Izaroke

Reply to Naval tactics in the modern age and why I think they are misrepresented in Sins. in Everything Else Sins Forums

[quote who="PeskyFly" reply="13" id="1903062"] quoting post Hey! I posted that link a long time ago in this thread. I never got a prize.[/quote] You get a karma from me for the link along with the naval tactics discussion, you were actually able to explain the thing I wanted to intelligently and succinctly. Cykur, yeah i realise a game were a single mistake would likely result in game over is probably not going to have the biggest audience, but I think the

Reply to Naval tactics in the modern age and why I think they are misrepresented in Sins. in Everything Else Sins Forums

Yeah its an excellant explanation of the limitations of fighters and what actual space combat might look like. He is also a much better writer than me. Honestly is someone came up with a game sort of like silent hunter(in terms of depth) but based off of a realistic interpertation of space combat I would snap that up in a second.

Reply to Naval tactics in the modern age and why I think they are misrepresented in Sins. in Everything Else Sins Forums

Go here http://www.projectrho.com/rocket/rocket3x.html and read the section about fighters it explains things a whole lot better than I could. Also remember a ship equipped with nukes in space is only constrained by its sensors and honestly anything big in space is going to light up like a christmas tree. So fighters bombers etc lose that range advantage for protecting the carrier ship. Also remember no horizon in space so

Reply to Absolutely pathetic in Technical Sins Forums

Well yes CC and act of war may be different but you have to take into account the amount of changes that tend to be in stardock patches, just look at the patch notes multiple changes to A.I., the network code and HUD not to mention the variety of changes made to ship stats and gameplay. That many changes and compatibility is an issue.

Reply to MINI-DUMP RANTS in Technical Sins Forums

[quote]i read about that edix and they didnt want peole ranting there and why should i have to do their job. I paid them to do it and im sick of it. Im entitled to be frusterated and not get flamed for it. If anything they should be kissing my ass.[/quote] Err no, you bought a game not the right to say whatever you want on the forums of said game and have everybody agree with you. You also did not buy the right to be abusive or flame the makers of the game.

Reply to The diplomacy game. Want to be a bastard? in Strategy Sins Forums

If it's a FFA game then anything goes, the entire point of a diplomacy system like we have. The most basic thing is never ever trust anyone you don't know in real life and even those people should only be trusted as much as absolutely necessary. The point of the game after all is to win, and yes have fun doing it. However if you are in a FFA game you should expect that everyone is going to be working to achieve victory, however they can. As long as you choose to play games without locke

Reply to Released premature in Galactic Civilizations II GalCiv2 Forums

Generally speaking, if you wish what you have to say to be taken seriously you probably shouldn't start a post by insulting everyone that disagrees with you. Just as a general rule if you go in with an attitude that everyone else is a moron and you are more than happy to tell them that, you won't get listened to regardless of the actual content of you message. Anyhoo, I think part of the problem here is that the OP didn't give a good account