View Full Version : Updated SWGB2 Template

Darth Windu
08-16-2004, 12:43 AM
For those who might be interested, i have updated my template with

- 4 unique Generals for each civilisation (Confederacy only has two at the moment)
- Semi Unique buildings (power generation and defensive structures)

There is still more work to do on it though, but it is now up at my website so feel free to go take a look.

Darth Windu
08-18-2004, 06:38 AM
One thing i forgot to mention, aside from unique Power Generation and Defence structures, each civ also has unique Airbase structures, although i may change the Rebel Airbase.

Admiral Vostok
08-18-2004, 09:19 PM
I was in the mood for a really thorough read of your design, so here's some comments.

1. First up, I like the improved navigation of the document, with hyperlinks going everywhere. Now all you need to do is put it on your website in HTML format so I don't have to download it every time.
2. Generals would be better off being called "Commanders" - more Star-Warsy and it lets you have Commanders who aren't Generals. Plus it's less obvious as a rip-off of C&C:Generals.
3. You mention that Smugglers visit all of the civs spaceports. This is silly. Smugglers would only operate with the Rebels (and maybe the Naboo, but unlikely); all the other factions would consider them criminals, especially the Confederacy.

4. I assume the bit that says OOM-9 gets a bonus for Mechs as well as a detriment to Mechs is a typo.
5. Other obvious Generals for the Separatists would be Count Dooku and Poggle the Lesser.
6. I still think Geonosis makes a better homeworld than Muunilist.
7. I like the Security Droid idea, it suits them. The fact that both AoM and C&C:G both already do it makes it less of a rip-off ;)
8. I don't think the Homing Spider Droid should be faster than the AAT. This isn't what we saw in the movies. Instead, I think the HSD should be better against Mechs than the AAT, with less armour but more hit points.
9. You mention the Droid Starfighter cannot "self-repair". What is self-repairing, I can't find it anywhere.

10. Rocket Trooper shouldn't be good against infantry for balance reasons.

11. Perhaps as well as the Clone Captain, the Republic can use Jedi Knights as their Officers? A Jedi Knight could be promoted to a Jedi Master and give a bonus like the Clone Captain does. Just a thought.
12. I don't understand why Jedi get promoted from Padawan to Veteran Padawan (:confused: ) to Knight. Surely Padawan to Knight to Master makes infinitely more sense.
13. I say again that the Gunship should not be "fast". Just look at how much more manouverable the Geonosian Fighters are in comparison. The Gunship whould be one of the slowest air vehicles, excluding large transports. This would help balance its effectiveness. The same goes for Dropships, but moreso.

14. Madine's ability to decrease enemy line of sight seems a bit overpowered, plus it doesn't make much sense. His lack of Fog of War is WAY overpowered.
15. Still not liking the personal trench idea.
16. How do enemies get rid of Bothan Spies in their buildings?
17. The Airspeeder's special ability that is only useful against the AT-AT is a tad overpowered when facing Empire.
18. I'd suggest that either the Rebel Airbase holds less than four units, or the Confederacy and Empire's holds more. This is because the Confederacy and Empire rely on swarms of fighters while the Rebels rely on a few elite fighters, so the airbases themselves should encourage this.
19. Bothan Spynet is overpowered.
20. Why the hell do the Rebels have a Mech Factory when they have no Mechs!?

21. The seismic charge defense system makes no sense.
22. Gungan Artillery should be called Gungan Catapult.

Minor Civs
23. I notice you listed "Humans" as a minor civ... how are humans a minor civ? They can be as different as Naboo is to Bespin.

24. Why can't Mechs move through forests? I seem to remember AT-STs, AT-ATs, MTTs and STAPs doing just that in the films I saw.
25. I still think autonomy would be more useful with a proper name instead of red/yellow/green. At the very least you should reconsider the associations; it would make more sense if red meant stop while green meant go... perhaps a wacky convention in your eyes, but a convention none the less.
26. I really don't think you need resource exchanging when you have just two resources. Resource exchanging is only used in games with at least three resources. Since you're all for less-micro get rid of exchanging and just allow metal deposits to give a reduced amount when expired, like StarCraft Vespene Gas.
27. Your pop-cost system doesn't make a whole lot of sense. How can a B-Wing cost 7 pop when an AT-AT costs 8? Also, air transports should definitely not cost 8 pop - no-one will use them at all, especially not when you've got your magical water transporting in play.

That's all for now.

08-19-2004, 01:23 AM
Ok my turn since I don't have anything else to do...

1. I still don't get these team colors. What happens if we're playing a random map and two players play as the Confeds? Two purple players?

