Naja

http://swg.stratics.com/content/lore/personas/images/veers.jpg That's Veers in uniform. Ehh, I still say that the character looks like him.

In terms of building and upgrading units and structures, how does single player campaign compare to single player skirmish? For campaign, I would assume that buildings and units are built and upgraded soley on the Galaxy Map, while in skirmish, I would assume that you simply manufacture them during the battle.

Yeah, it looks a lot like Veers. Since he's been confirmed, well, there ya go.

Hmm. Depends on which video you're talking about. If it's the most recent skirmish one, then yeah, you should be able to build on your planet/territory of orbit. After all, that's as far as it goes. However, if you're talking about the earlier E3 Convention videos where units were sent down to the ground by starship that makes total sense. If you're invading a world, your other troops & vehicles aren't going to be anywhere else except your fleet. And if you're defending and your enemy has made it to the surface, having defeated your fleet - you're basically stuck with the ground forces that you built or moved to that world. For the campaign, I think it's also great, tactically. It removes that sort of annoying C & C feature of having to not only care for the tactics, but the strategy of building up an army during the battle (which is even unrealistic in the fictitious Star Wars universe). It's also a convenience! If you can build up your forces, manufacture structures, and upgrade your armies and fleets on the Galaxy Map, that means that you can concentrate soley on eradicating your enemy when you do meet up with him. Edit by Cain : To all .... this is not a usual forum topic - don't chat on it - be direct and cristal clear or I will delete the ones who don't get it. Thanks

No prob. Does anyone know of any good developments in EU literature, these days? I hear that Timothy Zahn is writing a new series. Man, anything he touches turns to gold.

Is it just me, or are some ship's/station's explosions rather anticlimactic? Now, granted, I just got done watching that very long E3 video, and that was months ago. But in space combat, it seems that the only ship to get a worthwhile explosion was the ISD. When ISDs are destroyed, they beautifully split in half, and float around while slowly breaking apart and exploding. When a Mon Cal was destroyed, POOF! There it non-chalantly went. Even in a very recent video from the convention, a horde of ISDs attacked a space station, and it simply exploded. No graceful splitting in half, no floating debris, nothing. Do you think they're going to work it out so that at least stations and heavier capital ships get very grandiose destruction graphics?

Cold-hearted, totalitarian Imperial all the way.

Thank you muchly.

Ehh, he was a decent Obi-Wan. Sure as hell wasn't Alec Guiness, but he sure didn't make me cringe like Hayden Christensen's and Natalie Portman's love scenes. *shudder* As for great child actors? Dakota Fanning (War of the Worlds, "Taken"), Haly Joel-Osmond (6th Sense), Anna Paquin (The Piano), Sean Astin (Goonies, Rudie), Elijah Wood (Radio Flyer [before he was Frodo]). My point is that good talent - regardless of age - is timeless. You can always find it, it just matters where you look. Lucas is at fault, because with that much money, there is no way in hell that he couldn't have picked a competent Anakin if he chose to look hard enough. As for the Force, I disagree. I think when you try to break down the Force into something as crude, and well...insipid, as "midichlorians," it loses its magic. In the first trilogy, couldn't have been more simple: a sentient energy field created by and absorbed through all living things. In the prequels...a belabored, uninspired comic book gag. I think that a good example is a good joke or anecdote: when a joke is good, everything is concise, and that which doesn't need to be said, isn't. Turning a simple Tao-esque spirituality full of poignancy into a hoky "science" is like going through the joke, trying to explain how everything lines up, logically explaining why it is funny. You may or may not make people understand, but the joke will have lost all of its life - its humor - in the process. Make sense?

Might as well kill two birds with one stone, save some of the forum clutter. Question the first: Cain, or anyone, remember that one 40+ minute video from the E3 Convention? Is there a place where I can download and save one of those, without having to register at one of those stupid gaming sites? Question the second: I've heard that planetary battles will involve two environments. Does this simply mean the orbital battle in conjunction with the ground battle, or will you really have two ground maps if you want to occupy a world?

A year? I thought it came out in February. That's just a little over 5 months.

