Why do we have to start out at war with everyone?

Well the background of the game is that you are at war... So yous tart off at WAR...

Oh, come on - that's a lousy excuse. We know it will end up in war, but I agree that in an free-for-all, we should not start at 0% happiness with everyone. 50% and ceasefires, or maybe a little bit less, would be nice. This is a game of strategy - we don't shoot on sight, but rather backstab when we are sure of a win.

Ben

Well, maybe there could be an empire building mode and a battle zone mode, but all in all I don't mind starting off at war with everyone. Some of the missions are annoying though, and impossible to achieve.

Actually, it's not at all a lousy excuse. Everything in this game is done with a purpose. You're starting off being set up for a 3-sided conflict, and it's up to you how to resolve the war - not decide whether to go to war or not.

This is of course different from some turn-based games, but that's the theme of Sins

Ah, so if the title doesn't have "war" in it, the game should be called "Diplomacy"? I think not.

Might as well complain about the lack of diplomacy in Dawn of War. Space marines should just cuddle those orks! LOL.

Yeah, I don't mind the way it is tbh. It fits the lore and provides some interesting options for strategy. Should I ally with this one or that one?

But pitting a race versus another faction of the same race? How would that play in? The lore - what unfortunately little there is of it - doesn't seem to have any reason for intrafaction hostilities, and by the same token there is no definite animosity between Vasari and Advent. Goodness, if we're to pull the "lore" card, shouldn't each faction start with more than just a homeworld? Shouldn't there not be pirates? Shouldn't most of the tech tree already be explored? I don't think the lore of Sins factors in to this discussion.

I really feel that Sins, of all RTSs should start with parties relatively neutral to each other. While players ought to have the right to break the ceasefires right off the bat - and non-free-for-all games should have the alliances appropriately at a state of war with each other - I feel that new players in particular are at odds with a supposedly non-locked AI starts off the game loathing their guts.

Advalary - Starting in a ceasefire opens the floor for choosing which allies to choose with even greater strength. You can assess demands and the other party's status in the galaxy without having to worry early on about needless, pathetic skirmishes. All of this could lead to even greater epic battles at the end, with parties involved feeling still closer for the decisions they made near the beginning as to with whom they would ally.

Ben

By the way, don't construe the first paragraph as a tirade against the game lore. I really do enjoy the material I see - especially concerning the Vasari - but I certainly don't see enough of it to satisfy me. I hope Ironclad makes some way to enjoy the plot within the context of the game. Perhaps - by golly - a campaign, radical as that may seem.

If you want a game that starts out neutrally, and caters to different paths to victory, you'll probably like Galactic Civilizations II, which was also made by Stardock. It is much more rounded of a game, and by that I mean your nation feels more like a nation, with diplomacy, culture, espionage, and trade being much more important. If you aren't at war, there's still lots to do.

Sins is not that scale of a game; it's a combat game, and it fills its role quite well. But, if you aren't at war, the game is kind of empty. This isn't really a game about diplomacy, or there would be more options. Thus why you start off hostile to everyone; it's the ultimate point of the game.

Also, in my opinion, the games last long enough as it is, without having an era of early game peace to let everyone tech up to their ultimate weapons. But, having some sort of Start Neutral option might be an interesting option to add before starting a game, for those interested in such. But really, whether you start off with a cease fire, or form a cease fire, is really an unimportant detail.

It would be nice to not start at war with everyone. At least it would in single player, which is all I can play because of my crappy dial up. When you do a mission for another race, they wont agree with anything, and their happiness towards you goes away before you get another mission, so its near impossible to be diplomatic with the AI.

Gotta disagree with the OP. The TEC is locked into a life and death struggle with the Vasari who invaded the TEC unprovoked. You're not going to get any quarter there. The Advent is on a holy war of revenge against the TEC. You're not going to get any quarter there either.

How about this? - In a SP game, or MP with some AIs, the AIs that are of the same race as you, you have a 50% 'likeability' with them. Enough to call for a cease fire if you want it, but you don't have to if you don't want to. The other two races, however they're spread among the remaining AIs, you would start at 0%, and would need to do some work if you really want to ally with them.

One thing that hasn't made much sense to me, in SP, is that say in an 8-player game, I'm Tec, and say, 3 more AIs are also Tec. But we're all at war with each other, as well as against the 2 Advent and 2 Vasari, when it would make more sense if it were all the Tec players against the 4 alien factions. I had this exact situation in my last SP game, and ended up allying with 1 vasari and 1 advent, and wiping out the other Tec's, by the end of the game. Just my 2 cents, anyway.

Essentially, the initial state of war between factions in the game is a case of contextualization. There would be no game situation if things hadn’t broken down to a state of mutual hostility between all at the table. That’s the context; talks have failed and war is onrushing. Thus, you’re given one planet, minimal resources for the area and told “Go save the bacon, young man/woman/reptile-thing!”

Frankly, you might as well ask why you only start the game with one planet and not a vast panopoly of resource-rich worlds ripe to squeeze to fuel your hideous war machine. Because that’s not how it goes in the SP game and definitely not in the MP game.

Changing initial situational context is the place of scenarios, custom maps with different setups, etc. Which can and will be made (likely moreso once we get some better documentation on the scrupting system, etc). Within custom galaxies/maps, you’ll see a lot of variance.

If you want to play with friendly AIs right now, there is an easy way: start a SPgame. Set unlocked teams, then change a couple of the AI’s to be on your team. With unlocked teams, they can fall off but you start off with a Peace Treaty and it’s all downhill from there.

Good luck, soldier.

The counsil of the DessanT empire votes that all enemies should start out with at least 75% and have cease fire on until it drops to 0% and trade allances should not be breakable.