2. Understandable that a civ like the Confed loses control over their units if the Command Center is destroyed but for the other civs it doesn't make sense, especially for the Rebels.

3. Do we really need the square formation?

4. Weather is too powerful. If weather can take down an AT-AT, why can't it take downa Jedi? Besides the idea is bad.

5. Weapons autonomy is also called Agressive, Defensive or Do nothing. Much easier for the player to remember...


1. Doesn't General Grievous advantages the Confeds only against the Republic? It's logical but he'll be utterly useless against other civs.

2. I'll just say I disagree with Vostok on the AAT/HSD issue. It's obvious that the AAT should be a better anti-mech weapon. It's design makes it look a lot like those old WWII Tank Destroyers.

3. I still want the Hailfire Droid to be quite inaccurate against ground targets, mech or no. It's a lot more like a mobile rocket launcher la Nebelwerfer or Katyusha.

4. I've always wanted to see more mines:thumbsup:

Galactic Empire

1. Admiral Ozzel?! You could use somebody else...

2. Does it mean the Empire fires green blaster bolts? Geez...I've never seen Stormies fire green blaster bolts. Nor AT-ATs or STs as a matter of facts.

3. Rocket troopers can damage mass infantry AND good against mechs? Balance...

4. The AT-AT should take damage from infantry based weapons even if it's minor. Unless this ultimate unit of mass destruction la AoM Titans.

5. Tie Interceptor should have 4 blasters.

6. Does the type of unit we garrison in the Bunker affect its firing capabilities? Like, if I garrison a Repeater, does it use its repeater?

7. Why should I buil a StarFleet Uplink instead of simply building 5 Tie Bombers and doing the same thing? What's the advantage?

Galactic Republic

1. Master Tiin? Who is that?

2. Again, Weapon color...

3. Vostok, already said it, there's no point in having a Veteran Padawan.

4. Jedi Starfighter pilots should be weaker then regular Jedi of the same rank. It's a second life unit, in every game, they're weaker.

5. Gunship should be slow.

6. So the sole existence of a Clone factory means it halves the built time of infantry? Shouldn't it be better if it was connected to the Barrack?

Rebel Alliance

1. General Madine shouldn't reduce enemy LOS. Only increase yours it's enough. Same as Vostok about Fog-of War.

2. Isn't it overpowered to make Rebel structures Stealthy?

3. Foxholes are not trenches.

4. Rebel infantry should not be cloaked like that.

5. Bothan spy is overpowered while in enemy CC.

6. If anything, the Airspeeder should be EASIER to hit when using its two cable. Anyway, gives too much of an edge to the Rebels against the Empire.

7. Ion Cannon is more powerful then all of the other civ's Special Buildings.


1. The Heavy turret and Royal Cannon is very un-nabooish.


1. They just seem really dull. You're gonna torture the poor people who are gonna want to play the Naboo.

Last Comment

The civ design is ok, except for the few minor imbalances, I kinda like it.

However, the gameplay is similar to Civ building, which does fit the Naboo but pretty much none of the other civs for realism reasons. The Rebels especially.
That's I think what will be the curse of your template. It'll be Civilization:Star Wars.

The border is still a curse and makes no sense in this game. It was OK in RoN but here makes little sense. Why should civs like the Rebels be restrainedby borders? They just shouldn't be in.

So that's all for now and here it's 1 am. Good Night.

Darth Windu
08-19-2004, 04:46 AM
Excellent, some feedback on my template. Good to see. Okay now,

2. Alright, it's been changed

3. When i say 'smugglers', basically its referring to traders and whatnot. It just seems to me that 'smugglers' is a better term for it in the SW universe

4. Yes it is, it has now been corrected

5. True, but then Dooku is the overall leader while Poggle may or may not be a member of the Confederacy. Have to think about that one.

6. Perhaps, but considering Geonosis is a droid-producing planet and is captured at the start of the clone wars by the Republic indicated to me it is not their capital

8. See the problem here is that the AAT seems to have a larger and more powerful main weapon, while the Droideka and Dwarf Spider Droid are both excellent against infantry, so then i made the decision to make the Homing Spider Droid a faster but weaker AAT

9. You will see this in the Rebel, Naboo and Republic sections. Any fighter with a droid as well can self-repair itself to 50% when damaged.

10. Consider it changed

11. The reason i dont have it like that is because otherwise the Republic would have a huge amount of officers, and hence too much of an advantage over other civs

12. It does, but then i have 4 levels of experience, and i felt that having an army of Veteran Knights was more realistic than having an army of Masters

13. I have now rediced it to a moderate speed

14. I have removed his ability to reduce the enemy LOS

16. Good question. I was thinking of giving officers the ability to 'scan' buildings which would take a certain amount of time to see if there are any spies in them.

