I just came across this interview with Ironclad’s Blair Fraser with 1up.com about the next installment in the micro-expansions for Sins of a Solar Empire.
"The second micro expansion is really about both diplomacy and the non-military aspects of the game which will bring it more in line with the RT4X sub-genre we've labeled it as. Certainly, multiple paths to victory, especially non military paths, are part of that," Fraser said, adding that the introduction of additional game modes that will make the game more multiplayer-friendly is also a distinct possibility, pointing to the user-made Sins of a Solar Empire DOME mod as an example.”
Check out the article at 1up.com.
Wonder how those would work in multiplayer..
Sounds interesting. But I kidna lost interest in sins with the whole siege frigate fisco.
A little shy on specifics, but surely stirs up interest even more. Even a hint of spies!
Blair, give us the beta earlier! It can run for 3 months this time, we won't mind. Promise.
I second this.
I third this as well. I really enjoyed beta testing. It made me hunger for more.
I love the game, any upgrade will be welcomed.
Thanks
What DID sins do to stir up the ESRB? I haven't heard anything about that.
Well, some of the speech was going to be a bit more coarse, and they were going to have floating bodies and such when ships blew up. Craig mentioned that in a thread a while back. Besides that, I don't know!
Awesome interview!
This part is genius:
"The second micro expansion is really about both diplomacy and the non-military aspects of the game which will bring it more in line with the RT4X sub-genre we've labeled it as. Certainly, multiple paths to victory, especially non military paths, are part of that," Fraser said, adding that the introduction of additional game modes that will make the game more multiplayer-friendly is also a distinct possibility, pointing to the user-made Sins of a Solar Empire DOME mod as an example."
Hope IC is going to introduce this - specially that part in regards to MP!
"Don't despair though, because Fraser says that Ironclad wants to release a few special things that "have nothing to do with patches, upgrades, or expansions." He added that there was content taken out for reasons such as the ESRB that he would love to release without "stirring up trouble." For our part, we're absolutely dying to know what Sins of a Solar Empire could have possibly done to stir up the ESRB. "
Am I the only one who found this to be a VERY interesting comment??? I would absolutely love to know what these items were!!!
EDIT: posted this before I noticed the earlier responses...oops.
SINS of a Solar Empire can't have too many SINS in it, now can it? Looking forward to the next expansion. Espionage, improved empire management, and replacement to the current mission based diplomacy is more than welcomed.
great news! and earlier than I expected. I'd have thought we'd get more info by end of march.
it's definately what I had been longing for since the game's release and from I posted, I'm obviously delighted to also see the alternative victory paths apparently in. and the planet capturing ... well, it would be nice.
about the beta I'd agree. now, I'm can't tell about what the ai could do seriously wrong, but my take is: give us a beta as soon as you have everything in place and working without the most serious of bugs. never mind the ai using it. have it be a brain dead ai for all we care. after all, why program the ai to something that might change anyway. we saw that the entrechment beta introduced some considerable changes over its course. so ... maybe an earlier, slightly rougher beta would help in making the balancing and evolution branches more parallel instead of one having to go before the other and then back again. and of course we'd we more food earlier.
I see you have by now also adapted the 'when it's done' attitude. it's probably the best you can do. after all, what did murphy say: whatever can go wrong, will go wrong.
That's one way to get people to test these things in MP. If you remember in the Sins beta, the AI couldn't tie its own shoe, so everyone was playing MP (well, all few dozen of us active ones )
Im sorry if i dont sound grateful or anythng, and any adds to the game is good. but i was really hoping to see a new even more powerful race added. something in line with not one race can stand along against this newer even more powerful evil race. Im not about diplomacy when i play i like the head on brute force of battle. Plus adding newer planet types would be a welcome site too, I know there are mods but its becomes a real pain in the ass either waiting on someone to convert the old to new and having to do it yourself.
anyway i guess we will have to wait and see what they come up with.
I used to play a very good board game as a student called Dimplomacy, the game mechanics were very simple but the possibilities endless. What made it such a good gameplay experience was you having to communicate and negotiate with other players on what your intended moves were, but before those moves were executed you had to write down your orders and at that point you could either do as you promised or something completely different.
Unlike normal turn-based board games all the orders from all the players were assessed at the same time to determine the outcome which was when you found out who your friends and enermies were.
