Talk:Sword of the Stars

Homeworld: Cataclysm

IIRC many of the developers of this game were also involved with Homeworld: Cataclysm, and I bought the game because I loved that one. I find the RTS combat component of this game very disappointing though, as compared to the combat in H:C. Homeworld's controls were a lot more intuitive and fun, SotS seems a lot more dumbed down (particularly the fact that it's not true 3D combat, it's just 3D rendering but combat is on a 2D plane).

Well, you shouldn't forget that SotS is a 4X game, not an RTS. While some 4X's do use combat in real-time, I have never seen one that uses true RTS. I am OK with that because I prefer the entire game to be done well, instead of the developers focusing most of their time on one part of the game that can be skipped anyway. I especially like the ability to target specific ship sections and turrets, although the lack of boarding actions and planetary invasions does reduce the semi-realism of the game. Chronolegion 14:30, 30 October 2006 (UTC)

As a side note, Sins of a Solar Empire is a modern RTS 4X game, with real time combat "done well" (9/10 and Editor's Choice awards from GameSpot, for instance). 137.244.215.61 (talk) 17:33, 10 June 2009 (UTC)

There are boarding actions, though I'm not sure whether they were added in the expansion born of blood or not. You get a mission section that releases these boarding pods that take over an enemy ship but don't let you use its engines. As far as the 2D-plane, the ships do sometimes go up and down, only move orders and satellite positions must always stay on the flat plane. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.144.233.38 (talk) 16:10, 30 August 2009 (UTC)

The opening

Is it just me, or does the opening sound more like an add then a wiki writeup? 207.216.157.208 (talk) 00:04, 6 January 2008 (UTC)

Demo

Recently a far more robust demo of the original game was uploaded to FilePlanet - This new version gives a fuller tech tree to play with, and unlocked the Liir race for people to play as. Someone should update the article with all the information on it. --75.48.229.41 (talk) 02:26, 19 January 2009 (UTC)

But also it is limited to 100 turns, or so i am told.Crystal Alien (talk) 16:33, 20 June 2009 (UTC)

Races

Excuse me, but a sixth race exists.They are called moragi and more information about them can be found at the SOTS wiki Crystal Alien (talk) 16:31, 20 June 2009 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by 72.19.39.80 (talk) 16:25, 20 June 2009 (UTC)

I may be wrong but I think it's spelled with two rs, well anyways it looks like this article might die soon, unless we can establish the "notability". This wiki is on a slow spiral of death, but at least someone cares to point out a sixth race in a game. I doubt this article will improve very much since most of the info either comes from playing or the wiki made for it, the whole third-party is more reliable thing. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.144.233.38 (talk) 16:04, 30 August 2009 (UTC)

Thank you. More info added to the Morragi and about SOTS 2:Lords of Winter

The Morrigi section is flat-out incorrect. ALL ships contribute to the Flock effect; Gravboats only add a bigger bonus. It's also worth noting that the section talking about the sequel misspells Kerberos.

That aside, the entire article feels kinda slapped together out of whatever was available, based on whatever first came to mind. There's no real logic to how a lot of it is written; for instance, the Ship Design section, for no apparent reason, has a subsection talking about the Node Drive. Why the Node Drive is important enough to warrant its own subsection and the other FTL drives are not isn't at all clear, and there's no particular reason why it should go under Ship Design section as well. It all feels somewhat random.61.173.25.236 (talk) 15:10, 31 May 2010 (UTC)

Even the talk page is poorly written, the first four comments are all opinions on the gameplay and similar games, nothing to do with improving the article itself, the races section sounds like it was written by a fanboy, and for some reason the sequel is grouped in with the expansions. There are even several references to more info on the community wiki, we are not supposed to point the way to other info, we are supposed to host it here. Not to mention people put info here and do nothing, Node's don't deserve their own section in ship components, remove it. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 174.112.18.193 (talk) 14:22, 29 September 2010 (UTC)

The filter doesn't seem to want to let me say exactly what I want, but thats probably just as well. Suffice to say I removed untrue things, Nodes are no longer so special they receive their own section, and races are greatly improved in my opinion. Dolphins are no longer whales, the description of Morragi is no longer entirely fluff (with statements such as their drive system, in a game where every race has a unique one, is unique). Still needs work though, the other 5 races still sound more like fanfiction than an encyclopedia article. 174.112.18.193 (talk) 14:53, 29 September 2010 (UTC)

Section on reception?

Shouldn't this article have a section on how the game was received, mentioning, among other things, Tom Chick's 1UP review (and the lead designer's infamous reaction to it)? At present, the article reads more like an advert with a list of features, summary of the main alien races, and remarks of the various expansions and collections. 94.66.168.125 (talk) 20:53, 5 November 2010 (UTC)

I have decided to be bold and have rewritten the page, leaving only small portions of the original article intact. I have removed the entire, overly long and overly detailed section on each of the six alien races--that sort of stuff does not belong on Wikipedia, I feel. Instead, I have summarized the main gameplay features (they can be expanded to include more info on colony management, for example), and have added a section on the game's reception. 94.66.168.125 (talk) 20:53, 5 November 2010 (UTC)

External links modified (January 2018)

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Sword of the Stars. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20110515030614/http://www.paradoxplaza.com/games/sword-of-the-stars-2 to http://www.paradoxplaza.com/games/sword-of-the-stars-2

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 22:51, 24 January 2018 (UTC)