17. Not really when you consider it's really the only thing that can take on AT-AT's

20. Typo, my bad. Now fixed

21. What Siesmic Charge Defence system?

22. Done

23. Humans are a generic civ covering Corellia, Alderaan, Kuat etc - its just a pain in the backside trying to make all of them unique, hence the Human civ, although it would be nice to have unique art for Bespin.

24. This is basically to encourage people to use infantry and not just horde mechs.

26. True, but it should still be there anyway

27. I'll have another look.

1. Team Colours have been removed

2. It is to simulate a loss of command and control, which in battle is almost always catastrophic (sp?)

3. Why not?

4. I never said it could take down an AT-AT

1. He is good against all infantry, i just wrote 'Republic' because that is who he fights in the campaign

3. They didnt seem very inaccurate in AotC

1. Probably, but i thought that his style was unique and hence should be an option. Besides, it's better than including an EU commander.

2. I've changed that now

4. I suppose so...

5. why?

6. Yes, although i suppose i should state that in the template

7. The advantage is that the TIE Bombers coming in are free and regenerate from the Uplink

1. Jedi Master Saesee Tiin (the guy on the council with downward curving horns)

6. Maybe it should, but i dont think so

2. Probably, but remember they rely on stealth and speed to survive

4. I suppose, although some units will remain cloaked i will remove it from others

5. If you dont protect your CC then you deserve to have a spy in it :)

6. As i said to Vostok, the Speeder is basically the Rebels only defence against the AT-AT

7. Not really since it doesnt damage anything and only powers down some structures and units for a short period

1. I agree about the Turret, i dont like it, but i figure that after the Battle of Naboo they would have wanted a long-range weapon to engage their enemies before they got anywhere near their cities

1. If you can come up with anything better i would be happy to include it, although i am keeping Kenobi on Alderaan

Last Comment
In terms of borders, they are there simply to prevent things like building defensive buildings in your opponents base

Admiral Vostok
08-19-2004, 10:54 AM
Responses to Windu's responses to my responses:
3. Traders sounds just as Star Warsy and makes infinitely more sense. The term Traders has been used several times in the films.
6. But Geonosis was the planet on which the Confederacy was founded. It doesn't matter that Geonosis was lost at the start of the Clone Wars - Yavin 4 was lost at the start of the Civil War and you've still got it as the Rebel home planet.
8. I disagree. I think the HSD has a larger and more powerful weapon. Besides, with such a slow rate of fire on the HSD it would only work well against Mechs.
12. Veteran Knights, yes, but Veteran Padawans? What the hell is a Veteran Padawan? But at any rate, if you've played C&C:Generals you'll know that it is not all that often you get an entire army of veterans. So I think Masters would still be better, since it's unlikely you'd get a whole army of them anyway. Perhaps you could make it so that to attain Master veterancy, a Jedi has to gain more experience than other units trying to attain top veterancy?
18. Yes really when you consider the other two civs have no equivalent AT-AT killer. One unique unit on one army specifically designed to take out another unique unit on another army is bad balance no matter how you look at it. Imperial players would never build AT-ATs when playing against Rebel players.
21. It says the Naboo get Seismic Charges around their buildings (perhaps if I describe it as the direct rip-off from Chinese mines in C&C:Generals you'll know what I'm talking about)
23. People would want unique art from them anyway, considering we'll be seeing Alderaan in Episode III. You don't need Kuat. So Humans can be split into Alderaan/Bespin/Corellia... much better.
24. That wouldn't discourage me. There are plenty of better ways to discourage Mech whoring, making them unrealistic with their terrain movement is not one of them.
26. Why? Explain how your anti-micro stance justifies this.

Responses to Windu's responses to Luke'sDad's responses:
1. Well change it to just say infantry. I got confused by that the first time I read it too, and if it doesn't reflect their ability properly you should fix it.
3. The did seem pretty inaccurate to me. All those missiles the hailfire droid fires and we only see one AT-TE destroyed? Besides I think it would be cool seeing the missiles fly everywhere, and it certainly explains why they shoot lots of them in succession. Besides, from a gameplay perspective it means there are better choices to take out Mechs like the HSD. If the Hailfire Droid was accurate what would stop people building entire armies of them?
6. Yes, but again what of the Confederacy's and Republic's defense against the AT-AT? And no, I'm not saying they should have one, since as I said above if everyone's got a simple solution to AT-ATs they'll never be used.
7. It causes aircraft to crash. Just target it on your enemy's airbases all the time and you're sure to get your money's worth.
Last Comment
I suppose you believe forward base building is unrealistic then? I don't think it is, so borders should be removed.

