Jump to content



  • Posts

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by Xyvik

  1. I'm saddened that so few are keeping any interest on Supreme Commander. It will finally be a true real time STRATEGY game, not the tactical stuff that WC3 made popular. Medieval 2 I am looking forward to, but that is not an RTS, it is a Turn Based Strategy game with a few RTS elements thrown in, and those aren't as good as its TBS part. I hated the morale issue of R:TW. Roman Soldiers did not run away while they were anywhere near the italian penisula, otherwise they would never be able to show their faces near anybody who had anything to do with Rome. Morale buckled under far too easily, even for the Gaul. They would fight to the last man, regardless of who was coming at them, because of their fierce pride of their country, and similarly the romans. Meh. I hope M:TW2 fixes a bit of that problem. SupCom is definitely going to be the RTS to get, I just hope it doesn't suffer the fate that TA did: IE not very many people knew about it, but it was way better than the alternatives, including CNC and StarCraft.
  2. You're over-simplying and putting the blame where it does not belong. While I do not think Gamespy are angels, they are not to blame for the problem. The problem lies with people in general, mostly young teens with attitudes who think it's cool to abuse other people or cheat. If a gaming network tried to censor every possible abuse, we wouldn't be able to chat to anybody. Ever play Generals? The chat filter for generals was HILARIOUS because it bleeped out words that are not anywhere near insulting. The end result was that half of the time, my message never even made it across. So the question has nothing to do with Gamespy, it has to do with people. You either censor everything or you censor nothing, and I for one beleive in the right of all people to say what they want. The core issues with the MP are not just the people, although they are a large part of the reason why I don't play ANY game online except with people I know. The simple fact of the matter is that the FPS problem can be fixed very simply by several methods. The first was mentioned in the first post, a level indicator of how well your FPS is and the ability to screen out players of lower-end systems. Another problem that leads to low game performance is dial-up, and that can be simply changed to allow a filter which blocks all 56kers. I'm of the beleif that 56kers shouldn't be playing online anyway, but I digress. This was all a very roundabout way of saying: stop digging on GameSpy. They aren't even remotely the major problem.
  3. DX10 is also an overhyped MicroShaft creation, which will in no way pull of what it claims. A good card for the price is the X1600XT, preferably by PowerColor. Nvidia cards are power hogs and overheat too much, but if you've got the cooling they are, generally, a tad bit cheaper, albeit you get what wou pay for with lower quality. The X600 is definitely low-end, but still a fairly good card.
  4. Such is, unfortunately, the state of affairs of just about every online game these days. The online scene is too littered with (usually) young punks who think it's fun to 'haxxor' or aren't mature enough to face defeat as easily as winning. If I could ever send a message out to those kind of people, there are two things I'd want to say, first to the cheaters and second to the poor sports: One) Get a life Two) You learn more from defeat than from victory. That's why I only play online with people I know, which is a startling low number.
  5. True, very true. However, there are two things animals are good for: one, they are cheaper than anything mechanical, and two, they break down a lot less. So yeah, pretty much cannon fodder. But cannon fodder makes for very excellent strategies, if you just know how to use it...