Maybe this isn't a practical form of gameplay for Sins the point I want to get across that it was exciting and tense having everything play out at once, if you read it right it was glorious but if you got it wrong it was complete horror, which is highly unusal for a board game. So maybe worth consideration, kind of like a dimplomacy tech tree where you cast the dice in one direction at specific points in the game which plays to your advantage or detrement.
The 4x aspect isn't really going to be there until IC implements more races/factions. I'm not just talking about one or two. We need GalCivII or SEV amounts of races/factions for it to have the feel of an epic space empire game.
It'll possibly be harder to balance than other 4x games b/c there is more emphasis on combat, but SOTS did it (with 6). I hope a big expansion adds a least 4 more factions/races.
This sounds nummy. Can I pre-order it now? What about now? Maybe Now? Or Now? Now? Now?
Check now.
well, I for one don't particularly need new race(s). sure, I won't mind, but the things announced seem more important to me. and don't forget, 4X games have more races, because more often than not, these races are more or less variations of one single framework with an extra tech here, or some racial feature. sins' race balance is more the rts direction with fewer, but more diversified races. both are fine, but just don't expect a huge increase. DoW with sequels is probably one of the rare examples of an rts with more than 3 -4 races.
writing down .... yeah. I'd love to see in the mid future (that is in a decade or two) like a real ai. where you send messages in writing, anything and you would see some sort of intelligent reaction. basically an actual intelligence of sorts. but that's the nerd in me speaking I guess. would also be massively op for games. like the proverbial bazooka for hunting.
Shadowhal,
For example, Sword of the Stars (SOTS) is a turn-based 4x with real-time tactical combat and has SIX races. Its first release had four factions, and added two more with two expansions. It would be a great disappointment to me if SOASE doesn't at least get in the ball park of six races/factions.
And quite frankly, the TEC, Advent, and Vasari don't feel different enough as is to warrant the lack of races/factions. Right now, it feels as if Ironclad's strategy is "just give a different mesh/name for the same frigate, carrier, etc."
It's one of this games biggest cons in my opinion. I felt the first Dawn of War did a good job creating unique factions, even in the expansions. I hate that "it's a RTS" and "balance" are excuses for devs to not create multiple races/factions.
I didn't play sots, but I believe you on that point.
we've had the race discussion several time over. unit wise, they may be similar, but most games use some sort of framework to fit in for races and then make manipulations for them here and there. the important point is: do they play differently? do they require different paths to win? I think sins races do.
as for the rest, I can't think of anything more to say from what I did. I won't object to new races, but there's a whole range of things I'd rather see and new races require quite some work to implement. actually, I find more than a handful of races almost confusing, I'd rather have fewer and those with big diversity.
Sure, but you don't mention that the only real difference between them is their appearance and how they move around. The tech tree is the same and that's the only reason it works. They use the same weapons, the same "parts" in functionality, except for a handful of race-specific ones to facilitate the aforementioned minor differences.
Same with the majority of GalCiv.
In Sins, everything is unique. It wouldn't work.
Excuse? Balance is damn good reason for any RTS that wants to be taken seriously. DoW 1 was a fun game, but after Dark Crusade it was impossible to mention 'DoW' and 'ladder' without generating laughter. It takes a lot of time and money from the devs to balance a RTS with more than 3-4 factions, and most companies who try find they can't afford it, leaving a train wreck of balance behind.
I can't think of any RTS with more than 3 factions/races that felt really balanced. Warcraft 3 was pretty close, but that was only after a full expansion and ~15 more patches after that. Only Blizzard could afford that kind of support, and even then there are still some standout balance issues with that game.
As of SINS, well the player base is more casual so they could probably get away with looser balance. Even so if they were to make a new race that played really differently from the established norm, it would require a lot of testing to ensure the new race didn't have a major advantage over the existing ones. Nevermind that adding 2-3 new races that all play differently, as some people are asking, would require a long time to develop. You'd need 3 full tech trees + the new defence tree, with unique research options and specializations for each new race. You'd need 5 unique cap ships (possibly more if a future expansion adds to the existing races) with 4 different and balanced abilities each. And if you really want them to be different, you need a completely new gimmick to go with each new race. That's a lot of work, and once the micro-expansions are done will there even be enough interest in Sins to make money on this? It almost seems more worthwhile to start Sins 2 rather than add a full expansion at that point.
