PDA

View Full Version : Poll - March 05


DarthMaulUK
03-10-2005, 05:25 PM
Alot of you have complained that the game will only feature 2 civs. Is this a good idea or not?

Galactic Battlegrounds started with 6 and then expanded to 8 with Clone Campaigns but to some, all the civs felt very 'samey', despite the different artwork.

Your views?

DMUK

Dagobahn Eagle
03-10-2005, 07:27 PM
Good question.

Maybe yes, maybe not.

As for the "yes" option: Well, lots of good games have many civs. Domions II, which I already mentioned, has 17 civs. 17 unique, varied, creative civs, each with a unique tech tree of over a dozen nearly unique units. But "yes" begs the question: "What would that third or fourth civilization be in Empire at War"?

A smuggler organization/mafia: No smuggler organization was anywhere as grand as the empire. Black Sun would come closest, but they were wiped out instantly when the Empire wanted them wiped out.

Hutt cartel, Gungans or Ewoks: Go away. Far away. Gungans and Ewoks are tiny, one-planet civlizations. Empire at War is galactic in scale. As for Hutts, see above (mafia).

Mon Calamarians: Rebels are already in. A good idea might be to have different models for the rebels based on planet heritage (for example, recruit troopers on Mon Calamari and they are Mon Calamarians, but with stats equal to humans, of course).

Wookies: Wookies were advanced, yes, but only had one single planet, whereas the rebels had a whole fleet of ships and a myriad of planets.

Naboo: Again, a way too small entity.

Dominions II is a fantasy game based on Earth's mythology and folk tales (you've got a load of civs to choose between). In Star Wars, however, there are only two major powers in the Original Trilogy. If they add the Clone Wars in an ex-pack, they can add the Confederacy and the Republic, but otherwise... No.

But I chose "Nope. Great idea to have ol' faithful" as I'm happy with the civs already in.

Heavyarms
03-10-2005, 08:06 PM
I voted yes as in "only 2 civs?" and instead voted for more civs, so up there it should be no.

Why no? I believe what people were looking for is the pre-trilogy, clone wars civs- republic and confederacy.

I have argued no, for a couple of reasons.

1. Depth. If you can make a game with something like 40-60 unique units for each side, even more possibly, it's better than having 50-60 units all looking alike with 20+ civs (Empire Earth II or AoK)

2. Strategy. With depth, it helps to develop tons of strategies for people to take advantage of. With large, dynamic forces, you can create tons of different options for your men so you can create an awesome army.

Dagobahn Eagle
03-10-2005, 08:44 PM
That one should've been multiple choice, if you ask me.

And "yes" should really have been just "add more with an expansion". That's what they'll have to do if they're to add more civs anyhow. But good poll idea.


So it's really 1 for, 3 against right now. OK.

Two good points, too.

I'll try to come up with a "Third civ", but I don't think I can. Except maybe the New Republic and Imperial Remnants, with more modern ships? For example, the "Rebels", or ex-rebels, get E-Wings, "Imperials" get TIE Scimitar Fighter Bombers, and so on?
:confused: But that won't really add much, so meh.

lukeiamyourdad
03-10-2005, 08:49 PM
That would be pretty pointless to add more units to the already existing civs IF they have a good amount already.
Besides, it would seem like only a skin change.

Dragonball Fan
03-10-2005, 09:43 PM
An expansion pack could be made to include the New Republic and Imperial Remnant, possibly the Ssi-Ruuk and Chiss.

FroZticles
03-10-2005, 10:39 PM
Unique sides also come with balancing issues always. Would have been nice to add maybe 2 more sides but its there choice.

Jan Gaarni
03-11-2005, 04:25 AM
Originally posted by Heavyarms
I voted yes as in "only 2 civs?" and instead voted for more civs, so up there it should be no.

Fixed.




I voted No.

OT is more than enough for me.

saberhagen
03-11-2005, 07:47 AM
More civs=more balance problems.

If we only ever have 2 civs, it's going to be much easier to balance than if we have 4.

