I've played around with the new "Enhanced Edition" for a couple of hours and I thought some of you guys would appreciate some impressions. First, let me say that the game feels, once again, as with every "patch" released before this, more polished overall. The dots just seem to be better connected with more art and interface enhancements that seem to have been left out or had been "disconnected" during the patching process. From a technical standpoint, I have noticed some delay in turn resolution and in changing from screen to screen, but nothing aggravating or upsetting. Some people are actually reporting less of a delay, but I am noticing a little more of one. YMMV. I have not experienced any CTDs as of yet.
Second, I'd like to say that the new race is extremely interesting. The "Loa" are a "cyber-sapient" race of former slaves that have broken free from the chains imposed by their carbon-based creators. Think the machines from the Matrix franchise. However, the Loa are far from just a race of AI robots. First, when colonizing worlds, and they can colonize pretty much any rock in space, they do not grow traditional populations. Each colony is essentially one consciousness, or one Loa being that grows and adapts to the environment. This way, building stations and fleets are more akin to equipping a solider with weapons and armor. When the Loa colonize a world, they strip it of bio material that would support life for the carbon-based species and maximize energy producing potential. As a Loa colony grows, it does not increase in population, it increases in energy production. Energy is the resource used by the Loa to build new ships, research new tech and expand. the cool thing is that when the Loa arrive on a world, it can be lush and teaming with life. However, the Loa, over time, will turn every planet they colonize into a barren rock. Therefore, if a Loa colony is ever destroyed by an invading enemy, there will be little left for the carbon-based invader to salvage or exploit.
Second, the Loa, like the other races, has its own unique mode of FTL space travel. The Loa move through space using a "Neutrino Pulse Drive" that propels Loa vessels through space very quickly. However, although Loa ships move quickly, the NPD technology is fleeting and in order to maintain its velocity, the Loa vessel must pass through periodic structures called "Neutrino Pulse Gates," which can be built at colonies, surveyed systems and I believe at various points in deep space. Finally, and perhaps most striking, Loa vessels are constructed from modular megalithic cubes. These cubes are shaped into mission specific vessels on the fly, as needed by the player. So, by example, a Loa megalith can be traveling through space. The player decides that he wants the megalith to survey a nearby star systyem, so the megalith releases cubes that form into various vessels capable of surveying the system. upon arriving in the system, the survey fleet is attacked by an alien force. The survey fleet is then able to reconfigure itself into combat focused ships in order to defend against the alien attack. After the threat is dealt with, the cubes can reform into the survey fleet, conduct the survey, then, if colonizable worlds are located, the survey fleet can morph into a colonization fleet and colonize the planet, etc. etc. This is a very unique aspect of the new race that presents very interesting strategic possibilities.
There are several other things that make the Loa unique, as well, but you get the point. Its critical to read the new manual in order to learn about the Loa, or else you'll have little idea what you're doing because they are just so different from any other race in the game.
Another big addition is the option to order fleet specific missions, as opposed to just target specific missions. In vanilla SOTSII, in order to have a fleet take action, you had to select a target, and then pick a viable mission. Now you can select the fleet that you want to act, and then pick a mission. This adds a pleasing layer of flexibility to fleet operations that the old system lacked.
There are, of course, new technologies, including an entirely new cybernetic technology tree, which is available only to the original carbon-based races, and has been added the help them meet the threat of the new cyber-sentient race. There are also a number of new techs available to all players and races, which is meant to represent advancements in technology over the 40 years spanning in the timeline between vanilla SOTSII and the Enhanced Edition.
Finally, the menu screens have changed a little bit too, and although some of them are a bit more cluttered, they seem to present a lot more information that was left out of the pre-enhanced edition, especially with respect to finance and economics.
So, if you didn't like the game before, you probably won't like it now...its really just more of the same...but in my opinion it adds more content and more polish to what I believe is already a great title. I will post screenshots of the Loa, as well as the new menu screens over the next few days.
Great writeup, thanks for sharing.
Thanks Jarhead!
I'll pick this up eventually. While SOTS doesn't have a terribly deep grand strategy side, I certainly think other 4X games could take a lesson from the way each of it's races have a different game mechanic of some kind and how each one's available tech tree 'nodes' are somewhat randomized from game-to-game. It looks pretty cool, for sure.
