Makwu

The empire as spies and diplomats as well. A planet can rebel from the rebellion.

Nope, don't think either of those locations have tundras either. Keep trying

I dont recall anybody saying that. If planets can rebel, you'd almost certainly expect there to be a way to make your opponets planets rebel. If not, this would be a serious disadvantage to the rebellion.

I didn't know Egypt has tundra's. How interesting

Well i suspect the death star is programmed as a hero unit. Another reason (other than game dynamics) that you can only have one. Maybe associated with Tarkin?

unfortunetly he is. One of them was commanded by the one armed wampa after making peace with Luke. Sigh

This is why: (And very very clearly demonstrated in the video where the one star destroyer + ties attacks one calimari cruiser): The shields have a penetration rate and some weapons, likely missiles, have a high concussion damage, thus a missile would do damage to the hull and not much to the shields even though the shield is blocking much of the damage. Enough missiles would result in the damage pattern seen. This is the sequence if you watch the video in slow motion: 1) Tie Fighters and bombers are told to attack the ion banks. They head for it. 2) As the tie fighters get near the ship, the user tells them to do a "general attack" rather than a hardpoint attack. Then you see the fighters fire at the hull of the ship. 3) Next the bombers make a pass at the Ion bank. After this, we see the damage of the ion bank and see that it dropped the hull HP more than the Shield HP, though it dropped both. 4) Next we see the HP of the OTHER Ion bank which has at this point been attacked by a few tie fighters as they return for another pass (Why they fired at the ion bank im not sure, but you can see it). However, the ion bank attacked by the fighters has full HP while its shields have been dropped by the energy weapons. 5) As the Star Destroyer attacks with its energy weapons, we see the overall shield of the cruiser falling, while the HP stays intact. NOTE: The Damage Penetration rate for missiles I suspect will be altered from what is shown in this video but it gives us a sense of how damage is handled. ADDITIONAL: The Blue/Red bar above the minimap has been discussed before. Based on the relative power of the fleets, it appears to definetly be an indicator of that. Since they have retreat as an option it makes perfect sense to have a gaudge of how well your army currently matches up.

Wasn't she part of Krath?

Ta Da: http://www.eaw-fr.com/modules/view_screen.php?n=1779 Then http://www.eaw-fr.com/modules/view_screen.php?n=1778 Ok, first we can see that each hardpoint has its own shield/hp but it looks like the ship's hull has its own shield/hp that is not scratched by the attacking of a hardpoint. (The blue/green bad along the middle of the ship). The green apparently represents hp and blue shields. Then the hardpoints: (They seem to move around abit based on the view angle but:) The sensor domes are not a hardpoint. The bridge appears to be a hardpoint, the engine is a hardpoint and then there is a hardpoint along the middle of the ship below the bridge. I can't tell if that is simply the turbolaser on the other side of the tower or if its the bulge just below the tower on the center of the ship. Judging by these images I would definetly conclude: 1) You don't have to target a hardpoint, you can to a general attack 2) Knocking out all the hardpoints disables a ship but doesn't destroy it 3) There are no shield hardpoints I would guess: 1) There are engine, bridge, and gunnery hardpoints only 2) The bridge hardpoint, when lost, makes it unavilable to your command. However, the ship continues to function in an automated mode. It still attack ships so that losing it in the middle of a battle wont be of huge consequence.

eh, next page

EU got out of control

Possibly shield generators are not even a hardpoint. Each hardpoint has its own shield/hp.

This is a lively debate but becoming rather repetitive. The domes were originally sensors by the ship designers. (Circa 1980). The way the ROTJ was edited, it is a bit confusing and looks as though the sensor domes were linked to the shield. In the book, Ackbar made a consentrated attack on one point of the shields causing that grid to fail and allowed the A-wing to sneak in. The first sims came out and they needed a way for a small fighter to take out a capital ship and they chose the sensor domes as a shield generator. If you put any thought into that, its obvious that a single fighter could never take out a capital ship with guns alone - im sure if you made a mathematical equation of the Capitals energy + shield strength/recharge rate compared to the fighters energy + gun strength, it would be obvious the the fighter would run out of energy and that the capital ships shields would never fall bellow 99.999%. The C-canon got it wrong from the start and unfortunetly the error has been repeated over and over. And most likely will be. End of story. EDIT: G/C Typo

I'd like to point out again (since this detail was ignored the first time I mentioned it) that the death star is NOT on the mini map as a movable unit. It is in the right upper corner of the map letting you know that it exists off of the map. This would definetly support the idea that you can only have one death star in a battle (Though that doesn't mean "in the game"). It also makes me question the response of how the DS interacts with the fleets. If it is not on the map, it clearly can not interact "exactly" like all other ships. And I fear would suggest that it in fact doesn't interact with the other ships in a similar way at all despite what was said on in the interview. I still think they may make the DS a planet and you assualt it as you would a planet. "just like any other unit or building in the game". That doesn't seem right if you just think about it at all. Just like any other unit? It isn't just like any other unit, its a DS. I wonder if you attack the "death star components" just like you do any other unit or building in the game.

