gravity is still in the game.

oh I beg to differ. I'm one of those "one handed" RTS players (for the most part) so if I cannot map 3-D to my mouse I get pissed. I CAN map it to the right mouse button, but now I cannot move in either the x or y axis!

I cannot stress enough, THIS IS NOT A GOOD ENOUGH SYSTEM FOR 3-D.

and that COMPLETELY ignores the problem that orbitals are still restricted to a euclidian plane!

it isnt lacking... yet.

but it is definately losing innovation. many of the great things that made this game eye-popping for me are long since gone, but when you're removing game elements that have been mastered for well over a decade now, thats just unacceptable.

No, they'll whine about it being unrealistic and silly and not bother playing the game. Not to mention they'll be really ticked when they discover just how limiting "light speed" is for communications.

You way overestimate most people.



Just look at the sheer number of details Weber packed into those books, and yes they do need to have a basic understanding. Do I go straight down the direct course, or curl around and come in at an angle? Unless you understand how orbital / spacial mechanics works, you don't have a clue how to do such things.

Unless you mean to just strip out everything except the strategic level, and just let the AI handle the tactical -- AKA resolve it out of my control.

Id think if they were even interested in the game in the first place they would give some time to learn about it? That is what most intelligible people who take interest in the game would do, and even if we are talking about "stoners" most of them I know would think that kind of complexity in games is cool.

If the gamer is interested in a 3D space RTS game then it'd be good to add in unique and innovative gameplay designs like a more complex gravity system, or even some elements of newtonian physics as it would only attract him even more to the mysterious unique gameplay that "would" be in sins.

I've been reading through the thread and I am all for the realism elements that 3D space could offer for sins, and I may not end up buying sins if it becomes too boringly simple. I think more and more gamers are looking for games with unique gameplay bits like those suggested in this thread. If they wanted to play a simple RTS space game they could go play one of the other few that are already out.

It would be pretty hard for us to come to an agreement on this arguement, and if it were up to me I would add in selectable options for when choosing a game. Options that would decide whether there would be a realistic orbital system around stars, realistic gravity, using phase lanes as a means of planetary travel or free travelling with built up velocity and "slingshotting."

Personally I would love to have a game where planets orbit the system, no phase lanes so you would be free to travel anywhere making 3D movements more important. You might be thinking without phase jumping travel would be too slow - not if I used gravity as my velocity multiplyer. Ahead of time I could plan which planets would align with mine close enough so that I could use their gravity as my means of faster travel. Since it would be an option, anyone that doesn't like the complexities of space in a game could play with their group.

Actually I don't think any of this would be added into the game, but I had to voice it with a touch of hope. I can always hope for expansions too, but its not often that expansions add dramatic gameplay improvements, even if they were options.

I definitely agree with Karma and Polluxo. But they are fighting a lost battle it seems.

I'd just like to repeat that if the AI is not 3D aware (able to use it effectively) and everything is reduced to a 2D plane than PLEASE limit the player to it as well. It's either all 3D or no 3D (I'm only speaking about movement).

This link (to youtube) shows how beautiful a battle in homeworld (modded though) could look like. Also thanks to more 3d movement and positioning.

Explain why they'll call it unrealistic? And I never proposed putting light speed barriers on communication.

They have FTL travel so they might as well have ansibles (instantaneous FTL communicators.).




Again, they don't need to understand how it works. Does a leaping cat understand physical force equations?

No... it knows how to jump in earth normal gravity... It learned through trial and error and experience.


Give the player a few campaign missions that force them to do that sort of thing... don't bother explaining it... just make them do it and they'll understand it intuitively.


I can't say this strongly enough... an RTS without tactics might as well be turn based.

.Nexus: The Dread of new "3D" space games

Best 3D space dance yet. I was hoping Sins was heading in that direction; full 3D movement BUT with far less micromanagement possible. Meaning fleet formations and fleet orders with everything else being done by the AI. Leaving me the time to behold the beauty. Sadly it is becoming Warcraft with no visible terrain.

Looks at Warcrafts numbers sold...13+ million to date. Yeah, I think I'm okay with that.   

Sure, but they had solid ground beneath the Orcs. You don't...

When I first found Sins forums it didn't seem money is ALL you see. There was a genuine wish to create a great 3D space opera.

While I can appreciate your need to make money of course, I think there are very good points even if 3D is out.

Optional use of Phase Lanes for example, as some of us may indeed enjoy whack the mole, even if the AI was woefully inept at it, it would be nice for MP.

Acceleration realism, even if it was only for in-system this would be very cool.

Orbits, even 2d orbits are cool. OH and more powerful gravity issues...

But personally this is all secondary to me compared with terrain... more types of planets, more varience on existing ones (not all desert planets need look alike) and a heavy incline/support of modding. Oh and map editor. These are more important to me persnonally.

As I recall the problem wasn't that the AI was inept at it, it was that it was *too good* at it (at least at the mole part).

The only problem is: WarCraft games are short (30 minutes is the norm), while Sins games are not (probably over 2 hours the norm). I doubt that you'll get substantial amounts of WarCraft gamers to play Sins (if they aren't already interested in space games, 4x games in general).



Then at least give us the ability to mod it back in.

Um, we were talking about a game based on David Weber's books there

And they'll call it unrealistic because they don't understand orbital mechanics, and aren't interested.

Warcraft has a brand and thus they don't have to work as hard. The indy games succeed because they do something different.

If they aren't interested in orbital mechanics, what makes you think they would be interested in a space game with "gravity wells?"

