StarDestroyer.Net BBS

http://pc.ign.com/articles/606/606597p1.html

http://pc.ign.com/articles/606/606988p1.html

Too...much...drooling...for...words...

I see VICTORIES!!!!!

wonder if there will be Venators

Empire at War is starting to disappoint me. In the same game, we have shield-piercing torpedos and planetary shields that can't enclose their own generators. Sounds like revolting rock-paper-scissors game design at its very worst.

Sounds like game balance at cost of realism.

Come on, who but the ubernerds will be complaining if it doesn't list turbolasers at multi-gigaton yields and explicitly label the domes as sensors?

Nitpicking is one thing. Complete ignorance of the mechanics of the universe, and insistence of phenomenally stupid engineering is another.

I can find you a half dozen Star Trek games that do the same thing...

Jesus, quit the bitching already, it looks great. The game isn't out yet, it sounds like it's a balance issue anyway, and if push comes to shove this is the EXACT reason why mods flourish. How the hell can anyone be disappointed by this when there has never been an enjoyable SW RTS, period?

I am disappointed there isn't a fucking SW TBS. Fuck RTS, that's just for the popcorn crowd who want to see AT-ATs demolish Rebel bases. I want a goddamn empire builder. Something like MoO3, if only it didn't suck.

They had a Turn Based Strategy already. Star Wars Rebellion.
*wince*

Exactly.

White Haven wrote:Nitpicking is one thing. Complete ignorance of the mechanics of the universe, and insistence of phenomenally stupid engineering is another.

And it's clearly a game balance thing. No, it doesn't make sense from an engineering perspective, but doing it the "right" way would be a huge mistake in a game where one side is always the clear defender. Put the generators inside the shield, and half your games are going to end up with the attackers stuck helplessly on the outside until someone gives up and disconnects in frustration.

As it is, shields sound useful but not overpowering. They can provide some defense, and force an enemy to fight on your terms (to kill the generator). Anything more would disrupt game balance too much.

lPeregrine wrote:

White Haven wrote:Nitpicking is one thing. Complete ignorance of the mechanics of the universe, and insistence of phenomenally stupid engineering is another.

And it's clearly a game balance thing. No, it doesn't make sense from an engineering perspective, but doing it the "right" way would be a huge mistake in a game where one side is always the clear defender. Put the generators inside the shield, and half your games are going to end up with the attackers stuck helplessly on the outside until someone gives up and disconnects in frustration.

Only if the designers are dead-set on a rigid rock-paper-scisors combat system and can't figure out any other way to balance it.

As it is, shields sound useful but not overpowering. They can provide some defense, and force an enemy to fight on your terms (to kill the generator). Anything more would disrupt game balance too much.

Unless they allow shields to be defeatable in another manner, say with focused fire on specific sections, or temporarily bringing them down and then either targetting the generators or destroying it before they go back up and recharge. It's not set in stone to be heavily disadvantaged versus an obvious strategy. Plenty of tactical combat games have featured shielded ships and bases shielded without resorting to a tired-old WEG-invented brainbug.

It looks like it has potential to be fun, but a lot of stuff I see there just seems like another pulp RTS for people who want to see their favorite stuff on parade.

Well one thin (probaly the only thing) SW:Battlegrounds got right is how defeat shields (bring them down with heavy firepower and then destroy the generator(s) before the shield recharge (of course only double the HP of a unit, so they aren't bad thing)

White Haven wrote:Nitpicking is one thing. Complete ignorance of the mechanics of the universe, and insistence of phenomenally stupid engineering is another.

So Age of Empires should have had people dying the first time they got stabbed by a sword and their first arrow hit, right?

Ships should have started taking water immediately after they took damage...
buildings should have burned up after they caught fire...
priests shouldn't be able to heal...
etc.

Game balance overrides realism sometimes.

No. Rock paper scissors, which my learned colleague has suggested, is utter rubbish wherever it is found. If this game has fighters that kill caps and planetary shields that can't shrug off 'any bombardment' then, quite simply, it isn't a SW game. It's another carbon-copy RTS.

The cap ships will typically have their shields up, forcing you to get up close with torpedoes (since the shields block energy-based weapons but not projecticles).

This idiocy makes my head hurt. Would it truly have been so difficult to give the capital ships a shield bar that will deplete based on the volume of fire they absorb? And after that the hull and the stuff you can disable on it. That would have been smart and true to the universe, this is just bullshit.

The best part is that through the new stats on heat dissipation, the game mechanics for shield performance writes themselves. But no, lets have hitpoints, and shield-penetrating torpedeos, etc. When you can say 'these guys never saw the movie', you know it's going to suck.

Hopefully they give those of us who actually buy it a set of mod tools so we can change it all.

Yeah, let's hope they release some decent mod-tools for it.

WOAH- lookie here!



I spy...
From left to right...
1 INTERDICTOR!
1 Acclamator
1 ISD
1 VICTORY SD!

In fact, I see a LOT of EU stuff in the screenshots. TIE Crawler, Assualt Frigate, Interdictors, Corellian Gunships, etc...

Wait a sec...
http://pcmedia.ign.com/pc/image/article ... 521766.jpg

Are those...SCIMITARS? Sweet! But didn't those not come along until Thrawn?

A nice closeup/size comparison of ISD, VSD, and Interdictor:
http://pcmedia.ign.com/pc/image/article ... 858603.jpg

I'm happy

Ew, Tie crawlers. Vile little buggers. It's like putting an F-15 on tank treads.

I know, ridiculous idea. But still cool to see EU stuff.

Praxis wrote:Wait a sec...
http://pcmedia.ign.com/pc/image/article ... 521766.jpg

Are those...SCIMITARS? Sweet! But didn't those not come along until Thrawn?

What Scimitars? I see Scouts, Bombers, and Fighters.

Captain tycho wrote:Yeah, let's hope they release some decent mod-tools for it.

This is LucasArts. I don't think they've ever supported mods or modmakers.

Alan Bolte wrote:

Praxis wrote:Wait a sec...
http://pcmedia.ign.com/pc/image/article ... 521766.jpg

Are those...SCIMITARS? Sweet! But didn't those not come along until Thrawn?

What Scimitars? I see Scouts, Bombers, and Fighters.

What the heck is a TIE Scout?

The things on the left look somewhat like Scimitar Assualt Bombers.