Go play Space Empires V

lol Third... I think the ideas are cool concepts, be nice, he isnt dogging the game or bitching, he is actually giving cool new fresh ideas for the game.

I would really like a 3D space map. This would greatly increase the choices one would have for invasion and chokepoints. Also, it would be nice to have curved routes in addition to the straight lines. Having Planetary systems with orbits, offering choices such as gravitaional slingshots, waiting for planetary alignments....In other words, modeling the galaxies more the way they really are, not just a 2D linear model...
Orion 314159

When I picked this game up, I was thinking it would be like Pax Imperia II, an unsung hero of the space domination genre. The only reason Pax Imperia II fell short of epic was because it was based off of a Macintosh original, and the sequel never had quite the same feature set as the first, and it never released for the Mac. But, that history lesson is not the point.

I was imagining a Star, with several planets orbiting the star, and you were able to colonize the various planets, and do whatever, much like in Sins, except the entire solar system was visible at once and all the planets were orbiting the sun, and there were no "phase lanes" between the planets, instead there were warp gates between the stars themselves. It was very feasible to have hostile and neutral counterparts in the same solar system and each star had from 3-10 planets of differing resource values. All of this was delivered with a very beautiful GUI based upon windows where you had a galaxy view, and a solar system view, and a planet surface view where you could perform construction on the planet surface and watch it grow. Every view and differing levels of detail and activity. There was also a combat view where ship to ship and planetary combat was performed.

What Sins gave us was a flat, 3d illusion of a 2d world with little in the line of animation or activity. The planets don't orbit anything, they don't revolve, jumping from star to star is no different than jumping from planet to planet...and in fact, is easier because planet to planet requires a "phase lane" but from solar system to solar system just requires access to the central star.

Which is sad, because Sins did give us some very beautiful graphics (atleast they look good on the box) and some very nice spacial scenery. It would have been nice to see orbiting planets however, and more focus on the epic leaps of star to star travel rather than the phase lanes in planet to planet travel.

Sins could have taken the exact same game, made the asteriods planets, made the planets stars, kept the phase lanes, and then made the star to star travel intergalactic travel, and added some very basic orbital animations (and varying resources per planet) and made an extrordinarily epic game in scale and delivery. That's all it would have taken. When you zoom away from the stars they turn into galaxies anyway, so I'm not sure why they went with "asteriods" instead of planets. Then have 3-15 planets per star (now planets) with varying levels of resource generation and then you could build defensive structures on each planet and had the epic bombardment weapon as a solar system emplacement.

That's my .02.

I think it would just be cool to add a few new buildings, researches and units to keep things spiced up in a couple months. Maybe they can go a little farther and add a new category of unit that is built from a new type of building. If they can, some new diplomacy and AI interaction would be great. As UrzaEnderThrawn said, requesting the AI to attack a faction or help defend a point, etc. would be a very welcome addition to the game. The diplomacy in Space Empires V that is quoted above sounds awesome, but i have my doubts that it can be added to the game. But kudos because having that would be pretty damn awesome. We all need to keep in mind that damn near all of the games out there with really really good diplomacy are pure 4X (except the total war series) and Sins is a hell of a lot more than that, so we should all be thankful for what we have, lol.

As for the 3D space map...well i don't see why they couldnt implement that. It kindof already is there. The map looks completely 2D, however, some planets really are highter than others and such. I don't think it would be too hard to move those up some more or down, whatever. But i think that may make the game too hard to play. Funny things already happen with the camera from time to time in 2D...i dont want to make it difficult to look around and find the planet that is being seiged, or go see where i finally came across the space ponies, or whatever. I think Ironclad made the maps 2D just for conveniance to the player. But the option to have a more 3D map would be cool.

But most of all, i really, really, really, really (x10) want unit formations that actually matter in battle. Now, i realize that they already more or less form up before phase jumping off (i.e., frigates in front, LRM's in back, support in middle) but i want something more. I want a bunch of options that actually count. Like, when i have 4 light Cobalt frigates surrounding a Kodiak, i should get some kind of bonus for having him surrounded and shooting lasers up his ass as well as down his throat. I think that makes sense. It may be more complicated than that, seeings as how ships can move anywhere, but hey, i think it would be a lot cooler with formations. But regardless, i still can't wait for v1.04. I hope it comes out by the end of May. If it did, i would be happy.

As Rhedd said, you can use the "Ping" button to place a ping signal on a planet or structure, and usually your AI allies will do something in response, such as coming to your aid if you're assaulting it.

I think the Sins negotiations interface is quite comprehensive. I'm not sure what you're suggesting, Urza... you say you'd like to push it more toward Civilizations 4 or Space Empires V, but I don't know what that entails. Could you be a little more specific as to "what" extra conditions could be feasibly implemented into Sins?

As for the economy, there are not only trade ports but orbital refineries. And there are "special" planet resources, such as Entertainment Hubs and whatnot that you can discover by exploring the planet which give boosts to different things. The planet type already accounts for the diversity of resources: a terran planet will have more resources and be able to support a larger population than a more inhospitable ice planet, so terran planets give more income. I mean, sure, a volcanic planet, in theory, might have more natural resources than a terran planet, but how easy is it to extract? If there was a large amount of ores on a volcanic planet, there wouldn't be enough population to extract them, plus the technology of refining molten substance into usable goods may be relatively expensive, and perhaps beyond the available technology of the civilization. And in fact, that's only IF "finding more gold" on a planet SHOULD give you more credits. How important is gold in the Sins market? Or any resource? Certainly, it's relative, and you can't neglect the fact that higher civilizations will actually earn most of their income from tertiary and quaternary economic activities, and that the primary economic activity of resource gathering is only necessary for the resources to be utilized. And for that reason, the majority of the "useful" resources are actually gathered from the asteroids, which are used to build ships, infrastructure, orbital structures, and the like.