DoW has 4 unique civs with different tech trees and even differrent pop systems for some of them. The balance isn't too bad for a game so relatively new, but it has its problems.

Darth Windu
03-13-2005, 01:02 AM
Alright, so the question is 'should EaW have more than two civs?' Easy answer: YES, for a number of reasons

1. Variety - as different as the Empire and Rebellion are, it won't take long for people to master each civ, which will quickly get boring. An extra two civs (Republic and Confederacy) will double the amount of variety in the game and will hence make it more interesting and last longer

2. Multiplayer - this will also fall off fairly quickly due to the lack of variety. With the extra civs, multiplayer will last longer and will also encourage a younger crowd to join the game, leading to a much expanded online community

3. Single player - linked to variety, an extra two civilisations will produce a much fuller single player experience. In addition, having the Republic and Confederacy will take full advantage of the current SW focus on the prequel trilogy

4. Storyline - have single player campaigns for the Republic and Confederacy will again produce a more rounded and deeper gaming experience, as players will be able to play through SW history as the Republic turns into the Empire, rather than jumping in half-way through

5. Depth - a much deeper game due to the increased variety, gaming options, multiplayer community and a stronger storyline

6. Strategy - each of the four civs (Empire, Rebellion, Confederacy, Republic) has a different way of waging war. This increase in nummber of strategies and possibilities would make the game stronger

7. 'Uniqueness'/Balance - some people have commented on how the game or some units would be less unique if the Republic and Confederacy were added. The way I see it, however, is if Petroglyph can't make the Republic Gunship, Droideka, Hailfire Droid and Jedi Starfighters unique and balanced, then the game is already in serious trouble

8. Epic-ness - while the conflict between the Empire and Rebellion is more an insurgency/counter-insurgency conflict, the Clone Wars are truly epic, with thousands of droids and clones rushing into battle with massive armour and air support. Again, this could be linked to variety by giving players two different sorts of conflicts to fight through

Overall, the extra two civs of the Republic and Confederacy could only strengthen the game. It would create a stronger stroyline, more in-depth campaigns, create a greater and more varied online multiplayer community and would draw a younger developing crowd to the game while taking advantage of the prequel hype at the moment. In addition, there would be a great deal of possibilities if the designers chose to allow them, such as being able to fight the Empire while playing as the Republic for example.

Dagobahn Eagle
03-13-2005, 11:26 AM
1. Variety - as different as the Empire and Rebellion are, it won't take long for people to master each civ, which will quickly get boring. An extra two civs (Republic and Confederacy) will double the amount of variety in the game and will hence make it more interesting and last longer
1. It takes a long while to "master" a faction.
2. Just that you've "mastered" a faction does not make the game boring. In my opinion, it makes it a lot more fun.

2. Multiplayer - this will also fall off fairly quickly due to the lack of variety. With the extra civs, multiplayer will last longer and will also encourage a younger crowd to join the game, leading to a much expanded online community
I don't think multi player will "fall off rather quickly" just because there are only two factions. Lots of games with more than two factions have "fallen off rather quickly".

4. Storyline - have single player campaigns for the Republic and Confederacy will again produce a more rounded and deeper gaming experience, as players will be able to play through SW history as the Republic turns into the Empire, rather than jumping in half-way through
I could easily say that about having the New Trilogy in, too. What about the stuff that happened before Phantom Menace? Not to mention what happens after Return of the Jedi? Why do I only get half the story?

5. Depth - a much deeper game due to the increased variety, gaming options, multiplayer community and a stronger storyline
More often than not, more factions decreases variety. Dominions I and II are the only games I've seen with a large number of varied civs. In all other games with many civs, like SWGB, the civs are nearly identical.

7. 'Uniqueness'/Balance - some people have commented on how the game or some units would be less unique if the Republic and Confederacy were added. The way I see it, however, is if Petroglyph can't make the Republic Gunship, Droideka, Hailfire Droid and Jedi Starfighters unique and balanced, then the game is already in serious trouble
That's just some of the units. SWGB had unique units, and the civs were still nearly identical.

lukeiamyourdad
03-13-2005, 03:30 PM
Don't bother arguing with him mate. Just don't...

