Right now i am playing Homeworld 2. Great game


There is some surprisingly very good astronomy in this game.

In one mission you hyperspace into an asteroid field. The asteroids are all very far apart from eachother. Most of the area is made up of samll pebbles of asteroids or gass. No star wars asteroids in sight.

Resourcing has you mostly sending resource collectors towards a large resource rich asteroid and mine it. Not every asteroid contains the necesary materials.

Another mission descrobes the breaking up of a ancient ship. This ship brok apart 10,000 years before current time in the game and due to time the pieces of the ship has spread out over a very large area.

The spaceships act and looklike real spaceships. Instead of banking, most ships stop forward motion and turn on its axis. Large capital ships movie like they have a ton of mass, and small strike craft movie like they should. If a craft blows up while in motion, it will continue to move as it blows up.

I am only a third of the way throught the game. I will say more good astronomy as it develops.

__________________
"It takes Thousands to fight a battle for a mile, Millions to hold an election for a nation, but it only takes One to change the world."
G'Topia

Did you play the first two Humph? They were much the same.

Good
- solar radiation can damage ships
- inertial model for fights (as you described)
- big ships can ram smaller ships (fighters can kamikaze into hulls, carriers can 'bash' their way out of an ambush
- weapons are fairly conventional, still use of guns/mass drivers, no "lasers."

Bad
- nebula are too densely packed. IIRC if you were in a nebula you would have a hard time knowing, similar to walking through a very light fog.
- asteroid fields too close (looks like that's fixed) and large.

It's a good experience though - suspension of disbelief pulled off beautifully!

I plan to buy this one soon. =D>

__________________
bunk: Empty talk; nonsense.
de·bunk: To expose or ridicule the falseness, sham, or exaggerated claims of.
http://home.iprimus.com.au/eddo/images/fredheadtsp.gif

Gah... Now you are making me want to buy a new computer so I can play it! Is it worth it?

I loved the first one. Mmmmm... Barber's Adagio for strings on arranged for voice. And they must have pulled images from APOD or something for the background: it reminds me of this picture of M82. At least, I'm pretty sure that was the picture it reminded me of... Does anyone know where they got that background?

__________________
"What do you care what other people think?" -- Richard Feynman
"For a successful technology, reality must take precedence over public relations, for nature cannot be fooled." -- Feynman, at the conclusion of his Challenger report

Not being a classical connoseiur, I must beg you to describe the scene you recall... All the soundtrack in it just plain ruled.

Yup i played the first two. :-)

The nebulae fields can be seen up close, but i think that is alowable so you know you are in one. :-)

So far of the ships i play they have gotten rid of the "ram" ships. But i have not seen all of the ships yet. Most likely because nobody used them effectively.

Also i have not found any kamakazi yet.

This one does have close asteroid fields. But you do not see hundreds of them withing a few feet of eachohter. Most are miles apart and in small clumps of differing sizes.

I will try to take a screenshopt sometime to show you what i mean.

They did gewt rid of that awesome artillery gun in Cataclysm and the ability to combine ships. Which i did like in cataclysm. too bad. :-(

OMG....i feel oh so left out.....

being an avid gamer......never played Homeworld.

Im ashamed... Gonna go link-bounce...hmm **walks away in shame**

__________________
All your PX are belong to us
"I refuse to accept criticism from someone who's hiding under a table"
-Arthur

For the background, I meant the one you see more and more of over the course of the game: the galactic center. It looks a lot like that picture I posted of M82. The Adagio for Strings was the music you first heard at the beginning of the 3rd mission in Homeworld when something goes wrong (I don't want to ruin it for digitalspector, who is GOING TO GO AND BUY HOMEWORLD RIGHT NOW! I mean that. Really. You must.). I can PM you freddo, if you want me to remind you. You should look up a copy of the original: it was written for a small string ensemble, and is so wonderfully sad and moving.

__________________
"What do you care what other people think?" -- Richard Feynman
"For a successful technology, reality must take precedence over public relations, for nature cannot be fooled." -- Feynman, at the conclusion of his Challenger report

That's good, but I was referring to the tactic rather than class of ship... When you try and blow up the AI motherships (kadeshans to be specific) they often tried to close and collide with your frigates - I hate losing ships so I was madly peforming pincer maneuvers to avoid getting whacked - which resulted in a deadly spiral in space...

