The Rook's Bailey

Getting a little too busy on the video game side for me.

I'm still wanting to finish off my EUII game. I'm spending too much time on Crusader Kings. Yesterday, I just discovered Sword of the Stars in a junk pile that was dumped on me a few months back. It was a good thing I remembered you talking about the upcoming sequel a while back, because just looking at it, I had mistaken it for an RTS game. Haven't even had the time to install it yet.

And I've been testing DosBox by putting Gold of the Americas, Master of Magic, and Star Control though their paces. And I've been tempted to get back into HoMM or AoW recently....

And I have four Vassal PBEM games to keep up with.

Work work work....

Sword of the Stars is a good game (my review here & blog series starting here ). It started out buggy, but Kerberos is one of those indie devs that never quit until the game is as perfect as they can make it. Basically, it is Total War in space, i.e., turn-based strategy with real time battles. It is fun - especially if you are playing with all the expansions and the tons of content they add. Unfortunately, though, it is starting to show its age, which is why I am happy to see that we can expect SotS II in August. SotS II seems like it will be a more complex game, which should be good as the formula in the original can get a bit repetitive after the first few hundred turns. Nonetheless, I think you'll like it.

All I've got is the base game. :P Where should I go to find the patches?

I guess here: http://sots.rorschach.net/Category:V...s#Update_1.8.0

Heh, I hit a squirrel with my car once. I was driving down a street when the rodent leaped out from under a parked car. I did my best to miss it but not only did I feel the "crunch" but I heard the "crunch" as my windows were down. I flipped a b*tch and grabbed a bunch of plastic bags from the trunk of my car. I stood on the sidewalk after pulling over so I could go and pick up the squirrel which was in the middle of the lane in a 2-way street. I was about to go out and pick it up when cars started coming down. I had to witness and hear (again) cars running it over, thankfully not spilling its guts all over the road. As I waited a lady pulled into the house I was standing in front of. She informed me that it might be one of the squirrels she feeds on a regular basis which made me feel somewhat sad. But she gave me a trash bag to use instead of my two meager plastic bags from stores like Safeway or Target. She offered to bury to which I replied that I killed so I'll do the dirty work. I got home and threw the plastic covered corpse into the trash can (no real yard to speak of lol). So... that's my squirrel burying story. Not as..... prophetic as yours but just as awkward.

And that whole thing about animals being resurrected. I told my friend that if God doesn't take animals then I'm not goin. Especially if he leaves my cat behind.

I am actually glad to know that I am not the only one ridiculously sentimental about furry animals. It's funny: I understand that if a squirrel was as big as me, it would probably break me open in a second, just as if I was another wally nut. No mercy. By rights, I should just treat them the same way and turn the lot of them into squirrel stew (aka: Brunswick Stew...yum). Yet I am still compelled to feel sorry for 'em for no good reason. Go figure.

But, like I said, at least I now know I am not the only one.

Well, after installing SotS Friday evening, I have some thoughts (keep in mind I only have the base game):

First of all, it is kind of the 'anti-MoO3', since it is pretty well dedicated to simplifying a lot of complications down. No building individual structures, no multiple planets per star system, ship design is simplified with only three sizes, and streamlined with the use of 'modules'. It also lets you start building a competent (if primitive) navy straight off the bat, whereas most space 4X games make initial ship building horribly expensive. The ability to terraform most anything (slowly) off the bat was a surprise, but a nice way to further streamline the game.

The tech tree is pretty good, though from the format, I expected to see more crossovers between adjacent fields; instead you're more likely to unlock things on the opposite side of the cylinder by getting a key tech. Since they don't inform you of these things when there's no line between them, you have to keep a closer eye on what's available everywhere than you should have to. It'd also be nice to just be able to get a list of everything currently available to research and how long each would take; currently the decision making info is very scattered. It's also disappointing to see industry and C3 exploding into dozens of technologies, while others remain stubbornly stuck at two. Drive improvements come in three flavors: new module, checkbox for existing module, and automatic help for everyone; the last two in particular are hard to tell apart without going back into the ship design screen.

The scenarios are a nice touch. I was a little dubious at first, but I've now started the first one, and I'm liking it.

I had a lot of trouble with the combat at first. I've slowly been deciphering it, and I'm not liking the fact that I'm having to treat it very much like a normal RTS game. Why define fleets so much, if you don't have a 'select fleet' button in combat (drag-select? come on!). Why painstakingly define formations ahead of battle if the fleet is incapable of staying in formation? SotS is again the 'anti-MoO3' here, but the problem is that the fleet combat in MoO3 is a large part of why I liked that game! So far, SotS combat is an exercise in tedium and frustration.