I'm still hoping they do a bit more polishing before I get in the mood for a sci-fi grand strat again. But if Enhanced edition gets a Christmas sale I'll probably buckle like a belt, mood or no. :D
As a total newbie to this game, which faction would you recommend playing as to learn it?
Quote from: TheCommandTent on December 03, 2012, 08:29:22 AM
As a total newbie to this game, which faction would you recommend playing as to learn it?
Good question...outside of the new Loa race, Human is the only other race I have played. They do strike me as the most traditional of the bunch.
Actually no.
The Humans are pretty complicated with their FTL lanes.
I would recommend either Tarka or Morrigi as a starter race with Tarka being the most straight forward.
^Why do you think FTL lanes complicate the game for the human player? It may be a disadvantage under some circumstances, but "complicated?"
I usually recommend to start with the Tarka as they play like in most 4x games.
Quote from: Jarhead0331 on December 03, 2012, 10:21:54 AM
^Why do you think FTL lanes complicate the game for the human player? It may be a disadvantage under some circumstances, but "complicated?"
Because many people get confused about them as Humans only being able to travel to certain worlds via their lanes which are pretty obvious on the starmap, while the other races can go to the human player's worlds willy nilly.
At least in the perception of the human player.
The FTL lanes give the false impression of protection because many people tend to gauge chokepoints and tactical positions from the FTL lanes rather than proximity of (enemy) worlds.
Hence they are not as straight forward to play as they initially seem. Much less so than Tarka.
Quote from: Yskonyn on December 03, 2012, 10:38:14 AM
Quote from: Jarhead0331 on December 03, 2012, 10:21:54 AM
^Why do you think FTL lanes complicate the game for the human player? It may be a disadvantage under some circumstances, but "complicated?"
Because many people get confused about them as Humans only being able to travel to certain worlds via their lanes which are pretty obvious on the starmap, while the other races can go to the human player's worlds willy nilly.
At least in the perception of the human player.
The FTL lanes give the impression of a false sense of protection because many people tend to gauge chokepoints and tactical positions from the FLT lanes rather than proximity of (enemy) worlds.
Hence they are not as straight forward to play as they initially seem. Much less so than Tarka.
Ah. All good points. TCT...listen to this guy, he knows what he is talking about! :D
Quote from: TheCommandTent on December 03, 2012, 08:29:22 AM
As a total newbie to this game, which faction would you recommend playing as to learn it?
There is actually some advice about this in the manual.
Quote from: Yskonyn on December 03, 2012, 10:38:14 AM
The FTL lanes give the impression of a false sense of protection because many people tend to gauge chokepoints and tactical positions from the FLT lanes rather than proximity of (enemy) worlds.
I am constantly making this mistake ! As someone who plays a lot of Sins of a Solar Empire, where the phase lanes work this way, I'm usually not fully conscious of the fact that I'm playing SOTS the way I play Sins -- which is to say, the wrong way.
Thanks for clarifying one of the particular bits of stupidity I am prone to in this game... 8)
Quote from: Zulu1966 on December 03, 2012, 11:53:09 AM
Quote from: TheCommandTent on December 03, 2012, 08:29:22 AM
As a total newbie to this game, which faction would you recommend playing as to learn it?
There is actually some advice about this in the manual.
I believe Tarka was usually the first suggestion, in the original.
Welcome back to the States,
Jarhead! Hope you enjoyed your vacation. :)
Quote from: Jarhead0331 on December 02, 2012, 09:12:19 PM
Finally, and perhaps most striking, Loa vessels are constructed from modular megalithic cubes. These cubes are shaped into mission specific vessels on the fly, as needed by the player. So, by example, a Loa megalith can be traveling through space. The player decides that he wants the megalith to survey a nearby star systyem, so the megalith releases cubes that form into various vessels capable of surveying the system. upon arriving in the system, the survey fleet is attacked by an alien force. The survey fleet is then able to reconfigure itself into combat focused ships in order to defend against the alien attack. After the threat is dealt with, the cubes can reform into the survey fleet, conduct the survey, then, if colonizable worlds are located, the survey fleet can morph into a colonization fleet and colonize the planet, etc. etc. This is a very unique aspect of the new race that presents very interesting strategic possibilities.
