SirNuke

I'm not sure what to say. I have successfully played a single 3v3 space skirmish match, and minus the lag it was a ton of fun. Lots of Star Destroyers and Mon Calamaris blasting at each other. Quite possibly the single best online match I have ever played, primarily since it was from a good strategy move that won (sending raids to destroy the enemy's mining fields while surrounding the enemy fleet forcing them them to stay focused on our main fleet) rather than the typical RTS 'more units==victory'. However, the online network code is a mess and thus eliminating a huge portion of the game. On top of the multiplayer problems, the game seems riddled with bugs/annoyances. Ground troops firing but having their shots blocked by changes in the ground texture. Selecting bombardment then right click both cancels the bombardment mode and orders what ever units you had to move. I've had a Mon Calamari suddenly stop moving (still attacked units that came near it, but wouldn't move). Units trying to attack through map walls (not destructible) rather than moving around the walls. Tie Fighters, Tie Bombers, and X-wings (and maybe Y-wings, but I can't remember) lose their vocal responses when selected from a group number (assign them to group 1, then select 1). The force corrupted units don't have changed vocal responses for every command (like take cover). The furthest zoom out levels on the ground would be great for a sort of overall battle planning, but since you can't take advantage of special powers, it's not very useful. Nothing show stopping (except the unit stop thing), but irritating none the less. But I'm also sure that's only half of what has occurred to me. I understand that 3 months of polishing may have only started out as polishing and turned into rewriting large portions of the game, and that pushing back the release may have not been their choice (or a good decision for reason(s) I am unaware of), but I have to say "so much for Westwood's return the RTS field". I expected a higher quality product. But since I haven't seen anything that [hopefully] won't get fixed with patches, I will say it has lived up to my expectations.

You get a good 3v3 battle going and the space battles are more than adequate epic wise. But I think the ground caps are way too low, to the point where they often hinder the game pretty badly.

Not a game secret, it's a bug. I had it happen but the menus didn't show up, so I had to alt-tab out.

Or 100 years. If he keeps getting people to put his website on forums and such. 1,000,000,000 / 365 = 2,739,726 per day. Google gets 250,000 per day. Yahoo, the most visited site on the Internet, gets 300,000 per day. No chance what so ever. 27,396 hits per day for a website with absolutely no content isn't even going to happen, which is what he needs to average per day to get 1 billion unique hits in a century.

I am really looking forward to the multiplayer stuff. I find it odd they didn't state anything about that. Nor much about features that cannot be unlocked with the demo. I did notice the extremely poor AI and extremely poor pathfinding (in particular my artillery seemed to have difficulties standing still). Though really doesn't justify that score since that's not a structure problem, and therefore something that can be fixed fairly easy with patches. And there isn't a war between Bfme and EaW. The game that gets the better reviews doesn't get a trophy, nor does it automatically get more sales or anything.

You cannot planet hop around in the game. All of the planets are controlled by either your enemy or pirates in the final, and it takes a while to raise enough funds to build enough defense that you can remove most of your garrison. Don't judge the final game by the mods people have put together. Regardless, you aren't one of the developers. You haven't played the full game. It's fine to say "Hey this would have been really cool", or "this is a great idea", but how can say that feature x would have made this game y times better?

I agree with JediIgor, this is way too early for a magazine review. And what's wrong with gamespot all the sudden? BfME2 released their demo on the 9th. Plus where was the game before then? If it suddenly appears for the first time on the 10 ten list, a lot of people will check out the new comer, leading to a lot more people adding it to their list. No developer means to only make a good game. Either they care about the game and shoot for a great game or just throw out something and hope to make a quick buck. I think we all agree it's not the latter case, and that Petroglyph didn't just decide the game has gotten as good as it gets. You are just jumping to conclusions based on a single lukewarm review. A review that isn't clear whether it was even using the final version of the game. Does someone have a link to the text of the review? They don't appear to have it on their website.

