MultiCore-Support?!

devs had said repeatably that it will not happen.

I belive it would require completely rebuilding the game engine... so... expect it for SINS 2.  nothing sooner.

And, honestly. your wrong.  As galaxy sizes get bigger, the quantity of stupid dumb shit goes up.   I dont want to have upgrade the logistic slots 50 times, and build 200 trade ports.  not to mention, you have a severe fleet supply limit... which, means that due to the way stackings and repair, and everything works... if everything is maxed out, you cant realy split up your fleet into more than 2 main forces, and still be effective in battle... too many planets and not enough choke points means that the game devolves into fleets playing round robin, where both fleets never battle eachother, instead a cycle of bombing, and annoyng rebuilding.  the huge multistar is about (maybe even past) the limit of the size of the game as far as gameplay is concerned.

I do think that limiting the star's phase lanes to certain other stars, instead of every star on the map would help this problem.

If you have the Diplomacy expansion and log onto Ironclad Online, you can get to experience some Sins love the ancient Greek way (when you get "made love to" by human opponents in a real Sins game).  In all seriousness, if you love the game you should give it a try.

Oh goodness Yarlen! Now what does that mean?!

I really do think that increasing the amount of research entities (thus deepening the game) significantly helps with multi-star maps. Distant Stars as well as a few others in the past have done this very well while keeping the game balanced.

Personally, i am for scaling the game bit down, when it comes to Sins 2, similar to what Supreme Commander 2 did compared to SupCom 1. Its still a big scale game compared to likes of StarCraft 2, but you do not need to be constantly zoomed to orbit and actually enjoy the eyecandy.

I completely agree with PBHead regarding the relation between scale and repetitiveness... its definitely true, more systems means more of the boring stuff to do. I enjoyed old Conquest Frontier Wars tremendously, that game had 16 systems max (although starsystem was really a starsystem, it contained more planets unlike grav wells of Sins), but it always felt good, like a true grand-scale game. Less systems will mean shorter match time and not so deep research trees, i am all for it. The biggest weakness of Sins is its multiplayer due to its slow pace, Sins 2 needs to be definitely more like Conquest.

Make that an optional thing. Some of us like the deep, long games that are scaled big. I'm not a big fan of MP and enjoy a long, big scale game that takes a while. But I also understand that others like the MP and agree that going large scale can be annoying. So an optional setting would be nice.

I would largely have to agree with Ryat. The reason that I and our LAN group enjoy Sins so much is that you can have long large massive wars. It is what makes it so much fun. We'll play a 'campaign' over the course of a Saturday, a weekend, or a couple weekends depending on what we would like to accomplish. That's where we get our fun out of Sins.

I have 'tested' the Multiplayer several times (not very much at all)...it is definetely funny.

But I also REALLY enjoy a big scale game that takes 10 or 20 or 30 hours...

This is a HUUUGE bonus which sins have compared to other games. No matter what circumstances may exist, Sins 2 MUST HAVE the possibility for players that they can make 20+ hour games with hundreds of planets and thousands of ships.

In addition, for example for Sins 2, it is no problem to realize that.

I mean Sins Diplomacy does have really nice graphics and is 32bit and does have a single-core engine.

Considering the fact, that Rebellion is not realesed yet, we would NOT see Sins 2 before 2012, probably 2013.

Right now 4GB is nearly standard, 8GB of RAM is not rare.

Even in 2012 8GB of RAM will be standard and 12 or 16GB won't be rare.

Right now QuadCores are affordable for nearly every gamer.

Octo-Cores will be buyable in 2011 so 2012 Octo-Cores or even 8+-Cores-CPUs will be affordable for nearly every gamer...

And talking of graphics cards - my AMD HD4870 has enough performance for Sins at highest details and in 2012 we will probably see the AMD HD8870 and nVidia GeForce GTX780...

So with Sins 2 having a 64bit multi-core engine the game would get SO MUCH perfomance out of the future hardware...

New features, bit improved graphics and so on and the game would cost lets say 50% more perfomance than Sins 1.

But with the 64bit multi-core engine it would get like 10 or more times more performance...

With a good engine thousands of planets and ten-thousands of ships would be realizeable

^ Yes!

Great minds think alike, Ryat. I personally like long and big scaled games that take me days to complete. Sometimes I do like a shorter one, but mostly long and I've never tried the MP side yet. 

Keep up the great work with DS, I'm loving it!

Only thing I can think of with SINs to make it even more interesting than more tech and longer game play if desired would be the option to have the tech somewhat randomized so you never quite know what 'life' will deal you. That idea comes from playing Sword of the Stars where the tech trees will randomize some of the available techs. (example, there are  50 possible techs for your race but only 40 available slots. Some trees in the randomizing would not be added to the availability list for that game.)

Hell. No. If they even consider doing anything to Sins 2 along the lines of SupCom 2 besides general performance enhancement, I will punch kittens . SupCom 2 ruined Supreme Commander, and the same fate should not befall Sins.

totally agree with kyogre12, davidfalcon ,boshimi & ryat in that I WANT epic length(20+hours) on epic size(5 or more stars 200+ planets), and even did play these size games back in vanilla (1.05) days, but the most frustration back then was the weak defences as sins then was the bigger fleet wins, at least with entrenchment & diplomacy the defences can slow the attacks significantly. and also am enough of a programmer to realise that multicore/multithreaded programming IS an artform STILL, and could take two or three years(at best) to even get to an alpha state on the game engine.

harpo