IS vs stars in shadow

[Zhen2010]

Both games seem similar turn based strategy games

anyone played both for significant amounts that can contrast the differences and pros/cons of either.

[i_nive]

Already asked on SiS forum 3 months ago: https://steamcommunity.com/app/464880/discussions/0/3112522283868375202/

And there are at least a couple more threads comparing it with SiS on SiS forum (~ year old).

[Nate]

ISG is very slow to progress. Even with all of the sliders set to 200%. Many, many turns are needed to complete a game. Larger the map, the longer it takes.

The planet build-up in ISG is really boring and somewhat tedious. Pretty much exactly the same steps repeated on each planet.

Space combat in ISG is clunky and quite tedious when you have a large number of ships. My last, version 1.3 game, I used auto-combat for almost every battle.

AI opponents in ISG are not good at expanding. Played my last game using version 1.3 on hard difficulty with all of the sliders at 200%. I expanded twice as fast as any of the other AI opponents. Some of the AI opponents looked like they had hardly taken any new planets. This is probably the largest current problem with the game.

I have hundreds of hours in SiS. SiS doesn't have the deficiencies I listed above.

[coyote720]

I appreciate balanced, unbiased comparisons between games. The last poster (he would want me to mention his name) sadly failed to do this.

[lonetrav]

Nate님이 먼저 게시:

...Larger the map, the longer it takes.
...
The planet build-up in ISG is really boring and somewhat tedious. Pretty much exactly the same steps repeated on each planet.
...
AI opponents in ISG are not good at expanding. Played my last game using version 1.3 on hard difficulty with all of the sliders at 200%. I expanded twice as fast as any of the other AI opponents. Some of the AI opponents looked like they had hardly taken any new planets. This is probably the largest current problem with the game.
...

- The first point is certainly true. By choosing the map size players decide how long the game takes. This has nothing to do with "slow to progress".

- Planet build-up: Depends how you do it. If you repeat the same steps on each planet, it does get boring indeed.

- AI opponents: "Sliders at 200%" means double production and research speed compared to the default value. I guess the slider settings were applied to the player's but not to the AI empires. By default, their sliders are set to 125% at hard, compared to 100% for the player. "Hard" means that the AI empires get a few starting advantages (which lose relevance over time) plus said 25% bonus to production and research speed (which is applied throughout the game). Increasing your sliders to 200% means the AI empires don't have a 25% bonus anymore, but your production and research speed exceeds theirs by 60%. You shouldn't be surprised that you outperform the crippled AI empires.
Don't blame the game!

[Nate]

No, "all of the sliders at 200%". Me and the AI had sliders all at 200%. The production build-up in this game is somewhat tricky to optimize. Believe I have it figured out fairly well but the AI fails at it. For example, you hardly see them take asteroid belts and they don't use them for production.

Probably should have set the difficulty at Impossible, instead of Hard. Maybe the AI would then start taking planets?

[lonetrav]

OK - sorry for misinterpreting (edit: it still means you took away the 25% production and research bonus from the AI). Well, in my games (on hard or above) the AI does take objects, if it thinks it's worth it. All in all, on hard or above the AI empires make decent opponents for me (might speak against me rather than for the AI though :-)).
With that said, they don't all act in the same way - some are more aggressive, some are more "peaceful" (which means they pursue their goals in other ways). "Some of the AI opponents looked like they had hardly taken any new planets" sounds like a correct observation. But all of them?
Another aspect is that the AI empires want to WIN THE GAME, not the battles against you. If they can defeat you in other ways, they may not bother to fight any battles against you.
I remember one game, where I won the battles, but lost the game. One AI empire kept me busy by attacking planets and outposts with small ships, while another built up strength silently, without attacking, and surpassed me in terms of production and research. When I found out, it was too late.
Have you ever finished a game? And have you disabled the default voting victory condition? I think it changes the AI behaviour (I've been playing without voting from the beginning, so I can't compare myself).

[Obi-Van-Hamster]

Does this look like an AI that doesn't expand?

https://steamcommunity.com/sharedfiles/filedetails/?id=2527390652

Btw, i'm the one in the bottom right.

[Dorque]

Nate님이 먼저 게시:

ISG is very slow to progress. Even with all of the sliders set to 200%. Many, many turns are needed to complete a game. Larger the map, the longer it takes.

The planet build-up in ISG is really boring and somewhat tedious. Pretty much exactly the same steps repeated on each planet.

Space combat in ISG is clunky and quite tedious when you have a large number of ships. My last, version 1.3 game, I used auto-combat for almost every battle.

Just came to the forum to ask about this. Compare the number of turns to build a colony ship (good baseline) with any other game. Or even basic attack ships. Three finished planets took from turn 100 to 150 to make a fleet.

I'm going to reinstall Star Drive 2.