Once again, tactic not class. It was an order you could give to any fighter class ship in the fleet... The computer pilot would say something brave and smack full pelt into the target. I didn't do this much because the damage is ineffectual, and often the only thing that could kill my fighters were other fighters...

[-X Must play - essential.... :wink:

Oh, the music from Platoon - yes I know it very well - love it! Always gives the spine a tingle! The voice replacement made it all the more spectacular and haunting...

Now I know what you mean about the 'map.' Didn't it depict a spiral galaxy? Will check this and let you know what I find...

__________________
bunk: Empty talk; nonsense.
de·bunk: To expose or ridicule the falseness, sham, or exaggerated claims of.
http://home.iprimus.com.au/eddo/images/fredheadtsp.gif

for a good listing of some of the ships in HW2:

http://well-of-souls.com/homeworld/h..._hiigaran.html


Not all of the ships are lsited, but most.

Gaaah! No! Barber's Adagio for Strings! Not the music from Platoon. :P It was written long before that!

Not really. Or, rather, it probably depicted an edge-on spiral. Very bright in the center, dimming toward the edges but with small areas of light where there were clusters or nebulae. I really should go and play it through again.

__________________
"What do you care what other people think?" -- Richard Feynman
"For a successful technology, reality must take precedence over public relations, for nature cannot be fooled." -- Feynman, at the conclusion of his Challenger report

That's all I knew it as - it's the same basic stanza yes?

Certainly I'm not going to claim that's the title...

I loved the first Homeworld, didn't get to finish though. And now when I try playing it, it makes my computer unstable. :-?

I'll definitly have to check out HW2, just finished WC3:TFT so need something new to play soon.

HW2 is exactly like HW except it works much slower on my old comp... Not a bad game though... The introduction looks VERY nice.

So uh... "hyperspace" is good astronomy huh? Must've missed that one on Scientific America (on second thought I don't really read SA).

Also, there's no sound, music, or monotone voice acting in space... At least that's what I've heard... Maybe their space is filled with ether?

Anyway, back to playing freecell... the most astronomically sound game in space.

CRAP, ITS OUT AND I DIDN'T KNOW!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Took it too far didn't you... This falls under 'communications' in my book. I don't recall Apollo flying blind.

You're right about the sound in space though - in the first game's manual they talked about how the sound is simulated for the pilots to enhance their combat awareness. It's a cop-out , but they did think of it.

@freddo:
I was joking... See this is the problem with these forums, people think you are being serious if you don't express yourself with smilies or abbreviations like "LOL" or "ROFL" or "LMAO"...

Of course that's the explanation they opt for; it's the same one used in Starwars...=D>

Funniest bit of irony in your post - moi was joking too!! See I don't like the emoticons either!

Its called Agnus Dei. Thats the adagio for strings name when its performed vocally apparently (i think i learned that from someone here..this place is educational in so many ways!). It conveys such longing to me and is one of the best uses of music ive heard in a game. The choir in homeworld is i believe a Washington DC area choir though i cant remember which one.

The original game had ion cannons on several ships which is as close to lasers as that game got.
Im glad the asteroid fields are better. The flying though the moving asteroid field mission was not only bad astronomy but got it really tricky looking after 100+frigates hopefully with this one i won`t have that frustration again.

Homeworld was a spectacular game. I still break it out every now and again just to get the blood pumping with some of the scenarios where you can get ungodly large fleet action going in a full three dimensions.

The integration of fleet strategy, aggression levels, supply and refuelling. Capital ship tactics vs. starfighter tactics, research, and material harvesting, its got everything you could want in a strategic level game.

I still get a kick out of one scenario where I was able to blindside another player by flanking him while I approached openly with my mother ship surrounded by missile cruisers. Seeing the Carrier come up from underneath of him with a sphere of 40 multigun corvettes to shred him from the rear was utterly priceless.

