Sword of the Stars II: Lords of Winter

[Kane]

October twenty eighth is apparently when the magic happens.

Or so I'm told. The Sword of the Stars website (www.swordofthestars.com) doesn't seem to be being updated frequently.

At any rate, Sword of the Stars one was the worst best game ever, as I heard it. It was something I was happy to play only the finalized, two and a half expansions-plus-bugfixes version. It was quite apparent the original was made on a shoe-string budget by half a dozen programmers.

But what a game it was, once you look at the sum of the tweaks, bugfixes and expansions! Wage interstellar war in three-dimensional space, six very distinct races and drives, pages of setting description and background.... Not to mention tactical real-time starship battles, being able to design those starships before hand, each race with their own apparent design philosophy and...

Okay, before I go too far, I would like to state that it is a turn-based, somewhat-simplified strategic 4x space-empire-building game, with real-time 2.5d space-combat. It has a randomized tech tree, six very distinct factions, and some downright sadistic random events. Personally, it's a game I've happily whiled away easily a hundred hours on. The game was successful enough that the sequel is being made on a much higher budget, with a whole studio behind it.


And unlike most 4x games, the sequel is carrying on the plot. It starts at fusion-era, goes beyond Antimatter, and carries out the logical development of each race- The Morrigi, for instance, have become a multi-racial federation, with Morrigi as the 'directors'.


Okay, to be honest, all I can do is spout what little info has already been released, which you can go look up on your own, and probably find more than I'll remember. I mostly wanted to see what other people were thinking of what has been released, talk about the changes (Morrigi look even more sexy (http://images.wikia.com/swordofthestars/images/b/b9/SotS2_Morrigi_Generation2_01_0.png) now, for instance.), or ask about opinions of where to get it.

############

Speaking of which, since I am likely to pre-order and download,
(According to the website,
GameStreamer
PC Gamestore
Direct2Drive
Gamersgate
GameStop / Impulse
Play.com)
and I'm wondering what people advise, approve of, or have experience with, as I've never used anything here but impulse. (And contrary to their statements, their 'gamestop/impulse' link leads to gametap, while Impulse doesn't seem to have SotSII.)

[factotum]

I actually tried playing the original SotS-with-all-the-expansions, and I just didn't like it--it just got annoying that the ruddy PIRATES had better kit than I did from the beginning of the game and kept attacking me for no reason! It was like playing Civilization 4 in a world where the barbarians were attacking you with musketmen while you were defending with spearchuckers...

[Kane]

I actually tried playing the original SotS-with-all-the-expansions, and I just didn't like it--it just got annoying that the ruddy PIRATES had better kit than I did from the beginning of the game and kept attacking me for no reason! It was like playing Civilization 4 in a world where the barbarians were attacking you with musketmen while you were defending with spearchuckers...

I'm sorry, pirates?

I mean, there are raiders, but they're hardly a common threat- There are silicoids, but those aren't exactly pirates.

Not even trying to defend it, but that sounds more like Sins of a Solar Empire or something. :smallconfused:

[factotum]

You know what? I think it was...I am clearly an idiot. :smallredface:

[Airk]

You know what? I think it was...I am clearly an idiot. :smallredface:

I suggest you try SotS instead, it's really good.

That said, I'm curious about the sequel, but haven't really been following it because there hasn't been anything to follow.

[Gwyn chan 'r Gwyll]

GamersGate is my favourite. For one, the company was originally a sub-company of the publisher of SotSII, Paradox Interactive, and PI and GamersGate still have great relations, even if they are no longer as closely linked as they used to be.

[Kane]

I suggest you try SotS instead, it's really good.

That said, I'm curious about the sequel, but haven't really been following it because there hasn't been anything to follow.

Truth. The offer an 'Immersion pack' if you pre-order, but I had to go to direct-to-drive to figure out what the hell that was.

(Incidentally, D2D is offering the pre-orders for about five bucks less.)


Anyway, things I'm looking forward include A, real freakin' solar systems, rather than a single planet for each star, B, being able to put custom 'symbols' on ships (I'm really hoping that it will be possible to add your own custom things to the list, though I don't think it likely.), and C, of course, being all the new things to customize my ships with normally. (guns. So many guns. Lasers. More lasers. Missiles. Armor. Shields. And everything in between.)