08-19-2004, 12:55 PM
The Main problem i see with the entire thing is that's it's still Generic it has some semi generic elements but it's still generic.

as wel, of course the fact it's a frankenstein assembled with large amounts of ideas takenm from many many other games.

08-19-2004, 07:03 PM
Originally posted by Darth Windu


2. It is to simulate a loss of command and control, which in battle is almost always catastrophic (sp?)

3. Why not?

4. I never said it could take down an AT-AT


3. They didnt seem very inaccurate in AotC


5. why?


6. Maybe it should, but i dont think so

2. Probably, but remember they rely on stealth and speed to survive

5. If you dont protect your CC then you deserve to have a spy in it :)

7. Not really since it doesnt damage anything and only powers down some structures and units for a short period

1. If you can come up with anything better i would be happy to include it, although i am keeping Kenobi on Alderaan

Last Comment
In terms of borders, they are there simply to prevent things like building defensive buildings in your opponents base

First off, thank you Vostok for answering most of my points.


2. I still don't agree. A civ like the Rebel wouldn't even need a Command center to operate. They would have very mobile stuff. It's not like the invade other planets the same way the others do.

3. Because it's archaic and useless.

4. You said it could kill units. An AT-AT is a unit.


3. Same as Vostok. I remember playing Sudden Strike. The game was not very fun, pace was too slow and tanks weren't that powerful. However, there was nothing cooler then seeing a Katyusha shooting a huge volley of rockets flying everywhere over a targeted area.


5. I'm sure I saw in RotJ an interceptor firing from the tip of its wings. Besides, all SW flight sims support the Tie Interceptor having quad blasters.


6. I suppose so. Better make it a quite expensive building.


2. They better be frigging weak then...Besides, it makes them a bit overpowered compared to other civs.

5. That's not the point. It's almost a game exploit. Having complete line of sight like that is over powered. Building LOS only makes more sense then every unit LOS.

7. Vostok said it, it makes enemy aircrafts crash. Besides, it depends a LOT on how short it will be. If it's too short, it's ineffective. If it's a little too long it's overpowered.


Not really. I'll think about it though. It will be better if the campaign was a bit more story driven. This is like, build up and destroy enemy...yay...
I'll think about it.

Last Comment

Ridiculous. If they can bring workers that close to your base to build defensive structures you deserve it. AoK had the problem of enemy barracks being built too close to your base but that was effectively countered by SWGB's power cores.

08-20-2004, 02:58 AM
I'm with Viceroy on this one I read the first 2 civs and felt that it was obvious and generic. Also it does still show that you have cut ideas from other games (which we all have done) but you need to polish those off to hide it a bit more.

Darth Windu
08-20-2004, 07:56 AM
Hailfire Droid - as i said, these seemed accurate to me in AotC, so the obvious solution is that each missile is not very powerful but they fire salvo's instead of single weapons.

Airspeeder/AT-AT - the Airspeeder is the counter to the AT-AT, but it is rather weak, lacking shields and whatnot. For the Republic and Confederacy, they have the heavy forces like AT-TE's, Gunships, AAT's, HSD's, Hailfire Droids etc to handle AT-AT's.

Froz/Viceroy - the problem here is that it is impossible to make all units unique. For example, In terms of the Stormtrooper, Clone, Battle droid and Rebel Trooper all do the same thing. They have different speed, weapons power etc but there is no way to make them completely unique because they aren't complately unique.

08-20-2004, 08:52 AM
I know that they should not be all unique but I don't know what it is about your template but I just can't warm to it...

08-20-2004, 11:42 AM
While yet i understand where your coming from you could have made some variation on them and not given every civ a rocket trooper when some blatantly wouldn't use them. I like some elements but i'd like to see more vareity in the buildings like perhaps for the confederacy you could have production bonuses to production buildings grouped together.

Admiral Vostok
08-20-2004, 02:47 PM
Hailfire Droid: Each missile should be powerful, but inaccurate. The fact they fire in salvos makes up for the inaccuracy. It might not be exactly how they were in the film (they weren't completely inaccurate), but for the purposes of Gameplay it should be this way.

