Jump to content

Home

{DHU}Screed

Members
  • Posts

    163
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Personal Information

  • Location
    The Garbage State

Contact Information

  • Homepage
    http://
  • AIM
    AdmScreed

{DHU}Screed's Achievements

Newbie

Newbie (1/14)

10

Reputation

  1. This may be long, and most likely in vain but I feel I need to get my views out on the table. The game very much feels unfinished or unpolished. Ground Combat: By far my biggest gripe with the game. It's repetitive, unimaginative and simply, boring. IMO, the whole ground combat objective system should be wiped clean. Your objectives, as they currently are, are simple and straight forward. Destroy every last remnant of the enemy to win. The combat is purely a rock, paper, scissor match to the extreme. All ground combat takes place on open terrain in some kind of futuristic American Civil War style combat. There are no terrain advantages, there are no "digging in" places (if you count those holes with crates around them as "trenches" then thats pretty sad, seeing how the enemy can run right into them with you), there's no urban combat even on a planet covered by city scape...... Im essentially thinking in terms of C&C Generals and Ground Control 2 where you can have troops rapel down onto building roofs (air transports like the ones seen in the Battle of Geonosis in Ep 2)or take cover inside buildings for added cover/better firing positions. Objectives should be given during this battle to weaken or even cripple the defenders or even the attackers. For instance, one of the defenders objectives would be to keep control of the City Space port to keep bombing runs from taking them out. In turn the attackers should try to take the City Spaceport so bombing runs can become available. In addition the space port can be occupied like any other building by X number of soldiers, essentially making it a hardpoint. There's just so much left out of the ground combat aspect of the game...... I would rather have seen the ground combat be left out, until a later expansion and just have a polished space combat as the Gold edition of EaW. Space Combat: I like space combat, but ALOT of polish has been left out. One of my biggest gripes is the fact that unit "stances" basically don't exist. 1.) The defend unit command is useless. The unit you selected to defend the target will trail well behind the target as it moves, effectively only defending the rear of it....... I tell a corvette to defend a Cruiser, and the thing trails behind while bombers hit the Cruiser from the front and the corvette does nothing......... 2.) You should be able to tell star fighters to target specific things and they will follow those orders until the end of the battle. Example: My fleet warps in, I tell my fighters to target other fighters, and I tell my bombers to target capital ships. This actually applies to all ships. I should tell ships to do a basic search and destroy X craft and they should do it while the battle progresses I can directly take control of individual units and ships to target specific things. 3.) There should be some kind of HUD that lets you know what units are idle or have completed their given objectives, and you can click ont hose units in the HUD and it will bring you to them so you don't have to search for them on the map. Edit: I wanted to add some more but I ran short of time last night when I had some calls come in at work, so here is my unfinished "constructive" criticism. 4.) Space maps I beleive are to cluttered with debri. Some obstacles and tactical decisions can be made with the debri, but when over 40% of the map is covered by nebula's and asteroids...... I find it excessive. Overall Game Problems: I find it odd, that a game like Rome: Total War can incorporate 10 thousand troops, and a large city into a battle w/o lag issues and when you get a good amount of Star Fighters on screen you start getting a stuttering mess. With my computer sporting some pretty high end hardware, it should be able to handle it with no problem. Only thing I can think of is poor memory mapping within the game code itself. I have also heard that when a certain amount of planets (50+) are added, that the game slows to a crawl also. The problem greatly limits on what modders can do with the game. Hostile planets, they require no garrison what so ever to hold, and there's no way to appeal to hostile planets to make them unhostile. Veteran units don't exist. I doesn't matter if a unit has been through 20 campaigns and slaughtered 100's, he still is the same as a fresh batch straight from the barracks/shipyard. As I said before, I would have rather seen them release the Gold edition as a solid, polished, space combat edition and then later released a ground combat expansion pack that is just as solid and just as polished. As the game is, it may offer two different types of RTS games into one, but both versions are subpar to the ones that have concentrated on one or the other.