A and C, naturally, are the most important ones.

[Leecros]

My biggest hope is that they tweak the random events a bit. I enjoy and approve of the concept, but an unlucky roll of random events near the beginning of the game can really put a lot of hurt on you.

[DaedalusMkV]

My biggest hope is that they tweak the random events a bit. I enjoy and approve of the concept, but an unlucky roll of random events near the beginning of the game can really put a lot of hurt on you.

Ah, the days of patch 1.2. Anyone else play the game back then?

Turn 10: Shadows attack your homeworld! All of your orbital defenses are destroyed defending against them and you lose some of your ships and a few million citizens.

Turn 12: Meteor shower!

Turn 14: Slavers!

I am looking forwards to this game, though I'll have to see what it actually does before I go out and buy it. I'm a huge fan of SoTS and Kerberos is one of my favorite dev teams out there thanks to their fan friendliness and post-relese support.

[houlio]

They're also changing the scale of the game. Instead of being able to direct single ships, you move fleets around on various missions such as explore, raid, conquer, or colonize. Your fleets are also commanded by admirals who level up and gain experience. The admirals even vary depending upon races, so it's possible for the Morrigi to have an admiral of any race I believe, and Hiver admirals are capable of being resurrected as per their backstory information.

[Kane]

They're also changing the scale of the game. Instead of being able to direct single ships, you move fleets around on various missions such as explore, raid, conquer, or colonize. Your fleets are also commanded by admirals who level up and gain experience. The admirals even vary depending upon races, so it's possible for the Morrigi to have an admiral of any race I believe, and Hiver admirals are capable of being resurrected as per their backstory information.

Oh yes, I remember hearing about that. I confess I've never played one of the TW games, but I did hear someone describe the system as sounding like "Total War: In SPAAAAAACE!".

Having 'heroes', as the admirals seem likely to effectively be may be interesting. Certainly I look forward to seeing how they incorporated such things into a 4x game.

[Leecros]

That makes me raise my eyebrows in unease. Whenever i hear about an ability to "Level Up" and "Gain Experience" when referring to a Hero or even just a unit. It makes me uneasy about how it will affect the balance of the game and the required skill level of the player. Especially in any kind of strategy game.

Yes, i understand the concept well enough. There's a lot of places in history where a skilled general + a veteran army = a win against a more powerful force*. Regardless i have played games where smaller armies with only a small experience difference have been able to crush larger armies on that fact alone. With that said, i do like games like Total War where yes, an excellent General and skilled troops gives you a good advantage, but if you don't play your cards well then you'll lose regardless. on top of the fact that in the Total War games your generals age and eventually die which means you may have a military genius and when he died you may not have anyone else near the skill of him.

I definitely won't mind if the experience and levels and...stuff give an advantage, but i think i may be a bit disappointed if it turns initially non-threatening ships into living meat grinders. It's an interesting and if implemented well a good feature, but i really wouldn't want the whole basis of the game to get experience and levels and...stuff.




*Battle of Cannae- Hannibal crushed an army of Romans that outnumbered them by about 30,000 with minimal casualties to his army( ~8,000) and massive casualties to the enemy's (~70,000 killed/10,000 captured) . Hannibal had approximately 50,000 troops where the Romans had about 85,000...IIRC(its been a long time since History class) closer to 90,000.

[Spartacus]

Not a Warcraft 3 fan, then?

[houlio]

That makes me raise my eyebrows in unease. Whenever i hear about an ability to "Level Up" and "Gain Experience" when referring to a Hero or even just a unit. It makes me uneasy about how it will affect the balance of the game and the required skill level of the player. Especially in any kind of strategy game.

Yes, i understand the concept well enough. There's a lot of places in history where a skilled general + a veteran army = a win against a more powerful force*. Regardless i have played games where smaller armies with only a small experience difference have been able to crush larger armies on that fact alone. With that said, i do like games like Total War where yes, an excellent General and skilled troops gives you a good advantage, but if you don't play your cards well then you'll lose regardless. on top of the fact that in the Total War games your generals age and eventually die which means you may have a military genius and when he died you may not have anyone else near the skill of him.