Wow, that sounds pretty frickin' sweet. This alone almost makes me want to get the game.
However, I have to ask: How is this ability balanced? Because if it's not, it seems like it'd be rather overpowered...?
Quote from: Martok on December 03, 2012, 02:12:13 PM
Welcome back to the States, Jarhead! Hope you enjoyed your vacation. :)
Quote from: Jarhead0331 on December 02, 2012, 09:12:19 PM
Finally, and perhaps most striking, Loa vessels are constructed from modular megalithic cubes. These cubes are shaped into mission specific vessels on the fly, as needed by the player. So, by example, a Loa megalith can be traveling through space. The player decides that he wants the megalith to survey a nearby star systyem, so the megalith releases cubes that form into various vessels capable of surveying the system. upon arriving in the system, the survey fleet is attacked by an alien force. The survey fleet is then able to reconfigure itself into combat focused ships in order to defend against the alien attack. After the threat is dealt with, the cubes can reform into the survey fleet, conduct the survey, then, if colonizable worlds are located, the survey fleet can morph into a colonization fleet and colonize the planet, etc. etc. This is a very unique aspect of the new race that presents very interesting strategic possibilities.
Wow, that sounds pretty frickin' sweet. This alone almost makes me want to get the game.
However, I have to ask: How is this ability balanced? Because if it's not, it seems like it'd be rather overpowered...?
Thanks Martok...its good to be back.
Well, each "fleet" of module cubes has a set number of "construction points." The construction points are calculated based upon the number of modular cubes you have built. So, its similar to buying ships for a more traditional fleet. The more hulls you purchase, the larger your fleet. Likewise, the more cubes you build, the higher its construction points will be. Construction points are then used to form the various Loa vessels you will want to have in your fleet. Before each engagement, or before sending your Loa fleet on a mission, you get an option to configure the fleet into a set profile, such as "basic construction," "basic colonization," "basic survey," etc. etc. Or, you can design and save your own custom made profile. Each profile has a set number and type of ships that the cubes will form. However, you have to have enough "construction points" to form all the ships in the profile, or else some of the ships will be highlighted in red and will not be formed. You can frequently still go with the profile if you do not have enough points, but some of the vessels will be left out.
Hope this makes sense. Its not as complicated as it sounds.
Thanks Jarhead. Yeah, I think I follow. Sounds like a genuinely interesting (yet logical, at least in-game) way to do it.
I feel like I will probably cave and buy this during a Christmas sale, once my new Falcon MachV arrives (the program certainly won't run on my old video card); but I can't help but feel like I might be better off playing SotS1 first and then upgrading to this later.
Has SotS2 been polished to the point where a relatively new player (I only have minor experience with 1) might as well skip 1 and go on to 2?
(I know story progression is basically irrelevant in the game, so I'm not worried about having missed something important in 1 that way. It's purely a gameplay question.)
Quote from: JasonPratt on December 03, 2012, 03:54:13 PM
Has SotS2 been polished to the point where a relatively new player (I only have minor experience with 1) might as well skip 1 and go on to 2?
(I know story progression is basically irrelevant in the game, so I'm not worried about having missed something important in 1 that way. It's purely a gameplay question.)
I don't think its a matter of polish. They are both good games in their own right. You can buy a collection for pretty cheap now.
Quote from: sandman2575 on December 03, 2012, 11:56:26 AM
Quote from: Yskonyn on December 03, 2012, 10:38:14 AM
The FTL lanes give the impression of a false sense of protection because many people tend to gauge chokepoints and tactical positions from the FLT lanes rather than proximity of (enemy) worlds.
I am constantly making this mistake ! As someone who plays a lot of Sins of a Solar Empire, where the phase lanes work this way, I'm usually not fully conscious of the fact that I'm playing SOTS the way I play Sins -- which is to say, the wrong way.
Thanks for clarifying one of the particular bits of stupidity I am prone to in this game... 8)
Oh yes, this bit me in my behind a lot when starting out too. ;)
As for Jason; I think SotS 2 is a natural progression over 1. The mechanics are deeper and the combat is much expanded.
Some people complain about the mission system and claim to prefer 1 over 2, solely by this, but I think those people are either exaggerating or not very flexible.