Gravity wells as in the game area, they'd be plenty interested. Gravity wells as in things getting pulled towards the planet? Most player's probably won't care, alas.

Bringing this thread back from the dead... I don't understand. You guys struggled about z axis (which I miss terribly in this game...) I found the hotkey in the menu, tried to rebind it many times, but I cant have it to work... Was it disabled in beta 4?

maybe a auto random emergency evasive manuever?

well i dont think sots was a disaster... they are pushing out their 2nd expansion for it so id say it was far from it...

and alot of the examples you give (i wont quote the whole thing) are kinda weak, not photogenic? wtf? and the other issues you have with being able to attack from different angles... this is not homeworld... this is sins of a solar empire... you have little circles around planets that you fly your little ships in... what possible "defense avoiding" could you possibly do in that kind of situation?



whats this about? maby your real issue with the game is not about 3d but the fact that you have a problem with the way defenses work? because as far as i know with the itty bitty grav wells attacking from above or below wouldent seem any different than attacking from the directions already provided to you

Wow, just read the majority of the thread here.

Love the game. Playing the BETA4.....

At the moment I am a little dissappointed witht he 2D nature of tactical combat.

It would be good to be able to choose what point to jump in at and to slingshot. Perhaps this should be a realism option in the menu.
Enable complex gravity well :-
a) enables building structures anywhere on a sphere of the current build circles.
Enables ability to jump to a point of your choosing on the edge of the gravity well
c) Enables 3D formations to protect against attacks from any point of the sphere
d) Enables a more complex 3D movement system
e) Enables orbiting of objects around planet
f) Enables appropriate weapons unlimited range.
f) enables visability of upper and lower gravity well limits. Z axis limits
Enable Slingshot :-
a) Enables tactical slingshot and more apparent gravity effects on ships
MODS (things that are probably easily modded in):
a) Phase lanes to anywhere from anywhere

This would be awesome! It would allow many more tactics to be used, for instance if you have a large fleet, you split if before jumping to arrive at the north, south and middle poles, while a feint is carried out on left X axis.
The point of difference for space combat always needs to be gravity and 3D tactics.
Whatever game does grand strategy with 3D space gravity first....... well... instant classic just like homeworld. I think the gamers are being underestimated if this is not thought to be understood.

Due to the vastness of space it is understandable that the gravity wells are all that people want to fight in. And it is good that a few other different space-scapes have been provided in between.

One of the reasons I do not play Star Wars Empire at War is the dodgy space combat. It looked good but felt like I was playing command and conquer or supreme commander. Homeworld made me feel like I was in the vastness of 3D space.

How easy is it to include the modes suggested, even if you think it will be for a select few. I believe if modders can achieve the above, it will be the primary version of the game played multiplayer....
Oh and personally, in homeworld. Myself and friend use 3D a lot. Its a bit like having a submarine sim without being able to dive. And a lot of effort in portraying space combat for nought.

I think part of the problem is Homeworld players wanting to play Homeworld style battles on the scale of SoaSE with the accompanying galactic UI. Clearly this would be an instant success.

Iron Clad however have set out with something else in mind, and are taking a risk by using their own formula.

We'll have to wait and see I guess, I'm sure there are plenty of gameplay enhancements to yet to be implemented to offset the things that we think we want. Formations and the 3rd race for example will help.

Not going to happen.

A) All these "make it an option" threads are impossible -- they have to balance all the options, instead of the "core" game, which increases the workload exponentially.

Its far, far to late to add new features -- with the time remaining, all they can do is finish ones "in the pipe" and polish up the released ones.

C) They had a lot of the things people are asking for -- orbital mechanics, for example -- in an earlier version. Problem was, it turned out to just not be fun.

From the mouth of someone who has never played SoaSE in any form...

HW1 3D movement (on PC). Left mouse click and hold to activate the movement mode. Move mouse to desired placement on the normal 2D plane you want. Then click and hold right mouse button and move mouse up or down to designate position on vertical plane. Release both and order is executed. IMO simple and streamlined.

Yes, it is probably too late to add many new features and expect to release the game on time. Judging from what I hear though, more and likely the game seems that it might do quite well.

Anyways, sure, these things can't be added in this version, but what keeps them from adding the options in updates or sequels?

I agree with Destraex on his modes thing, and I have seen games that have atleast two different modes of play. None of them were this advanced, but the option was there to play either.

Me, personally, I'd love to play a game where I could literally slingshot around a planet or alternatively use a planet to slow ships down. From what I understand of Phase Lanes their movement restricton seems pointless to me, but that's just me. Then again, I also understand why they are there.

I'd like to see a form of this game where planets do orbit, and phase lanes don't exist. Heck I think it'd be cool if two opposing fleets jumping between two systems/planets actually caused each other to interrupt thier jumps mid-jump, effectively dropping them both out, and forcing them to engage one another in empty space. Call it jump interference, where to fleets that passed to close to each other caused the jumps to fail midway. Like I said though, that's just me. And yes, I've more ideas, but won't say them all cause I don't want to make this post any longer than necessary.

Does this mean I won't buy the game? No.
Does it mean I won't enjoy it? Probably not.
Should we stop making suggestions? No.
Should we expect many of those suggestions to be added immediately? Probably Not.
Should we keep suggesting anyways? Yes.

They're there because the devs don't want to release "Wack'a'mole" in computer format -- without them, the game didn't turn out all that fun

Like I said, I see why they are there. Besides, it'd be worse than wack'a'mole.... Atleast in wack'a'mole you had an idea where the mole would come out. That would be like ultra wack'a'mole or something.