What does everyone think of SotS: II E? Ive heard its turn based with RTS battles? How much emphasis is on the RTS part?
Its turn based in the strategic sense. You have a map of your empire and you make your decisions for your strategies from there. Any battles take place in real time. Similar to Total War series.
As for what I think about is that I enjoy it. It has a very large learning curve but when you do learn it, its very fun.
This is a better game, in my humble, but very accurate opinion: www.stardrivegame.com
Check out my videos on my channel: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mXWxM217XCM&feature=youtu.be
The Good:
Best combat system in any 4x game. Armor on 4 sides for each section, blue indestructible bar, armor, structure (structure takes crits ie dead crew, engine overload, weapons blowing off, etc...) rotating ships, barrel rolls, 3 planes to fight on, engine speeds, do shots reflect off the armor?, turrets and modules have hit points, etc...
The ship models are amazing.
Every game is random, sometimes you get your favorite tech and others well you make due.
Weapons in action are beautiful.
Looking at systems you own or in combat looks really good.
All races play differently and have strengths and weaknesses.
All races have different means of travel and handful of unique techs.
Tech Forest 250+ techs CRAZY AND I LOVE IT! So many choices I love it (16 tech trees).
Marine boarding pods, psionics, ballistics, lasers, shields, carriers, political science, energy and drive tech, command tech, torpedos, biotech, drones, pd weapons, armor, grapple hooks, sensors tech, cloaking, mines, missiles, micro warp jumps, modules, riders, cruisers, dreadnoughts and leviathans, (tons of mission, command and engine sections to choose from), etc... list goes on...
Immersion skins to choose from for 6 meatbag races (just a lore based skin no in game differences).
In game Sotspedia can give you more info, pictures and lore (still being updated).
The Strategic AI is actually getting good now (no more indebt ai and they expand like crazy).
Best multiplayer 4x I have played (few kinks left and if you want to host port forward).
Lots of sensor views on the strategic map (3d map hurt peoples brains less than Sots 1).
Battleriders, Battlecruisers and Battleships (haters that only want fighters go drink a tall glass of shut up juice or play humans ie nodefighters).
Minors, randoms, random events, grand menaces the universe to find and some of them are out to get everyone.
Sots is a lore rich universe. Seriously their lore section on their forums is wonderful.
Built in game chat if you got questions someone will have answers.
Mission system is better than Sots 1, if you got the supply you keep on trucking (only a very few left to be updated say station management).
The different types of admiral traits and admiral names "Bender".
You can specialize your research.
Turn 1 you get free prototypes, after that turn when making new designs you have to prototype them. They are expensive but there are techs to lower the cost. Also some ships can get perks, good or bad (none game breaking).
Research system- feasibility is researching this tech worth my time (you research 10% of the tech and your scientists say keep going or stop), salvage, tech links, tech prerequisites, tech boosting, accidents, ai rebellions, etc... (only thing missing is the tech list that you already researched from sots 1 but its coming).
Battle Manager- setup where your defense assets are and where you fleets will be in system when you get attacked. You also see where enemy fleets will jump in from. (police cutters, defense satellites, System Defense Boats, minefields, stealth structures, drones, battle riders, etc... lots of choices.
The game plays alot faster than it use to but still being optimized ie new ai updates slow down the game but then they speed it back up.
Updates every week. Big updates once a month.
The Bad:
Sticky notes are not in yet but they are coming.
The game was 64bit but for now its 32bit but one day it will come back once they hunt down most the problems.
The tactical ai has a few teeth. Its slowly getting updated every month.
Station system can slow you down if you upgrade too much (its on the list for getting another pass).
Sots 2 is a little slow at first but then picks up quickly (also slider options to make game faster in game setup).
No random map generation yet (in future and there is a mod for it).
Scenarios are not in yet. Only one ai and scenario guy so focus is ai right now.
Some of the screens need another pass.
Tutorials are online and on youtube. But you can use the forums, and built in chat (there are ? marks on each screen that give a basic break down on each screen).
Diplomacy ai still needs to be tuned. Sometimes ai kills off minors.
Some of the descriptions need another pass.
This game you need a really good processor. Graphics card is the next important thing.
Paradox isn't helping them out with these updates. Only when they work on expansions will they receive help (the pit is a means to help fund them to keep supporting Sots 2).
The mission system needs a few more updates ie stations system but its mostly win.
Documentation- say I want to retrofit ships, I need naval station level 3 and first engineering tech orbital dry docks but your are not told that.