That and my favorite tactic of surrounding my mothership with a swarm of those little capture corvettes. Nothing more hysterical than to see a squadron of cruisers and frigates come into view only to be completely overwhelmed and captured for my use.

If you want great voice characterization, go get the first person starfighter game called Tachyon. They have Bruce Campbell doing the voice of your character, complete with the signature wisecracking and commentary. Its absolutely hysterical.

__________________
The last time I felt a warm fuzzy feeling, I was informed by my doctor that it was just gas.

One BA point for both Homeworld series is that space seems awfully bright for some reason. Any realistic region of space (short of the surface of a star) should be very dark due to the fact that there is nothing to reflect light... Even if there is a light source the contrast should be extreme; instead of the kind of nice, warm, earth-like feeling in the game.

does anyone know if any of the homeworld games have been ported to the mac? i ask purely in the interest of... um... science... yeah... science.

sorry. i looked on a few search engines for mac games and could not find one for the origonal. Maybe on e-bay or something. But i can't guarantee anything. :-(

Games...for a Mac...um...ok :P

Try this link, it may have some useful information

I've never tried this game you speak of, Humphrey...but I only play Dark Age of Camelot and Photoshop...

__________________
~Brad - Astropaparazzo
http://signaturedigitalimages.com

[just stopped some late night studying. :-)]


It is a very fun game. It is a real-time strategy game (RTS) with space elements, a great storyline, and some of the best sound/misuic out there even today. With HW2 you do not need to play the first two (Homeworld and Homeworld: Cataclysm), but i reccomend it.

If you liked any of the Age of Empires series, or anything similar like Warcraft, you will absolutely love Homworld.

I won't lie to you, there are some people who do not like RTS games. They iether don;t have the time to play four a hour-hour and a half at a time, or just do not get into the feel of the action like they do with their favorite FPS (First Person Shooter) or RPG (Roll playing game? <--Not too sure about that one). Sure you can save the game at any point, but most internet and multiplayer games you can't.

Homeworld was uniqe and origonal because of its inovative management system, resource system, fully 4 axis movement in the world, a large number of unique ships, amazing graphics for the time, great storyline , and finally the music.

The plot of the game is that you are a small enclave of outcasts on some distant world. For thousands of years you have searched for your common history, your past. Then on one fateful day the great hyperspace core was found. Along with this hyperspace core a tablet showing that the origin of your race, your homeworld, was not the planet you now reside on. This hyperspace core allowed you to build a giant mothership to travel the stars in search of your homeworld.

But as you test your ship a great enemy comes and destroys your fellow exiles. all that is left is you and the crew abourd your giant mothership. So you take a journey searching for your homeworld. You meet strange races of beings in magnificant ships who impart starnge knolege on you and how you came to be. You will buoild great fleets of ships under your controll to fight and take back your home.

I will not ruin the rest for you. That comes with playing the game.


Just remeber, this is not a bunch of fanboys spouting how their game rules over all the rest. I have heard of very few game critics that hated it. It is definitly on a list of "must own" games.

__________________
"It takes Thousands to fight a battle for a mile, Millions to hold an election for a nation, but it only takes One to change the world."
G'Topia

*grin* I enjoyed it (the original Homeworld), but I could never get past the first few missions. I think my main problem is with understanding and using formations. (Note, I'm going to get a lot of terms wrong, it's been a couple of years since I've stopped trying to play homeworld.)

Thing is, fighters in formation appear to just sit there and get shredded, and I've never figured out how to get fighters to break formation and attack (aka dodge fire!) I don't set them to ultra-aggressive.

There's a mission very early in the 2nd campaign game where you have to drive off an attacking pocket-carrier of some kind. Doing so with fighters makes sense (cap ships have a hard time against fighters), but mine always get creamed for some reason, with no real effectiveness against the cap ship.

Doing so with corvettes brought a little more success, but not much. Even using repair ships to repair the corvettes as they fought was not much of an improvement.

Even a combined arms approach wasn't as effective as it should have been. Getting the corvettes to lure the fighters away and hitting the pocket carrier with the fighters should have been a good approach. But the corvettes just get wrecked and so do the fighters.

