Sword of the Stars

[Navaros]

GamePro gave it 55%. Ouch!

This is perhaps the only game in the genre to actually make each race feel unique and balanced... However, it isn't enough to compensate for the flawed tactical combat that lies at the game's core; nothing save a complete overhaul can redeem SotS from its current mediocrity.

http://www.gamepro.com/computer/pc/g...ws/79522.shtml

[Kraxis]

GamePro gave it 55%. Ouch!



http://www.gamepro.com/computer/pc/g...ws/79522.shtml

Ouch indeed...

I have only watched the videos and I quite liked that a bunch of smaller ships in one of them seemed to be running circles around a couple of big battleships. Those battleships or whatever simply couldn't bring their guns to bear enough, and it was their own smaller escort ships that had to clean up the mess.
And I must admist that those distorted voices are cool... Feels right...

But that review was good. It said what was needed. I don't feel that it was a biased tester, but one who actually knew what he was talking about.

[Crandaeolon]

Some bits made me wonder:

why is most of my fleet hanging back while only two cruisers take on a massive Hiver fleet?

Why the discrepancy? I doubt that there are radical differences in the ship-fielding abilities of different races (if yes, that would be an incredibly stupid design decision.) Did the reviewer fall behind in C&C technology race? Is he complaining because he lost the initial confrontation? Either of these would indicate sub-par performance in some areas of the game, which is not good for credibility.

Would also be nice to hear more detail about the reinforcement system.

you are only able to bring a fraction of your vessels into combat at any given time, with the rest being set aside as "reinforcements."

How much is a "fraction"? TW games have a reinforcement system, and I can't recall too many complaints about those. Maybe SotS has some horribly skewed numbers then, like 10-20% of fleet in the initial battle and rest as reinforcements? Would be nice to know in more detail, but alas, the reviewer does not tell.

Other dubious bits in the review as well. Iirc battle lengths are adjustable, so the complaint about five-minute battle length is kind of invalid. And it was not that hard to figure out the strong points of lasers and gauss guns, not to mention that there's an entire tech tree branch that deals with point defense.

I don't feel that it was a biased tester, but one who actually knew what he was talking about.

Funny, I got a different kind of impression. I don't think the reviewer was biased; his points about getting frustrated were probably quite honest. But, I do feel the review was a bit rushed. Pretty much the entire review could be based on the demo only - only a couple of sentences mention features exclusive to the retail release.

Maybe the game really is that shallow, I dunno. This review, however, wasn't very convincing. Not enough detail.

[CBR]

Well for a game with such low review scores Im surprised I like this game so much heh. Its one of those games where I totally forget about the time.

A fleet has a certain amount of command points based on what C&C ship/tech you got. Right now my Dreadnought C&C ship gives me 66 points and the cost for the shiptypes are 2/6/18 for destroyer/cruiser/dreadnought.

Im not sure how many command point you have with no C&C ship but its not much...12 perhaps(you can of course still control a dreadnought). Any ships you cant control in first wave will be reinforcements that come in when you lose a ship. I think someone actually modded it to have double the points so if one doesnt like it it can easily be changed.


CBR

[doc_bean]

It seems (based on the comments and reviews) this game really has one major failing: lack of a decent tutorial

Of course, damage report and a way to browse through your fleets or planets FAST would be nice too...

So far I haven't had much combat experience yet. I'm going to start a new game with a tiny galaxy and double production/research rate. Fighting with just three Armors isn't that exciting

[Kraxis]

Ahh... It seems the reviewer got overwhelmed rather than actually finding physical flaws.

Well, I tend to find that if the game does a poor job of explaining itself, and it is supposed to be played, it isn't terribly good. Better than the other case, but still not great.

[CBR]

My obvious response would be RTFM But yes there is no big flashing sign telling the player that he needs C&C ships for more control. I figured it out by playing the demo and checking out the tutorial that mentions the fleet management screen. On that screen you cant do any formations without a C&C ship and there is a even something like command cost/quota 0 on the right column.

My best guess is that the reviewer never give strategy games high scores as he gets overwhelmed easy. Information on weapon stats could be better indeed but you can still check them out in the research screen.

As it is right now Im inclined to say the opposite of what the reviewer concludes: that the depth of the combat system more than make up for the lack of information one might find in the game. I see a need for some tweaks and certainly not a complete overhaul as he claims.


CBR