38 replies to this topic

[HTRK74JR]

Personally, i tried it, didn't particularly enjoy it. Been a long time since i have played it so i can't comment on the gameplay and such, however i eargerly await the next release.

[Jaeger]

I loved SW EaW and i found Caw pretty good mostly just because I realllllllllllllllly liked the space combat set up that and it has ground combat. Sadly i don't know where my copy of EAW went and i don't feel like re buying it on steam.

 

Although with the MP being shut down I would not buy it anyway.

[Crisiss]

The game is broken and ridiculously hard to win as UNSC besides doing Charon spam. The devs say "oh yeah well we're simulating how bad humanity had it" but all it really does is create unenjoyable gameplay and a bad mod. I only play it for like 5 minutes before I get bored.

[Defender0]

im still waiting for GC, will be interesting IMO

[DGaius]

Hello guys, did you not get the part where we're still setting this up. We're not doing this untill everything is figured out. I will re-open/repost this thread once we're ready to go. 

 

EDIT: this topic has been re-opened. You know the drill: keep the discussion clean and fun. Etc.

[theselfescaping]

I just got Thrawn's Revenge and Covenant at War! You guys did a great job at re-creating humanity's desperation alright. But also, the limited-but-focused scale of the ships made me feel more of a connection to the ships I produced, than in SotP.

 

I know you're still setting it up, but I think having a GC is very appropriate to this mod. I've been trying to recreate the feel of a campaign in SotP maps, but from seeing the Thrawn campaign and playing CaW, I think the feel of a story-driven campaign is much more noticable in Empire at War.

 

The only thing that bothered me was not being able to raise money fast enough to build the Level 4 Space Station before I ran out of money/got overwhelmingly attacked - and on easy, to boot - but I guess Halcyon spam just wasn't in the cards for me...

 

Keep up the good work guys!

[Julian]

Covenant at War is the best mod i have ever played for STFOC. I am playing sometimes the Mod

 

i would change some points at the skirmish:

• the Covenant Destroyer (=CD) is to much overpowered.
• the Covenant Assault Carrier (=CAC) is very easy to destroy it. With the 5 MABs it is easier destroy the CAC then the CD
• The MABs are blocking to many suppliepoint. 10 points are to much. so i would reduce the suppliepoints for the MABs                  Or the suppliepoints for the UNSC should be set up to 80-100 points.    Beacuse then you can build the 5 MAB and send some Battleships to destroy the Station of the Covenant

thats some points that should be remembered for the next update and i am waiting foward the ground combat

you are doing a very good job

[Fleet Admiral agigabyte]

What are MABs?

 

 

Also, I love it, I can get largely diverse fleets unlike some people, and I have no complaints off the top of my head. 

[Aunt Gruntie]

What are MABs?

 

Uhm... it stands for Massive Amount of Bacon, everyone knows that.

[Julian]

in german we are using MBK or MAB for the Magnetic Accelerator Cannon-

[Fleet Admiral agigabyte]

But why not MAC?!

[Julian]

beacuse i didn´t think about the englisch shortversion

it was automaticaly that i wrote the german version

 

what i also want to suggest are more railguns for the UNSC- Base

Edited by DGaius, 07 September 2014 - 10:54 AM.
Edited in double post

[DGaius]

Covenant at War is the best mod i have ever played for STFOC. I am playing sometimes the Mod

 

i would change some points at the skirmish:

• the Covenant Destroyer (=CD) is to much overpowered.
• the Covenant Assault Carrier (=CAC) is very easy to destroy it. With the 5 MABs it is easier destroy the CAC then the CD

That's why the destroyers are destroyers and not carriers. I know, that's kind of a silly response. The jest of it is, that each ship has a role and bigger doesn't necessarily mean better.

 

what i also want to suggest are more railguns for the UNSC- Base

The same applies to this. The UNSC starbase has a different rol from the SMAC stations. If you want railguns, you'll need ships and SMACS. We deliberately didn't give the starbase any, since it's primary objective is to be your command centre. 

