.com.unity Forums - MOO3 finished!

Page 2 of 4

Show 50 post(s) from this thread on one page

.com.unity Forums (http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/index.php)

- Space Empires: IV & V (http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/forumdisplay.php?f=20)

- - MOO3 finished! (http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/showthread.php?t=8401)

Fyron

January 26th, 2003 11:29 PM

Re: MOO3 finished!

Yes I did. They got rid of the hit points and fire power scheme. So, medieval musketmen can now defeat modern Tanks, a lot. That is completely absurd. If it happens once after playing for like 100 hours, that is fine, and assignable to an anomoly. But if it happens a lot, then there is a problem.

They killed off Civ 2 ToT, which was the best thing to happen to Civ since the original release of Civ 1. There were so many awesome advancements made in the genre with ToT that they dropped completely. Thanks to the egomaniac otherwise known as Sid Meier.

Bombardment hardly does enough to matter. I have watched 32 bombers bomb a city, and do a total of 1 point of damage. That, again, is absurd.

The AIs cheat way too much to be enjoyable. They trade their techs with each other really cheaply, so you have a very hard time keeping up, esp. at higher difficulty levels.

Shall I continue?

Puke	January 27th, 2003 12:05 AM

Re: MOO3 finished!

could someone please take a break from bickering over the CIV/SMAC serise and the failings of games that crash every 10-100 hours, and give me an SE4 player's perspective on MOO3?

lets face it. tons of people left se4 because they thought that even a year after its release, it was still in 'beta.' it has given me tons of RCEs from the unmodded game and integer overflow errors, until some very recent patches within the Last year. the strategic combat still has some problems, and the simulator is still useless. and frankly, i dont care if you spend $2 on a meal, or $50.

please put that aside for a second, and if anyone has the game, shell out some facts about the gameplay. how are the features? how is the combat, and economics, and politics? can it be played well multiplayer, without realtime connections? can games be saved so realtime games can be continued later? how is the AI, and minister control? how is the customization? how does it stack up to SE4?

I care only a little bit what reviewers say. I want to hear the real story from people here, because as SE4 players, your oppinions count more.

Graeme Dice

January 27th, 2003 12:24 AM

Re: MOO3 finished!

Quote:

Originally posted by Imperator Fyron:
Yes I did. They got rid of the hit points and fire power scheme. So, medieval musketmen can now defeat modern Tanks, a lot. That is completely absurd. If it happens once after playing for like 100 hours, that is fine, and assignable to an anomoly. But if it happens a lot, then there is a problem.

It's hardly absurd that musketman can defeat modern tanks, especially in a good defensive position. Unless, as I've already said, you somehow believe that those are the same exact soldiers that you trained several hundred years before. Modern tanks are still vulnerable to infantry, and molotov cocktails will still cause them plenty of problems.

Quote:

Bombardment hardly does enough to matter. I have watched 32 bombers bomb a city, and do a total of 1 point of damage. That, again, is absurd.

And how many structures and population points were destroyed during this bombardment? Military units are not likely to be severely damaged during a bombardment from bombers, as that represents WWII level technology. The whole city of Berlin was nearly destroyed but the military still was functional. The point of bombardments is to destroy the population and improvements of a city so that your units can overcome the defenders.

Quote:

The AIs cheat way too much to be enjoyable. They trade their techs with each other really cheaply, so you have a very hard time keeping up, esp. at higher difficulty levels.

The AI's are quite willing to trade those technologies with you, which is the best way to keep up with them. After most of them have a technology, the price is low enough that you should be able to afford it. Once communism is researched, you can switch to democracy and blow past the AI in research as it starts to conscript troops for its defense.

Quote:

Shall I continue?

The things you've pointed out are fairly minor gripes.

Fyron

January 27th, 2003 12:34 AM

Re: MOO3 finished!

Quote:

It's hardly absurd that musketman can defeat modern tanks, especially in a good defensive position. Unless, as I've already said, you somehow believe that those are the same exact soldiers that you trained several hundred years before. Modern tanks are still vulnerable to infantry, and molotov cocktails will still cause them plenty of problems.