So far, it's batting a pretty solid 7.2 with me (just below all three MoO games... which means I probably need to sort out my 4X ratings better), with the possibility of going much higher if combat ever starts working better for me. I'm certainly not going to recommend it to my dad without telling him to leave combat to auto-resolution, and what's the fun in that? (He likes 4X, but has zero understanding of RTS.)

I'm also tired of all these games mucking around one planet for combat. I want to see one where the combat looks like it came out of a David Webber novel! :P

I think your observations are spot-on.

First of all, it is kind of the 'anti-MoO3', since it is pretty well dedicated to simplifying a lot of complications down. No building individual structures, no multiple planets per star system, ship design is simplified with only three sizes, and streamlined with the use of 'modules'. It also lets you start building a competent (if primitive) navy straight off the bat, whereas most space 4X games make initial ship building horribly expensive. The ability to terraform most anything (slowly) off the bat was a surprise, but a nice way to further streamline the game.

SotS is all about streamlined gameplay, something Kerberos has been adamant about since the game was first released. This can be a good thing as, once upon a time, there were too many spreadsheet 4X games out there, but I still believe SotS takes it a bit too far. I would love to be able to build structures on planets GalCiv II style. Also, I find the trade, terraforming and population management aspects to be simplified almost to the point of uselessness. I understand that Kerberos are revamping these these areas somewhat to make them more interesting and less tedious.

The tech tree is pretty good, though from the format, I expected to see more crossovers between adjacent fields; instead you're more likely to unlock things on the opposite side of the cylinder by getting a key tech. Since they don't inform you of these things when there's no line between them, you have to keep a closer eye on what's available everywhere than you should have to. It'd also be nice to just be able to get a list of everything currently available to research and how long each would take; currently the decision making info is very scattered. It's also disappointing to see industry and C3 exploding into dozens of technologies, while others remain stubbornly stuck at two. Drive improvements come in three flavors: new module, checkbox for existing module, and automatic help for everyone; the last two in particular are hard to tell apart without going back into the ship design screen.

Keep in mind that the tech tree in SotS in random, one of this game's coolest features. So, for example, in one game a particular line of tech might come to a sudden end, but in another game, it might flower into something more. This is why there is no master map of techs to explore (like in GalCiv II), because that map would need to change from game to game.

As you point out, I do wish techs were better explained. Lots of time I will research a tech and not realize it had unlocked a new ship section or component - that is something that should be announced right after making the tech breakthrough. Also, sometimes the new section is not explained at all, forcing me to check the SotS wiki to understand what it does. Like you said, tech needs better explanations, especially when you have all the expansions and there are hundreds of different things to unlock and put on your ships.

I had a lot of trouble with the combat at first. I've slowly been deciphering it, and I'm not liking the fact that I'm having to treat it very much like a normal RTS game. Why define fleets so much, if you don't have a 'select fleet' button in combat (drag-select? come on!). Why painstakingly define formations ahead of battle if the fleet is incapable of staying in formation? SotS is again the 'anti-MoO3' here, but the problem is that the fleet combat in MoO3 is a large part of why I liked that game! So far, SotS combat is an exercise in tedium and frustration.

Yes! This is where SotS got hit the hardest in the rating when it first came out. To begin with, the interface is a nightmare to use, leading to incredible frustration. Also, as you have discovered, most battles degenerate into furballs where fleet organization doesn't count for squat after the first few minutes. This is made all the worse by the fact that most battles come down to attrition where all the fancy weaponry and location-based damage is reduced to a typical DPS calculation, something exacerbated by vessels having the annoying habit of moving into beyond point blank range (sometimes literally rubbing up against each other) where maneuvering isn't worth a damn. I also find the line of scrimmage battles (i.e., where one side forms a defensive line, usually near a planet) to become old fast. Don't get me wrong - the battles do have their enjoyable aspects (particularly all the cool weapon effects), but there is a lot of room for improvement.

I'm also tired of all these games mucking around one planet for combat. I want to see one where the combat looks like it came out of a David Webber novel! :P

Don't get me started on that! I've written extensively about how ship to ship warfare in these 4X sci-fi games have less to do with naval warfare and more to do with fighter plane dogfights. I hope that SotS II is the first game that rectifies this. The devs have made a number of comments that seem to indicate that they are changing the ship combat drastically. For example, there will not be large furballs in SotS II. The devs have said that in SotS II, each ship you build can be given a name, because the ship is meant to be unique and stick around for a while. They also said that battles will be smaller, only involving a few ships at a time, leading to fights where the abilities of each ship count much more than they do in SotS I. Also, maneuvering seems to have greater importance as the devs said that you will be able to play a game of cat and mouse with fleets due to the far more detailed star systems with unique terrain such as moons and asteroids.