  6. I'm talking about skirmish battles, not GC battles. In a skirmish battle, the tactical depth was increased at the sacrafice of the strategic gameplay. In GC mode, yes, I agree the land battles are tactical but even on a planetary battle strategy should not be sacraficed -completely- for the tactical considerations. It's not as important because we have the giant chess board, but it feels like its almost non-existant. I beleive that we could leave GC mode as it is and not suffer needlessly, but the skirmish battles need a bit of a rewrite in my opinion. Actually, the first prophecy involving the Messiah is approximately 6000 years old, being the first prophecy in the Bible (he will bruise you in the head and he will bruise you in the heal.) The later prophecies, involving the lack of a human father and what not, were uttered in the Psalms as well as the Prophets, which are approximately 4000 years old. The Messiah being born and fulfilling those prophecies is 2000 years old, so it is the fulfillment of the prophecies that is only 2k old. The actual prophecies are much older To Rust_Lord: It was the Hebrews who had the original prophecies, and the Hebrews gave way to the TRUE Christians once Jesus came to earth. Most of the doctrines taught in today's churches are actually Babylonian in origin, but the prophecies regarding the birth of Christ are genuine. And that comes from my past 8 years of studying theology
  7. I will not be dragged into the same argument that has already faded, but I will make a comment on this. If you consider an unimaginative retread of a 4000 year old story to be exceptional, you really have no idea what a good story is. The whole "born with no father", "prophecies", and all that are found somewhere else. It's called the Bible, which is the most widely distrubuted book in the world. So instead of coming up with something good and original, Lucas steals an idea from the world's most popular book. Yeah. That's exceptional all right. Where's my rolling eyes smilie? On to the other debate: Once again, lukeiamyourdad, we find ourselves on the same side of an argument . I like the idea of the landing ping. Put that in there with the ability to land anywhere, according to ship size, and you have an excellent way of doing things. For instance, Slave I and any of the other smaller hero ships are famous for being able to land anywhere, they don't need a huge cleared area. Troop transports are a little bigger and therefore would need a little more room, but not that much. It's only the big barges that would require quite a bit of clear space. Keep that, the Guidance Beacons to hasten your own transports down, and you have a good way. But keep in mind that with the way landing zones are now, you know where your enemy is coming from. You also know where your enemy base is. That removes the absolute -need- of scouting forces. Back in the day you had to search a map before you found your opponent, and the first person to figure out where the other was had an advantage of information. That's the way it should be. Fight to keep your forces secret, fight to know where your enemy is. That's part of warfare.
  8. At the sacrafice of strategy. But anyway, you missed the point. In a Galactic Conquest mode, yes the idea of a beachhead makes sense, get the troops on the ground in one spot, far away from the enemy base. But once down there, no-holds-barred we can drop anywhere we want, as long as our troops can see it. Or did you miss that part? Which means you'd have to get your troops to the other side of the map before you could drop something in, and with the exception of speeder bikes you aren't going anywhere fast. And even in that case, let's say that certain units are excluded from the "spotter" list, kind of like how now you have to have troops take the areas. Make troops line-of-sight the indicator, but don't restrict us to landing on just a few spots on the map. It turns everything into a map of little more than decorated chokepoints. In skirmish, however, where both sides already have bases and beachheads and usually shields, the idea has no merit whatsoever. Beef up defenses a bit to compensate (which they should be anyway)and voila...you have an awesome way of playing.
  9. We're not talking about WW2 where people are limited to ground, sea, or even air-based transports. We're talking about Star Wars, where gigantic capital ships rule from orbit. They can drop their barges anywhere they *%&$ well please. I agree, in a normal RTS the idea holds merit, but when you have a Star Destroyer sitting in orbit, the guys above aren't going to worry about "oh, we can only land our guys in two places on this planet, because of some unseen force that keeps us out." It makes no sense at all. The idea of a guidance beacon, however, makes sense. Or restricting landing vehicles to areas where your troops can see. That makes sense as well. But limiting them to weird icons that can be lost is...well...strange. 'sides, the land troop limits are -far- too small. This is STAR WARS, not star dance-around-with-a-few-guys. While I hate the prequals, at least they had battles. Battle for Geonosis, anybody? I didn't see no pop cap there. My idea for the guidance beacon is this: remove the landing zones completely. Barges and whatever can land wherever they want. These are atmospheric craft coming in from orbit, there's nothing that's going to stop them from dropping in. Instead, however, troops can build Guidance Beacons a certain distance away from theirs or the enemy base. These Guidance Beacons allow barges and transports to land -faster-, more coordinated attacks. These Beacons can be destroyed or upgraded, and they -slow- down enemy transports. Dunno, just my ideas
  10. Yay, we agree on something! Let's continue this trend I think I counted the time it takes for the logos at 20 or so seconds. That's 1/3 of a minute. So let's say that you (like me) needed to constantly move in and out of the game over and over again, and let's say you did it once a minute. In an hour, you would have wasted 20 minutes just looking at logo screens that should be skippable (is that a word?) One of the few good things I can say about M$ is that even they let you skip the logo screens. Seriously, if the monopolizing *expletive deleted* M$ people can let you skip logos, LucasArts should be able to as well. To Wedge- I always thought the landing zones idea was stupid anyway, so one of my first plans for TSW is to remove them. Or at the very least, let the sides be able to "build" their own landing sites. The idea of a guidance beacon comes to mind, something that you have to build, that can be destroyed, but allows extra landing precision...I dunno.