You've been warned...


*Prepares for a flame war.

Heavyarms
03-13-2005, 05:27 PM
Originally posted by Darth Windu
Alright, so the question is 'should EaW have more than two civs?' Easy answer: YES, for a number of reasons

1. Variety - as different as the Empire and Rebellion are, it won't take long for people to master each civ, which will quickly get boring. An extra two civs (Republic and Confederacy) will double the amount of variety in the game and will hence make it more interesting and last longer

2. Multiplayer - this will also fall off fairly quickly due to the lack of variety. With the extra civs, multiplayer will last longer and will also encourage a younger crowd to join the game, leading to a much expanded online community

3. Single player - linked to variety, an extra two civilisations will produce a much fuller single player experience. In addition, having the Republic and Confederacy will take full advantage of the current SW focus on the prequel trilogy

4. Storyline - have single player campaigns for the Republic and Confederacy will again produce a more rounded and deeper gaming experience, as players will be able to play through SW history as the Republic turns into the Empire, rather than jumping in half-way through

5. Depth - a much deeper game due to the increased variety, gaming options, multiplayer community and a stronger storyline

6. Strategy - each of the four civs (Empire, Rebellion, Confederacy, Republic) has a different way of waging war. This increase in nummber of strategies and possibilities would make the game stronger

7. 'Uniqueness'/Balance - some people have commented on how the game or some units would be less unique if the Republic and Confederacy were added. The way I see it, however, is if Petroglyph can't make the Republic Gunship, Droideka, Hailfire Droid and Jedi Starfighters unique and balanced, then the game is already in serious trouble

8. Epic-ness - while the conflict between the Empire and Rebellion is more an insurgency/counter-insurgency conflict, the Clone Wars are truly epic, with thousands of droids and clones rushing into battle with massive armour and air support. Again, this could be linked to variety by giving players two different sorts of conflicts to fight through

Overall, the extra two civs of the Republic and Confederacy could only strengthen the game. It would create a stronger stroyline, more in-depth campaigns, create a greater and more varied online multiplayer community and would draw a younger developing crowd to the game while taking advantage of the prequel hype at the moment. In addition, there would be a great deal of possibilities if the designers chose to allow them, such as being able to fight the Empire while playing as the Republic for example.

1. That's why you have an extensive array of units that provide a "malleable" and "ductile" (for lack of better words) fighting force.

2. All the civs in AoK and GB had basically the same setup.

3. Yeah, it would, but I'll be happy without it if we get #1.

4. mmm.... yeah, quite possible, however... we already know that, if we did what you'd suggest we'd start at the beginning of the SW universe, and we'd play Empire StarWars.

5. Already mentioned where the depth goes.

6. Covered by #1.

7. I have no idea what you are talking about. The other things balance probably ok, just no balrog or annoying superweapons like in generals.

8. Isn't the full trilogy already epic? The way I see it, the last movie sets this sucker up, and then it happens after context filled in.

Dagobahn Eagle
03-13-2005, 08:47 PM
Isn't the full trilogy already epic?
Exactly. It is.

In addition, having the Republic and Confederacy will take full advantage of the current SW focus on the prequel trilogy
Far from necessarily a good thing. Battle for Naboo "took advantage of the prequel universe" and sucked big time.