Yes the system is different, but once you get to know how it works it is much quicker than the old way.
And with the new expansion I read the system has been tweaked yet again.
All in all I think SotS 2 really is the better and more complete game of the two.
It still has some bugs, but it's perfectly playable and patching has been quick and resilient by Kerberos.
If you liked 1. Go ahead, you'll like 2 even more (after getting over a learning curve again and unlearn some 1 habits)
...and the developer has already released another patch for the enhanced edition. I'm glad that he is not looking at the release of the enhanced version as an end of the line for improvements and fixes.
I am not the biggest fan of the guys working at kerberos (arrogance, paranoia and some others) but they are true professionals...they have all my respect!
I notice that Steam upgraded me to the enhanced edition so looking forward to giving it a try.
They have a lot to go to repair the bridges burnt for the initial release with non-fans. This seems to be a positive step.
Much as I like this game and think it's plenty polished enough now to be thoroughly enjoyable -- am I the only one who finds the 'real time' combat needlessly difficult to manage? If the dev's were going to focus on something further to improve, my vote would be the combat. It's still fun, but I always feel like I'm fighting against the combat UI, camera controls, etc.
Thanks for the feedback guys. Now I just need some time to sit down and learn the game. I am a bit intimidated by it but looking forward to playing it.
Also thx for feedback! :)
I already have the complete version of 1 (picked up in pieces, so I would have probably gotten a cheap version of the complete off Steam or somewhere for ease of access someday during a sale), but haven't played it longer than 100 turns a handful of times, and not recently, so I won't have to unlearn anything.
I don't post here, so take it for its worth...
I played a bunch of SotS and got bored with the repetition: after awhile the battles repeated themselves, or felt that way. I'd show up with 10 Dread's, 20 cruisers and 100 destroyers and duke it for 5 minutes against the AI. The fleets were huge and many of the ships were throwaway. What made this worse is that the combat auto-resolve mechanism sucked: you'd lose WAY more ships using that method vs. manually fighting the battle.
In SotS2, the ships are larger (the destroyer class is effectively gone) and take longer to kill and function less like PT boats. I haven't made it to the point in the game where you can field Leviathan ships... but when you finish one, it's a Big Achievement. Also, Kerberos has greatly improved the battle auto-resolve -- the game actually simulates a fast version of the battle on the screen using the orders you've given.
Notice many advanced techs have a good chance to fail unless you build multiple science station labs. What happens if you research shields and it fails? Does the research take twice as long, or does the project fail and you loose all progress? If it fails can you try to research it again or are you SOL?
What are the recommended techs to research first? Industry Materials Applications for the 10% discount to start? Or try for early rush to Warhead, Fusion Drive, or Shield technology?
After spending some time with this one I like it.... however, I never really have a good grasp on my Empire's economy. The overview and oversight of your colonies and finances are too abstract. I noticed the AI is still hit or miss as they have chosen some odd tactics. Pirates are a pain in the empires arse. Fleet management could be streamlined as I do not like drill down approach (the ui is not clean) and it would be nice to have better access to information. I do like the mission based approach to your fleets.
With all this, I still have enjoyed myself, however not sure if I will play long term.
PE
After playing SoTS1 for years (still do) I finally bit the bullet and started playing SoTS2 on my dedicated Steam rig. It is certainly interesting. My biggest impression is that I spend most of my time fighting the UI and trying to find information. SoTS1 had an OK UI and some data summary screens that were well done, if rudimentary. SoTS2 has a long way to go in those areas. I'll keep slogging. It is not a game made to be attractive to new gamers or those not familiar with SoTS1 but I see a twinkling of great rewards at the end of the tunnel.
SOTS 2 even today does not match SOTS 1. If only the battle AI were competent I'd spend more time playing. They have made many choices to make it more 'grognardy' compared to SOTS 1, but it appears that other goals were cut and so your left with strange tendrils of overly complex things.
Creating a fleet is overly complex, ordering a fleet to move, etc.
The game looks beautiful...maybe they can gain enough funds through other games to finally fix it as they intended.
I rather enjoy it.