[eddieballgame]

Attaining an Election Victory is easy on Viceroy/Hard...one game in 85 turns.
Playing without that option makes for a more challenging game. imho
Pace of the game is really good, in fact slowing down research to 50% feels better...again, imho.
The exploration part is implemented in a unique & brilliant manner...unlike other similar titles.
What I really like is how much tougher it is to create 'op' fleets of the best ships.
There is much to do to ensure an economy that can produce & grow in a timely manner & there are settings that can aid in this for those that prefer a lesser challenge.
Even 'Das got hooked, recently, on this game because of the depth & brilliance of the game design.

[Cyber_Wizard]

I do feel confused on either buying this or star drive 2 (tho no sale but looks interesting!)

[coyote720]

BlackGinger님이 먼저 게시:

I do feel confused on either buying this or star drive 2 (tho no sale but looks interesting!)

The SD2 developer many years ago walked away from his project, leaving it a buggy mess. Now I've heard years later he has been fixing the game with free patches. So, maybe it's good now.

Contrast it to these developers who are actively developing IS:G, and they are very active in the community and quick to squash bugs. IS:G is fun and stable. It's like an updated Master of Orion 2 but even better with some clever new features.

[lonetrav]

Dorque님이 먼저 게시:

... Compare the number of turns to build a colony ship (good baseline) with any other game. Or even basic attack ships. Three finished planets took from turn 100 to 150 to make a fleet ...

Depends how you do it. There are ways to speed up ship building considerably, and there are ways to get colony and other ships for free very early in the game. Choice and diversity are among the biggest strengths of this game.
I never build any ships in my colonies before they are capable of doing it productively. Until then (and to improve productivity) I invest in infrastructure, environment and culture (all of which play a different and bigger role than in most other games here).
That it takes "three finished planets" "from turn 100 to 150" "to make a fleet" doesn't say anything without additional information about the three planets, the fleet, and, not least, what you've done to improve construction productivity. And there are very different ways to play and win this game, not all of them require the ability to build fleets quickly (as long as you achieve and maintain superiority in other ways).
Comparisons are always problematic, especially when you don't exactly understand what you compare.

[ghost88]

Nate님이 먼저 게시:

No, "all of the sliders at 200%". Me and the AI had sliders all at 200%. The production build-up in this game is somewhat tricky to optimize. Believe I have it figured out fairly well but the AI fails at it. For example, you hardly see them take asteroid belts and they don't use them for production.

Probably should have set the difficulty at Impossible, instead of Hard. Maybe the AI would then start taking planets?

I play on lower difficulties because I play to kill time not to annoy my self with wars.
However in every game I've played I can not remember the AI not exploiting asteroids.
May not be the optimal use of them but I almost never use the for production.
I use them for much needed money and research as putting the slider to 50% production, building the robo plant, and choosing the middle production modifiers have me rolling in production points.

[Nate]

So I just completed an Impossible game with my and the AI sliders all at 200%. Yes, the AI expanded a little. Not as much as it should have.

Game start settings:
https://steamcommunity.com/sharedfiles/filedetails/?id=2526360194

Population growth graph after winning:
https://steamcommunity.com/sharedfiles/filedetails/?id=2529241849

Map after winning:
https://steamcommunity.com/sharedfiles/filedetails/?id=2529242102

Note that I was playing the empire with very slow pop growth, -50%. You can see only one other race did somewhat well on the pop graph before I took all their planets.

Look at the humans in blue in the lower, right of the map. They only took 2 additional stars after 133 turns. Lots of stars down there not even touched.

ISG isn't terrible. Find it relaxing to play. With Stars in Shadows I could easily lose if I had a bad start. And that was without cranking the difficulty past Hard in Stars in Shadows. Fail to push out in the start of a SiS game and wasn't many turns before the AI would colonize those planets.

[Nate]

eddieballgame님이 먼저 게시:

Attaining an Election Victory is easy on Viceroy/Hard...one game in 85 turns.
Playing without that option makes for a more challenging game. imho
Pace of the game is really good, in fact slowing down research to 50% feels better...again, imho.
The exploration part is implemented in a unique & brilliant manner...unlike other similar titles.
What I really like is how much tougher it is to create 'op' fleets of the best ships.
There is much to do to ensure an economy that can produce & grow in a timely manner & there are settings that can aid in this for those that prefer a lesser challenge.
Even 'Das got hooked, recently, on this game because of the depth & brilliance of the game design.

The exploration of the star map and the ruin exploration are quite good aspects of ISG. I also like the hero management and use. The tech tree is also quite good. Most techs have a definite impact after you get them researched.

Not everything about ISG is awful. However, some very important parts need a lot of improvement. Slow planet build-up. Clunky combat. AI that doesn't expand aggressively.