I am hoping like heck that SotS II is the David Weber / Jack Campbell sci-fi fleet warfare simulator that I've been desiring for many a year.

BTW: here is a walk-through of SotS II that I think is new:

http://www.gamereactor.eu/grtv/?id=1...a1b66d38634d23

That detailed armor info further strengthens the idea that ships are designed to last, and that the player will be encouraged to pull ships from the line before they get too heavily damaged. Yum!

Also, here's the vid where Cirulis seems to indicate a much more tactical approach to combat, mentioning "deep attacks", "searching for the enemy", "scanning for the enemy" and "true carrier-based actions":

One more vid, this time with that quote that in SotS II, ships are made to last; to survive multiple battles and become legends for the player to remember:

http://www.gamereactor.eu/grtv/?id=1...a1b66d38634d23

That certainly sounds close to Weber! He even mentions that "admirals will learn for that [surviving battles]:. Are we going to be able to recruit admirals, too? Be steady, my heart!

Edit: Gah, you've been busy posting!

I don't mind the fact that most of those things are simplified. I think they went a step too far in a few places (three ship sizes?), but most of it I can just shrug off. I mean, I like the 'building' model inherited from Civ and MoO II for the first few planets, but then it gets tedious, so after a couple minutes of shock, I liked the infrastructure percentage. It is a bit too simple, and I think what is needed is more of a basic control for what type of planet it is. Is it a commercial hub? An industrial powerhouse? Godsfire boiled it down to something similar to that, and I think it's a good idea. I'd also roll trade and population management into that system; personally I'm glad there's no real need to do much with that distraction.

Better terraforming options would be good. I'd also like to see a nod to that eternal staple of SF, belters, given a nod in one of these games. But more full-featured solar systems is one of those complications that I generally like, and start docking points for when it's not there. (Even the '80s classic, Reach For the Stars had 1-3 usable planets per system.)

I know the tech tree is random, and slightly different for each race, but it seems pretty clear so far that Stardrives and Shields in particular don't have anywhere near as many things to discover as C3 and Industrial. I'm also finding I'm really tired of the 'checkbox option' style of ship construction. That was part of the problems the MoO3 shipbuilding interface had, and I'm surprised to see it return here. I'm also unhappy that there's no way (that I've seen) to see what the weapons arcs are from the design screen. I've found how to do it in combat, but it's a little late to reconfigure the ship at that point....

My problem with combat isn't necessarily the 'furball' problem, it's just that like in pretty much any RTS I've seen, there is no attempt to maintain fleet order. I don't mind a close battle degenerating into electric football, it seems sadly appropriate. However, if I've got a fleet, and their main firepower is in missiles, giving the stand off order gives the right response: they maintain distance and keep pounding the enemy with missiles, turning into a running battle of the type the missile ships excel at. Or it would if they'd stick together for concentrated anti-missile defense instead of scattering to the four winds. *sigh*

Yes, combat is working a lot better today. I'm having disasters on occasion when the computer does something stupid for me, but I'm generally giving as good as I get, even when outnumbered. Of course, if the AI would practice proper fleet discipline, it would loose fewer ships....

One of the things I do like about the combat is that is something of a real world experience—that is to say there is momentum. I'd like to be able to say, 'go thataway, don't stop', instead having them turn and bring themselves to a halt if I'm not paying enough attention. Which is to say, I want to set a course, not a destination. Of course that's part of why I want a bigger playing field than low and medium orbit (and they skip gravity anyway...). The Webber reference is more to the wide ranging, high acceleration regime of space fighting, rather than the SciFi part (though there's nothing wrong with that!), so I'd be just as happy with a Gallacci/Cherryh/Traveller style.

The 'unique ship' model is certainly viable for 4X games, that's how MoO2 did it (quite well). Personally, I prefer the epic feel of dozens of ships slugging it out on each side. But then, I'm a Federation and Empire fan, so I'm a bit crazy.

Okay, that's annoying. The expansions are 15, 20 and 5 dollars on GamersGate. The Complete Collection is $20 there.

I'm contemplating it; I got the game free, and while not great, it is good, and I don't mind giving the developer a bit of monetary feedback to that effect. I've heard mention that they fixed some things in the expansions, and I've noticed that the UI improved just by patching it. Did they mitigate any of the combat problems in the expansions?

Originally Posted by Rindis

Edit: Gah, you've been busy posting!

