Thread: Sword of the Stars II (Or another 4X space game I will probably buy)

  1. #1711
    Neo Acoustic
    Join Date
    Oct 2004
    Posts
    1,889
    Quote Originally Posted by Janster View Post
    I kinda wish they had used a fleet pooling system instead of reserves based on location, it would have simplified stuff a bit...and instead used the naval bases as marshaling points. Which I honestly could not imagine any other use for them as...
    At the very least it would be nice if they would let you transfer reserves from one planet to another without having to shift them into a fleet first. I can see what they are trying to do with fleets, but I think they made the rules for them a little too rigid in some spots.

  2. #1712
    Social Worker
    Join Date
    Apr 2003
    Posts
    4,063
    Yeah I think it is too rigid as well. I'd like to be able to queue up multiple missions if the supplies are available. I like the idea of naval bases as rally points. On the other hand, I don't like being able to relocate a fleet to an undeveloped system.

    I find that ships are expensive enough that I only build them in a few key node systems, where I also get the construction bonus for the naval base. All the other systems are dedicated to trade.

  3. #1713
    How To Go
    Join Date
    Sep 2004
    Location
    Pasadena, Ca
    Posts
    11,328
    Yeah maybe once they can get the game to run reliably, they can go back to making the game changes. I hate the new fleet system it's way too cumbersome. I think I'll go back to Distant Worlds and AI Wars for now.

  4. #1714
    Social Worker
    Join Date
    Mar 2003
    Posts
    2,843
    New update, Jan 24:

    Critical Fixes:
    + Fixed AI from taking control of players in slots other than slot 1
    + Fixed upgrade missions from using the wrong system to populate upgrade options
    + Fixed issues with upgrade missions.

    Other Fixes:
    + Fixed missing start node lines for Humans
    + Fixed an incorrect calculation for ship construction that caused the player to have less production then they were supposed

    to have.
    + Fix missing Battle Cruiser and Battle Ship Categories
    + Fixed module weapons
    + Fixed spectres not being attacked by planetary beams when merged with planets
    + Fixed some animations for Liir battleriders
    + Fixed minor projector bugs
    + Fixed the order of fleets in all mission screens


    Other Changes and Additions:
    + Minor tech tree and ship tuning changes

    Known issues
    + Launcher not properly reflecting game version number

  5. #1715
    Social Worker
    Join Date
    Apr 2003
    Posts
    4,063
    I'm afraid your arch-nemesis beat you to the punch this time, Grifman.

  6. #1716
    Social Worker
    Join Date
    Mar 2003
    Posts
    2,843
    Quote Originally Posted by MikeJ View Post
    I'm afraid your arch-nemesis beat you to the punch this time, Grifman.
    Heh, missed that one :)

  7. #1717
    Social Worker
    Join Date
    Oct 2002
    Location
    San Diego; GamerTag: "Rorschach Six"
    Posts
    3,505
    Quote Originally Posted by Lorini View Post
    Yeah maybe once they can get the game to run reliably, they can go back to making the game changes. I hate the new fleet system it's way too cumbersome. I think I'll go back to Distant Worlds and AI Wars for now.
    The fleet mission system is very useful when you have to keep track of 20 fleets across multiple colonies covering a dozen systems. Early game it can be a little daunting especially if you're expecting drag and drop movement.

  8. #1718
    How To Go
    Join Date
    Sep 2004
    Location
    Pasadena, Ca
    Posts
    11,328
    Quote Originally Posted by Rorschach View Post
    The fleet mission system is very useful when you have to keep track of 20 fleets across multiple colonies covering a dozen systems. Early game it can be a little daunting especially if you're expecting drag and drop movement.
    Well if I want to send out 10 explorers/scout ships in either AI Wars or Distant Worlds, I build them and send them out. In this game I have to build 10 CC ships, as well as other ships to support them and then put them into fleets and babysit them across the galaxy. That's just insane to me.

  9. #1719
    Social Worker
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Location
    Elverum,Norway
    Posts
    3,376
    The fleet stuff was supposed to make things a bit more 'formal' I would guess. However it has turned things a bit tedious , surveying is also a mechanic that isn't really needed if you ask me.

