Teradyn_pff

Thrawn, the percentage of hits that register as such should be dependant on the health of the unit and how much damage the shots are doing... there are alot of ways to do it that are not complicated at all. I am just saying that technology has come along too far for the same hit routine as you see in Galctic Battlegrounds...

Yeah. This is an issue that we were worried about a long time back. I remember people saying, "quit complaining, they will fix the scale!". Looks like we were right to be concerned after all.

Wrong, dead wrong. I don't understand why the heck they can't display the shots as missed instead of impacting... If the shots are doing little to no damage, they shouldn't look like they are hitting dead on. This is one thing that I haven't been able to understand about RTSs. 5 years ago I can understand, but there should not be a technical reason why that can't be done. The horribly low unit limit is a large reason I think that we see so many ground units taking direct hits from things like AT-STs and the like and not even flinching. They can't model it right because every battle would last less than 5 minutes.

From the units there I believe you are looking at the entire invasion force that the Empire could muster to take over a whole planet.... I don't know what happened on Hoth in ESB... well, maybe that is an expansion since the Executor is not in this game and there were too many units on either side for our current pop caps.

No kidding. WTFH?

Probably not legally, but it still was a very bad, bad pr move.

Can we reword #1 to make sure we get some details on how the unit limit works when bringing troops to a planet?

Heh, the nukes in SupCom is what got me... I likes me some nukes

Can you describe the ways that the Empire and the Rebellion aquire information about each other's and neutral planets? For example, how is a probe droid: built, deployed, its information displayed, how much information is displayed, how does the Rebellion prevent it from being successful, etc. And the same for the Rebels.

Well, I think that the way they are approaching the game in SupCom is the way that RTS need to go so the "strategy" part of that name is true. The solar system level - galactic - planetary - continent - etc interactions are still evolving. EAW is a big step in the right direction when so many of the other SW RTS were headed in the wrong direction from Rebellion. It had the right idea, but just needed some updating, graphics, engine, etc-wise. I don't think that this game would do very well if it wasn't Star Wars, though. We don't know all of the details on the way the game will play out though, so I hope that I am dead wrong.

I do want to express my appreciation for Delphi. He has done a whole heck of a lot to keep me here at all with all of the changes that have happened. And while I do express myself very strongly on issues about this game, I think it goes to show how strongly I want this game to succeed and to be the SW RTS we have all been waiting for. I certainly hope that you guys are left alone to perfect the game and get it out on time without any furthur upsets. And I really hope the bugs are all very thoroughly dead and vacuumed up. Here's to the demo and for all of my fears to turn out completely unfounded.

Well, speaking of BFMEII, notice how they had the severely limited populations and the set bases in the first one? They realized how much that sucked and corrected it. Why would EAW go the opposite route especially since the should have learned from the previous mistake? You also mention Warhammer MoC and it's large battles. How does the measily 20 pop cap compair to that? And supreme commander... well, go to gamespy and read up on that while keeping the 10 unit limit and the small map to conquer an entire planet of EAW in mind.

I am curious as to how people think EAW will stack up against the competition, past and present in terms of pure RTS. This does not count it being Star Wars... how does it stand up as a RTS alone given what we know now? (I know we don't know everything yet, so don't even start on that)

Well, speaking of the timeframe, the Mon Cal does not fit in either.

Do we know if there is a limit on the transports in a fleet? That would make a big difference in how fast reinforcements can be brought to bear on the ground. If there is no limit, it would make the ground battle go to the attacker every single time and that doesn't validate even having that mode really.

Don't go mistaking me for some whiny 6 year-old crying about their "cool" ship from the horrid pile of bantha crap that was Episodes I - III. I am talking about the fact that if this wasn't star wars, it would most likely end up in the bargan bin faster than the Millineum Falcon made the Kessel run. Designing this game taking the SW license cushion into account is an afront to the Star Wars fans and RTS fans alike. It is too bad that even with all of this crap that is going on, EAW will probably be the best SW RTS to date by a large margin. Just goes to show you what type of competition it has in that realm.

No, delaying it wont work when the problem is the guidelines or lack thereof that they are working with.

Then what is the point of it having the Star Wars license then? Is there any other than artificially driving up sales?

Whether an argument is rational or not is a matter of opinion, so when you remove a post based on that, you are imposing your opinion on the entire board by means of a moderator flag. What is the general discussion forum for then, if not to discuss the metaissues around EAW? The specific units and how they work, etc should be discussed in the military academy forum.

Right, but that demonstration was how long ago? Who knows what the true story is now. I wish we could get forewarning of what the demo will have available. For example, will we be able to play the galactic mode with a time limit or with only 4 planets or something? Or will we be able to build up to a level 2 space station but no higher. Those kinds of things. I am worried that the demo may be too chopped up to provide us with an accurate picture of how the retail game will be as most people assume it will.

that sounds pretty balanced to me. But seriously, the Venator being in, or not, isn't the biggest issue here. LEC is doing a very sloppy job with content control. Also, having balance issues that are so massive as to require the removal of a very well known unit this close to release is disturbing.

hey, that is just sick, man... sick

Well, to someone else's point (can't remember who), if the Venator was available to both sides, how was it unbalancing?

Thank them for their misrepresentation? What?

Does it take playing the demo to have an opinion on things like the Venator being left out (probably due to saving for a clone expansion possibility), the Broadside being included, the timeline being misrepresented, etc? There is more to EAW than a RTS game. The Star Wars license should come with some responsibility. Sadly, the very body that is supposed to enforce that doesn't even handle it correctly. Anyway, it is statements like what I just made here in this post that are being deleted and that is what I am objecting to. I am not the only one that has expressed these views either. Some have done so more elloquently than I.