@@undecidedmajor1664 they have different firing ranges. frigates generally have much shorter engagement range than capital ships... if an infantry formation goes into battle, should all rifleman stand outside of effective fire range to keep formation with the snipers? or should snipers walk up with them to the line of engagement to engage in cqb?
Not first person, but looks cool. Wish there were more maps in HW3 and the missions weren't so short. Too heavily reliant on the space terrain as well. Compared to previous HW games, feels more like style over substance. Still a fun game. But not one you'd buy for $60. Speaking of first person, HW1 and Cataclysm had a first-person view for all ships. Wish they brought that back.
Wish they would have brought back context-sensitive unit chatter (e.g., it was sensitive to who they were attacking and other things... Such story-telling potential there!) and, more importantly, the comparatively complex unit behaviors (e.g., frigates facing the enemy while retreating or turning to absorb fire on a side with more armor). I was hoping this game would have built off of the vision and achievements of the first games, but what we got just isn't even more of the same. So disappointing...
Everyone shitting on the game not knowing the squadron carried out the order perfectly. You got PDCs engaging small targets on the way to the carrier, and all units did start attacking the carrier. Watch the HP of the carrier plunge as soon as they engage. Look closely and you will see the destroyer maintains good distance by turning to the side and sending in torpedoes which wrecks the carrier. The game is not broken.
For real people have zero clue what’s really happening, I’ll admit there are some issues with units cancelling commands given randomly but aside from that everything works great.
Most of the criticism I've read of the game isn't about how units behave, it's almost exclusively about how the game feels soulless and cheap when compared to the originals. One of the bigger complaints around gameplay is that every ship feels...weaker, softer, than they used to be. Also, the destroyer behavior is exactly like it was for HW2, broadsides backed up by guided torpedoes.
WTF.... This is Homeworld 3? So happy I didn't purchase.... Nebulous: Fleet Command is a much more faithful representation of what we all really want in a tactical fleet simulator ;)
Didn't you target the carrier with the whole group? Then the destroyer just turned to the the side as the rest fired? This game does not look like its been play tested.
have any of the critics even played ANY homeworld game? hiigaran destroyers have ALWAYS turned sideways to broadside the enemy. if you look at the bottom of the destroyer, 2 turrets are lined up right behind the other, so it's more effective to turn so all 3 turrets are able to freely track at the target
Sorry for your difficulty. In this context it is because the gameplay usually far zoomed out in a wider third person so despite this technically being third person as well its close up in an individual ship or what is commonly referred to as a First person perspective. I understand First person shooters have altered typical usage of the term
No, please. This is not 1st person by any sensible definition. Where are "you" in this clip? Are you floating and orbiting around the spaceship in person? It's 1st person only when the viewpoint is tied to a person's perception directly. That's the very definition.
That's where the portrait orientation of shortform content is a stupid idea. You can't take in the breath of what's going on around you and everything feels so claustrophobic.
never built a single destroyer or battlecruiser, because I had full cap when they were available. Finished the game with over 50 destroyers and not a single one was Hiigaran :D
Really it's just the campaign that's unfixable, and that's because of the story. It has some memorable levels in terms of gameplay scenarios. I think everyone is guffawing at the bizarre cut-scenes and embarrassing script dialogue. When it comes to War Games and Skirmish it's pretty solid. My bet is it'll be worth purchasing after a few major updates, patches, and fixes. Maybe grab it when it's on sale in 6 months or so.
It is mid. Most battles can be won by pumping ships out non-stop up to cap, hitting F4, and sending the swarm at the enemy. Unit abilities barely matter and are a pain to use, ships are clunky and don't always respond to orders well, and honestly there isn't much strategy in this real-time strategy game. Also, for a game from a series known for it's strong storytelling, the state of the single-player campaign is an embarrassment. It's beautiful, it's got some great set pieces, and I wanted to love it...but, if you're thinking of buying, wait for a sale and some patches.
Waited for this game for so long, yet there's so much issues with the mechanics and structure that even homeworld 2 still does better. Wtf happened during development is anyone's guess.
They do fire, just not in these large tracer volleys that you see from the frigates. They have more weapons and prefer to use their long range weaponry like missiles or heavy cannons
@@admiralmallard7500Formation are bad, ships just get in to position and never split up to evade or focus more than one target. Even fighters do not evade in formations. You can not atack move - a combat maneuver from older games, where you would be able to choose target and then move your ship in 3D space to avoid its main cannons, when facing it with your front. There seems to be no side armor, even armor seems to be bad, coz things die quickly and it is not rock, paper, scissors, just a bloob smashing and tower defense. The range of some ships seems off or bugged. Only a few maps, small like student`s room. A lot of mechanics are gone: no subsystem (you can not target engines), no hyperspace jumps for flanks, projectiles seems to be not simulated, no evade stance, which moves most power to engines, so fast units can live for a long time, no collisions, pathfinding seems to be bad... And whatever more which is already covered somewhere. Oh, and there are only a few units and some of them look almost the same... Music and graphics are at least good, but it is not a gallery.
@zbigniew2628 Some of those are valid, though attack move is in the game and directional armour technically exists, with more damage at the rear of ships. Subsystems were not that big a deal, though depends on who you ask. Hyperspace isn't in as it would invalidate the terrain being there. I dont get the criticism of ships though, they fit the homeworld style and barring a lack of some strike craft there's still a variety
@@admiralmallard7500 Attack move is not in game.... Try to shoot a ship and then move sideways or below it... Are you sure about rear armor? Coz in testing by someone who knows stuff much more than I or you it shows that there is none. I heard that some in game dialogue mentions rear / side armor, but people say it is only a text, not reality of gameplay. Hyperspace would not invalidate terrain, at least not completly, coz you can jump only with bigger ships... Also they should just add hyperspace disrupters or something, so you can not jump somewhere. Also the speed of vehicles is off... Fighters are not much faster than mothership, just a little bit. Anyway, Volound said enough about this game. Ah, even in this short the ship was not shooting and it was a simple atack order...
should a snipers continue marching in formation into close quarter combat? or should a rifleman sit with their snipers outside of their own engagement range? not sure what you want them to do, ships have different effective ranges. you want everything in a single formation, build only one type of unit or something
It is. The hiigarin destroyer here relies on its torpedoes for heavy enemy ships and stays out of enemy firing distance. If it was a ship of a different variety, say a frigate, it would close in to engage with guns.
