'll do the most good,

I'm not sure I see the point of this... especially if it's going to be as costly a feature as you're making it sound. Perhaps I'm just not visualizing this properly but if you can't fire through it, isn't this thing going to be just as likely to get in your way as it is to annoy your opponent? At best, it's just going to function as a stalling mechanism (I assume this thing isn't going to be invincible) which is pretty much what the current defenses are doing already. Also, wh

On the tactical note, you may not need much in the way of tactics against the AI (especially the pirates, which are a neutral faction) but there is most certainly room for micromanagement against actual people. Like most games in the RTS category, the AI isn't going to give you a very accurate picture of how to play effectively. It has no idea how to use the strengths of the units effectively so you can get away with playing a very lax tactical game. Competent people aren't going to g

Returning Armada is an autocast ability of the phase gates. If you don't want it to give you ships, just click on your phase gates and turn the ability off (by right-clicking on the armada icon). Keep in mind that even if you don't want the ships, you can scuttle them for free resources.

If you pick an appropriately small map, a 30-60 minute game isn't rare at all. You may not get terribly high on the tech tree (or depending on how aggressive the players are, maybe you will) but you can have a decent game in that time.

[quote]It is still very willing to abandon strategically important worlds (and even it's Homeworld until you begin to bombard it).[/quote] So far, coming back once you start bombing the homeworld is the only major difference I've seen consistently. Before the patch, the AI would generally just run with its fleet, even when you were taking down its homeworld, until it had nowhere left to go. Ultimately, it still seems to run for the hills whenever I get anywhere near it so, n

Research the 'long range jumps' (may not be the exact name but it shouldn't be hard to find) item in the civilian branch and you'll be able to jump from one star to another. You won't actually see a phase lane but if you click on another star, your ships will make the jump.

Not to mention that all of the current defenses are completely independent of your fleet capacity. I'm all for more options and wouldn't argue if they wanted to add one for more defensive structures or power but I don't think it's something the game necessarily 'needs'. They do exactly what they're supposed to do in their current form.

At the bottom/middle of the UI, there's a slim, striped little button that you can click to scuttle whatever you currently have highlighted. You'll get a small portion of your resources back for doing this.

If you use a cap ship that offers bonuses or abilities tailored to sieging planets, you'll get plenty of planet-bombing punch on top of having a very capable fighter with other useful abilities. Siege frigates can't do anything worthwhile besides bombing. Capital ships can handle themselves in any situation including helping to destroy everything else orbiting the planet (which, as I said, are also targets of high value)and are far less likely to wind up being experience for the othe

[quote]Actually, the problem was although Siege were easy enough to kill, it took more effort to kill them than it did to build another wave.[/quote] I'm not sure I follow... They don't fight back in any way worth mentioning and they cost a mountain of resources and fleet points (even before the recent nerf) to make waves of. Sure, they might knock a planet away from someone who's not paying attention but if you take out the fleet, the owner of that fleet is out all those resources and

[quote]wait, I thought that the PJIs have limited range?[/quote] They do but that range is generally enough to cover one or two phase lanes and they stall ships quite a bit longer than they used to. They also take 2 slots instead of 3 now. And during that stall, the ships don't fight back so hangar defenses pretty much have free reign.

[quote]the only thing they seem to be good for is buying time till my fleet arrives[/quote] Which is precisely what they're supposed to be good for. I wouldn't argue against improvements but as has been said a million times around this forum, they aren't supposed to be single-handedly stopping fleets. They exist to buy you time. Plus, unless we're talking about LRM frigates that were staying out of range and not getting shot at all, 10 frigates shouldn't have a chanc

If you look around, there's plenty of constructive criticism on this board. You're not being singled out for disliking the game. You're being singled out for pretending to discuss but offering nothing to talk about. There's really not much to say in response to comments like 'it's a mediocre game' with no specific gripes behind it. And yes, there are plenty of sycophants around who will trash you regardless of what you say but that's no different from any other official forum.

This is fixed in 1.03. I'm not sure if it was a bug or if it was a problem with the way culture was calculated (taking enemy culture rates into account whether your own culture was covering the whole map or not) but whatever it was, it's a lot easier to get that achievement after the patch. I had it in one game with the Advent and I wasn't even trying for it.

Following that, he said: [quote]Obviously, post-release we have a much bigger sample set and the overall concensus is people want it changed - so it will be. This is the type of support you get from Ironclad and we've been doing it from the start: we listen to what people have to say and actually make fundamental changes in the game based on their input.[/quote] ... Which means that they liked it the way it was when it shipped but they're changing it because quite a few of thei

[quote]So just what is this elusive concept call "balance"[/quote] Balance is going to mean different things to different people. For some, it's a statistical nightmare that will involve no faction being able to get ahead of another in any conceivable way at a given stage in the game. This sort of balance is an endless struggle and in all my years of gaming, I've never seen a game reach this in a way that made everyone happy. For others like myself, it's simply a matter of

Has 'rip-off' been a common complaint around here?

If someone were to claim that Starcraft or Age of Empires were 4X hybrid games, I could have just as easily had this conversation. If Blizzard wants to call its next Warcraft RTS a 'tactical Ork-smasher,' that'd be fine and all but if it looks and plays like an RTS, I'm still going to wonder why (beyond simple marketing) they bothered to make the distinction. Especially when someone makes a thread that's supposed to be explaining that distinction.

[quote]But when are you concidered a good or descent player?[/quote] It depends. Who exactly are you trying to impress? People are going to decide whether they think you're a good player based on what you say around here (or do in a game with other people). There's no set standard.

[quote]I still don't understand why SoaSE isn't 4X.[/quote] If it is, I don't understand why Warcraft, Age of Empires, Rise of Nations, and dozens of others aren't 4X titles. Those 4X's are factors of play in each of those games to some degree.

[quote]« not a 4x game » ![/quote] I don't think this thread is going to go much further down that road until we clearly define what '4X' actually means and why this game fits the bill because frankly, while I don't feel it plays quite like Starcraft, I agree with pretty much everything Hunting just said. If Dawn of War divided damage enhancement research into 15 separate upgrades, would it have a research tree worthy of being called '4X'? Are Rise of Nations/Legends 4X titles because

I don't know... the AI still runs from me constantly and in several games, it's just sat there accumulating credits although, if nothing else, it doesn't seem to be hemhorraging resources on siege frigates quite so often. Anyway, as was said, most of the complaints are either about the market and the usual balance issues. Since the AI rarely puts together an efficient fleet or bothers to use one properly, a few credits on frigate cost 'x' and a point or two to frigate regen rate 'y' ar

[quote]- Which alternate victory conditions would you include? And how would they affect gameplay? If you added a certain research victory, for example, I'd be pretty cheesed if you won the game by researching some abstract technology while my fleet is wiping out your planets. I'm not even sure how you would be able to stop someone, because we can't actually interrupt the research process of another player.[/quote] Well, if we're going to entertain rough ideas in this thread, I'd like t

[quote]Decisions like the size of your attacking force and defending force have to be taken into account. Fleet composition has to be considered.[/quote] I don't see how that's different from a free-for-all in any other RTS. Aside from being 'bigger'.