  11. Now see, I have the opposite viewpoint and yeah, the B-Wings do carry more warheads. I concede the point
  12. I sincerely hope the devs are reading this! In addition to side vs side (empire fighting empire etc.) it would be in the best interests of everybody if there was some way, a shortcut modifier or whatever, to skip past all the logos. Honestly, Petro, yours was awesome because we could skip it, but apparently Lucasarts has too much of an ego and we're forced to sit through at least 10 seconds of worthless logos about stuff we already know. We already know it's Star Wars Empire at War and that it is rated teen for fantasy violence. We already know that it's made by lucasarts. As a map tester, I am constantly moving in and out of the game, and that 10 wasted seconds adds up a lot over time. I wasted over 15 minutes out of an hour one time (I actually timed it) because of that. Please, Petro and Lucasarts, do something about this!
  13. Based on the X-Wing series, which I always liked to a certain extent but always thought they made capital ships a bit too weak, a squadron of X-Wings alll launching torps could severely damage a capital ship, and X-wings could carry 12 torps. So that means that B-Wings and Defenders are on par in actual missile capacity, but the B-Wings extra ion cannons meant they do a bit more damage to a capital ship (just a bit) whereas a defender can outmaneuver any fightercraft and still damage capital ships... they best make that thing bloody expensive! lol
  14. Yeah yeah, I know, I get too mad at all the stuff sometimes. My apologies if I offended anybody...I'm a die-hard purist sometimes As for the hyperspace...I'm not sure, I think they can fight back the instant they come in, but it always seems that either the ships are more vulnerable or something, because my Acclamators always have no shields left after hyping them into a battle scene, and by the time I can give them movement orders they are almost dead (and this is with very little fire actually being directed against them). Maybe it's just me.
  15. definetely smaller than corvettes. Perhaps they are one of the new fighters? Can't really tell =/
  16. Those are two things that I was going to mention myself, and I even tried to put them in my other post as an edit but my browser crashed =/ I would hope the first thing would also apply to Space, because ships get barraged while they are coming in from hyperspace and by the time you can use them, their shields are gone and they are almost dead. Watching the movies, all units came in from hyperspace almost instantly, not this 4 or 5 seconds crap of getting beat up before you can do anything about it. ((Off topic to Darth Anarch: Point One: You're wrong, the city-planet idea AND the name were both invented by Zahn, and Lucas was even not going to use them but finally buckled under pressure. Two: yeah, you're right, I forgot about west end. Third, sorry, you're wrong again, Zahn wrote his books as true Sci-Fi, something that Star Wars the movies was not. His books reached a larger audience as he had already won the Hugo award and was famous for science fiction, so he attracted, perhaps not millions, but certainly thousands of new fans because of his writing. Fourth, yes Lucas created the universe. However, once you set something in stone, I don't care who made it, it does not give you the write to go back and "fix" things. Anybody in the business knows that you go with the flow, you don't like how something turned out, too bad you're stuck with it. What does Lucas do? He screws up the movies in order to make more money. THAT automatically disqualifies him from his own works. It would be like Da Vinci suddenly saying "you know what, I don't like the way this guy came out on the cistine chapel, I'm going to go over and do it again, adding a few other things that I think were missing." He had already performed the painting, put it in stone, it was over. Same goes with the movies. Also, he did not have his master plan done. All he had was a very rough draft. In the end, you either love the prequals or you hate them, and I hate them, and I have a lot of reasons for doing so ))
  17. not to start an argument, but I'm curious as to where you got the info that the defender doesn't have the warhead capacity of a B-Wing. Defenders have 2 missile launcher tubes that can be stacked with either concussion missiles or proton torpedoes, depending on the mission, with a max payload of 12 or more don't they? Do B-Wings carry more missiles? I really forgot how many missiles the B-Wing can carry although I know they do have 2 missile tubes as well.