Please explain to me how men armed with arquebuses can defeat tanks, with anti-personal machine guns on them. Modern tanks are not vulnerable to men with arquebuses.

And how many structures and population points were destroyed during this bombardment? Military units are not likely to be severely damaged during a bombardment from bombers, as that represents WWII level technology. The whole city of Berlin was nearly destroyed but the military still was functional. The point of bombardments is to destroy the population and improvements of a city so that your units can overcome the defenders.[/quote]All the bombardment did was 1 damage to a unit. Nothing else was destroyed. No population, no buildings. This happens a lot, with all types of bombardment units. Catapults, cannons, ships, everything. I sit there, bombarding with tons of units, turn after turn, and nothing gets done, except maybe 1 or 2 points of damage to a unit, or population.

Quote:

The AI's are quite willing to trade those technologies with you, which is the best way to keep up with them.

No, you misunderstand. They are only willing to trade them to you for a lot more than the worth of what they are trading. But, they are always willing to trade for little to other AIs, even on the turn they receive the tecnologies.

Quote:

After most of them have a technology, the price is low enough that you should be able to afford it. Once communism is researched, you can switch to democracy and blow past the AI in research as it starts to conscript troops for its defense.

The price goes up with every tech you trade for, regardless of who you got it from. I have never seen them ask less for a tech that they all have.

Quote:

The things you've pointed out are fairly minor gripes.

Only in your opinion. They are mostly severe flaws in the combat system (or lack thereof) that make the game less than fun to play.

Graeme Dice

January 27th, 2003 01:39 AM

Re: MOO3 finished!

Quote:

Originally posted by Imperator Fyron:
Please explain to me how men armed with arquebuses can defeat tanks, with anti-personal machine guns on them. Modern tanks are not vulnerable to men with arquebuses.

Yes, modern tanks are vulnerable. In order for musketeers to have a 10% chance of defeating a modern armour unit while defending, you have to have the unit in a metropolis, on a montaintop, river square, and be fortified. This multiplies its defense by 2.5 times. In a situation like this, where a single combat Lasts for four months(three attacks per turn for the tanks), there are plenty of occasions for a musketman to kill the soldiers, or disable the tank. After all, the attackers don't spend their entire lives inside the tank. The terrain is also completely unsuited to the tank, and perfectly suited to the infantry. In open terrain, you have tank traps, mines, and everything else the game abstracts away.

Quote:

All the bombardment did was 1 damage to a unit. Nothing else was destroyed. No population, no buildings. This happens a lot, with all types of bombardment units. Catapults, cannons, ships, everything. I sit there, bombarding with tons of units, turn after turn, and nothing gets done, except maybe 1 or 2 points of damage to a unit, or population.

I highly doubt that this is the case, unless you are trying to use low-tech units to bombard high-tech ones.

Quote:

No, you misunderstand. They are only willing to trade them to you for a lot more than the worth of what they are trading. But, they are always willing to trade for little to other AIs, even on the turn they receive the tecnologies. The price goes up with every tech you trade for, regardless of who you got it from. I have never seen them ask less for a tech that they all have.

Then you have not actually attempted this strategy. It works, and is one of the standard methods to play. You can play an entire game where you perform no research, and simply buy tech advances.

I assume that you never play on a difficulty level less or greater than monarch then, so that the AI doesn't get production bonuses, and you don't either? Otherwise, what you are complaining about is that the AI makes the game too hard, which is easily remedied by choosng an easier difficulty level.

Quote:

Only in your opinion. They are mostly severe flaws in the combat system (or lack thereof) that make the game less than fun to play.

In my opinion, they are what make the game worth playing. It is unrealistic to assume that high-tech units will _always_ beat low tech ones.

Fyron

January 27th, 2003 01:50 AM

Re: MOO3 finished!