I think that my question boils down to this: While I think I have a handle on the strategy and logistical elements of the game, there is a major flaw in my tactical handling. Based on my description above, can anybody see something obvious I'm doing wrong?

2nd Campaign Game? I presume you're referring to Catyclysm? If so I'd bet you're talking about the Taidanni cruiser that's left beat up after the big fight. The thing is that you don't want her to manuver and bring the heavy guns to bear on the ships. I don't know if you built a ramming frigate as you don't have to in the first mission but I did for the hell of it and by ramming the ship you can immobilise it for a while and let the fighters wail on it. Also, if you can build a processor do so. That thing has a lot of guns early in the game and it can repair your fighters to boot.

In the newest one the ships will break formation and surround a ship of the fighting gets on for a while. But usually they stay in for mation.

What i usually do in HW2:

Frigates have a hard time dealing with strike craft. I usually build at least 15-20 groups of strike craft (mostly bombers with a few interceptors). Then i have about 10 torpedo fr4ogates, 5 ion frigates, a destroyer, and a splattering of gun and pular corvettes. This is my main force. I will then send a diversion force of three or so strike craft to bring away at least some of their more anoying crafdt, mainly their own strike craft. I will then hit hard, and fast at their main anti cruiser/frigate armament. Then i will destroy subsystems of the mothership and carrier so they have to take time to rebuild their forces.

During theis time i will take the carrier i moved up to a position nearby and repair my ships. One repaired i will sednn the force back in to tottaly cripple their forces.


Then my mean strewak comes in. I will usualyl take a small amount of craft6,. sometimes a single strike craft and just slowlly, very slowly kill off the guy whule my main force kills anything he/she creates.



But this tactic does change as situations develope. In HW it is very, very hard to pl;ay a defensive game. IT is a very offensive oriented gam,e. With the advent of stationary turret guns, defense has become alot easier, it is still hard with the super cruisers that can destroy most ships with a single strike.


With yuor strike craft i suggest is right befor a attack to drag select a few of them, then tell to attack a object, then do the same with the next group untill all of the craft are seperated. This then seperates the craft into several smaller groups. Thus they do not sall get smasshed at once.

...post derailed...

Anywho, there are only 3 axis (namely x, y and z) in terms of movement in HWII... Not exactly sure what you meant by the fourth axis... yaw? You can't really specify that.

One point worth mentioning though; are the crafts in the game using projectile weapons? would that be an efficient weapon to use in space? Also if we were to ever develope intersteller warfare would it be safe to say that projectile weapons would be completely avoided in favour of the missile or perhaps more sci-fi-ish, energy based weapons?

Well they're all there:

Mass drivers or projectile weapons are used as the cheap mainstay weapon on the field - technology is well known and easy to produce - according to the game

Missles have prevalence, but are really only useful for taking down smaller craft - where the missile's maneuverability comes into play

Energy weapons are used - gravity manipulation and ion beams to be specific

Mainly the reason the missles aren't the be all and end all in Homeworld is that many of the craft are so large and slow - that simply throwing a chunk of highly accelerated mass (a gun) is sufficient to guarantee a hit.

__________________
bunk: Empty talk; nonsense.
de·bunk: To expose or ridicule the falseness, sham, or exaggerated claims of.
http://home.iprimus.com.au/eddo/images/fredheadtsp.gif

I think a projectile weapon would actually benefit from being in space.

It would have a pretty much flat trajectory.

It would not lose velocity over time and distance since there's no atmosphere or gravity to slow it down.

So your range and accuracy would improve. Though current weapons would need modifcation to be usable in space. Modern smokeless powder needs oxygen from the atmosphere to work (ironiclly, black powder makes it's own, and would probably function). But this doesn't seem like a big challenge to me.

I know they're not as fancy and spectacular as energy weapons from a sci fi movie, but they do their job and do it well. There hasn't been a whole lot of innovation in the realm of artillary and firearms in the last 70 years or so, but then nor has there needed to be.

Course a real energy weapon probably wouldn't be much to look at either. Lasers are invisible in a vacuum unless your looking straight into the beam (and it's in a visible spectrum of light). I have no idea what a weapon based off a particle accelerator would look like though.