The Future:
2 More expansions one big and one small (like sots 1 and stuffed).
Next one new race (with focus on ground combat, unique tech and drive tech), ground combat, more missions ie mining, more ships, more mission sections, more tech, more randoms and grands, etc... filled to the brim with awesome.
Rumors of final expansion skirmish mode... and more goodies.
Their kickstarter The Pit comes out in March? (Around that time). Its in closed beta right now. The only direct way to support Kerberos.
Updates keep on coming out.
They have a huge list of player feedback and are slowly going through it.
Way more good than bad right now. Yes learning curve is hard but once you get it omg it sucks you right in.
Sounds terrible.
That's an opinion.
What are you basing that on? I`ve seen you on the kerb boards so I believe you may have some info. I`m a PiT supporter and have never heard or seen anything like this posted on kerb`s board`s. I`d like to see it, I`ll support it if it does come.
I would recommend it. Hawawaa`s description is accurate, The best way I can describe it is Total War in space.
Sots 2 getting same expansion set like sots 1. 2 big 1 small.
I love the sounds of "the good" in the post above but this
is a huge red flag to me. It is a very bad sign to pay for your development of an unfinished title by taking payments for your next title. Those studios do not last. Am I missing something?
Yes, it is...
I will probably still try it.
Nope. The graphics engine is really, really good, but the actual models are one of the worst i have seen in a game like this. Too complicated, with lots of spikes and shit, way too much particle effects and way too colourful... and the worst part is, cause of all this, its kinda difficult to "comprehend" the basic shape of the ships. You know, on Sins, Kortul is like a tank, Progenitor is like flying wing, Evacuator is Egg, Vorastra is Manta Ray, Kultorask is Space Turnip (or was it Orkulus?)etc, etc... you get what i mean. This is IMHO important from design standpoint and its missing in SotS.
I completely agree with this, which is why I keep wondering why most people seem to think SotS2 is a good looking game. I think the ship designs are awful - like made by a 12 year old going mad. The engine itself seems quite capable though.
Agreed. I like the models in your game, btw, although so far i just saw only structures and smaller ships Anyway it slightly reminds me of Homeworld, which is always a good thing. I would just tone down the saturation of the team color or even better, reduce the team color surface on some models (i recall seeing something, where it is over the top). And please, for love of god, change the purplish nebula in the background, it makes my eyes sore I love the nebulae in the background, i even love that particular color...but its way too much there, it does not even look like a space. It basically associates with the DSS in my case, its the first thing i recall, when i see it somewhere. Bit more of black please.
Heaven- Yes its worrying but they already are throwing their artists into the creation pits for the next expansion so we are good. Also the next expansion they will make money on it ie its not gonna be free again. Also don't forget the pit will be launching soon. It's all good. They sold lots of Sots 2 merchandise too in their Pit campaign. Hopefully they can hire another programmer soon so they can get through that tall list of wants quicker.
Oh one other good thing is the music Studio X Labs and composer Paul Ruskay ie guy who did the Homeworld music.
I do turn off focal blur and bloom. Sometimes the lights are too much. You can up the graphics with Nvidia control panel too.
I put this in the "the bad" list. 16 months after release, the tactical AI is getting slightly less braindead. It still sucks horribly, it just sucks less.
Yes, usually, 4X AI isn't all that awesome, and giving the AI a boost to its economy ('cheating AI') is usually required to make it really competitive. But it does put up some sort of fight.
In SotS 2, however, the AI just won't threaten you. Once you've started to understand the workings of the game (the complexity and the lack of guidance being the only difficulty in single player mode) you will never feel like the AI has a short at winning. Its colonization and station building choices are somewhat poor, it designs absolutely horrible ships, send them in inadequately-assembled fleets, ignores your own fleet lineups entirely (if my fleets are point-defense heavy, sending waves after waves of light-drone cruisers/assault shuttle cruisers for 80 turns is completely moronic, and a total waste of its money and industry), and attacks the same systems repeatedly turn after turn, so all you have to do is defend choke points and tech up. Oh, and it does a piss-poor job at defending its own system, placing its defense platforms randomly like a 2 year old (instead of catching the invader at the entrance of the system with as many ships and platforms as possible, to combine their firepower).
The tactical AI is also dumb as a sock and exploitable, of course.
Unfortunately, in order to enjoy the game, you need to take part in multiplayer. Then, the subtleties of the game become much greater, and the richness of the combat system start to show; and yes, it *is* the best combat system of a 4X, making Elemental's unit design and combat systems feel cosmetic and dull by comparison. When Elemental lets you choose individual armor piece without it actually adding anything to gameplay, every part of SotS 2's unit design counts and interacts well with the fleet composition and tactical combat aspects of the game. A blind spot in your point-defense coverage, and you could take a volley of torpedoes that would seriously damage your engines. Powerful close-combat weapons are great when you can get close to the enemy, but will not save you against a fleeing hit-and-run force. Fixed-mounts heavy combat lasers are great if you can aim, but terrible if your ship is jerked around by the enemy's kinetic weapons. Etc.