I definitely won't mind if the experience and levels and...stuff give an advantage, but i think i may be a bit disappointed if it turns initially non-threatening ships into living meat grinders. It's an interesting and if implemented well a good feature, but i really wouldn't want the whole basis of the game to get experience and levels and...stuff.




*Battle of Cannae- Hannibal crushed an army of Romans that outnumbered them by about 30,000 with minimal casualties to his army( ~8,000) and massive casualties to the enemy's (~70,000 killed/10,000 captured) . Hannibal had approximately 50,000 troops where the Romans had about 85,000...IIRC(its been a long time since History class) closer to 90,000.

I'm not entirely it'll work out that way, I'd be more willing to bet that an admiral's experience would affect things more indirectly related to a battle, such as supply, initial setups, and maybe even the retreat countdown instead of the power of your lasers (or mass drivers if you're into that).

[Leecros]

Not a Warcraft 3 fan, then?

Not of the hero system, but that's just my opinion.


I'm not entirely it'll work out that way, I'd be more willing to bet that an admiral's experience would affect things more indirectly related to a battle, such as supply, initial setups, and maybe even the retreat countdown instead of the power of your lasers (or mass drivers if you're into that).

It's probably going to be something that i'll have to see before i'll stop being paranoid about it.

[Kane]

I believe Kerberos has done enough to justify some faith in them. Whether enough, well, we'll see.

Also, an interesting article (http://www.escapistmagazine.com/articles/view/features/9082-Story-of-the-Stars) I found. Most specifically, the hints/suspicion as to who the Lords of Winter are.


Oh, and the in-game, auto-filled wiki (but with room in the margins for scribblings) sounds wonderful. I do hope it proves functional in practice as well as code; it really seems like an excellent idea.

[houlio]

Also, an interesting article (http://www.escapistmagazine.com/articles/view/features/9082-Story-of-the-Stars) I found. Most specifically, the hints/suspicion as to who the Lords of Winter are.

Great last line, "It is very cold in space." :smallbiggrin:

The nature of the Suul'ka has already been revealed, by the way.
MINOR SPOILERS:
It's right here in the wiki (http://sots2.rorschach.net/Suul%27ka)

[Kane]

Great last line, "It is very cold in space." :smallbiggrin:

The nature of the Suul'ka has already been revealed, by the way.
MINOR SPOILERS:
It's right here in the wiki (http://sots2.rorschach.net/Suul%27ka)

Well, I feel a bit clueless. So it is.

Not sure if it merits spoilers, but just in case, discussing the Suul'ka
It seems like the Liir would need an awful lot of their elders to end up Suul'ka for them to actually have a sizable population. Also, if the Suul'ka were the enemy of the old Morrigi empire, fought a costly war with them, and have been being hunted by the Liir... Well, if the literal ancient empire could not handle it, it doesn't seem like it's fallen descendants (or their peers) will have much luck.

Edit:Oh boy. The zuul can apparently summon Suul'ka as a superweapon-ally of sorts, and "there are only seven Suul'ka available to be summoned and they arrive first come, first serve."

[Smight]

Also, an interesting article (http://www.escapistmagazine.com/articles/view/features/9082-Story-of-the-Stars) I found. Most specifically, the hints/suspicion as to who the Lords of Winter are.



Actually identity of Suul'ka has already been revield


here is Opening Cinematic (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=up3OpdYvtKw), be warned about spoilers if you wish to wait for the game to find out who Suul'ka is

[Kane]

Actually identity of Suul'ka has already been revield


here is Opening Cinematic (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=up3OpdYvtKw), be warned about spoilers if you wish to wait for the game to find out who Suul'ka is

Okay, I'm apparently way behind times.

I approve. And I'm definitely preordering it.

That part during "And not by sword!" when a Suul'ka tentacle just pulverized a human dreadnought. That.Right there. Clinched it for me.


Incidentally, I've heard that it will be sold on Steam, but it isn't there yet, and I have no way to know. (And steam isn't mentioned on the game page.) Anyone know the truth of it, or any way to determine?