Darth Windu
03-13-2005, 09:00 PM
Eagle-
1. So image how long it will take to master four instead of two :). Therefore, you get more for your money are greater variety

2. It gets more interesting after you have used the same units and straegies against the same enemy countless times?

3. So if multiplayer falls off quickly for games with more than two civs, it will fall off quicker for only two

4. Common mistake. You have to remember that SW is the story of Anakin Skywalker and the events surrounding his life. Therefore, pre-TPM and post-RotJ are irrelevant

5. Perhaps so, but we have very strong bases to create two unique civs from the films, so why not take it?

6. True enough, but the four civs are very different from each other - quick example, the Empire relys on heavy armour, the Republic uses all-arms, the Rebels use stealth, and the Confederacy uses massed infantry - besides, i'm sure Petroglyph would be able to make four unique sides...unique


Heavy-
1. True enough, but adding two more civs gives you double the amount of 'ductile' and 'malleable' fighting forces

2. ...and? We aren't talking about AoK or SWGB here

3. Well, by adding two more civs you would get both #1 and #3

4. As said above, SW is about Anakin Skywalker's life, therefore all you need to know is TPM-RotJ

7. What I mean is that some people had commented that adding more civs would reduce balance or the uniqueness of the current civs. What i'm saying though is if the team doesn't have the ability to make units like the Republic Gunship, Droideka, Hailfire Droid and Jedi Starfighters unique, then basically I have really big concerns about the quality of the game already - if they cant make unique units...unique, then whats going to happen to things like the AT-AT, Airspeeder, X-wing etc?

8. Exactly - how can you have an 'epic' game when you only get half of it?


Frankly, I just don't understand why anyone would actually oppose the addition of the Republic and Confederacy. It would increase the multiplayer community, make a stronger SP game, make the game more appealing to ALL fans (not just the old ones :)) and generally increase its 'fun' factor. After all, if you didn't want to play as the prequel sides...dont - no-one would be forcing you to.

lukeiamyourdad
03-13-2005, 10:08 PM
Must not...flame...can't resist urges...

Heavy, Dagobahn- Please, I urge you to reconsider. I urge you to stop posting. You will suffer severe brain damage due to a lot of bashing your own skull on your keyboard.

Dagobahn Eagle
03-13-2005, 10:38 PM
Heavy, Dagobahn- Please, I urge you to reconsider. I urge you to stop posting. You will suffer severe brain damage due to a lot of bashing your own skull on your keyboard.
That's where it came from:eek:. Thanks, doc.:cool:

lukeiamyourdad
03-13-2005, 10:54 PM
I was serious. You can't debate with Windu. For your own sanity, stop replying to Windu.

saberhagen
03-14-2005, 07:21 AM
The thing which most affects the success of a multiplayer game is balance. If it isn't balanced then people will stop playing it, because they feel they can't win against overpowered units/strats. That will happen long before they get bored by lack of variety.

Heavyarms
03-14-2005, 07:52 AM
Originally posted by lukeiamyourdad
I was serious. You can't debate with Windu. For your own sanity, stop replying to Windu.

Affirmative, disengaging.

Darth Alec
03-17-2005, 03:02 PM
Keep it to the episode 4-6 and not 1-3, just the planet natives (Ewoks, Wookies, Jawas.....) and nothing more.

Darth Windu
03-18-2005, 01:02 AM
Interestingly, 47.06% of people surveyed indicate they would like to see more civs added (presumably the Republic and Confederacy), whilst 35.29% want the game as boring as possible with only two civs.

PETROGLYPH TAKE NOTE!!!

Dagobahn Eagle
03-18-2005, 10:09 AM
Keep it to the episode 4-6 and not 1-3, just the planet natives (Ewoks, Wookies, Jawas.....) and nothing more.
I don't like the idea of playing as any of those, though, if that's what you meant. Neither were very big powers, to say the least, and they don't have units to fill many of the slots in the game (starships, fighters, assault vehicles, and so on). We'd be left with a weird thing like Gungan bird riders shooting down TIE Fighters, like in Galactic Battlegrounds.

If you mean that they should be added as indigenous third parties, I can't disagree too much. I don't fully support the idea except from with the Wookies, but it's not like it's going to keep me from buying the game if I have to fight Jawas to take over Tatooine or whatever.

Fishflesh
03-18-2005, 10:56 AM
Originally posted by Darth Windu
Interestingly, 47.06% of people surveyed indicate they would like to see more civs added (presumably the Republic and Confederacy), whilst 35.29% want the game as boring as possible with only two civs.