- No more of that fucking 'midichlorian' crap. It's the Force. Stop trying to rationalize that which is fictitious. It just comes off as forced, childish, and trite. Save that for the Happy Meal merchandice. - Jake Loyd, Hayden Christensen, JAR JAR BINKS...eliminate them. Anakin, kid and adolescent, must be played by stellar actors who can deliver his very strong and contradictory emotions. And if you tell me that no young child can act well, watch Leonardo DeCaprio's performance in "What's Eating Gilbert Grape." - More thoughtful dialogue, all the way through. No more of this tripe that could have been written by stoned, prepubescent 12 year olds. Etc.

Well, it just seemed choppy to me. In that first video, when Vader is slaughtering Jawas and the few Rebels defending them, the lightsaber action wasn't abysmal, but it could be refined a bit. Same with his duel against Obi-Wan. In that one footage video from the German convention, when Obi Wan is defending the Rebel shield perimeter being stormed by Snowtroopers, it again seemed a little choppy. Now, granted, that video was very low quality. But his lightsaber swings still seemed a little odd. Also, his movement seemed a little bad, too, in that Hoth footage. It just seemed like Obi-Wan was floating around, rather than walking. *shrugs* Just how it looked, to me. Ah well. I'm sure that it will look much more graceful come February, no?

Lightsaber combat, in the form of Obi-Wan and Vader, seems to still be a little choppy - at least in the last videos we've seen. Do any of you see lightsaber combat heroes gaining more fluidity and grace in their animation? Besides this, what other heroes do you see having lightsabers? So far, we know that it's going to be Darth Vader, Obi-Wan Kenobi, and Mara Jade. Perhaps the Emperor is still lightsaber-capable? Luke Skywalker, obviously. Perhaps Yoda can still hack it? I'm out of ideas, now.

Hmmm. Good point. That alpha skirmish made it a lot easier to have upgraded units.

Yeah, yeah, it's been fun to make fun of the French - even before that whole stupid French-bashing, "freedom fries" phase of my country.

Yeah, but apparently almost all heavier starships have the ability to re-power their shields. I just remember ISDs being stronger than even Mon Cals.

I've looked at those pictures from the German games convention, and here are a couple things that simply confuzzled me: - X-Wing squadrons have 10 combat points while TIE Fighter squadrons have 20 - ISDs have 70 combat points while Mon Cal Cruisers have 80 I assume that combat points are more or less the units' strength, i.e. hitpoints? If that's the case, that doesn't make sense. ISDs are near-impregnable space fortresses, and while not invulnerable, I don't understand why a Mon Cal would be stronger. I'm even more confused why the frail-ass TIE Fighters are stronger than the Rebels' X-Wings.

Ehh, maybe so, Gen. Vader, but subjectivity in standards is one thing, compared to a certain discernable quality - a "magic," if you will - about some original material, compared to newer, more redone stuff. There's just something about the original trilogy that the prequels lack; hense my idealistic hope that some maverick will re-do them properly once Lucas becomes one with the force.

As I've said though, I hope that the whole upgrading-and-building-your-units-in-the-midst-of-combat-thing is particular to skirmishes only. I can't reiterate that enough.

Maybe we'll get a very small-scale taste of the galactic interface?

Post an explanation with your vote, too! I think that despite how Lucas may have tarnished his once infallible creation with...well...his choice of dialogue and plot, there is a thriving EU community that writes surprisingly good novels, and expands so much on the SWU that sometimes Lucasarts itself is pressured to adjust their content to keep up with it (Victory Star Destroyers, "Shadows of the Empire," and the Emperor's locale on Byss, to give some examples). As long as it's good and still keeps giving fresh ideas, I don't think Star Wars will go the way of the Trekkies. I'm actually optimistic that it will be better once Lucas croaks, sacreligious as that sounds; Lucas will no longer be able to piss on his own work, and there might be room for someone to take more constructive creative liberty where he left off. Who knows...maybe some ambitious slob might re-do the prequels and do them well??

Thank you, Fosh. It's odd that I hear someone like you, and I live in a supposedly "Blue" state. You'd be surprised how many idiots believe that these "sand niggers" hate us for our freedoms as opposed to say...our foreign policy that supports corrupt dictatorships (SAUDIS! SAUDIS!) which makes it seem to them that it is our intent to "oppress" Muslims.

Maybe if American schools were funded in proportiona to how those other countries fund their schools, we might stand a fighting chance.

Knowing what we know now today, I don't think that anyone deserves nuclear devestation. Especially with today's technology, and today's manmen.