Airspeeder/AT-AT: Then how do the Rebels deal with AT-TEs, SPHA-Ts, AATs, HSDs. etc? (Damn that's a lot of acronyms). The Airspeeder needs to be a bit more versatile. There isn't an RTS game on the planet that has a unit specifically designed to only take down a single unit in a single civ. For example, in my design I've got the Airspeeder and it has a special harpoon attack like yours, but I've made my harpoon good against all Mechs, not just the AT-AT. I've justified it by saying that against walkers, it wraps their legs up like on Hoth, but with hover-vehicles and tracked vehicles, it shoots the harpoon into the ground and effectively "ties up" the Mech.

Uniqueness: I agree with Viceroy and Froz, but I also can't place my finger on exactly what makes the design too generic. Perhaps it's the fact that your buildings are mostly generic. You could also add some uniqueness into their research centres, since this is a major part of your design. For example, while one civ uses the Research Centre as you've got it (with all research done in the one place), another civ might have different buildings each for the different research fields. A third civ might use a unit rather than a building to do the research.

Also, perhaps some of the more generic units - like the Rocket Trooper, which everyone has - could be more genericised. This was one of the reasons I was originally wary to include rocket troopers in my design, because they'd all be generic and would seem out of place. However, I came up with some unique ways to incorporate rocket troopers (for example, my Clone Troopers can upgrade to have rocket packs like Jango Fett, rather than the Republic having an individual rocket trooper).

Finally, the Generals/Commanders and their abilities are all pretty generic. Some (Madine off the top of my head) are pretty unique, but for others you've picked their speciality and increased all the stuff in that area but decreased other areas. Perhaps unique units and the loss of some of the generic units would work better in this regard.

08-20-2004, 06:16 PM
It is coming along nicely but still we need to get away from this horrible idea that everything or the majority has to be generic when it should be a minority of generic units that can't really be made unique like say air transports they all transport they all fly they either have weapons or sheilds and they're all slow. so the air transport could be classed as generic.

One thing i think we must do, is to do away completly with the idea of an original side yes an orginial side can be discussed as a foundation but to be used to create commanders from.

Admiral Vostok
08-20-2004, 08:43 PM
What do you mean by "an original side"?

Darth Windu
08-20-2004, 10:18 PM
- with the Speeder, it is effective against Mechs, it just has a special attack to take down AT-AT's. For all other mechs, it would use it's blasters, and you could and should also be attacking with X-wings, Y-wings and B-wings.

Viceroy - which civ would 'blatently' not use a Rocket Trooper? Again, the problem is that we have never seen a unit like this in the films, so we dont know how they work. I should point out though that Battlefront has included Rocket Troopers for all sides.

Generic vs Unique - i understand and accpt that some of my template is generic, but there is simply no way around it. For example, how do you make five Barracks unique? Each building, like each unit, is different in that it can be sold (Rebels) or that it is self-powered (Republic) or that it is stronger than others (Empire). But apart from that, i have no idea how to make them more unique.

Incidently however, what do people think of my unique Power and Defence structures?

Admiral Vostok
08-20-2004, 10:44 PM
I know that's what the airspeeder has. It's exactly that I've been saying is wrong. A special attack only useful against a single unit is bad gameplay. You won't find an RTS out there that has the same sort of thing.

The unique power and defence structures are alright, nothing amazing.

08-21-2004, 06:53 AM
I mean the ones where their are no commander adavnatges or disadvantges or what windu has called combined arms with the likes of padme and that rabble.

Admiral Vostok
08-21-2004, 09:13 AM
Oh, I see what you mean. I think a "vanilla faction" as I like to call it is probably a necessity, though perhaps it doesn't need to be with the right considerations.

08-21-2004, 09:35 AM
Especially since it would be un-realistic i'll use an example as rebels. they'd hardly be able to send all of their equipment to one battlefront a commander would be more lkely to get fighters another would get troopers and so on they would't be able to afford to send all of their best to one place and as such commanders would be better at tactics using those units.

Admiral Vostok
08-21-2004, 09:53 AM
Well I don't think it would necessarily be "unrealistic". Sure, different Commanders may specialise but surely the Rebellion still has the ability to deploy the entirety of their forces adequately.

Not having a "vanilla" faction is somewhat like AoM, where each of the three major Gods for the civs are different from each other, with no-one being the "vanilla" God.

08-21-2004, 10:36 AM
That thought hadn't crossed my mind actually I've decided a while ago not to play on AoM until i get the xpac.

Admiral Vostok
08-24-2004, 11:45 AM
I like AoM without the xpac a bit better, so no need to wait.

08-24-2004, 05:11 PM
I got the Xpac and i love the game even more i think the Atlanteans are perfectly balanced with the rest of the civs.

08-28-2004, 06:43 PM
Bah hate the Atlanteans. ES should have improved the other civs also.

