Anyone play Sins of a Solar Empire?

[Tolya]

What pissed me off in Sins was a particular situation, in which the AI runs away from a battle if he thinks he is set to lose.

Normally. this is the logical thing to do, but there are times when you just whore your massive fleet around looking for engagement. And find none, because everyone just scatters.

And then the AI sends a one unit rush of world destroyers upon your core world and the HUGE defense grid made up from countless hangars and orbital guns is just pointless, because they will blow up your shielded colony anyway.

Lack of proper balance killed this otherwise nice game.

[Straha]

What I find particularly sad about that is the whole 'movement is a bit slow, so it's STRATEGIC' thing. Building ships still takes 25s. Powers still refresh in 30s. Mining still takes place per second. The only way in which it's 'slow paced' or 'strategic' is because the damn ships are so fucking slow. Unlike games like Conquest with linked maps, it doesn't actually matter if you get cut off from your systems - your fleet was pretty much expendable anyway, and by the time it's run around blowing shit up and avoiding the enemy's fleets you've built another one at 30s/ship anyway.

Hilariously, Conquest had a) bigger maps, so more driving, b) the larger ships were even slower, and c) supply lines, so you couldn't rampage around for long before your guns stopped working and d) bigger ships took longer to build so losing them was more significant. 10 year old game wins again! And Conquest was NOTHING but 'Starcraft in space but with linked maps', the races were even zerg/protoss/terran!

Conquest was a great game though. It had its faults (the single player campaign), but aside it was such a fantastic game. I remember showing it to a friend of mine who likes strategy games, I'd just loaded a saved game and was showing him my fleet as it was attacking an enemy system and then the AI attacked the middle of my supply chain so I pulled out. My friend was confused why, so I explained to him the supply system and how I have to maintain and protect a supply chain that gets longer and longer in order to keep my units as usable. The look of wonder on his face was... perfect. Even now I love to just start a single player quick battle mission against two Impossible AIs and just play it, even if it does take hours to finish. Hotfoot was actually the person who introduced it to me, and I can't thank him enough for it.

(Also, irrelevant side note, my sig comes from that. I went on a very very long rampage against a celareon AI and it 'chatted' that line. I cracked up laughing for a minute and used it. I'd read the Ellison story before but I didn't like it that much, but the use in game was perfect I thought.)

[Stark]

Conquest is great - it's just a shame it was never balanced or finished. If you're not Terran you lose, if you get a few dreadnoughts with invincibility shield near a planet with 3 supply bases you literally cannot be killed. With a bit of balance and modern graphics, I'd buy it again, and it'd be better than Sins.

[Fire Fly]

What is this "Conquest" game and why have I never heard of it? Googling turns up too many options and I'm not sure which one is this Conquest you guys keep talking about.

[Adrian McNair]

What is this "Conquest" game and why have I never heard of it? Googling turns up too many options and I'm not sure which one is this Conquest you guys keep talking about.

It's actually called Conquest: Frontier Wars. Here is some more information about it.

I did find it to be enjoyable, but the single player campaign was an exercise in frustration. I still haven't been able to complete it to this day primarily because the 13th mission was practically impossible.

The enemy could warp into any point of the system with impunity (after a while they sent two to three separate battlegroups to various areas of the map simultaneously), making mobile defence fleets mandatory. But the system was massive, meaning that multiple fleets were needed. Unfortunately, the ridiculously low unit cap prevents you from adequately reinforcing your territory. Short of cheats, I don't see how that mission can be completed. Has anyone on this board ever finished it?

Personally, I don't know what Stark is on about. If any faction was overpowered in that game it was the Mantis with their Tiamat supercarriers. One of those can cripple a bog-standard, unenhanced Terran Dreadnaught in seconds.

Sure, the Dreadnaughts are great force multipliers with their Aegis (Invincibility) shield ability, but they're only effective if you've got a decent supply line. Otherwise, they can rapidly become combat ineffective.

[Straha]

What is this "Conquest" game and why have I never heard of it? Googling turns up too many options and I'm not sure which one is this Conquest you guys keep talking about.

"Conquest: Frontier Wars" a game that was in development hell forever, finally came out years delayed and yet still incomplete. However it was laden with features that should have been incorporated into every RTS since (unit supplies, supply lines, organizable fleets with different specialized admirals, and up to sixteen simultaneous maps in one game) that made the game one of the most challenging and enjoyable.

