LordVader

Unconventional according to other races, but completely normal for the Yuuzhan Vong I would imagine

No wonder we have so many Warlords, it's easy to chalk up the count with 1 line posts... Oh I can feel the glares now... Please don't eat me *best innocent Ewok baby look* it was a fair comment

I can suggest an IRC server to use, it's easy to access no matter where you are in the world, for people from here to meet and arrange multiplayer games. IRC isn't such a resource hog since it's mostly text. I use IRC often and it's a good way for arranging things, will free up the forum a bit too. pm/e-mail me if you're interested and if any of the admins/moderators are reading this and agree/disagree with my suggestion, please let me know either way, the last thing I want to do is discourage people from using the forum.

Congratulations are in order Tell those people who have been making it difficult that if they don't cease their evil ways, we shall feed them to the Sarlacc.

I'll play you. I have a gamespy account. Haven't played multiplayer before but I'm really keen to start learning. You're in luck because I prefer to play Empire. If you're interested, send a prv msg through here or e-mail me at the_holy_paladin@msn.com

I would include "eliminating the opposition and ruling the galaxy" in that statement

Of course you can. If you're not doing anything while he is, well that's a headstart enough for me. Like running a race and saying, yea.. I'll start running in a few days. Meet me at the finish line I am experimenting with giving the AI a headstart (on default settings) by not being aggressive apart from sabotage/espionage missions. So if the AI invades planets, I leave them, instead I concentrate on building mines and refineries on new planets. If you want to practise strategy against potential human opponents, then giving the AI a headstart is not a good idea because would you do that for the human player? The game would go for longer I think until eventually you would be forced to attack the AI just to get the maintenance points you need. Has anyone tried doing this?

I turned it off and have had no problems so far maybe that was it. Thanks for the feedback everyone.

I've never played multiplayer before but I would try to keep my options open tactics wise. I would consider it a bad move to follow one tactic rigidly and expect it to work out, much better to keep your opponent guessing.

Look under "Other games" in the forum list and you'll see Rebellion 2 Ideas. That's where people have been discussing it. Not sure if there definitely will be Rebellion 2, if anyone wants to clarify that, post something in the Rebellion 2 forum please.

I appreciate your honesty in conceding the game before it begins, it will give me time to prepare the guest room on Home 1 for your arrival. Should we do the surrender in the time honoured manner, you giving your sword up? Oh fighting words

I have seen the AI "fail" espionage missions to a system they occupy. This gives away vital information, because if the system is in the Outer Rim, chances are it will be lightly defended, therefore leaving it vulnerable to attack. This isn't limited to espionage, it also affects R&D and diplomacy missions. Point to consider here is, if *you* fail espionage missions, you would be giving away locations of the systems you occupy in the Outer Rim. Or in the case of failed R&D missions, the other player can target that system and capture the characters etc.

I use XP home and have been having problems with SWR crashing. I did some experimenting and discovered that the NAV Auto-Protect was responsible for the crashes. I started disabling it when playing SWR and for 2 weeks now it hasn't crashed on me...

Hey chancellor, have a look under the Multiplayer section of the forum. This thread might help you http://www.swrebellion.net/modules.php?name=Forums&file=viewtopic&t=677

Has anything been mentioned about morale and quality of ships crews? Morale- this would be in place to prevent you from ordering a ship to "do a suicide attack" on a much stronger ship. Example, Corellian Corvette VS ISD. The crew of the CC would refuse such an order because who wants to die needlessly? This would be where the presence of Admirals and characters make a difference. The Admirals/Generals could improve the morale factor for that battle. Could have different officer ranks so you can have an officer on each ship, a Captain for example. There would need to be some sort of scale to caculate the strength of each ship, an very rough example could be: ISD= strength of 5 on the chart CC= strength of 1 So telling a single CC to attack an ISD is not allowed, but maybe telling 2+ CC to attack the ISD would be because the ships support each other. Ships Crews. This could be a crucial thing in terms of how a ship performs in combat. The ship would gain experience from the number of battles it took part in and the number of ships it destroyed (fighters could count but they are easy to kill), and also if it did any planetary bombardments, what it destroyed from that. So this would place an emphasis on 2 things, firstly actually naming the ships so you could keep track of it (or maybe have a symbol or mark on the ship indicating it's crew quality) and secondly, to preserve the ships in combat, so it will change the strategy. Also if a ships crew is more experienced, it could resist being boarded more easily and also could foil any sabotage missions.

Ready to play, either side, any settings though would prefer original settings to begin with since I haven't played multiplayer before. Contact details: the_holy_paladin@msn.com or message me through here. -Edited Small correction, I *have* played multiplayer now with a few opponents and have learnt alot! So I can't be called a newbie anymore

I wonder about the TL being used primarily to kill Corvettes, consider the strength of the Carrack's TL. A possible theory is that the LC would do more damage to the shields because it fires more quickly, giving the Corvette less time to recharge the shields. I've noticed that ships with LC's take a long time to destroy the hull's of disabled ships, whereas TL are more effective.

Congratulations Mask, I have a while to go yet, but at least I know what'll happen when/if/hopefully I reach 1500

Where did Evaders say this? Thought he was talking about hyperdrive ratings...

Sorry this isn't an informed response, just another vague non-sensical rambling....but what if the weapon recharge rate referred to how quickly the weapon regains it's numerical value? I've noticed that the weapon recharge rating of the ship seems to diminish at the same time as the value of the weapons. Another thing, has anyone ever seen a ship with turbolaser, ion cannon and laser capabilities shoot all three in a battle? I added laser cannons to the bigger capital ships but have yet to see it being used in combat (you can tell whether a ship uses laser cannons or turbo lasers by the different sound it makes).

All this talk of the PC crashing with HUGE fleets, maybe that's a good sign *not* to have them but rather to have smaller, yet still effective fleets. Remember, using characters and spec forces to sabotage ISD's and SSD's *is* rather fun, annoys the hell out of your opponent and forces them to either hide their wonderful creations or keep them on the move constantly.

What about letting the AI take control of the Core systems while you virtually start from scratch in the Outer Rim. This would allow the AI to get more maintenance and therefore enable it to build ships, fighters, troops more quickly. All of this you can do without using RebEd.

This is a good point. I still suggest the Sarlacc because it doesn't "kill" a person, it just slowly digests them. On a side note, just imagine what life would be like living in the Star Wars Galaxy. Would you see yourself as an Imperial lackey or a Rebel freedom fighter or even a feared Bounty Hunter. Of course everyone is going to say "Member of the Jedi order"....but lets be realistic, it takes years of training to become a Jedi and most of you are way too old anyway

Give them to the Sarlacc.

Yes you're right Ric. It's my fault for not reading the posts properly. Someone has suggested the idea of aiming at different targets with the ships weapons.