Admiral Vostok
08-28-2004, 08:36 PM
That's exactly how I felt. I suppose the Atlanteans were probably balanced properly - I mean, it is Ensemble - but they just had so much cool stuff that the other didn't, it didn't seem right. multiple-use God Powers, uber-Workers, not having to return resources to anywhere, cool uniqueness like chrono-shift and lust... Atlanteans were so different they didn't feel right.

That's just me though. And Luke's Dad apparently.

08-29-2004, 01:34 AM
I was awaiting a regular ex-pac where they improve existing civ and add another one.

Though I always saw the Atlanteans as ES "lower the micro" civ.

Admiral Vostok
08-29-2004, 10:45 AM
Originally posted by lukeiamyourdad
I was awaiting a regular ex-pac where they improve existing civ and add another one.It's true that's what most RTSs do. However I think Ensemble probably felt bound by the fact that the AoK Expansion added new civs, so although AoM was fundamentally different it would be seen as a bit strange if they didn't add extra civs to AoM too.

08-31-2004, 02:16 AM
Yes but remeber their disadvanatges. they get less pop unless they aggresivley capture TC's that also applies to favour which they get a slower trickle of. They did put a few new techs into the other civs but not much just enough to balance them out. Of course the atlanteans were diferent where you expecting some sort of super ultra hyper giga generic tosh?

Admiral Vostok
08-31-2004, 06:46 AM
No, of course the Atlanteans should be different, but I think they're too different. The existing three civs are normal but some of the Atlantean stuff is just weird and doesn't seem to fit in well.

Maybe it's just me.

08-31-2004, 07:48 AM
That and I always pictured the Atlanteans to be more Greek.

They should have made an Inca, Aztec or Maya civ. Would have been much more fun.

Admiral Vostok
08-31-2004, 09:01 AM
I agree. A real-world civ would have been much better than a completely mythical one. Though it would have been harder to fit New World civilisations into the storyline...

08-31-2004, 09:13 AM
Atlantis Is about as mythical as the sky is blue.

Atlantis is thought to be the Greek Island of Santorini Indeed most Archelogical Evidence points to that.

Vostok define about the Atlantean civ does not fit in well and i shall gladly come up with a way to explain.

Admiral Vostok
09-01-2004, 07:03 AM
Viceroy, there's no point arguing with me on this one, the developers themselves have admitted the Atlanteans are vastly different. I can't get the exact quote for you because the interview with Bruce Shelley has been removed from Gamespy, but essentially in the interview he said that one thing they were unhappy about with the original AoM was that they didn't include enough things that made each sub-civ vastly different to play - for example one Greek sub-civ is pretty much the same as the next, with only minor differences. They made up for this with the Atlanteans, as each Atlantean sub-civ has fundamental elements that make them very different - mostly Lush, Chronoshift and those Sky Passages or whatever they're called. So this idea that they are vastly different was done on purpose, but I'm not sure I like it.

09-01-2004, 07:55 AM
The atlanteans do kinda need stuff like that though unless they capture pretty much every town center on the map they don't get as much pop as other civs or as much favour.

Admiral Vostok
09-01-2004, 09:25 AM
Yeah, I'm not really saying they're unbalanced, just that some of their bonuses seem weirder than existing civs bonuses.

09-01-2004, 12:17 PM
hmm true but a lot of these bonuses i don't think you quite understand or are overestimating them, I mean how many people would build something in the middle of their enemies base without levelling the thing first, so lush really isn't that big a thing it's akin to the gungans and their healing buildings. Time shift is handy and it's alike to your idea of the republic bheing able to move their buidling round {see vostok you cam up with that idea and now using it would seem like a rip off } and sky passages while cool don't really seem to have that much of a point realistically yeah it's cool and all to move your units all around the map you've still got to build em and they are vulnerable to destruction and require quite a bit of micro, expecially since i'm not sure what happens if they're all destroyed and you forgot to ungarrison your army.

Weirder means they stand out more because they're newer. They do have their disadvantages remeber their citizens are slower take more pop and cost a lot more their heroes thing is neat and can be useful but sometimes it's the wrong thing to do when numbers count as much as quality.

Admiral Vostok
09-02-2004, 05:59 AM
Your whole post was about how balanced they are, when I just said I don't consider them unbalanced. This is the most relevant comment to what I'm saying:Weirder means they stand out more because they're newer.