The game's Amazon page, Dr. Wikipedia on the game, and a forum for the game.

The sole single player campaign is absolute complete and utter shit. But it is without peer in just loading it up and playing a custom battle. Also multiplayer with other people is one of the best game experiences I've ever had. (On that note, if there are enough people from here that still have the game would anyone be up for a game or two of Conquest?)

[Adrian McNair]

The sole single player campaign is absolute complete and utter shit. But it is without peer in just loading it up and playing a custom battle. Also multiplayer with other people is one of the best game experiences I've ever had. (On that note, if there are enough people from here that still have the game would anyone be up for a game or two of Conquest?)

I certainly would be willing. It's been a while since I've had a match against a human opponent in, well, any game.

[Stark]

Personally, I don't know what Stark is on about. If any faction was overpowered in that game it was the Mantis with their Tiamat supercarriers. One of those can cripple a bog-standard, unenhanced Terran Dreadnaught in seconds.

Sure, the Dreadnaughts are great force multipliers with their Aegis (Invincibility) shield ability, but they're only effective if you've got a decent supply line. Otherwise, they can rapidly become combat ineffective.

Playing a RTS singleplayer is always crap.

And Tiamats require a) intel to direct fighters at range b) heaps of money and c) die to absolutely anything, like a cloaked missile squad. Having your best ship not be gun heavy meant one mistake and your entire fleet was utterly annihilated, and Tiamats have zero ability to break DN blockades (whereas the Celaron at least can jump around blockades). If you can manage their carriers, the Zerg are okayish, particularly at the start, but unless they can sieze a choke and stop their super-vulnerable carriers getting constantly raped (ps they can't) they're doomed. Their battleship (the bird of prey) thing is complete shit, so any direct fight results in the Zerg getting raped. The Celarons can nearly match the humans in a direct fight, have better strategic mobility, and have almost-decent defences. Don't even start me on micro to totally defeat bombers by toggling shields long enough to track down and kill Tiamats.

Every game I've ever played results in chokes with planets near wormholes being surrounded to the rear by 24/7 invincible dreads and ion cannons. Cloaked missile ships can slip through and try to mess up supplies, but even without 24/7 invincibility dreads still beat pretty much anything except Tiamat bombers (assuming their out of LOS of the dreads). The game's lack of faction balance (the zerg and celarons are clearly unfinished) and huge UI is the only thing stopping it being still a good game.

Conquest and Kohan are basically the watershed for RTS becoming unimaginate shit, which is kinda sad.

[Adrian McNair]

*SNIP*

My post was based solely on my experiences with the single player campaign where the AI cheats to an almost desperate degree and has no restrictions placed upon it.

As a matter of fact, I haven't played any multiplayer matches of Conquest at all, so the fact that Mantis carrier fleets (or their Battleships being a pushover for that matter. They were always damage sinks in the campaign) are weak is a bit of an eye-opener.

[Stark]

Wow, really? You are 100% missing out. The campaign is silliness incarnate (lol antimatter fences) but multi is really cool. You'll get a few games maybe before the problems surface, and then it'll just be human-human conflicts, but it's still fun by virtue of the multi-map system.

And you're right about the Tiamat bombers; without aegis, I think 3 Tiamat worth of bombers can kill a DN in one pass. Thing is, you can micro the shield to minimise supply use and once you find them they're utter toast - a six-pack of missile cruisers is good for that. They're very useful but very vulnerable, and it's so much easier for the humans to just steamroll with invincible DNs.

EDIT - really, even Conquest skirmish is great. The AI is a bit ropey and the max unit limit is a bit low for the larger maps, but it's a lot of fun regardless.

[Adrian McNair]

Wow, really? You are 100% missing out. The campaign is silliness incarnate (lol antimatter fences) but multi is really cool. You'll get a few games maybe before the problems surface, and then it'll just be human-human conflicts, but it's still fun by virtue of the multi-map system.

Oh, I do agree with you on the campaign, but are there still any games to be had? I know that there's only one active forum and the official site no longer even exists.

And you're right about the Tiamat bombers; without aegis, I think 3 Tiamat worth of bombers can kill a DN in one pass. Thing is, you can micro the shield to minimise supply use and once you find them they're utter toast - a six-pack of missile cruisers is good for that. They're very useful but very vulnerable, and it's so much easier for the humans to just steamroll with invincible DNs.