Quote:

Yes, modern tanks are vulnerable. In order for musketeers to have a 10% chance of defeating a modern armour unit while defending, you have to have the unit in a metropolis, on a montaintop, river square, and be fortified. This multiplies its defense by 2.5 times. In a situation like this, where a single combat Lasts for four months(three attacks per turn for the tanks), there are plenty of occasions for a musketman to kill the soldiers, or disable the tank. After all, the attackers don't spend their entire lives inside the tank. The terrain is also completely unsuited to the tank, and perfectly suited to the infantry. In open terrain, you have tank traps, mines, and everything else the game abstracts away.

What you are trying to do is rationalize the absurdities in the combat system. It doesn't work. These are not men with low grade rifles, they are men with arquebuses. One small round bullet, which you have to pack in with the gun powder to the gun. Such guns can not penetrate a tank's armor, period. Sure, it is theoretically possible, but highly unlikely. The tanks get defeated on open terrain too. These musketmen don't have mines and such.

Quote:

I highly doubt that this is the case, unless you are trying to use low-tech units to bombard high-tech ones.

Nope, trying to bombard equal and lower tech units. It happened all the time when I tried bombarding, even with absurd numbers of units.

Quote:

Then you have not actually attempted this strategy. It works, and is one of the standard methods to play. You can play an entire game where you perform no research, and simply buy tech advances.

Ok, so unless you spend all your trade on taxes and then buy everything, you fall behind. Sounds like fun to me.

Quote:

I assume that you never play on a difficulty level less or greater than monarch then, so that the AI doesn't get production bonuses, and you don't either? Otherwise, what you are complaining about is that the AI makes the game too hard, which is easily remedied by choosng an easier difficulty level.

I am complaining that the AI cheats too much. Not a simple bonus to remain competitive, but cheating. I stopped playing the game long ago because it was no fun. So, of course the rampant cheating is insurmountable with my skill at civ 3. Had the game been fun, I could probably have played enough to learn how to cope with the cheating. But, it wasn't fun, so I stopped playing.

Quote:

In my opinion, they are what make the game worth playing. It is unrealistic to assume that high-tech units will _always_ beat low tech ones.

It is unrealistic for large numbers of high tech units to be required to defeat low tech units. The problems happen with things like Pikemen too. Tell me how men armed with Pikes (and nothing else) can defeat tanks? They simply can't, unless you artificially create a lot of bizarre circumstances in their favor. In 99.99% of situations, the pikemen would be slaughtered without any danger at all to the tank. But in civ 3, they can defeat the tanks.

steveh11

January 27th, 2003 02:35 AM

Re: MOO3 finished!

Well, this thread doesn't have much to do with MOO3 anymore...

I own and still play SMAC, especially the expanded variant (Alien Crossfire). I played Civ2 for years. I never bought Civ3 because of gameplay issues I'd read about - this is the first I've heard of it having other problems. But I had been considering getting it despite these because:

I own and still play Europa Universalis - more recently EU2 - and that definitely had bugs and 'features' that needed work, but it was a fun thing to play even out of the box, and Paradox worked hard with the user community to improve it.

Similarly, SE has improved over the years. I still play that too - obviously!

Even a hard-core wargame such as Uncommon Valor from Matrix Games is now up to Version 2.20, having fixed many gameplay issues, and some more serious faults. (I don't own this yet but I'm likely to buy it in the next couple of months or so.)

So I think that in general it's wrong to think that you'll get a finished, polished product at first issue. As complex as games like these have become it needs 'road testing' to fix it within the limited resources of the companies we buy from. Yes, even EA - Last I looked they didn't have the budget of the US military, and look what they sometimes come up with! http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon7.gif

Steve.

Graeme Dice

January 27th, 2003 02:42 AM

Re: MOO3 finished!

Quote:

Originally posted by Imperator Fyron:
What you are trying to do is rationalize the absurdities in the combat system. It doesn't work. These are not men with low grade rifles, they are men with arquebuses. One small round bullet, which you have to pack in with the gun powder to the gun. Such guns can not penetrate a tank's armor, period. Sure, it is theoretically possible, but highly unlikely.

And if you understood the combat system at all, you would realize just how unlikely it is. Without any modifiers, a modern armour will defeat a musketeman 98.64% of the time.