[Derthric]

I actually only ever played the base game and had a bit of fun with it. I liked the fact that the races varied in their play style and presentation. Having only heard positive things about the expansions and updates I will definitely check this out. I need a good 4x space game to help fill the gaping hole in my soul that was left over by MoO3 that still festers after all these years.

Also my first reaction to the subhead was "Holy Crap someone gave Ned Stark a Spaceship!"

[GungHo]

You know what? I think it was...I am clearly an idiot. :smallredface:
It's really understandable. They both got noticed around the same time and came out of small developers, though SotS, gameplay wise, is probably closer to Master of Orion or GalCiv than Sins.

Of them all, I probably liked MOO2 the most, but I liked SotS a little better than GalCiv 1 or 2. The only thing that bugged me about SotS was the techtree(s). It's very intimidating when you're just starting out... and I'm saying that as an experienced 4x player.

Edit/BTW: I know perfectly well that SotS came out a couple years before Sins. However, it took a bit of time before anyone really noticed it. Apart from Tom Chick and the GalCiv 2 people.

[Airk]

Of them all, I probably liked MOO2 the most, but I liked SotS a little better than GalCiv 1 or 2. The only thing that bugged me about SotS was the techtree(s). It's very intimidating when you're just starting out... and I'm saying that as an experienced 4x player.

I don't really feel MOO2 is comparable. The game has SO MUCH more micromanagement (Indeed, what I feel, these days, is a completely unacceptably high level, causing late game play to drag painfully) when compared to SotS that it's barely even on the same level.

I'd also disagree strongly about the tech tree; Not only is the tech tree one of the things that attracted me to SotS (Playing the demo, it just made my eyes light up), but it doesn't suffer from MOO2s absurd "If you're not a scientific race, you only get one of the three benefits for each research item" arrangement. Add to this the randomized nature that keeps you from being guaranteed your favorite gamebreaking tech, and it scores huge a win for me in the replayability category. Yeah, the MOO2 "make you choose" thing was SUPPOSED to add replayability ("I'll pick tech X over tech Y this time!") but really, most of the time there was a clear winner in each tech pick, which meant that you picked pretty much the same thing every game.

MOO2 was good in its day, but it's shortcomings become more glaring for me when set next to SotS.

[GungHo]

Ok. Let me restate. At the time I played MOO2 in 1996, I liked MOO2 more than I liked SotS when I played it in 2007. That doesn't mean that SotS hasn't benefited from a full decade of computer game design.

That being said, I get where you're coming from with micromanagement. And, that's an issue that's shared with a lot of 4x games even to this day. You often start out with the same tools that you were using to manage a one-city civilization that was deciding to learn writing or agriculture as you are when you have a 50 city monstrosity of an empire trying to learn the Theory of Everything.

[Gaius Marius]

Aahh.. MoO2, I remember scoring an Aurora-styled victory at te last game I played. After this, I lost interest.

[Airk]

Ok. Let me restate. At the time I played MOO2 in 1996, I liked MOO2 more than I liked SotS when I played it in 2007. That doesn't mean that SotS hasn't benefited from a full decade of computer game design.

Fair enough. Tastes change. ;)



That being said, I get where you're coming from with micromanagement. And, that's an issue that's shared with a lot of 4x games even to this day. You often start out with the same tools that you were using to manage a one-city civilization that was deciding to learn writing or agriculture as you are when you have a 50 city monstrosity of an empire trying to learn the Theory of Everything.

Yeah; To this day I wonder how I got past "Okay, I've settled colony #37, time to build their barracks, hydroponic farm, ... etc."

Essentially, MOO2 is, with a few minor deviations (mostly: Combat) "Civ in space". Your star systems are your cities and are managed EXACTLY like cities in Civ (Or at least, older Civ games.). When I stopped having interest in that sort of fiddly gameplay, I stopped having interest in MOO2.

Also, it was crazy unbalanced. ;)

[Gaius Marius]

Master of Orion 2? Unbalanced? NEVAr!!!


Hey, I was wondering if people know of any Babylon 5-related mod for Sword of the Stars. Seems to me B5 would be one of the best universe to adapt to SotS mechanics...

One thing I wanna see more in 4x games is specie map-features like the Minbari or the Vorlons. Species who don't care about what is going around them, but never. Ever. Ever invade their territory.