  2. Frequent spy missions can reveal enemy fleets still in hyperspace routes to your system, therefore you can intercept them. If you don't have planetary shields and they bombard your planet, they risk the chance of hitting civilian targets which can be even worse than losing a few ships. I remember purposely letting the AI cap planets that are loyal to me just to go and recap them to increase my popularity within the entire sector. A great way to swing your popularity within the entire sector into your favor w/o spending large amounts of time doing diplomatic missions. If you left your production planets unguarded, then that's your own fault.
  3. That also made me laugh. Once you get your production planets set, turn on auto manage with your droid helpers. Then they will manage your refinery's, mining, and even garrisons.
  4. That made me laugh. You basically just said, "I'm an idiot and don't like to think when I play a game."
  5. I actually like the space combat, although the nebulas do get to be annoying. My gripe with the gameplay is the ground combat. It's boring, repetitive and the maps are un-involving. I want to be able to fight in a City, like Mos Eisely. Have my troopers fortify buildings as defensive positions and cover from bombers. I want my StarWars game to feel like StarWars. Open terrain combat with infantry has been absolete since the Civil War, so why are these armies that are way more advanced doing it? They stand in lines shooting at each other, its like playing Robert E. Lee: Civil War General with starwars characters. Troop transports don't exist. There should be some kind of armored or air transport to move troops from point A to point B quickly and efficiently. I wanna be able to land my troops in, have a Air Troop transport (think Episode 2: Attack of the Clones at the Battle of Geonsis) transport my troops in the city outskirts and have them land on a building rooftop and act as the first troops into combat to hold off the enemy until armored reinforcements arrive. Nope, in EaW we have holes in the ground with crates where the enemy can run right into them with your supposedly "dug in" troops. Defeats the whole purpose of "digging in" your troops. I want a more urban combat friendly ground combat system in place. Something where your infantry can hide in to take cover from anti-infantry weapons. Make the buildings destructible just like in C&C Generals. In all honesty I think the wholke ground combat system needs to be overhauled. Whipe it totally clean. I don't think that troop barracks, and Factories etc.. should be destructible, only capturable. I also don't think that they should continually pump out troops during the battle. Sure, have each building come with a garrison unit, but don't make the building keep pumping the troops out endlessly during battles. Instead give the attacking army objectives. Like, hold the city space port for X amount of time to win, or you can also win by destroying all the enemies. In addition the city spaceport can be a heavily fortified defensive position. In which the defenders have control of in the beginning of the fight. Bombing should be available, but if you decide to bomb civilian targets, your public support in that system will diminish greatly and you will be continually attacked by civilians in the streets of the city. If I were a Developer, I would have done the ground combat alot differently than what it is now.
  6. Just one more thing the creators of Rebellion gave you when you bought the game. I'm not picking on Petroglyph, b/c I don't know what their situation was in terms of pressure from Lucasarts. If they were under no pressure, then yes I am picking on Petroglyph. If they were under pressure, then I blame Lucasarts for a very unpolished game. Hell, Rebellion came with a freaking Bible that you could read. I miss the days where gaming companies made very detailed gaming manuals that gave background stories, art, individual unit details right down to the kind of gun they are using.
  7. Rebellion had a certain realistic feel to it. It took long periods of time to create the huge powerful capital ships. They were expensive to upkeep, research and development wasn't just "build this and train this and you can learn this". You actually had to appoint people to research and development. Diplomacy was just as powerful as a fleet of doom. Espionage, assasination, abduction, sabotage, recruitment..... These were all things that gave the game a great deal of immersion. You could also create planets just for certain production means. One planet you can have 12-14 Ship Yards to pump out capital ships faster, same with construction and training facilities. Then you could fortify those planets just like you would in real life. I also had a ton of fun with the ability to name each of your capital ships and assigning a Admiral, Commander and General to each one. For instance, the Imperial Star Destroyer Majestic was the Emperors personal Star Destroyer. The SSD Executor was Vader's chariot of death...... These things were great in Rebellion. I to wish they made EaW a Rebellion with just upgraded graphics, space, and ground combat.