  18. Not in the least. The prequal trilogy did nothing but destroy longly-held EU ideas left and right. And for what? Cheap thrills, "kiddy" movies, and more style-over-substance crap than any other recent movie memories. The number of inconsisties between the prequals and the originals numbers in the hundreds, despite Lucas' promises that everything would make 'sense'. As for Zahn keeping Star Wars alive, lets look at a little history. Star Wars: A New Hope (unnumbered at the time) is released to movie theaters in 1977. Star Wars fever hits the public, Empire Strikes Back is released in 1980, and then ROTJ is released in '83. For the next five or so years, Star Wars is still extremely popular, action figures sell left and right, toys, posters...the works. Then it begins to dissipate. By '90 most stores have stopped carrying anything Star Wars and most people only retain fond memories of the movies. 1992. Heir to the Empire is released. Star Wars mania grips the people once again, and the almost dead Star Wars franchise is brought back to life with a tremendous roar that has not yet stopped. The books of Timothy Zahn attracted millions of additional fans, fans who could never really get into the movies but now found some excellent books they could sink their teeth in. By the time Episode 1 rolls around, Star Wars has more fans than it would have had at the time, and that prevents the movie from being the flop it well and truly deserved to be. Then the originals are butchered for the digital revisions (Han shot first, anybody?) only proving that Lucas has lost all sense he ever had when he made the originals, and he is out only to make the millions he now has. Who helped him get those millions? Zahn. So in the end, the prequals are apocryphal. The originals are not. And since Zahn was instrumental in keeping the saga alive where Lucas failed, his works are canon as well. Or can anybody forget that Zahn invented Coruscant, and the Noghri, Dreadnaughts, AT-PTs, Talon Karrde, Corellian Action VI transports, Mara Jade, Grand Admiral Thrawn, the Chiss, Interdictor Cruisers...the list goes on and on.
  19. Indeed, even before Endor the Empire still considered hyperspace starfighters to be a waste of money (hence why the Advanced never made production) and then the upheavel caused by the death of the emperor and the funds drained by people like Isaard and warlords like Zsinj left the Empire without the resources to mass produce the Defender. If the Empire had seen things differently, then the Rebellion would never have survived. Even the vaunted firepower of the B-Wing was no match for a Defender. And yeah, I think the tractor beam would be hard to implement, but I remember several of the manuevering tricks you could pull off if you used it right.
  20. *breathes a sigh of relief* So glad to hear that others feel likewise! I know it has to be balanced, but I'd so love to just -feel- the power of it. XWA it was powerful, but still a tad lighter than it should have been...yeah, I know, balance and all that, but at least you're looking to make sure it lives up to its history. But dang is it expensive!
  21. I am both delighed and a bit worried to hear that the TIE Defender will be making it into the game. My question to the Devs, however, is based on past experience. Both X-Wing Alliance and (obviously) Galactic Battlegrounds made the mistake of making the TIE Defender far less powerful than it actually is. For those who know the technical details of the craft, the Defender is, without a doubt, the best starfighter in the galaxy. It is as fast as an A-Wing(and faster if it shunts its shield power to it), has better shields and armor than an X-Wing, has more firepower than a B-Wing, and is even more manueverable than the vaunted TIE Interceptor. Obviously, however, such sheer superiority of the craft came with the vehicle being extremely expensive. Is FoC going to remain true to the power of the Defender, or are you going to "nerf" it? Obviously it would have to cost more, but for once I'd like to see the craft get the honor it is due: that of the best starfighter in the galaxy. -edit- also, the defender had a tractor beam. Is that going to be incorporated in any way?
  22. And that would be a bad thing...how? GalCiv is an awesome game on every level, and any attempt to be more like it would only make FoC even better. Onto the debate regarding technical details... Timothy Zahn, author of the most popular Star Wars novels and arguably the man responsible for Star Wars surviving this long, has several degrees in the science of physics. Therefore, anything he put in his novels was backed by hard science, and always has been (the only exception being the ysalamari, which were a concession to both fantasy and science). Also therefore, I would trust whatever he wrote to be just as accurate, if not more so, than some paper-pusher technical writer. Therefore, in the end, whatever Zahn writes is truth, anything to the contrary is lies. Including Ep3, which blasphemes Kashyyyk and is therefore apochryphal.
  23. That depends on which WarCraft you are referring to. WC3 doesn't deserve any title of RTS period, so shouldn't even be mentioned in that group. As for StarCraft, at one time it was more than just a rush fest, but then patch 1.08b came along, and brought with it Terran Heavy Metal, and it hasn't been the same since.
  24. I was hoping that was the case, and it's good to hear it directly from you guys
  25. Dude, the underworld doesn't BUILD the eclispe, they STEAL it. There's a difference. As for finding the people...surely that is even easier. The Fringe is a huge collection of criminals, if you promised them they'd get to fly in the largest SSD ever they'd come willingly. And no, the Darksaber was a very dumb idea from a very dumb storyline. Besides, it would be messing even more with continuity.
  • Create New...