That doesn't solve the problem that you can't build anymore space units (can't build a space station with an enemy fleet orbiting)

I don't use MSN/XFire, so I'll leave some stuff here (AIM: seniornuke if you wish)... I believe you want to set the target for the links to "extra", but I could be wrong. A better idea would be to avoid frames completely and do something like this with tables... <table width="100%" border="0" cellpadding="0"> <tr> <td width="200px"> <h2>Navigation</h2> <!--Navigation Links--> </td> <td> <!--Page Content--> </td> </tr> </table> I am 99% sure that freewebs allows Server Side Includes (make the extension shtml). <td width="200px"> <!--links.html is the html code for all pages links--> <!--#include virtual="links.html"--> </td> <td> <!--content--> </td> Then if you want to update the navigation page just change the links.html file. An example links.html file would be... <!--Navigation--> <h2>Navigation</h2> <p> <a href="reallycoolpage.shtml">Really Cool Page #1</a><br /> <a href="reallycoolpage2.shtml">Really Cool Page #2</a><br /> <a href="reallycoolpopup.html" target="_blank">Really Cool Popup</a><br /> </p> And two more suggestions: 1. The red is really hard to read on the grey back ground. Maybe drop the red entirely from the main frame. 2. I would suggest avoiding Marques. They don't look nice at all, and can be a hard to read.

If your enemy has that much of an advantage space wise, I think the game is pretty much over anyway. I suppose if they are lightly guarding some planets you can use heroes to break free.

My wishlist... is actually a wish item. Simultaneous ground and space battle with lots of interaction between them. I would imagine it would be hard to coordinate everything (though that also might make it a lot more fun). Three layers: 1. Deep space: space station, most space combat 2. Atmosphere: Move transports here to deploy, some ships can enter to attack ground units and other atmosphere units. 3. Ground: remove the check points and instead allow enemy to land units anywhere. Transports take a little while to land so are very vulnerable to anti-air and atmosphere units. A quick thinking defender also has time to move units to counter the drop. Oh, make that two things. Even more importantly, hard code restrictions preventing the addition of "Give Dorkthehunter a ". Seriously though, I'm not giving up my homebaked cookies for anything, and I don't appreciate any attempts to get me to do so

I honestly hope the quality of the average online EaW player is higher than the typical online player. Commanding a squad of 4 random people==ugly.

PM Delphi. I suspect they won't respond to an irrelevant email on their job request address. And wouldn't the bar be a better place for this thread?

I would imagine it's very hard to sneak up on an Imperial player who has Tie Fighters sneaking all around the map. And much hard to protect your transports (if you are rebellion) with 10 or so squads of Ties randomally flying around the map.

That was weak (hosted on albino black sheep gave it away for me). Watch this.

Um, we have 24 people and 24 isn't a power of two. Just some suggestings for getting the number to a power of 2 (16) by weeding out some weaker players early on.

Why not have a couple of early big battles and take the top x scores. Four Battles of 6, take the top four scores from each and continue on. (5 rounds) 4 battles of 6 -> 16 winners 8 battles of 2 -> 8 Winners 4 battles of 2 -> 4 Winners ... or if you want it shorter (4 rounds) 4 battles of 6 -> 16 winners 4 battles of 4 -> 4 Winners or (also 4 rounds). 4 battles of 6 -> 8 winners (top 2 from each) ... or any of the hundreds of deviations of this.

BS. I wish Wikipedia wasn't editable by non registered users, it would solve a lot of problems. The only two things that non registered users cannot do is 1: Create new articles and 2: Edit articles that are semi-protected (last time I checked there was only a dozen or so that were protected like that). Also, never believe mainstream media when they report on technology related issues. I have read far too many articles that spin the restrictions on unregistered users into "You have to register to edit wikipedia".

Can we give ourselves some time to pratice before this tournament? Two weeks would be amazingly awesome for me, since I would have no exams during that week.

You aren't that old. Nor are your parents. I used a 486 with Windows 3.1 up until one year before XP came out. A colecovision (similar to the original Atari) is still the newest tv console my family has. My first TV was one of the first color TVs that could support channels higher than 18, and is still in use in my family's basement. To be somewhat fair, we did get a DVD player early on in their existence (pre region codes). I think I got most of you guys (where (forumMember.getAge() <= 21ish) ) beat

He wasn't elected. And he won't ever get elected. I strongly believe as the average gamer age increases (as Gen X gets older) the "video games are the evil!" views will go away.

The following are also missing their textures: The pirate infantry and vehicles are missing. The Pirate frigate is also missing. Rebel Space stations 3 and 4. Rebel Infiltrator. Obi-wan.

I believe the Imps will have shock troopers in the final game.

I certainly hope they don't spell dome. That would be very odd if futuristic light wave based weapontry formed spherical architectural structures when used.

Does it include the infamous 'Lando System'?