As for me ripping-off time shift, my movable buildings work in quite a different way. Besides, movable buildings was hardly Ensemble's idea. Blizzard had it way back in StarCraft, and if you want to go even further back I seem to remember a Westwood title where you could pack up and move buildings. Many other titles have movable buildings too, in fact Dawn Of War has it in pretty much the same format as AoM. By the time that many people have done it it's no longer a rip-off. If you want to analyse things further, time-shift, lush and sky passages all come from Starcraft: lush = creep and sky passages = nydas canals.

09-02-2004, 06:51 AM
Originally posted by Admiral Vostok

By the time that many people have done it it's no longer a rip-off.

Thank you for that vindication vostok so hence we should have the commanders idea in since it's subtly different yes i'll admit at face value it seems like a rip off but in depth it isn't really.

I think your reffering to one building and one vehicle in westwoods.

MCV that actually had to be moved and was very slow not that special really

Fist Of NOD now this is a curious idea a portable war factory.

I've never actually played Starcraft so I can't exactly comment on those but the developers did say they wanted to make the atlanteans different and most other civs don't have these so their not bad ideas. Many people around the time of atlantis would have though Atlantis very weird since they didn't have a king and when Atlantis was wiped out by the Volcanis Explosion { yes explosion not eruption too violent to be called an ereuption } their island sank below the waves and rose again { huge tidal wave really } and they took down another power with them Minoan Crete. they were the classical greek version of a cross between China And America

Admiral Vostok
09-02-2004, 08:15 AM
Viceroy, you do know Atlantis is a myth, right? It's never been proven to have existed.

Anyway, back to the issue, I suppose by that argument the Generals/Commanders idea could be included. However I don't think it's what a Star Wars RTS needs. It can certainly be justified in the context of Star Wars, but Star Wars doesn't necessarily immediately lend itself to the Generals/Commanders model. What I mean is it would be unnecessarily similar to Generals when there isn't really any good reason for it to be so.

So include it in your design if you want. I'm not including it in mine, and I personally can't see LA including it either, but that's just my opinion.

As for StarCraft, I highly recommend it. Not only is it generally thought to be the best RTS ever created, but if you're such a fan of WarCraft III you should absolutely love it.

09-02-2004, 09:19 AM
You should love it more. StarCraft is sooo muc better...

09-02-2004, 09:20 AM
I wouldn't say MYTH i'd say a yet to be proved theory I however think it's true and alot of other people do but if you do check about the greek Island of Santorini they do mention that The Island is thought to be the lost island of atlantis since Atlantis is oft spoken of as an island in an island which santorini was before the Island explosion. The ruins on Santorini were highly advanced and all of the evidence is complemnted by the fact that they have discovered ruins under the water in the caldera So i think Atlantis was real and was on the Island of Santorini.

I thought the commanders idea would add a bit more diversity since we're only having 4 major civs especially since i think without it yeah it could be a great RTS but it would just be remeber as another old RTS that brings nothing new in or offers a new slant on a gamplay idea.

I thought the Pre Generals C&C Games were thought to be the best RTS games.

09-02-2004, 09:25 AM
They've also discovered ruins underwater of an ancien civilization in the Caribbeans. It doesn't mean it's Atlantis.

And StarCraft is thought to be one of the best RTS ever. It's the most POPULAR RTS of all-time. It's Korea's national sport.

09-02-2004, 10:37 AM

That supports Santorini as being the lost island of atlantis.

Beleive me I take Classical Civilisations which is the study of anceint mythology I ACTUALY know what i'm talking about.

Admiral Vostok
09-02-2004, 11:28 AM
Okay, Atlantis may have existed. But as I said it is not proven. At any rate, Atlanteans would have been Greek and worshipped the same Gods.

StarCraft is the best selling RTS of all time, and all of the "best RTSs of all time" lists I've seen have StarCraft at the top, and most "best games of all time" lists also include StarCraft. I highly recommend it, Viceroy, it's still sold in stores (remarkable for such an old game), and is pretty cheap now, so well worth the money.

without it yeah it could be a great RTS but it would just be remeber as another old RTS that brings nothing new in or offers a new slant on a gamplay idea.But if the Commanders idea follows the Generals idea exactly, it will still not bring anything new in or offer a new slant on a gameplay idea either. The Commanders idea needs to be tweaked so it doesn't resemble the Generals idea so much for it to work well. As for only having four civs, so does WarCraft 3, and you love that game. Four civs is a pretty decent number of unique civs, I don't think many are going to complain it only has four civs.

09-02-2004, 11:50 AM
I wouldn't Use LOVE as much as i'd use LOATHE but by the by.

there are 39 Game stores in the area where i live and a grand total of Zero Nadda Zip Zilch and don't forget NONE have Starcraft or any Starcraft paraphenlia, that propably explains why.