Unfortunately (again), the game suffers greatly from "fake good ideas" and "overdesign". The mission system you need to use to send fleets around is unnecessarily clunky, station management is irritating, and in general the game does a good job at making you waste time for simple actions. This will make multiplayer somewhat tedious, so unless you are very patient and immune to frustration, it doesn't work that well either.
And the expansion is actually making things worse. Sure, the Loa are interesting on paper, but their implementation makes playing them tedious and micro-management rich. Having to split/recombine fleets all the time just isn't fun. There were much better ways to approach the same concepts, but Kerberos isn't really good at making their clever ideas into efficient implementation.
Also, it crashes all the time and the engine's garbage. Let's be honest: yes, it looks okay - because the competition isn't doing much better. But X3 was released in 2006 and had better graphics already. Overall, I'm not that impressed. Add to this the terrible performance once combat gets a bit crowded (~50 battle riders and their carriers), and you can see why I don't join the praise.
In the end, if you want to play a good game that's almost as rich as SotS 2, but much less frustrating and much better designed, play... SotS 1! (it also has a very good AI).
I don't feel very confident either. SotS 2 was a debacle and their reputation is seriously tarnished (aided by the legendary atrocious attitude their boss can have on their forums).
The game on paper sounds like my ideal space TBS. These point particularly:
Sure if your one of those who has to mid max everything, The fleet system is a godsend later game. It feels unusual at first but its 1000% better than what we had in SoTS1.
If your one of those players who like to spam stations yeah sure, managing tens of systems with 1-4 stations in it will be tedious. Or you could take the other way to play and not mid/max, super micro everything and not build so many stations.
Again players who like to hyper micro 4x games are gonna get frustrated. Loa are not more mirco management than say Hivers, or SolForce. It just takes relearning the game. The way they did the Loa is awesome very unique gameplay mechanics. Its nice to see a race play so differently, a rare event in games in the recent years.
Less Frustrating, *shrugs* it plays like most 4x so I can see why its less frustrating. Its no where better designed. SoTS2 is much better. As for the AI, did you play SoTS1 AI after intial release? It was just as bad as SoTS2 was at release. It got where it is now only after 6 years of development. Give SoTS2, 6 years and your have AI that will be great.
If your looking for the standard streamlined Civ style 4x that been a stable for years, SoTS isnt your game. If your willing to rethink how to play and play by a new set of rules. SoTS2 is the best 4x out there, and will only get better over time. In the end its what kind of game style you like to play.
Comparing Age of Wonders to SoTS2 is unfair to either game. They are vastly different.
One of the side effects of the complex interaction of all the small parts of SoTS2 is that there are more menus, and windows.
I find the UI, works well. It does some getting use to. But its been simplified since launch and I would assume as time allows more tweaks to make it less overwhelming at first.
Like I said above, If you play the game like its designed its awesome. If you try to play it like you would other 4x games, your gonna hate it. There is no perfect build order/turn order/ship design. The sheer amount of random factors in the game prevents that. It also makes trial and error, the key to understanding how 90% of game mechanics works.
I was wondering when you were going to find this thread Carbon.
Sure if your one of those who has to mid max everything, The fleet system is a godsend later game. It feels unusual at first but its 1000% better than what we had in SoTS1. I don't have to "min-max" everything, I just hate having to go through dozens of clicks and menus for simple action (with poor readability of what's going on, too), something that SotS 2 makes me do all the time. Yes, SotS 1's traditional approach had issues, but in my opinion they create a much bigger problem to solve a marginal one.
It's been 15 months. SotS 1 got much better after Born of Blood, and even quite before that.
Again players who like to hyper micro 4x games are gonna get frustrated. Loa are not more mirco management than say Hivers, or SolForce. It just takes relearning the game.Loa let you combine fleets during invasions, so if you want to use their full strength, you have to do it (this is not a small min-maxing OCD thing, it's about making your fleet a lot stronger). Just that is already annoying and clunky. The gate limitation mechanics is a terrible one and is redundant with command points limitation, and all it does is force you to micro fleet merging at the destination. The cube concept is a great one, but their FTL needs a complete overhaul.
Also, creating riders for rider platforms is a pain in the ass as Loa, and has clearly NOT been thought through.
