Though, again, I'm pretty sure there is a campaign in the works, and it'll probably be worth playing, consider the difficulties: do you start with zero research each mission? Why, from a storlyine point of view? And if not, then what about the entire research element of the game?

Do you colonise from scratch at the start of each game? Why, from a storyline point of view? And if not, what about the entire expansion element of the game?

Do you, as TEC, need to explore the map at the start of each game? Why, from a storyline point of view? And if not, what about the entire exploration element of the game?

When the Advent and Vasari turn up, why do they need to research and build warships? Don't they already have fleets? They are invading, after all.

Heaps of the 4X elements of Sins make no sense in a storyline campaign. So is the game is reduced to "mash known forces together over and over and over"?

Well no, there are ways to do it, but it'd be hard. Look at the GalCiv campaigns. It's a 4X, and they have a campaign that preserves all the elements of a 4X - but the problem there is, it sucked horribly. Can it be done in Sins? Maybe. I think it'd be pretty cool to have, say, a fully developed TEC civilisation, but with no warships at all, when an Advent invasion turns up. Perhaps a mechanic to "scrap" merchant ships, to convert into warships, or a process to actually strap guns onto the previously merchant-only capships. Maybe have a fleet retreating into the rim, to colonise around the pirates - that'd let you explore and expand in a storyline context.

Vasari might only be able to send the Evacuator alone in an intergalactic jump, tasked with grabbing a foothold and building gates to let the rest of the fleet come over. Research could be seen as simply rebuilding the capacity to construct known designs.

Advent is hard. They arrive with all their tech, all their ships, in an invasion. Perhaps you could have a splinter, cut off by the Vasari arrival? Or a scouting force that discovers Awesome Magic Device X that needs to scramble to build up industrial capacity to beat the other factions trying to get same.

...but in each and every case, what do you do in the second mission? In the first you research, build, expand, explore, develop, win. Then what? How do you reset for a next mission? Why are you starting again, again? How fast would that seem contrived? Tech tree limits always seem fake, and make the game feel like a bit of a drawn out tutorial. But unless you limit or reset them between missions, you'll just be playing with cruiser fleets every game.

So maybe it can be done, but I think there's about as much potential in - perhaps player made - scenario maps. Link them with a storyline, set each up to fit, perhaps use some triggers, and there you are. Campaign.

You have to remember... this is a 4X RTS... the whole point behind it is building (and hopefuly keeping) your empire, but in real-time...

I love C&C... in fact, after pre-ordering and finishing the game i've been playing C&C3 (skirmishes) constantly for the last couple of months. However, a similar type of campaign just won't work here... it will take away the whole "epic" 4X element that attracted most of us to this game in the first place.

That said... a story that advances with triggers would be awesome... That would give more personality to the races and the lore, and you it would allow us to get much more involved in the game universe.

I also say this from the perspective of a mostly solo player... I LAN now-and-then, but mostly real life kinda limits the time to do that

Homeworld's campaign 'story' was daft if you ask me (lol we killed the giant empire by ourselves with magical nanolathes cause we are Israelites lol). GC was better, but GC's format (dropships etc) leant itself to that sort of thing and the levels were heavily scripted (thus boring after one go).

It's sad that people talk about 10-year old games as examples why games 'must' have campaigns. I'd agree that they've definately become worse lately (SupComs campaign is famously boring), but people who think Warcraft had 'a good story' need to read more books. 4X games generally don't have campaigns because 4X players generally aren't interested in a linear progression through a series of scripted levels explaining some programmer's idea of high fantasy at a glacial pace.

Good games HAVING campaigns in no way means games are good BECAUSE they have campaigns. Correllation does not equal causation and all that. But I guess the RTS market demands huge timesinks. I don't care if there *is* a campaign (GalCiv2 has many campaigns, but I can safely ignore them) but I don't want dev time wasted on something so useless when there is actual work to be done.

I"m pretty annoyed at the lack of a campaign. If one isn't released via download, and I have to buy an expansion to get the campaign, I will be angry. Any type of game like this should have one. Its a basic component of gameplay to many people, especially with such a highly developed story.

It wouldn't be hard with any group. The advent invasion might not be at full tech level. Or you are simply in command of an attack on one small sector of TEC space. There are many ways to do it. Same with Vasari. They are a migratory civilization on the move. Perhaps their campaign starts at the point the battle with the TEC grinds to a halt. A new commander is assigned to one sector while the majority of the fleet battles on near the TEC homeworld. Limited resources due to always being on the run, so you have to build you area and begin to secure the resources to mount a secondary front.

Lots of ways to do it guys, just takes a bit of imagination. With the setting made in such detail, I expect a campaign from them. Heck, I'm a writer. I'd love to do it, but I have a thing for canon settings in games. So I'd prefer they did. Otherwise, the expansion won't make sense. : )

How bout a campaign in one map?

A one-game campaign.

I think it might be a little hard for IC though.