Re: Space battles not as good as I expected them to be....

[Teradyn_pff]

DarthCycle, don't double... er in this case, triple post.

 

I do agree with the fleet of bombers statement.  All an opponent has to do is have (Imps) Tartans or (Rebs) Corellian Corvettes and they will wipe up the map with your bombers and fighters too for that matter.  There is a reason that combined arms is used in the real military.

[Necro]

the trick is to not send ur bombers in till their anti-fighter ships are out of comission!

[Otto von Bismark]

I'm not knocking HM, but I think there are far more people who are much happier with the route we took. 

 

I do pose the question, if the perspective in HM was so great, how come more developers don't adopt it for there games?  Hmm...

 

What the devil is HM? Hobo man?

And why do you say...with the route WE took? You're so awesome, I'm glad you come to this site and give us information about this game. And as for not using home world's perspective in games, that sounds like a smart idea.

Edited January 25, 2006 by Nevets

[LtKage]

What the devil is HM? Hobo man?

And why do you say...with the route WE took? You're not a dev, you're just some dude that runs this site. And as for not using home world's perspective in games, that is utter bull sh**. Rebellion uses the same camera angle.

It doesn't sound like you've even played homeworld, and if you have then you probably sucked at it.

 

Umm i think he is a dev, check out this simple google search (http://www.google.co.uk/search?hl=en&q=Delphi-PG&meta=)

 

As for him playing "HW" he stated that the dev team have tried all the RTS games and took what was fun from them and incorporated them into this and left out the micro management that people found so boring.

 

Just a FYI

[Otto von Bismark]

If he is a dev, he shouldn't be bashing other RTS games. Especially Homeworld which recieved high ratings from several sites(check IGN and GameStats). In fact, EaW probably won't recieve as high of a rating as HW did.

[The Saint]

If he is a dev, he shouldn't be bashing other RTS games. Especially Homeworld which received high ratings from several sites(check IGN and GameStats). In fact, EaW probably won't receive as high of a rating as HW did.

 

 

 

Says who? He has every right to bash another game because he is also a consumer. As for the asinine comment, lets just take a wait and see approach as to what accolades EaW will and wont receive.

[noian]

Says who? He has every right to bash another game because he is also a consumer. As for the asinine comment, lets just take a wait and see approach as to what accolades EaW will and wont receive.

Yes he has the right but he may not choose to bash them. Also, I am really hoping EaW will get very good ratings If not, blame the raters

Edited January 25, 2006 by noian

[Jmaster3265]

the only thing negative in my post was the note to the people who complain about complaining, i was just saying that I wanted it to be like homeworld's

 

Are you really one to talk when all of your posts are complaints and or negative?  : Anywho, keep in mind this is just a demo made in early Decemeber, the finished product will highly be better and more balanced. At least for our standards, idk about yours....

[Guest]

If he is a dev, he shouldn't be bashing other RTS games. Especially Homeworld which recieved high ratings from several sites(check IGN and GameStats). In fact, EaW probably won't recieve as high of a rating as HW did.

 

kind of sad that HW (which was made like 10 years ago) has [opinion but mostly true] better space battles [/opion but mostly true] than EAW. 

 

percent wise I'm seeing EAW in %60-%89 range by PC gamer's standards (which are like the best raters out there)

[raydude]

You're so awesome, I'm glad you come to this site and give us information about this game. And as for not using home world's perspective in games, that sounds like a smart idea.

 

I agree with Otto's sudden change of heart  ;D . You Devs ARE so awesome, and I am also glad you take the time to educate us about the EAW game. It makes the wait for the release a little more bearable.

 

And I love Homeworld and Homeworld 2 but guess what? None of my friends would play with me because the 3D interface was perceived as an annoyance. So, if it has to be 2D space combat to get some local multiplayer time with my friends then so be it.

[Gen.Vader]

ive played HW before, and it is not my cup of tea. Albeit, i havent played very much, but the 3 dimensions seemed unneccessary, it looked like another way to escape defeat, and no matter what level you are on, there will be conflict, and it was frustrating on the 3 dimensions. Although it is more realistic, i do not think it was the better course of action. But as for space battles being sucky, have you taken the time to wtch them up close and in the cinematic view? they are the best i have ever seen! (2nd space game) i liked the rates of fire, shields, and i thought for a sec i was watching a movie, not a game.

[Delphi-PG]

If he is a dev, he shouldn't be bashing other RTS games. Especially Homeworld which recieved high ratings from several sites(check IGN and GameStats).

 

HUH???  ???

 

Where in my statemeant did I make one negative remark about Home World?  It's a great game, if you like that style of combat.  My point was merely that more people prefer the 2.5 3D (as many of you like to call it) over the free form mechanic found in Home World.

 

If you don't like EAW, well, you don't like. 

[Guest JediIgor]

I wonder if Delphi has even played Homeworld very much.. he mistakenly refers to it as HM and now "Home World" (notice two words).

 

The point in case, however is that instead of saying HW's UI wasn't popular, you should be wondering why Petroglyph took a step back with the 2D space battles. I would rather see more inventive ways of dealing with 3D, maybe a limited Z axis movement. But ships can't even change Z axis on their own, as Stellar suggested. Thus you can't even "float" capital ships on top of each other for absolutely no reason.

 

Aside from that, how many strategies with a space battle component can you name that have come out since Homeworld anyways (besides Homeworld series itself)? (Pre-established series like MoO don't count)

[Delphi-PG]

you should be wondering why Petroglyph took a step back with the 2D space battles.

 

If that's what you'd like to call it.  ;D 

 

Honestly, if you really feel the itch to play a true free form 3D RTS, don't hesitate to load Homeworld up. 

 

I wonder if Delphi has even played Homeworld very much.

 

Not really, but it is sitting next to Dark Reign 2 on my games shelf.

[Guest JediIgor]

you should be wondering why Petroglyph took a step back with the 2D space battles.

 

If that's what you'd like to call it.  ;D 

 

Honestly, if you really feel the itch to play a true free form 3D RTS, don't hesitate to load Home World up. 

 

Ok, hi, Delphi, when space battles went 3D with Homeworld, that made them *more* immersive. Are you saying going back to 2D made it *more* immersive then with 3D? The UI may have been poor, but that doesn't change the fact you could do some crazy things like drop in fleets over someone's head. But you still haven't answered my question, can you name some space-battle including games that have been released since Homeworld?

 

(That's one word, check http://www.relic.com/product/homeworld/description.php for yourself)

[Delphi-PG]

But you still haven't answered my question, can you name some space-battle including games that have been released since Homeworld?

 

That caught my attention like Warcraft, Starcraft, Age of Empires, C&C, Dark Reign, Dragonshard, RTW.  Nope...

[Stellar_Magic]

JI, You're getting a we bit aggressive.

 

Anyway, the main problem I have with the Space Combat in EAW is that units *never* (With the exception of fighters) move from their assigned layer (Capital ships, Frigates, Corvettes each fly at the same elevation).  I mean, how hard could it have been to make it so that ships could fly over or under a ship in their way.  I get so sick of watching my units move in a stupid manner because there's another large ship of the same class between them and where I want them to go and they take some crazy wound about route.  It makes controlling vessels in a space battle *more* difficult in that respect.

[Delphi-PG]

I get so sick of watching my units move in a stupid manner because there's another large ship of the same class between them and where I want them to go and they take some crazy wound about route.

 

You and me both.  This is something we will be looking into tweaking down the road. 

[Akula_pff]

I have to comment on this one:

Personally I think that the battles in EAW are some of the best space action that I have seen in a game, far more realist looking then a lot of the homeworld screens I've seen.  Yes, you might claim that full 3D is better but frankly I find it can be hard to keep up with and depending on the camera angle and engine less realistic then EAW.  Furthermore, who said that you needed 3D for a great game, look at Star Fleet Command and the game its based on Star Fleet Battles(www.starfleetgames.com).  The only comment I will make regarding EAW and space is that it seems whomever brings the greater fire power to the table wins, but I think that is realistic to Star Wars. Especially, sense its possible to defeat a large space fleet with a large group of rebel fighters.

[Delphi-PG]

when space battles went 3D with Homeworld

 

They went 3D for the Homeworld franchise.  Homeworld was built around this aspect from day 1, EAW was not.

 

If one day we decide full 3D is a route we want to go, then we'll design a game around this mechanic. 

[vasuba_pff]

Homeworld as far as Space battles go is basically the only game to use full 3d.

 

Other games that i have enjoyed much more then HW 1 or 2 are 2.5d as some are calling it. Jupiter: The nexus incident while full 3d graphics is on a 2.5d plane and IMHO stomps HW2 in every way.

 

The concept some people are saying of sneaking fleet in by coming overhead is complete idiocy if you ask me. If were in a high tech universe i highly doubt a fleet cause its a few degrees above an enemy fleet is suddenly gonna be able to sneak in. Sensors are 3d so all these "tactics" are really nothing more then a game failure to recognize the fact that such tactics wouldn't exist.

 

Empire at War is great for its design. Fighters zoom up and down a bit on the plane and thats great and how it should be. Star Wars Was built on the battles of World War II and earlier. Ships moved in and lined up for the broadside barrages etc. There wasn't zipping up and down left and right in the movies for the capital ships. Ships moved in and hoped they survived.

 

EAW to me captures the battles the way we saw them in the movies. Slow lumbering capital ships moved in and duked it out. Fighters are the ones that zipped around all over the place up,down,left and right. Some of you will fight to the death how great Rebellion was and it too had the 2.5d system even though it claimed 3D.

 

Just my 2 credits

[Stellar_Magic]

The sneaking a fleet in is more in regard to playing against a human, and as so far as going a few degrees above the enemy... In Homeworld 2 you could go as far up and down as you could left or right, forward or backward.

[Xenomorphine]

The one thing which puts me off of HW? The logistics. I want to concentrate on combat, not sending out some little miner unit - which is defenceless! Then having to construct an entire strike package aorund it, to cover any and all eventualities of what it may just happen to encounter.

 

EAW gives me that. Or will do, when it is available, since I don't have the sort of connection speed to let me have the demonstration of it!

 

Would I like units to go around 3D space? Yes. But then I value the mining-less aspect far more and, while it's not a case of either/or, it's enough of a huge improvement to make me not care about the 3D thing nearly so much.

 

I used to load up maps which had nothing but gem stones and oil derricks on two certain other games, almost purely to get around that. I'm glad that this game reflects that, as someone commanding a fleet, all of that would have been taken care of back 'home', before the ships are ever sent out.

[Darth Plagueis]

Hey now guys don't forget about the FreeSpace games they are also true 3D and are extremely fun.

 

I don't quite understand how anyone could have a hard time with a 3D environment, perhaps it was the slow pace of the game.

[The Saint]

Ok, hi, Delphi, when space battles went 3D with Homeworld, that made them *more* immersive. Are you saying going back to 2D made it *more* immersive then with 3D? The UI may have been poor, but that doesn't change the fact you could do some crazy things like drop in fleets over someone's head. But you still haven't answered my question, can you name some space-battle including games that have been released since Homeworld?

 

(That's one word, check http://www.relic.com/product/homeworld/description.php for yourself)

 

The 3D part was rather minor when you then consider everything else that made the game great. Storyline, music, graphics. The 3D itself again wasnt that big of a deal. The major capital ships were better off moving in a straight line than taking time to move them on the Z-axis only to move them down again. Strike craft could move along the Z-axis because they moved fast enough that they could take out the wayward resource collector and still have the speed to join the main fighting in a matter of 30 seconds depending on how large the map was and amount of fuel (or no fuel in later HWs) consumed.

 

The fact that moving along the Z-axis is restricted doesnt hurt the space battle, doesnt even mean the strategy is any different. As for the capital ships being on the same z-axis when switch to cinamtic view I've seen Imp capitals on different levels. So its not like you dont notice it, its just hard to notice from the top down perspective even at the angle the game puts you in.