Quote from: solops on April 25, 2013, 11:17:59 AM
After playing SoTS1 for years (still do) I finally bit the bullet and started playing SoTS2 on my dedicated Steam rig. It is certainly interesting. My biggest impression is that I spend most of my time fighting the UI and trying to find information. SoTS1 had an OK UI and some data summary screens that were well done, if rudimentary. SoTS2 has a long way to go in those areas. I'll keep slogging. It is not a game made to be attractive to new gamers or those not familiar with SoTS1 but I see a twinkling of great rewards at the end of the tunnel.
Give Star drive a try. Better ship customization, Planetary improvements and Not so cartoony like sword of the stars
I have Stardrive. Much simpler game, but it, too, is unfinished. A lot of potential there, but it will need some major work after it gets out of beta. I am looking forward to it. It could be a game with mass appeal.
SoTS2...this could be a great game if they can get the AI right, make the UI friendlier and add some serious information screens... tables of planets, fleets, etc. SoTS1 was barely adequate in that respect. SoTS2 has not gotten to that level yet. But it will never have mass appeal.
To each their own... But I find Star Drive to be much Deeper and complex then sword of the stars 2. I still play both games however.
Quote from: mikeck on April 25, 2013, 03:23:46 PM
To each their own... But I find Star Drive to be much Deeper and complex then sword of the stars 2. I still play both games however.
Deeper? More complex? Than SOTSII? Are we playing the same two games?
Well, in Sd, I can pick and choose which types of buildings to put on which planet. In SOTS, I get a developement slider. In SD I can build freighters and actually watch them travel from planet to planet transporting resources and food depending on which planets are importing or exporting. In SOTS, trade is abstracted. In SD I have spies I can send to do various missions. In SD I not only pick what type of weapon or engine i want but select and place every part of the ship: weapons, point defense, bulkheads, armor playing, shields, engines, ordinance bays, missile racks, energy cells, etc. where I place these items has a direct impact on ship performance. So if I don't build a bulkhead around my reactor and a beam cuts through the hull and hits it...whole ship goes boom. I can build a ship that has all thick armor on one side and a broadside full of weapons on the other. Tactically, just like SOTS, I can tell the ship how to fight. I can tell it to point broadsides at an enemy or the armored side. I can tell it to strafe of stay in place. Just like SOTS, I can set fleet formations.
I get to watch my freighters and fleets move around the galaxy...I can create marines or tanks and land them on enemy planets.
So for me, I find Stardrive to Be more complex in many ways. I like SOTS. But outside of combat, I find SOTS2 to be lacking...I feel like I am just grabbing planets to act as bases. In Sd I can develope planets how I wish
It's personal taste. I did not like Endless space but many did. Many will hate Stardrive I'm sure. But for me, next to Distant Worlds, I find Stardrive to be my favorite space 4x. I would also add that as much as I enjoy SOTS2... I feel like I am playing a cartoon.
SOTS2 does have a better research system and even at .5x, combat in SD is too fast. But if I'm not fighting I. SOTS 2, I feel like I'm not doing anything
I think the big difference between the two games is that SOTS 2 is really oriented toward being a space fleet management game with supporting 4X characteristics, and Stardrive is about screwing your early backers.
But I'm not bitter.
That's why I don't back any of these guys early. Waited until it went into open beta few weeks ago and bought it on steam. Get an auto update every few days and drive on.
Quote from: panzerde on April 25, 2013, 07:53:52 PM
I think the big difference between the two games is that SOTS 2 is really oriented toward being a space fleet management game with supporting 4X characteristics, and Stardrive is about screwing your early backers.
But I'm not bitter.
...bbbbbbbBWAHAHAHAHAHHAAAAAHHAHAHAHAHAahahaa....
Speaking as someone who had enough sense not to buy Sots2 on release, SOTS2 fans have
no room to talk about
other games screwing their early backers by contrast.
(I realize SotS2 has gotten much better through dedicated hard work by the devs who have been very good about supporting it post-release; and I'm looking at their game eventually. But still.)
(Also,
Distant Worlds beats them all.)
Yes, DW is better by far... It just takes about $115 in expansions to get there unfortunately.
Quote from: mikeck on April 26, 2013, 11:15:01 AM
Yes, DW is better by far... It just takes about $115 in expansions to get there unfortunately.
But I suspect about 33% cheaper if you wait for the Xmas holiday sale.