oohhhh my bad

you have to have a campiagn to have a single player game

im sorry, it must be my IMAGINATION that allows me to play a skirmish game without a campaign or storyline written by someone else and be satisfied

and your right, diplomacy only will bring peace to us all on the multiplayer world, there will be no backstabbing, or underhanded secret treaties because we humans will always be a peace lovin people and when we have the option of peace we will never, ever go to war over something we want

you are entitled to your opinion sir

but remember

opinions are like assholes
We all got one and yours stinks!

Ryat good smack dude I love it.

wow, and i was going to say leave the poor OP alone, until he posted his most recent asinine statement. lets just all agree that he is an idiot and move on.

or not.

OP, you are the biggest idiot on these forums. if one person is playing, and he (or she) is playing alone, with only AI for company, then he is playing SINGLE  PLAYER. you know, alone=one=single. come on, you cannot possibly be that dense. shisno.

back to diplomacy. i kinda doubt we will see a campaign here (somthing i am really looking forward to in a possible sequel x cross your fingers! x) but the new stuff sounds really cool. being able to make treaties and give missions will add another, completely missing dimension to an already awesome game. cant wait

Darksxx, anything else you'd like to add, or should I end this with a mercifull casting of Melf's Acid Arrow?

ooh. the green writing just hurt my eyes!

A new race would be really cool, but I don't think it'll come soon, if ever. Whatever the devs decide it to be, it'll seriously disapoint a lot of people (just cause everyone has different opinions of what the race should be). Althought I'd love to have a new race, I just use mods for now and let Sins be rebalanced. That's more important to me right now. Not that I'm playing a lot of sins recently but....ha there's my thoughts.

@Ryat: Booyah for you sir!

i love the way he fights with Annatar: "Disagree all you want, you are still wrong, and my way is perfect" - Darksxx

lol, i havent heard arguments like that since what? the second grade? considering this guy supposedly has a 15-16 yr old child (as mentioned in one of his other posts), and therefore an 'adult', i am really surprised at the way he interacts with people.

anyway, on to my own thoughts.

Diplomacy isnt a bad idea. first, im sure there is more to it that just new ways to make alliances. for instance, on the Vanilla box, it said one way to 'win' (or at least cripple the enemy) was to undercut his economy by offering your resources at a lower price...

now, ive never been able to use that effectively... i dont think anyone does. but it makes sense, and if there was a more clear-cut way of using the economy to destroy an enemy, if would add another dimension to the game. TEC would have another weapon, just like Advent have culture and Vasari have phase manipulation (not perfect comparisons/similies, but close enough)

another thing is to make pirates more useful... for instance, having pirates breach enemy lines and take out a superweapon or two, or some mil labs or a fleet production planet or so, maybe even acting in concert with your own forces... maybe defending a planet of yours that is under attack, (or not, just holding the line while your fleet does other things), or aiding in combat against a larger fleet...

and then, there is always the most simple and blunt answer. if you have more control over your allies, you can co-ordinate better. as it is, you can never really co-ordinate massive battles with your allies either you or them go charging in and the other one follows... maybe... if you can organise to have two large fleets attack a heavily fortified and defended system, you have all the more chance of winning. atm, you cant even micro-manage an allies fleet within a grav well, because the AI responds with "we dont want to attack our allies" (although they as you to do it all the time)

all in all, im willing to see what Diplomacy brings. I do agree that the central core of Sins is to fight, but Sins is also RT4X... and without Diplomacy, it just remains a standard RTS. i do agree that without intelligent players (Human or AI), much of Diplomacy could be overlooked (for instance, making an ally believe you are allied with him against player 3, but then you and Player 3 turning on your previous ally and wiping him out, etc etc), but then things like tech trading and more... sophisticated or elegant trade routes would bring a dimension to Sins that i love to play with... even if there is no campaign i can make my own story about protecting my trade routes, or sending an envoy to a neutral/hostile empire...

and finally... Darksxx, you are an ass. seriously, you come, you critisise with no proof, backup or support, and then you lash out when everyone gives their opinion... you did it with your post about splitting the Empire Tree as well... you are acting like a child

honestly, considering you should be an adult, you should be ashamed of yourself.

just wait until the X-Pack comes out, you have no stake in how Ironclad is run nor their potential success/failure, and therefore no say in major things like what to do with an X-Pack, especially considering Diplomacy has been in the works for at least 8 months, if not more. AND, the way in which you have conducted yourself here, means you should have no say in how even the little things turn out. but... you know, free speech and all...

just wait till the damn thing comes out, you may even finding yourself liking it. if you dont, go play Command and Conquer.

Seriously, you should be ashamed of yourself

C.I. ur about the only sain person on this board. And as for the rest of you morons that cant read correctly I said theres no sense in Diplomacy in a MP game.  And people do play with AI in their games morons!  Again peanut gallery theres no SP campaign so you all can kiss my ass.

um no you never said anything about a campaign, I did. And I actually agree with him, though I have no problem creating my own with my imagination.

Notice this person used the word "I" as in he himself would never use it. Others would.

I love people who think that their opinion is sooooo awesome that its has to be fact.

If you don't like it dont buy it.

And go find a

Im done here.

Especially in MP games diplomacy could add very much depth. Of course in team games with locked teams it might be useless but think of epic FFA games and what you could probably do with diplomacy:

- make a peace treaty with a stronger player nearby to assure he's not attacking you, thus you have one front less to defend

- gathering forces with an allied player to prepare a combined attack, than backstabbing that ally by quitting the treaty and crushing his fleet before he even notices whats going on

- sending an ultimatum to other players to end treaties with a third player

- demanding protection money from weaker allies

or what I loved in other (round based) X4 Space games (Master of Orion, Space Empires...)

- Espionage (spying tech, ship vision, planet vision)

- Sabotage (sabotage fleets, slow down enemy research, disrupt trade - AND put the blame on someone else)

...

While OP´s behavior here is hardly what you call polite, i agree with him, that diplomacy might end up bit pointless even with the new features. Ironclad claims Sins is RT4X, but i think it is safe to say, it is mainly RTS. At least for me personally Sins is bit more complex version of Conquest Frontier Wars, which was definitely RTS. And as you surely know, one of the most important aspects of RTS games is balance. Playing with unlocked teams, which is essential, if you want to utilize diplomacy, can end up being unbalanced and unfair and i do not think that is something, what most RTS players are looking for. Therefore i think regardless of the new features diplomacy will continue being overlooked and most people will choose to play with locked teams.

However i would love if Ironclad implemented some kind of minor races with their own new ships and special technologies/ characteristics. These minor races would replace local militia in current game and players will be able not only to fight them, but they will have the possibility via diplomatic features to ally them. So actually playera will be able to gain new planets thru diplomacy instead of colonising. And finally these alliances could bring players new specific techs, they could somehow boost income rates, researching or culture, or they could provide supporting fleets in battle - all depending on minor race characteristics. IMHO that would be fun.

I was imagining a campaign for Sins would go something like Supreme Commander; the threat chasing Vasari arrives, and forces the three other races to co-operate against the new enemy. The new enemy being the fourth playable race in MP and skirmish. Oh well, maybe in Sins 2..

Anyway, looking forward to the Diplomacy beta, i need to learn to play Sins again.