Quote:

The tanks get defeated on open terrain too. These musketmen don't have mines and such.

Ahhh. So what you are saying is that these musketmen are actually 400-1000 years old by the time they fought your tank. Why don't they have mines and such? To say that they don't is to be irrational.

Quote:

Ok, so unless you spend all your trade on taxes and then buy everything, you fall behind. Sounds like fun to me.

Quote:

I am complaining that the AI cheats too much. Not a simple bonus to remain competitive, but cheating.

There is no difference between a bonus to production and trading research. Both are cheating.

Quote:

I stopped playing the game long ago because it was no fun. So, of course the rampant cheating is insurmountable with my skill at civ 3. Had the game been fun, I could probably have played enough to learn how to cope with the cheating. But, it wasn't fun, so I stopped playing.

So basically, you couldn't beat the game at as high a difficulty level as you could play the other games, so its obviously the games fault that you don't understand the game.

Quote:

It is unrealistic for large numbers of high tech units to be required to defeat low tech units. The problems happen with things like Pikemen too. Tell me how men armed with Pikes (and nothing else) can defeat tanks?

This is an artificially constructed dilemna that you have built for no reason other than to convince yourself that the combat system is severely flawed. Pikemen can defeat tanks in several ways that I have already explained. If not, then apparently the Russian civilians in Leningrad didn't actually manage to defeat a single German tank. You cannot explain away the fact that a single attack from a tank represents an entire four month campaign.

Quote:

They simply can't, unless you artificially create a lot of bizarre circumstances in their favor. In 99.99% of situations, the pikemen would be slaughtered without any danger at all to the tank. But in civ 3, they can defeat the tanks.

BZZZT. In Civ 3 they are defeated 99.5% of the time.

What you see as a "severely flawed" combat mechanism, I see as standard, and expected, statistical variation.

Rollo

January 27th, 2003 03:14 AM

Re: MOO3 finished!

Quote:

Originally posted by Puke:
could someone please take a break from bickering over the CIV/SMAC serise and the failings of games that crash every 10-100 hours, and give me an SE4 player's perspective on MOO3?

lets face it. tons of people left se4 because they thought that even a year after its release, it was still in 'beta.' it has given me tons of RCEs from the unmodded game and integer overflow errors, until some very recent patches within the Last year. the strategic combat still has some problems, and the simulator is still useless. and frankly, i dont care if you spend $2 on a meal, or $50.

please put that aside for a second, and if anyone has the game, shell out some facts about the gameplay. how are the features? how is the combat, and economics, and politics? can it be played well multiplayer, without realtime connections? can games be saved so realtime games can be continued later? how is the AI, and minister control? how is the customization? how does it stack up to SE4?

I care only a little bit what reviewers say. I want to hear the real story from people here, because as SE4 players, your oppinions count more.

Well said, Puke. So are there any news about MOO3?

Graeme, Fyron, please stop the bickering (or make a new thread for that). You both have to realise that none will convince the other.
Agree to disagree, give a hug, and be happy...

Rollo

Phoenix-D

January 27th, 2003 03:15 AM

Re: MOO3 finished!

"Ahhh. So what you are saying is that these musketmen are actually 400-1000 years old by the time they fought your tank. Why don't they have mines and such? To say that they don't is to be irrational."

Because they're not armed with such. I have only simple knives for weapons; this does not imply I have been around since the knife was invented!

Why WOULD they have mines? They're main weapon certainly doesn't indicate they would.

Phoenix-D

Baron Munchausen

January 27th, 2003 04:11 AM

Re: MOO3 finished!

The bombard problem at least is easily solved. Use the editor to change the power of the bombarding units in the .mod file. http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon7.gif With some thought you might be able to re-value the attack and defense of the whole collection of units in a way that makes things work better. Is the maximum combat attack and defense value known? It might be 255. http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon7.gif

Desdinova

January 27th, 2003 06:12 AM

Re: MOO3 finished!

phoooey. moo3 still not out. not until 2/25/03. but a least it sounds like it will make it out this time.

Suicide Junkie

January 27th, 2003 06:42 AM

Re: MOO3 finished!