    Simpler pool of ships, fleets should be able to do like Shogun 2, gain ships from the pool every so often to replace losses.
    CNC ships was a weak spot in SOTS 1 too, idea is good, execution so and so, I would remove them personally and instead just have a 'lead' ship.

  10. #1720
    Social Worker
    Join Date
    Oct 2002
    Location
    San Diego; GamerTag: "Rorschach Six"
    Posts
    3,505
    Yep surveying is different from the previous game. Personally I don't build surveying fleets, I build general purpose combat fleets which I use to survey, defend, and attack.

    I like the Shogun idea of unit replacement. Something like that is kind of already in the game. If you task a fleet with a mission and you don't have a required ship you'll automatically build that ship and add it to the fleet.

  11. #1721
    New Romantic KevinC's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Location
    Utah
    Posts
    7,387
    IMO the fleet system is a good concept yet to go through some playtesting / iteration cycles. Hopefully they're open to making adjustments after the bigger issues are tackled?

  12. #1722
    Neo Acoustic
    Join Date
    Oct 2004
    Posts
    1,889
    Quote Originally Posted by Rorschach View Post
    Yep surveying is different from the previous game. Personally I don't build surveying fleets, I build general purpose combat fleets which I use to survey, defend, and attack.
    Yeah that's what I tend to do. I don't mind surveying actually and quite honestly, my old SotS 1 tactic of sending out lone tankers to explore the galaxy always felt a little gamey. I think the new survey system is pretty clearly intended to keep players a little closer to home and not be able to send a few lone ships on a suicide mission to explore the cosmos. It's also worth pointing out to new players that you shouldn't skimp on your survey fleets... the more planets a system has the longer is takes you to survey. If you only have 1 or 2 ships in your fleet it's going to take you upwards of 10 turns to explore a system with 5 or 6 planets.

    After playing a bit more the last few days and fighting a few battles I can really see the charm of the fleet system, but it needs a few tweaks to be a little less annoying. I think one of the biggest things in it's favor is, because battles now tend to be fleet vs. fleet, you get a lot more battles that are roughly even instead of being able to build a giant fleet and rely on the bonus outnumber ships to win.

    Primarily, I think they need to add the ability to let a fleet relocate at any time. It's really frustrating to have a fleet on a mission in a system right next to another system where you want to rebase them, but the fleet has to travel back to it's previous base before you can give them the relocate order. It would just save some hassle and time if I could tell that fleet to relocate the instant they are done with their mission... or even better, add to the mission creation interface the ability to select an alternate system to return to.

    As I mentioned above another option that would streamline things a lot is letting ships transfer from one reserve to another without having to join a fleet. Sometimes I need to spread my construction out through multiple systems to speed it up a bit, but then I'm left with having to send a "ferry" fleet around to pick up the new ships and gather them together. That's just annoying micro management that slows things down. At the very least being able to give a rally command to order all new ships to gather at a certain system would also probably help.

    I think the main thing annoying me at the moment is an odd issue on the main map. Is anyone else getting an issue where sometimes a fleet in a system is placed "on top" of the system, so when you try to select the system you only get the lone fleet? You can usually click around and eventually get the system selected, but it sometimes takes a lot of clicking and rotating the camera to work and it's really irritating.

  13. #1723
    Social Worker
    Join Date
    Apr 2003
    Posts
    4,063
    Quote Originally Posted by Sepiche View Post
    I think the main thing annoying me at the moment is an odd issue on the main map. Is anyone else getting an issue where sometimes a fleet in a system is placed "on top" of the system, so when you try to select the system you only get the lone fleet? You can usually click around and eventually get the system selected, but it sometimes takes a lot of clicking and rotating the camera to work and it's really irritating.
    Yeah I am getting that. Annoying as heck.

    I'd like to see some tweaks to the fleet system (you have some good suggestions). Overall I think it's pretty reasonable.

  14. #1724
    Neo Acoustic
    Join Date
    Oct 2004
    Posts
    1,889
    Quote Originally Posted by MikeJ View Post
    Yeah I am getting that. Annoying as heck.

    I'd like to see some tweaks to the fleet system (you have some good suggestions). Overall I think it's pretty reasonable.
    I did a little reading over at the Kerbero's forums and it sounds like it might be related to cancelling missions, but can be fixed by reloading the game. I'll mess around with it tonight a little probably and see if that's the case and if that helps any.