From what I can remember, it only took about 3 or more squadrons of Tiamat bombers to obliterate a DN.

[Stark]

I think it depends on relative levels of research; I've definately seen those bombers blow the shit out of non-invincible dreads, but you need to micro them to kill each in turn.

I don't play pub games; there aren't many servers and the crazy people who've been playing for 10 years have wierdo house rules. I just organise games among my friends if I want to play.

[Fire Fly]

Hmm, I might go ahead and give Conquest a try; lots of copies floating around Ebay. I've been really itching to find a new strategy game to play but I've been really disappointed with the latest batch.

-Sins of a Solar Empire: Boo, not very fun and needs lots of overhaul to make it a better game.

-Homeworld 2: I finally got it and its fun but I can't get the Warlords mod to work. Its only real flaw is lack of a conquest type campaign mode.

-Supreme Commander: Its ok; generic strategy game with build lots and then rush. I'm tired of Star Craft redux.

-Hearts of Iron Anthology: I've gotten tired of it.

-EU Rome: Tired of it; lacks staying power.

-Even Medieval and Rome TW aren't doing it for me anymore.

The PC strategy genre seems completely dead right now, for the last few years at least.

[Hotfoot]

Fire Fly, have you played World in Conflict and Company of Heroes? They're more Modern/Historical, but they're a good bit of fun.

[Adrian Laguna]

I did find it to be enjoyable, but the single player campaign was an exercise in frustration. I still haven't been able to complete it to this day primarily because the 13th mission was practically impossible.

I loved Conquest's single player campaign. Though admittedly it was a bit repetitive since my strategy was basically to make a giant fleet, expend it conquering the next system over, then rinse and repeat. I beat the whole thing... well except for the very last mission, which I never even started.

I remember I had a bit of trouble with the 13th Mission, but I wouldn't say it was frustrating or impossible. In fact, I have fond memories of it, especially the British Admiral's inspiring speech at the beginning.

[DocHorror]

To be honest I found Sins to be a poor remake of Ascendancy. Fancy graphics don't hide the fact that the game mechanics are nearly identical.

[Stark]

To be honest I found Sins to be a poor remake of Ascendancy. Fancy graphics don't hide the fact that the game mechanics are nearly identical.

Except it's actually WORSE because Ascendency had more interesting technologies, better ship designs, and effective defences.

Fire Fly, Hotfoot is right. If you're done with old strategy games, WiC and CoH are the places to go.

[DocHorror]

To be honest I found Sins to be a poor remake of Ascendancy. Fancy graphics don't hide the fact that the game mechanics are nearly identical.

Except it's actually WORSE because Ascendency had more interesting technologies, better ship designs, and effective defences.

Fire Fly, Hotfoot is right. If you're done with old strategy games, WiC and CoH are the places to go.

Agreed. I played the shit out of Ascendancy over the course of 97-98. Sins doesn't have half the gameplay of a 10 year old game. Thinking back I think ship/fleet combat was actually better. Being able to kit out your ships with the latest death rays rocked.

[Straha]

As a matter of fact, I haven't played any multiplayer matches of Conquest at all, so the fact that Mantis carrier fleets (or their Battleships being a pushover for that matter. They were always damage sinks in the campaign) are weak is a bit of an eye-opener.

In multiplayer and skirmish they're weak as all heck. Their one advantage is that if the AI has a fleet of fleet carriers and Tiamats they can take you by surprise with their fighter fleet, utterly destroy a number of ships (I've lost more flagship Dreadnoughts that way than any other way) and then flee. Once you've found them, though, they're dead. One tempest charge destroys Fleet Carriers and Scout Carriers, and the only thing which can prolong the life of a Tiamat is its gravity well, and that'll only keep it alive for so long.

That being said, play skirmish mode. It's the most fun I've ever had with an RTS since Warcraft II. It makes all the money that you pay to buy the game worth it. And multiplayer (both against humans and co-op against AI) is even more fun.

Rather than drag this thread even more off topic I started this: http://bbs.stardestroyer.net/viewtopic.php?p=2853270 to co-ordinate multiplayer games.