 

You mentioned decreasing the SMAC station population points, that's something I find worth investigating. Some of the SotP playtesters have given us some good feedback and based on that we may want to give the SMAC's a more accesable role. On the other hand, we may not decrease their points because the SMACS are pretty powerfull as is. 

[HTRK74JR]

I just don't think the mod is very good.

 

a lot of work needs to be done on it

 

most notably optimization, models need to be replaced with better looking ones that are lower poly (it is possible, don't say it isn't)

 

fighter and bomber spam need to be decreased

 

range of defensive weapons need to be increased

[Bornstellaris]

 

most notably optimization, models need to be replaced with better looking ones that are lower poly (it is possibly don't say it isn't)

 

What is it with you and your gripe against our models? 

[sloosecannon]

it is possibly don't say it isn't

Is this English?

I personally don't see anything wrong with the models in CaW, so I'm not sure where you're coming from. More descriptive feedback than "models need to be replaced with better looking ones" would probably help too...

Also, saying you don't think a mod is very good on the forum where said mod lives is quite unlikely to win you any brownie points...

[DGaius]

I think the biggest gripe with our models is not about the models themselves, but with the textures. Blamtroid does our textures, but technically he's not a 'skinner'/texture artists. Our idea is to get one or two of those in the future, you'll see that our models' (and in reality their textures) improve. 

 

About the need for lower poly models, our models are low poly. They're just not optimized. Zero has given us some great pointers on how to make the mod less CPU heavy (like the use of even lower poly models to fill in the LOD gaps we have). So those things are being done. 

 

Quite frankly, I don't think either HTRK nor Crisis agree with our philosophy (which we did debate with them). It seems a lot of other people came in expecting the same thing they get when downloading a mod. They're not getting it. Thusfar there haven't been many good arguments to chance things. Those who were are either being considered or actually done. So, to me, it still feels like the criticism(this mod is broken) is aimed at the fact people are not willing to consider what we did and I am to tired to keep explaining them why it isn't broken. That's one of the reasons why I originally locked this thread (didn't forsee anything constructive happen). The other reason being I was the only CaW member (besides Born, who's pretty much always here as part of SotP) present and busy setting up our forum parts.

 

Also, to just drop another bomb: I am able to win in this mod without fighter/bomber spam (which reminds me, we're restricting those, so Crisiss wtf are you complaining about ) and without frigate spam. It's not a given anyone else could, but apparently there's an exception to the 'you can't win without either spamming unit x or Y'  claim. 

[Julian]

i think what he wants to say, is that when you are playing as the UNSC the Covenant sometimes send  a lot of fighters and bombers

 

BUT you can mange that "PROBLEM" with the railgun sattelits, corvette or nuce-mines( thats a very usefull parts of the game, thanks that you invent that )

and i can confirm that you don´t have to spam f.e. Halycon Cruiser to win the battle

 

and i think that question is getting on your nerves but are you playing to bring an update this year or not???

[Fleet Admiral agigabyte]

Also, to just drop another bomb: I am able to win in this mod without fighter/bomber spam (which reminds me, we're restricting those, so Crisiss wtf are you complaining about ) and without frigate spam. It's not a given anyone else could, but apparently there's an exception to the 'you can't win without either spamming unit x or Y'  claim. 

You aren't the only one.

[Julian]

I just don't think the mod is very good.

 

a lot of work needs to be done on it

 

most notably optimization, models need to be replaced with better looking ones that are lower poly (it is possible, don't say it isn't)

 

fighter and bomber spam need to be decreased

 

range of defensive weapons need to be increased

what do you want to change, the Railgun system is good enough to protect the ship from enemy fighters and bombers

the mod is at version 1.2 the have not realease the Galactic Conquest annd the Ground Combat

so why are you criticizing the design the are still working at the design and the gameplay