  15. #1725
    Social Worker
    Join Date
    Mar 2003
    Posts
    2,843
    Quote Originally Posted by Sepiche View Post
    Yeah that's what I tend to do. I don't mind surveying actually and quite honestly, my old SotS 1 tactic of sending out lone tankers to explore the galaxy always felt a little gamey. I think the new survey system is pretty clearly intended to keep players a little closer to home and not be able to send a few lone ships on a suicide mission to explore the cosmos. It's also worth pointing out to new players that you shouldn't skimp on your survey fleets... the more planets a system has the longer is takes you to survey. If you only have 1 or 2 ships in your fleet it's going to take you upwards of 10 turns to explore a system with 5 or 6 planets.

    After playing a bit more the last few days and fighting a few battles I can really see the charm of the fleet system, but it needs a few tweaks to be a little less annoying. I think one of the biggest things in it's favor is, because battles now tend to be fleet vs. fleet, you get a lot more battles that are roughly even instead of being able to build a giant fleet and rely on the bonus outnumber ships to win.

    Primarily, I think they need to add the ability to let a fleet relocate at any time. It's really frustrating to have a fleet on a mission in a system right next to another system where you want to rebase them, but the fleet has to travel back to it's previous base before you can give them the relocate order. It would just save some hassle and time if I could tell that fleet to relocate the instant they are done with their mission... or even better, add to the mission creation interface the ability to select an alternate system to return to.

    As I mentioned above another option that would streamline things a lot is letting ships transfer from one reserve to another without having to join a fleet. Sometimes I need to spread my construction out through multiple systems to speed it up a bit, but then I'm left with having to send a "ferry" fleet around to pick up the new ships and gather them together. That's just annoying micro management that slows things down. At the very least being able to give a rally command to order all new ships to gather at a certain system would also probably help.

    I think the main thing annoying me at the moment is an odd issue on the main map. Is anyone else getting an issue where sometimes a fleet in a system is placed "on top" of the system, so when you try to select the system you only get the lone fleet? You can usually click around and eventually get the system selected, but it sometimes takes a lot of clicking and rotating the camera to work and it's really irritating.
    Your suggestions sound good, have you posted them over at the Kerberos forums?

  16. #1726
    Neo Acoustic
    Join Date
    Oct 2004
    Posts
    1,889
    Quote Originally Posted by Grifman View Post
    Your suggestions sound good, have you posted them over at the Kerberos forums?
    I probably should, but I stopped posting there years ago after being hounded by fan boys for making modest critiques. :P

  17. #1727
    New Romantic
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Posts
    6,738
    I would imagine the blasting you'd get would be a lot less nowadays, but one can only guess. At least think about posting over there and letting the fanboys chew on it for old time's sake.

  18. #1728
    New Romantic KevinC's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Location
    Utah
    Posts
    7,387
    Yea I'd recommend posting it on the suggestions forum.

  19. #1729
    Social Worker
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Location
    Elverum,Norway
    Posts
    3,376
    Well, 200 + turns out, really stable, 6 player DISC, turn times are good, I'm happy.
    AI is somewhat weird, sometimes he gives me absolute hell, I can't get off the ground, other times he leaves me alone..

    Combat in space works, however I keep wondering if they ment for their space combat to contain a lot more ships than it does now.

    Woah, what firepower on my new War Dreadnaught, I could sit in design and watch that thing fire on those targets ALL day...
    Holy crap what a game it would be just to play one of them...
    Last edited by Janster; 01-25-2012 at 05:35 PM.

  20. #1730
    Neo Acoustic
    Join Date
    Oct 2004
    Posts
    1,889
    Quote Originally Posted by Janster View Post
    Well, 200 + turns out, really stable, 6 player DISC, turn times are good, I'm happy.
    AI is somewhat weird, sometimes he gives me absolute hell, I can't get off the ground, other times he leaves me alone..

    Combat in space works, however I keep wondering if they ment for their space combat to contain a lot more ships than it does now.

    Woah, what firepower on my new War Dreadnaught, I could sit in design and watch that thing fire on those targets ALL day...
    Holy crap what a game it would be just to play one of them...
    Yeah I have to admit, despite the huge holes that still remain to be fixed, I'm starting to have a good time playing it. I find I'm kind of liking the smaller scale of combat compared to SotS actually, although I suspect there will be some tech advances down the line that up the number quite a bit.

