I hate Battlegrounds

Discussion in 'Games' started by AlexJedi, Mar 9, 2002.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. Debo Chosen One

    Member Since:
    Sep 27, 2001
    star 5
    Well, I like it...
  2. CrixMakin Jedi Knight

    Member Since:
    Feb 24, 2002
    star 2
    Blame Westwood. They started the resource gathering. Admittedly, that was a game which actually suited it. Age of Empires suits it too. Galactic battlegrounds doesn't. I think there shouldn't be unit building, it's unrealistic to build armies on-site. Should maybe be a reinforcement system? You get reinforcements every so often based on the scenario. And you make do with the units you have apart from that. I mean some units will be able to heal or repair themselves at different rates, eg jedi heal quick, other troops need med officers. if the med officer dies, well you're screwed. Same with Repair techs/astromechs.
  3. IAmTheDarkSide Jedi Master

    Member Since:
    Jan 9, 2002
    star 4
    me = good at tactics, bad at strategy.

    I like armies, I don't like cities.
  4. CrixMakin Jedi Knight

    Member Since:
    Feb 24, 2002
    star 2
    I agree. Good at tactics, but not resource management. I want to be a general, not a chancellor.
  5. jp-30 Manager Emeritus

    Member Since:
    Dec 14, 2000
    star 9
    Dammit Jim, I'm a Doctor, not a lumberjack...

  6. AlexJedi Jedi Master

    Member Since:
    Mar 3, 2002
    star 1
    I hate this game. It has no feel like a star wars game at all. It does just feel like an add on to Age of Empires.

    The AI is none existant. The game is flawed in so many ways.
  7. Jomero Jedi Knight

    Member Since:
    Jun 3, 1999
    star 3
    AI is nonexistant? *snicker*

    You must have played it on "easy."

    -Jomero
  8. Emperor_Dan Jedi Master

    Member Since:
    Aug 21, 1999
    star 4
    So what if the idea is silly? It works a WHOLE lot better than the Command Point system (which, for me, randomly gave me a negative flow, even if I wasn't repairing something).

    And anyway, I don't think you guys have actually seriously played the game. The first few minutes are very tense, as you need to be the fastest to the next tech level so you can either properly defend yourself or attack someone. Or, you could even attack the enemy right off the bat...
  9. CrixMakin Jedi Knight

    Member Since:
    Feb 24, 2002
    star 2
    I hate the AI of most strategy games..

    ..it just doesn't have human failings. It should make a mistake every now and then for a human player to exploit. Just like a real player. My best C&C games used to be against my brother, because although he would do dumb things, he would also have truly inspired moments. AI should be like that.
  10. Emperor_Dan Jedi Master

    Member Since:
    Aug 21, 1999
    star 4
    Then play multiplayer.
  11. CrixMakin Jedi Knight

    Member Since:
    Feb 24, 2002
    star 2
    If only my access was quick enough I would. As it is I have to set up a network with my mates. I'm pestering them to get the game so I can play properly.
  12. jp-30 Manager Emeritus

    Member Since:
    Dec 14, 2000
    star 9
    It works a WHOLE lot better than the Command Point system (which, for me, randomly gave me a negative flow, even if I wasn't repairing something).

    Not random, most likely too big an army for the resources you were allocated. It causes a drain on points. The idea behind that is to encourage the right balance in your units, and to discourage ridiculously sized fleets of heavy artillary. You did read the manual, right?


  13. CrixMakin Jedi Knight

    Member Since:
    Feb 24, 2002
    star 2
    Clearly not. One good thing with FoCom was it heavily discourages the old C&C tank rush. disadvantage was the AI shat all over me so much to begin with (even on easy) I couldn't be bothered to play long enough to get good at it. What is with the difficulty curve on RTS games these days?
  14. Emperor_Dan Jedi Master

    Member Since:
    Aug 21, 1999
    star 4
    Hah! That's a lame way of trying to do that. In REAL RTSs there's something called a COUNTER UNIT...
  15. Darth_Nemesis Jedi Youngling

    Member Since:
    Aug 6, 2001
    star 3
    I like GB, but it's no starcraft that's for sure. The problems with GB lies in the differences between races. There's not enough of a difference between them. Also I expected capital starships in this game, in which they have a lack of. It also takes forever to build your forces up. There should be no tech levels, you should have to build buildings that require you to build it in order to get a unit like in starcraft. I like GB just because it's star wars in a RTS style.
  16. Emperor_Dan Jedi Master

    Member Since:
    Aug 21, 1999
    star 4
    There are differences between the races, but, yeah, they should be more different. This will be fixed in the X-pack.

    Capital Ships? In a game called Galactic Battlegrounds? I think not. At least they're putting the Air Cruiser class in the ex-pack.

    It doesn't take forever to build up your forces; you must not be very good at the game.
  17. Darth_Nemesis Jedi Youngling

    Member Since:
    Aug 6, 2001
    star 3
    To max out with no cheats it does! And I don't care if it's called galatic battlegrounds, I want Capital ships!
  18. Riley Man Jedi Grand Master

    Member Since:
    Dec 19, 1999
    star 5
    There is a deathmatch option in the game...

    How long "forever" is I guess depends on your point of view -- how long you want to wait before the action starts. In a random map game, you should be able to get a good-sized Tech Level 2 army going by about 15 minutes, with forward towers. Or a Tech Level 3 army by 20 minutes. There are some people that even stay in Tech Level 1 for a while and attack there.

    The reason the game is done the way it is, is to give you alot of options on what type of army you want to attack with. You can balance your workers on carbon and food if you want to go with troopers; or put a bunch of guys on nova to break out the artillery; or maybe on ore to forward-tower the enemy.

    I used to be not so impressed with Age of Kings when it first came out. Then I went and watched a few recorded games of some good players, and read some strategy articles on mrfixitonline.com. I got hooked after that. There's an incredibly diverse game in there, if you choose to look for it.
  19. Protoss72000 Force Ghost

    Member Since:
    Dec 3, 2001
    star 3
    "CrixMakin:I agree. Good at tactics, but not resource management. I want to be a general, not a chancellor."

    Try playing myth, all strategy and no resource management, very good game.
    I havent tried myth3 yet, but myth2 is very good.
  20. Emperor_Dan Jedi Master

    Member Since:
    Aug 21, 1999
    star 4
    I agree with Riley Man. I too read MFO.

    To those who think it sucks, you truly don't CARE to find out how to get better at it.

    Sucks for you..
  21. jp-30 Manager Emeritus

    Member Since:
    Dec 14, 2000
    star 9
    To those who think it sucks, you truly don't CARE to find out how to get better at it.

    The same could probably be said about you and Force Commander, Emperor Dan.


  22. Emperor_Dan Jedi Master

    Member Since:
    Aug 21, 1999
    star 4
    Hah! No, I played that game for months! I really DID like the single player aspect, as I've said before. But I don't buy games anymore for single player, I play for multiplayer.
  23. Jedi-Corleone Jedi Youngling

    Member Since:
    Oct 28, 2001
    star 4
    I got bored of GBG. I'm going back to FoCom.

    Let's see how long it takes me to get bored of that again.

    I want JO, dammit!
  24. Debo Chosen One

    Member Since:
    Sep 27, 2001
    star 5
    Most of the problems with the game that are mentioned here can be overcome by using the...scenario editor.

    It's fun when you get the hang of it.

    The game is fun, anyway. But to each his own.
  25. Resolute Jedi Knight

    Member Since:
    Feb 11, 2002
    star 1
    You're right. Its not as impressive as I would have hoped, but it does the job, and thats good enough for me.
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.