LOL! Nothing gets my blood up like a discussion about 4X games.

It is a bit too simple, and I think what is needed is more of a basic control for what type of planet it is. Is it a commercial hub? An industrial powerhouse? Godsfire boiled it down to something similar to that, and I think it's a good idea. I'd also roll trade and population management into that system; personally I'm glad there's no real need to do much with that distraction.

I agree with that. That is GalCiv II's strong point. Because that game allows you to build all sorts of different structures on a planet, you can really fine tune the way you want them to develop. I once turned an entire planet into a massive intelligence collection center, appropriately placed on the border of a hostile empire. I wish other games would allow such detailed planetary development.

I'm also unhappy that there's no way (that I've seen) to see what the weapons arcs are from the design screen. I've found how to do it in combat, but it's a little late to reconfigure the ship at that point....

You can: just click on the weapons bank in the ship designer screen and the arcs will appear...unless this was something added by one of the expansions.

My problem with combat isn't necessarily the 'furball' problem, it's just that like in pretty much any RTS I've seen, there is no attempt to maintain fleet order. I don't mind a close battle degenerating into electric football, it seems sadly appropriate. However, if I've got a fleet, and their main firepower is in missiles, giving the stand off order gives the right response: they maintain distance and keep pounding the enemy with missiles, turning into a running battle of the type the missile ships excel at. Or it would if they'd stick together for concentrated anti-missile defense instead of scattering to the four winds. *sigh*

Yeah, exactly. This doesn't happen because SotS, like so many other 4X sci-fi games, have engagement ranges that are ridiculously small. I mean, I bet a WWI battleship could out-range these futuristic warships by a factor of 10. IMO, it's all part of the "furball" mentality where warships move and attack not like naval vessels, but like fighter planes.

One of the things I do like about the combat is that is something of a real world experience—that is to say there is momentum. I'd like to be able to say, 'go thataway, don't stop', instead having them turn and bring themselves to a halt if I'm not paying enough attention. Which is to say, I want to set a course, not a destination. Of course that's part of why I want a bigger playing field than low and medium orbit (and they skip gravity anyway...). The Webber reference is more to the wide ranging, high acceleration regime of space fighting, rather than the SciFi part (though there's nothing wrong with that!), so I'd be just as happy with a Gallacci/Cherryh/Traveller style.

Right. Again, it all comes down to getting game devs to stop thinking Top Gun and start thinking in terms of Sink the Bismark.

The 'unique ship' model is certainly viable for 4X games, that's how MoO2 did it (quite well). Personally, I prefer the epic feel of dozens of ships slugging it out on each side. But then, I'm a Federation and Empire fan, so I'm a bit crazy.

I'm the opposite: I rather have small fights where each ship counts than a giant dogfight where so much is going on, the battle comes down to mass attrition - the last shipping standing, wins. Again, for me, its Sink the Bismark...but in space (space...space...space) rather than the fleet battle in Return of the Jedi or ST: Wolf 359.

By the way: if you like big fights, you might want to check out Sins of a Solar Empire. You can have big slugfests there, but because the battles are largely static - the fleets stand off from each other and blast away - it actually works pretty well, with the various vessels ordering themselves according to the range of their weapons all on their own. Sins is currently my favorite game of sci-fi fleet warfare (how I can't wait for Sins: Rebellion ), followed by AI War (you want big fights? Try the 10,000-ship battles in that game! ) .

Originally Posted by Rindis

Okay, that's annoying. The expansions are 15, 20 and 5 dollars on GamersGate. The Complete Collection is $20 there.

I didn't realize that. Think they want you to purchase one over the other?

I'm contemplating it; I got the game free, and while not great, it is good, and I don't mind giving the developer a bit of monetary feedback to that effect. I've heard mention that they fixed some things in the expansions, and I've noticed that the UI improved just by patching it. Did they mitigate any of the combat problems in the expansions?

Not that I recall. It's been a while since I played the vanilla game, but I don't recall any drastic changes. From what you have written, the base game largely operates the same way as the Ultimate Edition. The expansions mostly brought new races and lots more equipment.

Well, GamersGate decided to run a special on SotS this week. So, I just bought the Complete Edition for $8.



Pity they don't carry SoaSE.

Complete for $8? That's awesome! You lucked out there!

As for SoaSE, yeah, that is an Impulse exclusive. I don't blame Stardock - SoaSE is their biggest hit ever and they aren't willing to share it with anyone. If there's a sale, though, don't let Impulse hold you back. The game is just too awesome for that. I mean, just mentioning it in this thread has caused me to boot it up again and start a new campaign.