This conversation is eerily similar to forum wars between SP and MP peeps for SoSE....
Well, I was hoping SotS][ would be more like prime than it is.
As it turned out, I can't be bothered to even try ][, just too many changes from a system I really enjoyed, and I don't see the benefit in actually learning it, as it came out in such a poor state to begin with.
Maybe once the expansions are done I'll take another look at it as a 'finished' product. Kinda what I'm doing with Civ5 as well. Sad that that's the way games are released these days, but I guess that's just life, and my choice is to pick up the ones which are a couple years old, and have had that extra time and attention lavished on them rather than just jump into what appear to be beta releases all over the place
Only new game I jumped on was XCOM, though I just love squad based tactics so much I didn't really mind that I was paying a premium to play it before all the planned bells and whistles are in.
Just because a game is different from it's predecessors does not mean it is inferior or unfinished....
Had Civ V been the first in the franchise, you would not have seen nearly as much criticism for it....people who simply liked the mechanics of previous Civ games were disappointed because those mechanics were changed...
It would be no different than if the NFL suddenly changed all their rules to become Rubgy....sure, many football players and fans would be very upset....but a lot of rugby fans and players would be drawn to the league for precisely the same reasons the old guard left...
I stalk alot now a days.
I fail to see where you get dozens of clicks to do anything approach. Can everything be done in 1-2 clicks? no. But this is not an RTS, there gonna be menus. This adversion to having to visit or click more than twice strikes me as odd. Ive seen it pop up and Ive yet to see the logic why it drives people crazy. To each their own though. After all personal preference is just that.
Yes, but lets put some context into that statement. The game mechanics are more significantly intertwined. Which does make for slower AI devleopment. Even more so when its done by the same person who fixes alot of bugs for patches. The Dev team is tiny. Its smaller than what you had for SoTS1. So it will take more time. Though, comparing SoTS1 and 2 is like comparing Total Annilations AI to Supreme Commanders AI. Basic game mechanics are the same but they are 2 different games.
SoTS2 is an improvement on SoTS1. It just doesnt update graphics and tweak a few mechanics and call it a new game. (Side note: Previous statement rings true to alot of squeals in recent years) SoTS2 is the evolution of the title. Its gonna be different as its been stated. I understand peoples desire for games to 'feel' the same. I bet Homeworld would be vastly different if and/or they reboot it. Or even if it was devleoped and released in the present game market.
There are plenty of 4x that have the 'elegant simplicity' going for it. Endless Space has that covered in spades.
As for the 'clunkiness', personal preference comes to mind on this opinion. There are several ways to do the most task( for example: assinging missions can be done by clicking on fleets or the system you want to send a mission to) But I have said, it requires a change of thought and playing the game with is 'clunkiness' as its intented. Not easy, it took me what feels like forever to break through this 'try to play the game like its SoTS 1, and not like its SoTS 2."
If someone is not willing to invest a bit of effort on their part, ok. No big deal, there are other games. Sadly though you be missing out on one of the best space 4x ever. Not to mention some of the best Real Time tactical combat you can find.
Ive said all I can really say without us going in circles. I be happy to speak back up when someone else wants to discuss the game.
As someone who was very fond of SotS1 and the ease with which I could finish the eXplore, eXpand, and eXploit parts of the game and get right to the eXterminate part where ships started exploding, SotS2's increased emphasis on managing your empire and decreased emphasis on fighting and winning battles has not endeared me to the game.
Sadly though we are talking about SotS][ which was inferior and unfinished when it was released. That doesn't really have anything to do with where it is now, but it clearly was a major F up on the part of Kerb, and yes, Mecron admitted as much.
Now to your more general point. Once ][ is patched up and has all it's expansions out then we can do a comparison. I can still think it inferior if I don't like the design choices they made though, but that's clearly personal preference. Some people love it, some people hate it, some people are in the middle. For me, the new mechanics are not what I was hoping for, nor do they sound particularly appealing. That's why I continue to pass on the game. Not saying the mechanics are good or bad in and of themselves, just that they don't appeal to me. So why would I waste me time on it?
Oh, who knows what the criticism would have been. If not for the fact that the prior games in the series established how we look at CiV people would have been complaining about any number of other things, which for the time, are just accepted for being 'how Civ does things'.
But really I don't care about those comparisons anyway. I want what I want, and I like what I like. I liked SotS, I do not like what I see in SotS][, it went a different, and unneed (from my pov) direction. Good on them for doing what they wanted to do, bad for me that it's not something I'm interested in. Life goes on, plenty of other games out there to be picky with.
There are many great features available to you once you register, including:
Sign in or Create Account