I think in AoM's case the Atlanteans worshipping a different set of gods make sense even during classicla greek times There were several Cults of the Titans and Some of the titans were actually worshipped as gods Particularly Gaia and Rheia as well as Hyperion and Helios, and those who worshipped Demeter and Persephone would also Offer up to Hecate. Leto however sounds remarkable like Eris or Discord and what she is goddess of is implied in the name and because of this she was rarely worshipped, well at least by the games definition. Leto however was worshipped on the Isle of Delos i beleive if I rember correctly. There was some Oranos worship and Sveral Cults of Kronos. Prometheus was Especially Honoured.

The idea of the Atlanteans abandoning the Greek gods is all Fluent with Classical Greek Literature when Zeus did not punish a hero { I forget which i suspect it's Odyseus or Jason } In which Zeus said that if he punished every mortal who went against him he would run out of followers and when mortals stooped worshipping the gods the gods would cease to be.

Remember God Worship was largely due to location as islands had Patron Gods where one god was worshipped above all other as well as time of year where one god was worshipped above all others. An Example of time of year was the Greater Dionysiac or a modern version A drunken Film Festival With Orgy On the side. where the people would watch greek theater have a grand procession and Drink wione in order to allow themselves to be possessed by Dionysus in Worship to him.

A Timely Example would be the Olympics. The Olympics were held in honour of Olympian Zeus at Olympia where offerings were offered up in form of the sporting acheivements and the many great offerings awarded as prizes.

Anyway back to the main topic. It is different from the genrals system remeber we added in a Second In command where you picked from another set and depending on your commanding officer would get a certain cocktail of bonuses and techs compared to the same with another.

Admiral Vostok
09-02-2004, 12:00 PM
Okay, I'll accept all that, and I'm not even sure what the original point was with the Atlantean debate, but let's be rid of it.

As for StarCraft, I find it rather odd that none of the stores near you carry it. Very odd indeed. At any rate, it's available from online stores like Amazon.com and the like. And there's no need to get angry, I'm just recommending a game to you. I don't think you'll be disappointed with StarCraft in any way.

And I was under the distinct impression you were a WarCraft III fan. Perhaps I'm getting you confused with someone else if you say you loathe it.

09-02-2004, 12:02 PM
Looks like i Can actually make you back down for a change with my knowledge of Ancient Greece

:bdroid2::D :D :bdroid2:

the Point you tried to make was the Atlanteans would have worshipped greek gods but since the greeks worshipped some Egyptian gods and Egyptians worshipped some Greek gods that doesn't make for a definitive staement.

Some Bits about it i love some bits I loathe. Mainly i'm begiining to Loathe it because of Crappy Battlenet and the inability to cancel entering a game so you wait for half an hour before it tells you what you already know, the fact that the games started or been cancelled.

Admiral Vostok
09-02-2004, 12:05 PM
Well, I don't claim to be any master of Ancient Civilisation knowledge, just Star Wars knowledge.

09-02-2004, 12:10 PM
Both of those honours lie with yours truly.

I did actually see Starcraft in one of those stores but when i walked in someone walked out with that game in their pocket. I was pretty shocked to find that out of 39 shops all of them were doing a booming buisness and their all in a 2 KM radius

09-02-2004, 02:49 PM
Odd indeed. Over here there's not a single video games store without StarCraft.

09-02-2004, 10:40 PM
I've been trying to get hold of the much Vaunted Starcraft for quite a while now actually, the one time i saw it I had my mind set on buying Mario Kart Double Dash or The Legend Of Zelde The Wind Waker or Pokemon Colluseum. I even looked at it and it struck me as expensive for an old game, it was at least 30

09-03-2004, 03:11 AM
None of the stores near me carry Starcraft, they only hold games for a year then drop them. Kinda disappointing but I order online anyways since Star Wars Galaxies is still not officially released in Australia.

Admiral Vostok
09-03-2004, 04:56 AM
Froz, do you have a Harvey Norman near you? I know they carry StarCraft.

Viceroy, that price does seem rather odd, and you were right not to get it at that price. You can get the StarCraft Battlechest (StarCraft and the Brood War Expansion) for US$20 from Amazon.

09-04-2004, 04:39 AM
Though it may have had something to do with the fact that that store nearly always has their games more exp[ensive than the 38 others but they do usually keep an extensive back catalogue and i mean extensive they've got an entire wall with game at least 7 years old, though they are usually a tad on the expensive side, so nect time i go into a game store i'll look out for it as well as Evil Genius, now that looks like an inovative RTS.