PETROGLYPH TAKE NOTE!!!

are you a noob?

a game whit just 2 civs can be just as fun as whit 8...or even more fun and whit space battles 2 civs would be great.

it would be boring if there were 4 or more... becose it would all be statistic

FroZticles
03-18-2005, 04:12 PM
It's not that you can't debate with Windu it's just he cannot see reason. It's his way or no way.

He should just give up because PT RTS won't be with this game it's set in OT. Just wait until the next SW RTS is annouced so we can stop listening to your rants all over the board..... again....

lukeiamyourdad
03-18-2005, 05:12 PM
He can't do math or look at statistics.
Only 2 person actually want those civs in the game.
The 6 who voted for more was in an expansion pack, in other words, those people are not senseless idiots.
They want more but prefer to wait and not whine.
So now, please, could you STFU about your rants? If you have nothing constructive to post, don't.

Dagobahn Eagle
03-18-2005, 10:03 PM
Cough (http://www.imagedump.com/index.cgi?pick=setandget&tp=217568&poll_id=0&category_id=20&warned=y).
Just a suggestion:).

Darth Windu
03-19-2005, 03:25 AM
Ackbar - ah...everyone is a noob with this game, including you. Also, with your claim that a game with 2 civs is more fun that a game with four, wouldn't it then follow that a game with 1 civ is more fun than a game with 2? I realise that there shouldn't be too many civs, but there is no good reason why Petroglyph cant make four balanced, different civs

FroZ - i will never give up, never surrender! ;)

luke - lol, thats rich. Actually, if you want to look at the stats i got, i simply added the 'yes' to the 'x-pax' to get my figure - after all, both are saying yes to more civs. It might also interest you to note i voted for 'more in an x-pac' because obviously the game is being made with Empire/Rebellion, but this can and should be corrected in a x-pac. Also, forgive my ignorance, but what does STFU mean?

DK_Viceroy
03-20-2005, 10:31 AM
Why on earth must poeople let the babbling idiot get started?

Seriously I thought people had the good sense to stop windu before he could get up a good head of steam:rolleyes:

Although it's rich coming from me why were people suggesting Mafia Hutt Catrel and Mon Calamari as 3rd and 4th civs when Republic and Confederacy were obviously the better option, The Chiss and the Yuuzhan Vong might be nice but the only civs likely to get put in, in an expansion pack I will add are Republic and Confereacy.

*Sees the Gunship thread rise again in the form of this festering pile*

Listen to Luke you must don't make me link to the last time people allowed Windu to talk "sense" it went on for at least 17 pages.

And I'll gladly Oblige your question Windu but you were warned somewhere else :p

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v619/DK_Viceroy/ShutUp.jpg

lukeiamyourdad
03-20-2005, 12:22 PM
Nice pic but you should censor the F word.

DK_Viceroy
03-20-2005, 04:36 PM
Heh thanks, He's clicking it at his own risk I did however warn him.

Darth Alec
03-21-2005, 04:52 AM
Originally posted by Dagobahn Eagle
I don't like the idea of playing as any of those, though, if that's what you meant. Neither were very big powers, to say the least, and they don't have units to fill many of the slots in the game (starships, fighters, assault vehicles, and so on). We'd be left with a weird thing like Gungan bird riders shooting down TIE Fighters, like in Galactic Battlegrounds.

If you mean that they should be added as indigenous third parties, I can't disagree too much. I don't fully support the idea except from with the Wookies, but it's not like it's going to keep me from buying the game if I have to fight Jawas to take over Tatooine or whatever.

Sorry, I meant natives as nutrale third parts (maybe an unlockeble feature in the game) and a trading partner. And probebly some fighting or diplomatics to gain kontroll over a popullated planet.

jokemaster
04-23-2005, 12:24 AM
Nah, I like how both civs are shaping up to be distinct from each other. Plus, there's really no room for a third civ in early Civil-war period.