Guest DarthMaulUK Posted January 12, 2002 Share Posted January 12, 2002 When Age Of Myths is released, will SWGB die or continue? Many experts from AOK who have moved to SWGB should move to AOM and leave the newbies and rookies to SWGB?! I think it will die a slow and painful death but like Rebellion, will have it's 'small band of freedom fighters' still playing it' What are your views?! http://www.galacticbattlegrounds.co.uk UPDATED today! Your Ultimate GB resource NEW Scenarios - Polls - more! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rogue15 Posted January 12, 2002 Share Posted January 12, 2002 only sw fans will continue playing it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Kudar Posted January 12, 2002 Share Posted January 12, 2002 I personally don't care who's playing it, let the "experts" move on if they like, as long as there are people to play online with then that's fine, it's not like I'm going to be the only one left playing, who really cares that there aren't 3000 people playing this at the zone at one time? Not me 'cause I can't play them all at once can I? edit - on a happier note I've just been over at the zone and it's certainly picking up by the looks of things - I've never seen a FULL room before : FULL Galactic Tyranny 134 Rebel Alliance 10 Sith Lords 3 Jedi Knights Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Crazy_dog no.3 Posted January 12, 2002 Share Posted January 12, 2002 Course it will, unless this forum will be deleted! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
1MGxLeGion Posted January 12, 2002 Share Posted January 12, 2002 I say if the "experts" leave for a new game, GREAT!! they can go become an "expert" at that game and take their attitudes, egos, and arses with them. than maybe all the people on the zone can experience more balanced games and atually enjoy a 1 1/2 hour game instead of being rush in 10 minutes loss track of your ego and than get double teamed at 20 minutes. Than when you know absolutely there is no hope for you, you tell the experts i am quiting gg than they get pissed at you for not staying as if you had a chance to make a come back. I leave on purpose now if i know its over and i am playing an expert i let them build this huge army to destroy me and than resign right when i see it and OH MAN DO THEY GET PISSED HAHA stupid experts. and for those i have played and had the chance to bad mouth..... MAUH LOVERS!!!! GO TO YOUR NEW GAME NOW!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dagobahn Eagle Posted January 13, 2002 Share Posted January 13, 2002 That's what the GB x-pack should do. Upgrade GB to AOM graphics. Come on, who needs more civs or units? Anyone agree with me on this? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
__DoA_Ogmius__ Posted January 13, 2002 Share Posted January 13, 2002 I like the game and think I might be 1 of those few freedom fighters mentioned above Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JediMasterEd Posted January 13, 2002 Share Posted January 13, 2002 Eh...don't believe them. GB has been only out for about 2-3 months. it's still growing and more patches are coming. besides, Gaber might consider the explansion pack to have the same engine along with AoM but then again, they would all need to re-map, redo, and remake EVERYTHING that was in GB. it would take too long to completely redo the whole thing. better off making a new game while their at it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chessack Posted January 13, 2002 Share Posted January 13, 2002 I, for one, will keep playing GB, whether or not I get any new versions of the AoE game. Heck, I still play the original AoE from time to time. It was beautiful in its (relative) simplicity. Unless they come out with another version of GB or something else like it that includes, specifically, Star Wars , GB will continue to be a favorite of mine. Sorry I seem to be defending it so much against the same set of complaints, but I love this game, and it's hard not to come to its defense. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest DarthMaulUK Posted January 13, 2002 Share Posted January 13, 2002 I think it's great that some of you are rushing to the games defence! I did the same for Rebellion - full of bugs and left to rot by Lucasarts (Hey...where's Rebellion II?!). I quit Rebellion to play SWGB and having very little experience with AOK, I decided to wait for Star Wars. However, after reading other players experiences with both games, I find it rather sad that Lucasarts left some of the AOK bugs within the game. Ok, they spent a lot of time doing the Civs but they still should have fixed most of the bugs. That is my main gripe - as from experience they never fix them fully. I will end up a 'freedom fighter' as there's times when i love the game ( especially some of the wonderful scenarios) and times when I hate it (the bugs and dumb unit AI). Once AOM is released, things could hopefully balance up - all the AOK experts leaving - and at that time - SWGB should have a price drop of around £10 to £19.99 or $24.00 making it extra good value and create even more new players. DMUK http://www.galacticbattlegrounds.co.uk Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Com Raven Posted January 13, 2002 Share Posted January 13, 2002 Uhmm, change engine with a x-pack ?? Now common ... they should use AoM engine for GB II.... Ppl couldn't even say that it was a clone due them being really different (mythological units/gods/faith ----SW ...) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Prince_Xizor Posted January 13, 2002 Share Posted January 13, 2002 I AGREE! Let the experts go get Experted at another game and leave GB to the starwars Folks.... THEY HAVENT ANOUNCE ANOTHER GB GAME... THEY PROBABLY WONT MAKE ON!!