Congratulations to EvilTesla and ShadowMastif for their "Mode" mod!!!!! This is quite a feather in the cap!!! Being mentioned by Blair himself in a worldwide interview. Very very very very cool!!! Congrats again!!!
We are proud and happy you are getting the accolades!! Nice work!!!
Take care and Keep Modding out there!!!!
-Teal
however they decide to overhaul the diplomacy system, it has to go both ways. I find it more than annoying where AI opponents expect you to kill X amount of ships from this empire or that, but you can't task your potential allies to do the same. What the computer is able to proposition you with, you should be able to as well.
If we see other options of aquiring planets they'll likely be through economic, though this might give TEC a unfair advantage with all the revenue they can generate mid-late game, so balancing might involve other factors on whether the AI is willing to sell a planet to you or not.
I'm a bit dubious about any diplomacy overhaul, as this will greatly change how the game is played. Entrenchment gave some goodies for defense, but you basically play the game same as before. If the next micro expansion is changing gameplay, they need to open up the AI. We're likely left with the same 3 races, a bunch of terrans who can move economies between worlds with ease, an exiled race, Advent, who can bend mind and wills with their psi and beam weapons, and the warlike Vasari who would likely still shoot first and talk trade second. Does anyone else see how diplomacy has little to do with the back story between each race. I think customized AI, at least for diplomacy is essential for any diplomatic overhaul to work. It doesn't have to be anything fancy, even if it's just a set of sliders that determines how each empire reacts to the other based on certain conditions, and adjusting the level of trust when you start a new game. I won't hold my breath for changing combat AI directly, but without the ability to customize diplomatic AI for each game, Ironclad might as well jump to their next micro expansion and put an actual campaign together for each race.
I could be wrong here, and this is just an opinion mind you, but StarCraft, also by Blizzard was one heck of a game that had very different races, the Zerg being my favorite. But that said, Sins has in my mind a wonderful difference in that the races although being different, aren't TOO different, by that i mean going from one race to another requiring me to completely re-learn how to play.
But yes, difference and more races would be nice in my book, but maybe not too many. And the importance will be to have the racial differences be strong enough to play out interestingly.
Say a race of Diplomats? That attack with culture and intrigue and behind the scenes backstabbing/politics/influence buying without ever raising a fleet above small size. Perhaps they can't raise a fleet above small size. This could allow players who are very much into that kind of thing to play, and win in scenarios against the vasari, or tec or advent. Perhaps the influence could "turn" a forthcoming raid/invasion on its head and stop it. Something the other factions do not have the ability to even attempt.
Or Trade race, where trade ships and purchasing/selling to the market, or to each race is the prime point. Where fleets of tradeships are "guarded" by the advent or vasari, or tec, depending on what is being shipped and where. This wouldnt mean not losing any ships at all, but the "guards" or the pirate "buyout" could mean a mostly hassle free shipment of goods from one place to another. Perhaps in this scenario, the Trade Repulblic would only "win" in alliance with the faction that they pin most of their trade to, while "starving" the others, but that might be a decision late game after playing "all of the factions" in the beginning to determine which way the war is going.
Biological race, where "grown" ships (perhaps in the manner of Zerg or perhaps not) give them an edge in certain aspects of battle. Perhaps Giant ameoba that draw /absorb weapons fire from attacking ships and ultimately dies, but gives the small more fragile fleet the chance to sneak in and either "corrupt" planetmodules or ships, "infect" them so to say, rendering them either slow decay and erratic behavior or converting them, i would prefer the former as we already have a conversion ability in the advent, and it would be nice to see some difference from that. But with enough infected ships, modules, planets it could be a way where any of the other factions have the ONLY choice of losing vast amounts of low end ships or targets in order to overcome the relative at a distance killing of these infectors. This could mean warfare with this race in a more "indirect" approach, instead of stand off fight to the death weapons fest that we have now. It could bring a new approach and tactics of course, and by doing so could make the game more interesting.
What im saying here, is not just to introduce ANY race, or random-quick drawn thrown into the game kinds of races, but races that have distinct and very obvious and "Playable" differences. The ones i note above are only ideas, but my thrust here is to create a different kind of "play approach" when playing them.
Anyway, just some ideas and thoughts, take care and keep modding!!!
There are many great features available to you once you register, including:
Sign in or Create Account