  21. #1731
    New Romantic KevinC's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Location
    Utah
    Posts
    7,387
    I know one of their goals was fewer, more important, and less disposable ships.

  22. #1732
    Social Worker
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Location
    Elverum,Norway
    Posts
    3,376
    Did someone say how to change combat distance, I often find my pursuit ships not closing in enough to give proper fire to the enemy.

  23. #1733
    Social Worker
    Join Date
    Oct 2002
    Location
    San Diego; GamerTag: "Rorschach Six"
    Posts
    3,505
    Quote Originally Posted by Janster View Post
    Did someone say how to change combat distance, I often find my pursuit ships not closing in enough to give proper fire to the enemy.
    Pursuit range is based on the primary weapon. You select your primary weapon by "starring" it like a favorite.

  24. #1734
    World's End Supernova Brian Rubin's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2003
    Location
    Chango Dock
    Posts
    25,440
    Thought y'all might like to see this:

    Paradox: Sword of the Stars 2 was "a big failure"

  25. #1735
    How To Go
    Join Date
    Sep 2004
    Location
    Pasadena, Ca
    Posts
    11,328
    <shrug> There are still a ton of people who never saw a refund like me, and for them to continue to market the game on Steam while talking about how much of a 'failure' it is, is hypocritical in the least, and unethical at the most. Why would they even say that at this point, such a slap in the face.

  26. #1736
    World's End Supernova
    Join Date
    Jan 2005
    Location
    Under a big sky
    Posts
    18,149
    It's nice that he's taking responsibility, but it doesn't exactly explain where the failure happened. The reference to changes in contracts seems to support the idea, to me, that Kerberos was beyond an agreed upon release date and beyond Paradox funding agreements and thus both sides were stuck.

  27. #1737
    New Romantic KevinC's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Location
    Utah
    Posts
    7,387
    Quote Originally Posted by Sarkus View Post
    It's nice that he's taking responsibility, but it doesn't exactly explain where the failure happened.
    Yea, he mentions the choice between two really bad decisions but I still don't understand why it had to be like that (because I don't know the details). Maybe someday the whole story will come out.

  28. #1738
    Social Worker
    Join Date
    Apr 2003
    Posts
    4,063
    Yeah you'd think the normal route would be to fund the completion of the game, in exchange for Kerberos getting a smaller slice of the sales income. That or just drop the game entirely if the expected costs of completion were too high.

    I'm wondering if that whole renegotiation broke down? I guess 'who owns what' if the game isn't ready on time is the critical part of the contract.

  29. #1739
    New Romantic
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Posts
    6,738
    Well, for what it's worth, he says they've changed the way the do contracts with third parties so that might be exactly what they're going to do in the future. It's still a little mind-boggling that people weren't able to come up with that in time to stave the disasterous release that this was. Then again, one thing I've seen with mismanagement is that there's always enough blame to go around when it comes right down to it. It's good that Wester took full responsibility for the release, but I doubt we'll ever know for certain what the nitty-gritty details were.

    Thing is in the end I guess it doesn't matter too much on the consumer side: we're waiting for the game to be completed (or waiting for a refund that is proverbially forever in the mail for Lorini). At least it's shaping up to be pretty solid and I'm looking forward to seeing the whole package when they're done. And yes, they're still selling it at full price. At least anyone looking to buy it will have easy access to reviews or message boards explaining the state of it. That said, it seems like a worthwhile purchase at this point (at long last)

  30. #1740
    Broad Band
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Posts
    283
    Quote Originally Posted by MikeJ View Post
    I'm wondering if that whole renegotiation broke down? I guess 'who owns what' if the game isn't ready on time is the critical part of the contract.
    I think there must have been a breakdown of trust, even if only temporarily, as otherwise Paradox would have extended the delivery deadline. Presumably the sticking point was just how much Kerberos was going to have to give up in exchange for that, and the best they could come up with was to release it as was and patch it into submission later.

    IMO it's pretty fun to play now and it's shocking to see how far it's come from launch state. I hope that this has gone some way towards mending the relationship between Kerberos and Paradox; sounds like it's a risk that comes with working with the smaller dev teams.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •