Disappointed

[WarHawk_pff]

I do not like the fact that there is no diplomacy at all (AFAIK), and there are very few factions. I want to be able to cut deals with the hutts, the hapes, set up protectorates and puppet governments, settle disputes between groups like the demok and the ripublus etc

 

also, I find that the galatic map is rather limited, it fails to represent the star wars galaxy effectively IMO, it seems so much smaller than it is supposed to be.

 

another thing that bugs me is that the space battles are almost exactly the same as the land battles, just with space ships, no z-axis, and the locations are very rigid. I want to have battles all over a system, not just the same place every time. It's like a sandbox you can't go outside of. You are also very limited in space installations you can build, oh gee one space station per planet. LAME. I want to be able to have golan platforms and shipyards and stuff, and have some choice in how to defend them, and where to place them. I also want to be able to set up fleets and have them more organized than just all the ships in one of the planets fleet slot all lumped together. I want the fleet to have a name like 1st fleet, 2nd fleet etc and be able to assign an Admiral of my choosing to that fleet. Same goes for the armies as well, I want organized divisions with generals in charge.

 

I also want GRAND STRATEGY, not the current go here and kill kill kill.

[Lord Pickle]

Petroglyph said they wanted to focus on action and leave out most of the base building and resource gathering. That said I agree with you some diplomacy would be good and a system is a system not just one planet.

[ShockMeSane]

Your best bet would be to form your own game company and acquire the liscensing from Lucasarts. I do wish the Galactic Map had a little more depth ala Rome: Total War, but its basically just an RTS that drags on for a really long. Sadly, you win the game after one major successful space battle.

 

It's too bad, because I agree with you 100%. Rebellion was aimed at a very hardcore strategy audience, and it suffered terribly sales-wise because of it. It actually was close to being a good game, if the combat had actually been involving, fun, or non-grotesque to look at, it might have fared better. I would have loved the strategic overview had been the more important focus, but the way the game stands now, you win after the first major fleet victory, and the game just drags on for hours as a cleanup action after that.

 

The only way the AI even attempts to make it interesting is by throwing up free Calamari Cruisers and Star Destroyers over their planets instantly roughly 30 seconds after the system is empty if you fail to take the planet and withdraw for some reason. Fortunately for the player, these are surmountable odds because I can't tell you the amount of battles that have ended like this for me:

 

Your losses:

 

2x Tartan Cruiser

 

Enemy losses:

 

16x Corellian Corvette

8x X-Wing Squadron

12x Y-Wing Squadron

5x A-Wing Squadron

8x Maraudor Cruiser

4x Nebulon B Frigate

2x Assault Frigates

 

Luke Skywalker

Admiral Ackbar

Han Solo

Antilles Dude

 

I don't even know how the AI manages to pull off stuff like that. Its AMAZING.

[Guest JediIgor]

It's too bad, because I agree with you 100%. Rebellion was aimed at a very hardcore strategy audience, and it suffered terribly sales-wise because of it. It actually was close to being a good game, if the combat had actually been involving, fun, or non-grotesque to look at, it might have fared better. I would have loved the strategic overview had been the more important focus, but the way the game stands now, you win after the first major fleet victory, and the game just drags on for hours as a cleanup action after that

 

The game came out at a bad time, there was no prequel hype then, it was too advanced, and it was hindered by a very poor UI. For example, having to right click->mission->diplomacy instead of just drag+drop Leia on a planet's diplomacy spot. The combat was weak, but then again, if you played any other 4X game, their space combat usually sucked too.

[Kij0t]

EAW did a great thing for me: it inspired me to dust off Rebellion. Recommend you do the same.

[namarie]

Hate this, I love the Galaxy part, the Space battles are fun (allthough they don't feel Epic, spaceships "feel" too small!), but, gawd, the Ground Battles.. 1 day owning the game and I'm allready pressing "Auto Resolve" because they are boring and uninspiring...

[Nevets]

Hi Warhawk, Bant! 

 

Joking, couldn't do that to a GATer, even a Conservative Canadian one.

 

Anyway the only reason I think Rebellion failed is because it didn't have the eye candy that other strategy games had. If you don't look visually pleasing you lose 3/4 of the market. If Rebellion took EAW's graphics it would probably take the title of greatest strategy game ever.

[Captain Data]

I think so too. MY best Game 4ever will be a mixture of following games

 

- Spacebattles - Homeworld-Series. Best Space-RTS atm.

 

- Galactic Conquest (with dozens of systems to conquer): EaW

 

- Ground Battle: Earth 2150 / Soldiers of WW 2 (great for capturing enemy tanks, great micromanagement)

 

- Research-Tree: Haegemonia

 

- Diplomacy etc: SW: Rebellion

 

 

That plus a real good AI, the possibility of being Admiral or just Wingleader of a single Fighterwing or a Freelancer (like in X-Series) would be great. A Game where you can play ANY role you want.

[Darthscharnhorst2]

I think if Rebellion were re-released today with snazzy graphics,a better battle system, and a better UI it would sell like crazy.  The Total War series has made the combination of Grand strategy and real time battles very marketable and appealable to the mainstream.  Rebellion was just a bit before its time. 

 

EAW is more akin to a game of Risk with real time battles.  However, to its credit, the galatic conquest is really more of an "add on" than the actual game.  It seems like far more time was spent on the two campain games which are pretty solid.  Hopefully this venture proves successful and Lucas Arts will decide to take the star wars licence in a "new" direction and develop a game that covers the entire era of the films and is more in line with Galatic Civ II, Rome Total War, Civilization, and Rebellion.  I mean the first three games I listed are selling/sold very well so I am sure that a star wars game would do the same in today's market.  Streamlined 4x strategy gameplay + good "flashy" battles + a clean UI + Star Wars = 1 million plus games sold.  Someone email George to give the green light  ;D

[Zer_Teron]

My ultimate game would be a Ultimate Combat Star Wars mod with much less bugs and crashes. That games awesome, it just crashes every 10 minutes. EaW is awesome also.

[ShockMeSane]

Yea, other than the obvious graphical and UI issues, Rebellion had one other major flaw going for it. It was just too overwhelming for most of the gaming audience. I remember my friend and I both bought the game, but he wasn't a super-hardcore strategy fan. I still remember him telling me how he quit the game when a rebel fleet came to one of his undefended planets, bombarded all the life off of it, and proceeded to invade it with 1 unit. Well, for some reason (even though using the Death Star made you less popular galaxy-wide), bombing all installations and units off of a planet was actually an inspiritation to the rest of a sector in that game, and he ended up having like 2 planets going into revolt and another flat out changing sides. He quit and never played again, and who could blame him.

 

The game was a little too unforgiving to the new-comer, even on easy. I went on to play it quite a bit, but its still a far cry from being as good as even Master of Orion 2 in my book I do agree that a with Darth that his recipe would be one for huge success, if only someone would do it!

[Nevets]

Yea, it was a bit overwhelming at first, it had a large learning curve. But that is why people are still playing it today and some even enjoying it more than EAW. The large scale of the game made for a lot of replay value and it is hard to find a lot of games that fill that niche. I'm sure a lot of game companies are afraid to make this type game now after things like Rebellion, but after the reaction people had for it after EAW was announced I hope LEC will give it another chance. The main reason why I hope EAW is really sucessful, I want Lucasarts to invest more and spend more time on the strategy genre.

[WarHawk_pff]

I never played Rebellion, what's it like? 3d battles?

 

I think if LA combined all the best aspects of startegy games, like RTW, Homeworld, Hearts of Iron 2, they could have come up with a much better game than EAW. As it is now there is very little depth, it's like an fps of rts games. shoot shoot kill kill, very little strategy at all.

[Guest]

The battles in EAW are kind redundant, all the space battles pretty much the same and the ground battles vary only a little. I think it deserved it's %73.

 

Rebellion is OK, I only just played the game for the first time a few weeks ago and I found it to be an OK strategy game as long as you enjoy being bored to death. 

 

My dream version of EAW (or any SW RTS) would be as the following:

 

It would be a combination of EAW, HomeWorld, AOE III, and Rebellion. The space battles would be on a 3-D plane with a bigger pop cap than EAW's. (In Homeworld the pop cap is almost unlimited, I have never reached the pop cap in HW) It would also be similar to AOE III in the fact that it would have good graphics and an awesome physics engine that had bodies flying and a totally destructable enviornment. The resources would be like in Rebellion except withour matiance points and the refined materails would give you credits and you would build things with credits instead of resources like in EAW.

  Not to much base building except that you could build defenses around each of the facilities on your planet. Like the mines, refineries, shield, generators, HQ, and anti-spacecraft guns. Which brings me to another thing. Instead of just having the battle for the planet in some random location on the planet. There would be 5 or so different battles for one planet. Like you could land your troops outside of the anti-spacecraft gun's range and advance to the nearset facility and shut it down or take it over, but to take the planet you would need to take the planet's HQ.

  The game would have more than 2 factions, It would be kinda like a RTS version of battlefront in which there are 4 factions: Empire, CIS, Republic, and Rebels. There would be separate campaigns for each of the factions and a freeplay galactic conquest for each of them as well. There would be a sandbox/skirmish thing or a "quick battle" like in EAW.

    And it would almost perfectly be realistic to the SW universe without making up any units for "balance". There would be just enough balance to make things even but not over do like in EAW, BF & BF2. Examples like ATST's killing groups of infrantry in 2 shots max. Rebels would have slightly less numbers and the troops would be inferior to StormTroopers as they are supposed to be. Acclamators would actually be kick *** capital ships like they are supposed to be instead of "frigates" Star destroyers would have sufficient ant-fighter capability. There would be no need for "counter units" the only reason you'd build smaller and task specific ships would be for cost efficiency. SD's would infinitely be superior to anything the rebels have cause that's how it was.

[Lord Pickle]

I never played Rebellion, what's it like? 3d battles?

 

I think if LA combined all the best aspects of startegy games, like RTW, Homeworld, Hearts of Iron 2, they could have come up with a much better game than EAW. As it is now there is very little depth, it's like an fps of rts games. shoot shoot kill kill, very little strategy at all.

 

It's funny when people believe that because a game isn't grand strategy there is little or no strategy. It's true that EaW doesn't have anywhere near the depth of Hearts of Iron 2 there is strategy. Most of it revolves around the units you send into battle and what counters what. I haven't played MP but I bet there will be numerous strategies there. That said it would be nice to see a RTW in space, I can't play the total war games since I have no idea how to use acient weapons and don't care to find out.

[Nick2730]

It's funny when people believe that because a game isn't grand strategy there is little or no strategy. It's true that EaW doesn't have anywhere near the depth of Hearts of Iron 2 there is strategy. Most of it revolves around the units you send into battle and what counters what. I haven't played MP but I bet there will be numerous strategies there. That said it would be nice to see a RTW in space, I can't play the total war games since I have no idea how to use acient weapons and don't care to find out.

 

That grand stratagy is what alot of us were looking forward too, playing the game feels more like an arcade version of a game than a galactic conquest mode. I was hoping this game would last months, where a single camp could take weeks like in rome. I can beat anything on hard in a few hours. Ive already exhausted the game which blows

[Morphium]

The Game lacks depth in both space and ground aspects, no doubt there. Minor bugs stil seem to plague the game but given that it's only been out for a week, i'll let it slide off until sometime next month when the ramblings about the imbalance and bugs have become a sea of anti-redundance gamers, waving their pitchforks and torches at PG for patch updates...

 

Currently the most annoying feature i can come about is the fact that you can't decide which units will start in the battle. When i play rebels i usualy get a truckload of fighters with 1 corvette and 2 capital ships(MC, AF, Neb-F). Then the computer pulls forward with 3 tartans and bam, 0 fighters/bombers left on my side, even when i pull them back behind my corvette and capitals to make them draw their fire but nooh, they go straight for my fighters and within secs of comming in range of my fighters the tartans commit suicide by turning on their "Boost Weaponry power" ability and, well, you can imagen the results....

 

I was hoping the game would have had some more depth and character to it but it getting dull very fast...

 

I just hope some near future expansion will change the game drasticly for the betterment of itself and not just add more content...

 

Morphium.

[Redeye_pff]

Well my two cents.

 

First off I am a Star Wars buff since I saw Episode IV in the theater as a kid I have been hooked by it.

That said I must admit that after first hearing off EAW I was thinking, perhaps hoping is a better word, that the game was 'Homeworld meets Rebellion'.

 

Well it is not coming close to either games (yet??!!). The tactical maps are far to small to have any kind off strategie requirement. And that is my opinion about both the ground and space maps. It is also the reason that I'm not changing the Pop Cap because only the small numbers is cause for some skull sweat. Use greater numbers and it becomes a simple slug fest. Not much fun in my opinion.

 

I love the graphics. And frankly I can start up the game and just watch the fireworks through the TIE-cockpit for some time without getting bored. Don't change nothing there as far as I am concerend.

 

What this game needs in my opionion is:

- bigger tactical maps. Bigger and more random would even be greater. Because after the first couple off battles you know the terrain.

- select your forces to go into battle yourself

- in space, allow a ship or squadron to retreat and not fight to the death.

- setup of ground defenses before the attacker comes in

 

The rest I or someone else can mod it into the game. Talking about changing stats for the Rebel fighters as I did and adding units as other peoples fingers are itching to do!

 

Final verdict, a game with the potential to became defintatly my ultimate Star Wars RTS/Stratagy game. The only question is will the developers go that road?

 

Redeye

[jedi mike]

I had a bad taste in my mouth for awhile, but after finally getting the multi to work it was so cool. I mean playing with pff people on line is very fun the single player, is getting better by the day. Ive figured out the right maps and what tech to start at to get the most out of the AI so the hard mode is somewhat challenging.

so i never was dissappointed but there were things missing like good multi but now things are looking up  ;D thats my opinion.

[Nick2730]

The Game lacks depth in both space and ground aspects, no doubt there. Minor bugs stil seem to plague the game but given that it's only been out for a week, i'll let it slide off until sometime next month when the ramblings about the imbalance and bugs have become a sea of anti-redundance gamers, waving their pitchforks and torches at PG for patch updates...

 

Currently the most annoying feature i can come about is the fact that you can't decide which units will start in the battle. When i play rebels i usualy get a truckload of fighters with 1 corvette and 2 capital ships(MC, AF, Neb-F). Then the computer pulls forward with 3 tartans and bam, 0 fighters/bombers left on my side, even when i pull them back behind my corvette and capitals to make them draw their fire but nooh, they go straight for my fighters and within secs of comming in range of my fighters the tartans commit suicide by turning on their "Boost Weaponry power" ability and, well, you can imagen the results....

 

I was hoping the game would have had some more depth and character to it but it getting dull very fast...

 

I just hope some near future expansion will change the game drasticly for the betterment of itself and not just add more content...

 

Morphium.

 

I know how you feel, i was hoping the game would last months liek rome but, its already shelf material which sucks