[RIPP_n_WIPE]

Hmm, I might go ahead and give Conquest a try; lots of copies floating around Ebay. I've been really itching to find a new strategy game to play but I've been really disappointed with the latest batch.

-Sins of a Solar Empire: Boo, not very fun and needs lots of overhaul to make it a better game.

-Homeworld 2: I finally got it and its fun but I can't get the Warlords mod to work. Its only real flaw is lack of a conquest type campaign mode.

-Supreme Commander: Its ok; generic strategy game with build lots and then rush. I'm tired of Star Craft redux.

-Hearts of Iron Anthology: I've gotten tired of it.

-EU Rome: Tired of it; lacks staying power.

-Even Medieval and Rome TW aren't doing it for me anymore.

The PC strategy genre seems completely dead right now, for the last few years at least.

Warlords is fun but becomes a bit of a cap ship fest. And it's pretty much empire only. Once you get a super cap (ie sovereign) the game is over since super laser spam kills everything.

Plus you don't really even need to kill enemy ships, your ions disable them, meaning that you can run around taking them out, without destroying them, leaving them utterly useless to your opponent while still choking up unit cap. The only redeeming quality of the game is are hyperspace jammers which take out half of approaching ships HP.

[Adrian McNair]

I remember I had a bit of trouble with the 13th Mission, but I wouldn't say it was frustrating or impossible. In fact, I have fond memories of it, especially the British Admiral's inspiring speech at the beginning.

Could you recall how you did it? Nothing I did seemed to work. I tried dividing my fleet into taskforces centred around Dreadnaughts but to no avail. I was always overwhelmed and at one of my HQs was destroyed, resulting in instant mission failure. The main issues I had were with the randomness of the Mantis wormhole assaults.

In multiplayer and skirmish they're weak as all heck. Their one advantage is that if the AI has a fleet of fleet carriers and Tiamats they can take you by surprise with their fighter fleet, utterly destroy a number of ships (I've lost more flagship Dreadnoughts that way than any other way) and then flee. Once you've found them, though, they're dead.

I was able to overwhelm the lower tier carrier groups with ease in the campaign, but I always dreaded the arrival of Tiamats in large systems with multiple wormholes. Maybe it's the fact that I'm more of a defensive type of player or that I'm poor at micro-management but Tiamat fleets were always the bane of my existence unless they arrived at chokepoints that I controlled.

One tempest charge destroys Fleet Carriers and Scout Carriers, and the only thing which can prolong the life of a Tiamat is its gravity well, and that'll only keep it alive for so long.

It was two tempest charges for the Fleet Carriers and one for the Scouts, if correctly recall.

[Adrian Laguna]

Could you recall how you did it? Nothing I did seemed to work. I tried dividing my fleet into taskforces centred around Dreadnaughts but to no avail. I was always overwhelmed and at one of my HQs was destroyed, resulting in instant mission failure. The main issues I had were with the randomness of the Mantis wormhole assaults.

I'm not sure, it's been a long time. I think that what I did was put three HQs in very close proximity to each other, and then concentrated my entire fleet there. The hard part is when Smirnoff arrives, then you need to send a units to force him to retreat while still leaving something behind to defend your HQs.

Also, my fleet building consisted entirely of dreadnoughts and battleships. Far as I'm concerned all other warships are worthless.

[starfury]

-Supreme Commander: Its ok; generic strategy game with build lots and then rush. I'm tired of Star Craft redux.

Funny, Most TA/Supreme commander fans have never forgiven Starcraft for overshadowing their games during the 90's and Ironic enough, for you it feels like Starcraft redux

[CaptHawkeye]

WiC is the only RTS game I even bother playing anymore. It works fine when the devs aren't going out of their way to completely ruin the game balance because the forum whores complained. It runs itself on a different formula from most RTS games though, and for once, it actually works. Matches actually *are* unpredictable in that game.

[Fire Fly]

I finally bought WiC but I haven't played WiC much lately since my microphone doesn't work for some reason; basically takes out all of the fun from multiplayer battle. So maybe my strategy game malaise might be lifted once I get my mic fixed. I've also avoided Company of Heroes but might relent. I haven't been impressed yet from video clips so I've more or less avoided it. Ideally, I'd like a space battle strategy game with capital ships and fighters. I've thought of X3 but given the poor user reviews and learning curve, I've been somewhat soured by it.

Is Galactic Civ II any good?