Cykur

Yes, it was 3 jumps, but two of the jumps are almost right angles and don't take long to traverse. The final time I was showing Sagewon he could defend from me, I sent the Migrator immediately and it was arriving just as the technology was finishing being researched. 2 jumps or 3, it was near the limit of how soon an Orky could be built. The other thing I demonstrated was that there is quite a margin of safety...you don't HAVE to be completely prepared as lon

If the Vasari player gets a head start on the Orkie, neither TEC nor Advent can stop him. A superior player may indeed successfully rush you, but I just don't understand why you say TEC can stop the rush and Advent can't. TEC does have some advantages because they usually have LRM pretty quickly and can start rolling them out soon while the Advent must rely on Disciples because they won't have Illuminators or carriers immediately. TEC also has Marza as a first sh

Disciples are just fine at stopping an Orkie being built...you just need more of them because they are a bit smaller than LF's. Just ignore the egg and lose the asteroid. As long as the Vasari player scraps or loses the Orkie, he loses more in resources than the cost of your asteroid, at which point you hunt down the egg with the Disciples since it won't have much backup due to the cost of the Orkie.

[quote who="Chibiabos" reply="14" id="3358602"] Sins is okay ... but TBH its too un-micromanageable. Probably my biggest thorn with it is the fact that ships can slow down and stop, or even just stop dead in their tracks (inertia be damned) if they cast certain abilities, but they are never allowed to turn around while stopped, so you can't quickly assess "oh $#!t, this planet has too many defenders, I need to get my fleet outta here" ... instead your ships have to basic

Yeah, I didn't even try to play SC2 for this reason. I can micro reasonably well if I force myself, but my hands can't take it for too long, and I don't feel like crippling myself. This is why I loved to play Sins when it came out, it is a nice balance of micro and macro style play. I just don't feel the need to compete with all the kids giving themselves carpal tunnel.

The story was dumb and very contrived -- there were so many plot holes...was very disappointed. Tom did a great job carrying and the other acting was decent. The movie was gorgeous to watch. Doesn't make up for the stupid movie premise. I guess the studios figure that as long as they hit all the emotional beats, no one will notice a bad story.

[quote who="petrasvu" reply="29" id="3347825"] Quoting Cykur, reply 25I just started playing the beta a bit, and I too noticed the "swarm" mechanic seems to allow the bigger team in a fight to snowball a win really quickly if they have the numbers or the initiative... With bigger and more initiative team you simply cant looze with or withouth swarm mechanics (assuming you are doing rational choices after all). So removing it in this particular ex

I certainly don't think the same promotion path is best for every hero, but I do think you will end up with cookie cutter builds. I guess a lot of people really hated the randomized promotions, but I never found I had any problems making good heroes....there was always a couple good things to pick. I really prefer the randomized method, but it seems I'm in the minority?

My initial thoughts on LH after having played a while with the 0.80 build. I like Heroes are acquired via Fame now. I haven't quite decided if I like the timing of the heroes arrival, maybe it would be nice to have some randomization to when they show up so you didn't always KNOW a certain building was going to net you a hero. I don't like The swarm mechanic....it is too easy to abuse. It i

I just started playing the beta a bit, and I too noticed the "swarm" mechanic seems to allow the bigger team in a fight to snowball a win really quickly if they have the numbers or the initiative. The mechanic seems too powerful, but I completely admit I have to play a bit more to get a feel for it. My initial thoughts are that the AI isn't going to use it as effectively as the player allowing it to be an easily abused mechanic. Maybe just have a simple "flanking" bonu

I was also shocked when my SOTS2 purchase from Impulse launched the Steam installer. I just don't like Steam because it is both invasive and takes control away from how you manage your software. I don't want to be logged in and tracked to play a game on my home computer. And while it is true that you can turn steam off while you play SOTS2, it requires Steam to launch. At one point I was trying to launch SOTS2 and Steam reported that "This game is not current

I would agree that the game is still in some kind of unfinished beta state. I was patient with the bungled launch (seriously though, compiling the wrong version of the game for launch day is pathetically sad), but even after the initial patch the game has so many problems and feels unfinished. Even beyond its unfinished state, I'm concerned about the added level of complexity with the fleet management system. Maybe it will make end-game fleet management easier, but for

Nice chart....did the Jikara Navigator have its command point reduced to 2? I haven't played in a while and don't have Sins installed to check.... Anyhow, I don't think most of the imbalances are going to cause much effect except for the one on LRF. Even if Cielo's to Guardians are really imbalanced, by the stage of game you are seeing them (if you even see them) they aren't going to have a big impact. Still, it would be good to see it all make sense. LRF on

All games are simulations and most require some sort of strategy, but we create more specific classifications to group similiar games. I tend to think of Simulations as more open ended where a big part of the enjoyment in the game is just watching how the pieces interact and behave. Sims is definately a simulation...there is a reason it is named such. Strategy tends to be more goal oriented, more about defeating an enemy. Sins is a type of RTS. There are definate

Did they can it already? I played it for a couple days in beta and was also very unimpressed. I have no clue what they were thinking -- they marketed the game as an MMO, but it played much more like a standalone game, and not a very good one at that. I wouldn't have played it for free, much less pay for it.

The thing people have to remember is Civ IV combat is not tactical, it is high level general combat between armies. If you use the units in the way they are intended, you almost never lose. If you have tanks you also have artillery that can soften up an entrenched position. If you come across some elite medieval units that are entrenched in a fort on a hill across a river, just soften them up with a couple artillery attacks first, and you will roll right over them. I t

[quote]Randomness may or may not be good, but it was ludicrous when macemen and longbowmen would destroy my stack of tanks in civ...[/quote] I remember stuff like this more from Civ I than from Civ IV. I have a fond memory from Civ I where my Battleship was cruising along a coast and I spotted a Phalanx on a hill. I attacked the Phalanx and my Battleship sunk. You can still have some improbable victories in Civ IV, but nothing like earlier versions of

[quote]lol, but it's still only an unfair AI. One level 6 Marza can toast its fleet repeatedly.[/quote] Oh, heck no! You misunderstand, I make us fight an equal number of Unfair AI's....or maybe have them outnumber us if I have a 2nd skilled. 5 Unfair AI vs myself and 4 noobs has proven quite entertaining before.

Hey Jinx! Ok...just wanted to make sure it wasn't something I had to tweak on my end. I have actually gotten a couple games in, but you have to make an awful lot of attempts before one works. I'm sure they will get it resolved soon enough...