Or they simply have an ingenius way of handling it and don't want to let the cat out of the bag. I suspect that they need a balance of strategy. They eliminated resource gather, but that needs to be made up some how in campaign mode. So I suspect to see something slightly new. If I had to take a stab I would suggest something like this: (NOTE: We haven't seen much from campaign mode, skirmish mode would be completely different) I bet on a system lilke this: Two resources required in making new ships. Material AND personel. Available personel will be some sort of factor like: Available Population(1000000) X Popular Support (75%) = 750000 available personel. Then multiplied by any planet facttion modifiers. Then each ship has a "personel" requirement and a "resource" build requirement and maintainence requirement. As you loose a planet, or your popular support sways, you will loose available personel. If you fall below your maintainence requirements, your ships hardpoint/shield totals will suffer. If you fall below your personel requirements, your ship performce will suffer. (Since the game already has ship performance modifiers from heros, adding a negative modifier based on personel levels would be very easy). This keeps resources very basic, while at the same time keeping a larger sense of strategy and colonization.

It would be fun if they got a bit creative. They are trying to make 40 unique enviroments. Make a planet (Say one of the water worlds) in which there is no place for land troops. They defenders have airspeeders and antiaircraft guns and the invaders must have a mass of bombers to take it out. That is the most obvious "creative" deviation, I'm sure we could think of many others as well.

This is inaccurate. It has been said that the "main" buildings, ie factories, will be predestined. However, ground defense weaponary can be placed where the player wants it. Also, knowing which way the enemy is going to attack generally benefits the defender more than the offender. I have tried to study the maps ussing the minimap and screens. It appears to me that most maps are designed from a defensive standpoint, as in there are only two or three routes from the drop point into the city.

Thanks Darth, my post wasn't meant to be taken too seriously (I hope that was obvious). If we can get one or two "Important facts" revealed to us, then i think it will have been a success.

Ryloth is not the only planet with extremes like that. I can't wait to see how certain planets are played out. Some are obvious like Bespin, in which you'll likely just fight on cloud city.

Alucard, models look nice. But I suspect Thrawn will be in the game..as he is the only real "hero" that the imps have who never ended up swtiching sides. The most recent interview says there will be EU content.

I bet the milestone is last of the unit models finished or last of the planets finished. Or maybe both. Ultra random speculation is so much fun

OMG How old is this interview? Good questions and answers. This is by far the most informative interview yet. How come it wasn't better posted on the forums? hmm Thanks Nevets PS: If they are going to have some EU units and inhouse creations, I don't think anybody here should worry about ceps, b-wings and SSD's. Im sure there first priority would be to get all the movie vehicles into the game. let me say yay! EDIT: Looks like this interview was on the 30th. (Only a few days ago). Nevets, you want to make a post for it in the general? (I don't want to make it like i was the one that found it or something )

Yeah, and that never made much sense to me, since the cold side of hoth could never be colder that most areas of space. In fact, most planets in the galaxy would be very very cold/very very hot. You'd think that would be accounted for in all vehical designs. Note that the imperial ships had no problem with the cold. The one arugment could be that the air gets too thin in the extreme cold for the aispeeder engines to work, however, air that thin would not be breathable or sustainable for humans.

Thanks Fosh, that sorta clears up the issue.

That has been confirmed during the Australia event!! I disagree. What was said was: "He can continue to take this battle on. And if he wanted to, depending on how he is playing the game, he may just want to take out the space station or he may just want to take out those ships, again it depends on his overall strategy." I have listened to it many times and do not feel that he is talking about what the "Death Star" can attack, but rather saying that you dont' "have" to take out the planet just because you have the Death Star with you. Also, we still have not seen a way to select the Death Star and the Death Star itself shows up in the minimap in the corner and never moves, as if it is not actually on the map.