![sins of a solar empire nexus sins of a solar empire nexus](https://staticdelivery.nexusmods.com/mods/214/images/108663_1.jpg)
In HWs it's obvious that the more ships survive, the better, but the preservation of ships is not planning. Stategy (IMO) begins when you have to PLAN for more than one battle. But as HW it has a linear storyline that more or less automatically excludes STRATEGY.
![sins of a solar empire nexus sins of a solar empire nexus](https://media.moddb.com/images/mods/1/18/17952/Nexus.png)
It's a tactical spaceship battle simulator. In HWs it has a little something that lasts from one battle to another, but Nexus for instance had far greater consequences (experience of the ships, the weapons that were placed on them) and nobody - not even developers - never tried to present it as a strategy game. The next battle is predetermined, no strategic planning of the attack or movement. What I'm saying is that the result of this battle bears little consequences on the game in general. It's almost the same as in Warcraft where each battle begins from 0. I like their story a lot, but that's all there is. There is no empire building, all they have is a story. No, HWs don't have a single fight, but neither do they have a strategy behind the battles. I guess I'm answering to both Inert and Schematic. unless they're board games or something.Īs far as I knew, neither Homeworld 1 or 2 fights were over after one engagement. TBS games are usually so slow that anyone can copy the move. I've never seen an RTS game that lets me do a strategy that few people can copy. 10 year olds are almost always the fastest. which is unusual of most RTS games where they're dominated by 10 year olds. But you had to be more then fast to win that game, you had to be smart.
#Sins of a solar empire nexus full
All of them going from practically full health to NO health. And then BANG! One side would make two or three mistakes in a row and ALL their units would die in under 3 seconds. attacking units had to be retargeted constantly so htey weren't attacking something htat was either reversing or impossible to kill. repair units had to be constantly retasked. units loosing too much health had to be brought off the front line for 5-10 seconds. Both players had to react VERY quickly to maintain their army in that mess. The game was famous for two huge armies clashing and not a single unit dying for like 20 seconds while all the weapons fire was absorbed by shield units or repaired faster then any unit could die. That said, some games are all about speed. Often players in real time games will stop to think about something which means they're effectively skipping turns. what is important is always doing something. you don't have to wait for them to do something. The thing with real time games also is that it's ALWAYS your move. I can commonly beat a enemy two to five times my size in real time but in turn based it always seems to be a numbers game. I like real time strategy more because you have more flexibility with what you're doing.