  8. Please play me in multi-player and try any strategy you want against my artillery. You strategies on paper mean squat to what actually works in game. I don't know about you but I have been playing MP alot (when it works) and so far in ground campaigns as a Rebel I am undefeated. More times than not my opponant leaves as soon as he throws everything he's got at my artillery teams and loses everything.
  9. Ok, since my edit's aren't going in im gonna make a new post. There's a strategy i've been implementing in MP and it hasn't been beaten yet. There has certainly been good tries, but there is just no possible way to beat it w/o taking enormous losses. I call it Artillery "crawling". You have two groups of artillery (the more in each group the merrier), have both within each others firing range, so if an opponant manages to get within one, or even both of the artillery's firing range, you can rape them with the other group of artillery. Since freindly fire doesnt exist, you can bombard the hell out of your own artillery and be worry free about taking friendly fire. Now the crawling part, you take one group, move it up ahead, still within firing range of the other group and deploy. Take the other group and move that group ahead of the other and deploy. Support each group with plex soldiers and tanks and they are invincible to anything but a bombing run.
  10. Yes, and the Plex troopers will rape the 2m Tanks faster than you can blink. 'Oh but, why not rush them with Tie Maulers." Maulers will also die faster than you can blink. Oh, how stupid of me! Oh wait..... now if that player is smart, won't he layer his Artillery, so if you do manage to rush the first group of artillery, the second group behind it will be able to hit the first group? Ah, yes. The brains of a human opponant are such wonderful things. Petroglyphs argument "AT-AA's are counters to Rebel Artillery" is folly as well. You rush in some Rebel tanks which move far faster, and are FAR cheaper than the AT-AA's and they will die VERY quick. There's just no CONCEIVABLE way to attack a group of supported artillery short of a bombing run.
  11. You guys are talking about AI when your fighting the Arty. I'm talking about fighting a real person when fighting art. You back the Art up with Plex soldiers galore and there is nothing short of a bombing run you can do to get by it.
  12. I don't know if this has been said or not, but fix the "defend" feature with units. When you select say, a Tartan cruiser to defend an ISD, it will lag way behind the ISD, effectively only guarding the far back of the battlefield.
  13. Im telling you, if you try to go on the offensive against anyone that is even remotely smart and has loads of artillery, you WILL NOT win w/o taking massive losses.
  14. Try playing against someone who knows how to use artillery, then tell me the game is easy.
  15. The only thing I find myself having trouble with is Artillery in space and ground campaigns. In space, the ability to hit your space station with enormous destructive capability from all the way on the other side of the map is rediculous. Same goes when you are attacking that space station. To just send in Tie scouts and have 4-5 Broadside cruisers bombard the hell out of the station w/o ever worrying about a reprisal is rediculous. Sure you can rush some fighters in to kill the missile frigates, but all you need to do is have 3 Tartan or Corellian Corvettes sitting around them with just one ISD to ward off the bigger capital ships. The fact is, the attacker or defender with alot of Broadside Cruisers can completely dominate the map w/o ever worrying about losses. Now for ground campaigns, Artillery is ungodly. There isn't a single unit in the game that can stand a chance against 5-6 Artillery pieces. Your only hope is to bomb the hell out of them or rush in alot of units and take MASSIVE losses. I know when I do a ground assault and see the enemy has artillery, I basically play a very long and BORING waiting game. Most of the time I tip toe around calling in bombing strikes on the enemy and when I get the the base I call in that bombing strike to take out any artillery and do a massive rush with all my units into the base and take out the Heavy Engineering facilites before it spawns more artillery in. My biggest complaint is the Artillery's capability to completely wipe out hordes of infantry within 1 or 2 volleys. You can bring in some AT-AT's to take out the Rebel artillery, but you cant back the AT-AT's up with ANYTHING else, therefore the AT-AT's get completely raped due to the fact that a smart player will have plex soldiers standing by the Artillery. You try to support the AT-AT's with infantry and they will die in 1 volley. You try to support them with Maulers/AT-ST's/Tanks anything, and you will suffer MASSIVE losses making it a Pearic victory. Artillery needs to be removed from the game period.
×
×
  • Create New...