I don't quite see where you're coming from Urza, but perhaps you could elaborate a bit more. As for the space sheep idea, I hope that's a joke, heh.

Nice Pirate theme there, but i hate pirates so that's not a good start for me and you, lol. Good concept, but Eve's ships are way the hell too detailed to have hundreds on screen at once blowing each other up. But it would be cool, and they are definately imaginative. I rather like the story that Sin's has put together. It is mysterious and full of all sorts of strange stuff that leaves it open to the future. It may not be as deep and detailed as Eve's, but it is equally as enthralling i am sure, seeing as how its an RTS, lol. The phrase, "Space Sim of the Century"...well.....I think Sins has already bagged that title. It's just already that great IMO.

I'm sorry, but have you actually played the game. You can set the game up with a lot of stars (solar systems).

Uh, yes, yes I have. The most stars I have seen thus far is five, with an obscene number of planets in a non-spherical format, interspersed much like stars would be in a galaxy, and each planet orbited by a small, random number of planetoids, much like planets would be doing around stars.

SHHH!

I'll update my wish list original post, with some screenshots, to indicate exactly what I'm looking for. I can understand if my thoughts don't come across as well as I imagine haha.

Screenshots from Civilization 4 added (scroll up to the original post to check them out).

Response to Sheepdude, but also as a more detailed explanation of my wishlist:

I posted screenshots for a basic idea. All the empires you've encountered are listed along the right side of the screen, and if you mouse over them, you can see their relations with you. The Wang Kon screenshot is just an example - there are quite a few more relation modifiers than in that screenshot. All the aforementioned "Influence" data is then added together to make up one "Behavior" overhead - is the leader cautious towards you, pleased, friendly, or hostile?

I also added a screenshot for trade. I'm talking about TRADE goods here - yes, gold may be subjective, but I'm sure that the universe would have some sort of universal "important goods we need". The screenshot cuts off after Aluminum and Coal, but you get the idea.

Yes, I realize that most money does NOT come from trade goods, even in the real world, but it's the fact that it's there in the first place. Why shouldn't a capital ship require a specific mineral (such as Adamantium) that must be found on a planet, or mined from a gas cloud? Why wouldn't a siege frigate's guns require a certain type of gas or laser optic? The game assumes that you can find every resource needed to build a ship everywhere in the galaxy, even if it's just a rock in a forgotten corner of the universe.

I understand that technology trading might be iffy, since all three empires have different buildings and units, but why can't humans demand a Vasari tech, or vice versa? For game mechanics and balance, it might be a little thought-invoking, though.

I think what a lot of people miss when they point back to turn based games as a resource for material is that adding the level of depth of say MOO3 to a real time game would slow any game on a map bigger than the medium single star map to a crawl. Turn based games have the luxury of not having to calculate the myriad variables for 9 different races over dozens of planets and multiple star systems in real time along with combat and everything else leading up to it, and the lag that you normally would experience all happens between turns where the responsiveness of your mouse clicks, keystrokes, and what have you aren't going to be affected since you're not doing anything.

It's my belief that many sacrifices had to be made in complexity to streamline the user experience in a real time game, in order to make it playable on all but the smallest maps with the lowest settings for users with anything but a $3000+ gaming rig. Even with as much streamlining as has been done, the 5 star system huge map still slows to a crawl on my dual core 3GHz once every race has a decent sized fleet and combat is occurring all over the place.

There's still a great deal of detail in this game, and I applaud Ironclad for being able to pull something of this scale off with today's technology. The AI in 1.03 even on normal difficulty is pretty engaging, the game plays well on the huge random map right up to the endgame where all stars are populated, and combat has a level of detail to it that's amazing in a 4x game. The fact that fleet positioning and firing arcs are all a factor amazes me in a game that's already doing so much. My hat's off to you guys, the game really does feel like a 4x game in an RTS world. No other game to date has been able to bring as much depth as you have to real time, and until PC hardware makes its next big leap in processing speed, I can't see anyone pulling off anything on a grander scale than what you've given us.

While diplomacy could use a little more depth, such as tech trading and whatnot; it would be hard to do with the major differences in tech trees between races. My only beef was not being able to make demands of the AI, such as resource demands in exchange for cease fires, etc. As it is, I'm barely able to keep up with all the incoming AI diplomacy messages once things pick up anyway, so I'm not really concerned by it as the game is keeping me engaged in other areas. I'd have liked to see more depth in the tech tree as well, but I understand that sacrifices had to be made in order to streamline the user's experience as well as make balancing the game for all three races easier. The ease of bullying the AI seems all but fixed in 1.03, so I can't say I really have any complaints over the AI's behavior. In fact, there's little I can say I'd like to see added at this point, especially if it's going to add even more processing power required in order to add it.

I guess dual/quad core support would be my only real request, as to allow today's PCs to put their processor to full use once the game really gets underway and performance starts to suffer on larger maps.