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JediMasterEd Posted January 13, 2002 Share Posted January 13, 2002 well, why not make an engine made by Lucasarts, for Lucasarts. Out of the ordinary, an engine that is not a clone or a copy but an origional. many games has more than one sequal to it like Dark Forces and Dark Forces II Jedi Knight. they used the quake engine. why not create an one of a kind engine that would change everything? it would be so cool! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rogue15 Posted January 13, 2002 Share Posted January 13, 2002 wth dark forces and jedi knight DID NOT use the quake engine!!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dagobahn Eagle Posted January 13, 2002 Share Posted January 13, 2002 The Quake engine? What are you talking about, man? :confused: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chessack Posted January 13, 2002 Share Posted January 13, 2002 Originally posted by DarthMaulUK (snip) I quit Rebellion to play SWGB and having very little experience with AOK, I decided to wait for Star Wars. However, after reading other players experiences with both games, I find it rather sad that Lucasarts left some of the AOK bugs within the game. Ok, they spent a lot of time doing the Civs but they still should have fixed most of the bugs. That is my main gripe - as from experience they never fix them fully. (snip) I would agree with you if any of the "bugs" seriously affected my game play. To date, I have not had any problems with bugs in AoK nor in GB. Is the unit AI stupid on occasion? Sure. But I don't really consider that a bug, and as I have amply stated elsewhere, I prefer my units to be relatively stupid and just wait for me to hold their hands. Odds are, the programmd behavior wouldn't match what I want them to do anyway. May the Force be with you. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
darth_shadow Posted January 13, 2002 Share Posted January 13, 2002 i say that aok will always be better then swgbg no matter what. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest DarthMaulUK Posted January 13, 2002 Share Posted January 13, 2002 As mentioned in other posts, it's just the simple stuff the game can't get right. People have posted about Plummels stopping short of their target and are quite happy to sit there until they have been destroyed. Today, I was rushed but managed to EVENTUALLY win back - but no thanks to the game AI. My troopers - rather than attack a tower built and firing at them, they chose to attack the one that wasn't built fully - posing no threat at all - to me there is NO excuse for this behaviour. Other games seem to cope with this. I am already re-considering my support for this game as I have given it so many chances but when these 'bugs' costs games, it just isn't worth the effort...ive paint to watch drying! DMUK Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chessack Posted January 14, 2002 Share Posted January 14, 2002 Originally posted by DarthMaulUK My troopers - rather than attack a tower built and firing at them, they chose to attack the one that wasn't built fully - posing no threat at all - to me there is NO excuse for this behaviour. Other games seem to cope with this. I still don't see how this is a "bug". What you have here is a situation where there are three possible ways to attack the problem. 1. Ignore the "in progress" tower being built and attack the "live" one with all available forces in range. 2. Ignore the "live" tower and attack the "in progress" one with all available forces in range. 3. Attack both with part of the force. This would then involve deciding how much of the force to direct against each target. It seems like you, personally, would choose strategy #1. That's a perfectly acceptable thing to do, but I don't believe it is the only choice. The game programmers have apparently decided that strategy #2 is better. You may not agree with them, but that doesn't mean it's a bug -- it means your tactics are different from those of the guys who programmed the game. Maybe you think their tactics are stupid, and you think you could kick their butts if you played against them in a GB battle... and maybe you would be right. But that doesn't mean there's anything in the AI that is a "bug." To me a "bug" is something that is an error -- what you have is merely a difference of opinion. In point of fact, given two equidistant towers, one being currently built by a worker, one live and firing at me, I would choose neither 1 nor 2, but option 3. The problem with #1 is that it takes too long. If you have artillery, great. But troopers? It'll take them way too long to knock out the first tower. Meanwhile, the worker(s) can build the second tower, and now you have that one to deal with as well. #2 is better.. .take out the partially built one first. It's much quicker, and that removes the threat entirely. But in fact, I'd go for #3, concentrating most of my fire on the live tower, but making sure a trooper or two is going at the one being built (after ensuring they have wiped out any workers first). That prevents the "in progress" one from coming around, while still concentrating most of your fire power on the live, immediate threat. In a case like this there are many possile choices. I listed 3, but #3 is not a constant; it is a continuous variable. Out of 10 troopers, you might do 9 vs live:1 vs in progress, 1:9, or any ratio in between. What's the "correct" way to play it? Some of it depends on the current circumstances. Some of it depends on your "style" of game play. The tactic that is my favorite might be one you hate. Just because the guys who prorammed the game do not "play the way you do" does not make it full of bugs. It just means they don't play the same way you do... And thank the Force for that, or I'd never be able to get through the computer's defenses... since mine are usually quite strong. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest DarthMaulUK Posted January 14, 2002 Share Posted January 14, 2002 Ok, my point. I don't see why I HAVE to 'nurse' every single unit with instructions - especially if I am busy elsewhere in battle or microfarming. Units should be at least able to carry out the basics - a task that seems to be impossible and, I might add, something that didn't help AOK. Now, with SWGB being a 'new game', these are things they should have fixed, especially considering the games price point. Only time will tell if Lucasarts decide to throw another patch at this game - if they do - great stuff - if they don't, it wouldn't be a surprise. Maybe they are waiting for the release of Episode II (May 16th release in the UK). Game companies have become 'clever' by creating a game that still lacks a lot, forcing people to purchase the X-Packs. This sort of thing happened with Tiberian Sun and Red Alert 2. Both games lacked something (be it units, maps etc) and the X-Pack fixed this. Im gonna try out Cossacks and put GB down for a little while. DMUK Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Paragon_Leon Posted January 14, 2002 Share Posted January 14, 2002 Excellent points there... Keep 'em coming ! I, for one, will continue playing GB until i drop. Simply because of it's replay-value. There's always someone out there better than you, and that requires rethinking your game. I'm still looking for someone to totally outclass me though.. :D Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
duder Posted January 14, 2002 Share Posted January 14, 2002 you've found me Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Com Raven Posted January 14, 2002 Share Posted January 14, 2002 Uhmm, why should they make an engine of their own ?? Using an existing engine allows you to concentrate more on content, plus most (!) LCE house-engines lamed along behind others .... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chessack Posted January 14, 2002 Share Posted January 14, 2002 Originally posted by DarthMaulUK Ok, my point. I don't see why I HAVE to 'nurse' every single unit with instructions - especially if I am busy elsewhere in battle or microfarming. Units should be at least able to carry out the basics - a task that seems to be impossible and, I might add, something that didn't help AOK. Now, with SWGB being a 'new game', these are things they should have fixed, especially considering the games price point. I completely understand what you don't like, but I don't agree that these are bugs, nor do I even want them "fixed" (since I don't see them as problems). Some of us like nursing our units with instructions. If they were so smart that I could just click on a group of units and have them "go here and do the smart thing", then I'd have been bored a long time ago. I like resource management and tech development as much as (perhaps more than) the next guy, but not to the point where I don't want to be involved in the tactics. If you don't like micro-managing your units, then perhaps this is not the game for you. But because it is not the game for you does not mean that it "sucks" or that LucasArts has put out "crap" -- Star Trek: Armada is not the game for me, but lots of people loved it (enough that they made a sequel). I don't think the things I disliked about it were "bugs", or even that the game itself "sucked." It's just not to my taste (in particular, because it works too differently from AoE, and that's the kind of RTS game I really like). Indeed, several RTS games that I have bought, have frustrated me by not letting me micro-manage my units enough, and forcing me to let the computer take over. If I wanted the computer take over, I'd let it run all the civs by itself and just watch. I want micro-control, and I want my units to stop when I haven't given them orders (and I use the pre-sets like 'stand ground' and 'defensive posture' to help ensure that they do). I don't trust any other person to determine my units' behavior -- I want to do it myself. Now then... it seems that if the LucasArts guys please people who feel like you do, they will frustrate people who feel like I do. Meaning that Lincoln was quite right when he said, "You can please some of the people all of the time and all of the people some of the time, but you can't please all of the people all of the time...." I don't mind that you are frustrated with some aspects of the game, but it would be nice if you would acknowledge that these are taste issues, and that the game is not to your taste, rather than that there is some objective standard of quality gaming that LucasArts has some how violated with this game, just because it does not conform to your expectations. It vastly exceeded my expectations in every measurable area... that doesn't make it the greatest game ever made. But it might make it my favorite. There is a difference. May the Force be with you. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rogue15 Posted January 14, 2002 Share Posted January 14, 2002 Rebellion 2 would be fun. or Force Commander 2. FC2 would be so awesome! they could use the same engine, but fix all the stuff that made it bad (like have option to use just overhead camera) and they could make good ai, something that I think lec seems to be lacking, except for in TPM, where the ai was fun. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.