I would like to know how a Battleship can attack a coastal city with Phalanx guarding it, and LOSE.

I mean, seriously!

Pointy sticks vs Steel Armor ship floating far enough away to fire shells.

When I lost two battleships in a row that way, I'd had it, and just nuked the freaks, half expecting the nuke to lose too.

Krsqk

January 27th, 2003 06:58 AM

Re: MOO3 finished!

According to my Civ2 docs, they introduced the hitpoint thingy because of such freak accidents. Now it seems they've taken it back out? http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/image...s/confused.gif

Graeme Dice

January 27th, 2003 08:20 AM

Re: MOO3 finished!

Well, on the subject of silly combat results. I once heard that in Civ 1 a fortified rifleman in a city successfully defended itself from a nuke. The nuke did explode, but it lost its combat round.

Fyron

January 27th, 2003 09:48 AM

Re: MOO3 finished!

Quote:

Originally posted by Krsqk:
According to my Civ2 docs, they introduced the hitpoint thingy because of such freak accidents. Now it seems they've taken it back out? http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/image...s/confused.gif

Yes, that is one of the worst problems with Civ 1.5 (or Civ 3 as they claim it to be).

Graeme:
I understand how the combat system works, and it is not very good.

Quote:

Ahhh. So what you are saying is that these musketmen are actually 400-1000 years old by the time they fought your tank. Why don't they have mines and such? To say that they don't is to be irrational.

Because THEY ARE MUSKETMEN, not modern units with mines. Saying they have mines is highly irrational, and an attempt to explain the absurdity of the combat system.

Quote:

So basically, you couldn't beat the game at as high a difficulty level as you could play the other games, so its obviously the games fault that you don't understand the game.

No, I understand the game perfectly. The AI cheats more in Civ 3 than Civ 2, which requires different tactics. I simply did not spend the time developing them, because the game is not any fun. I resent your accusation that I only see problems with the game because I suck, and am whining about that. I think an apology would be in order for that.

Quote:

This is an artificially constructed dilemna that you have built for no reason other than to convince yourself that the combat system is severely flawed. Pikemen can defeat tanks in several ways that I have already explained. If not, then apparently the Russian civilians in Leningrad didn't actually manage to defeat a single German tank. You cannot explain away the fact that a single attack from a tank represents an entire four month campaign.

I don't need any convincing. Russian civilians did not fight like medieval pikemen, nor have the more limited knowledge of them.

Quote:

BZZZT. In Civ 3 they are defeated 99.5% of the time.

What you see as a "severely flawed" combat mechanism, I see as standard, and expected, statistical variation.

Seeing it once is a minor irritation. Seeing it repeatedly is a flaw.

Lemmy

January 27th, 2003 10:04 AM

Re: MOO3 finished!

I'm sceptical about moo3, it has very low requirements:
Windows� :

300 MHz Pentium II or better
128 MB RAM
8X or faster CD-ROM
400 MB Hard Drive Space
Direct X 8.0 Compatible Video Card (must be able to display 800x600x16bit)
DirectX 8.0 Compatible Sound Card
8 Player Network Play via TCP/IP (LAN or Internet)
Windows 98/ME/XP
Macintosh� :

G3 Macintosh - 300 MHz or Better
Macintosh OS 8.6 or Better
128 MB RAM
CD ROM 8X or Better
TCP/IP Internet capable connection for Multiplayer Play

Which could be seen as a good thing off course, but the main thing that interests me, is the AI, and consequently the wait between turns, and those usually need more processing power.
And then there is course this minor thing about he reolution being fixed at 800x600....i hope it can run in window, so it will still look sharp on the bigger monitors http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon10.gif

[ January 27, 2003, 08:06: Message edited by: Lemmy ]

couslee

January 27th, 2003 10:50 AM

Re: MOO3 finished!

this is turning into a real troll thread.
two quotes
"keep off the grass"
"don't feed the animals"
two more
"never enter the arena of debate with those unwiling to learn"
"never enter into a battle of wit with an unarmmed person"
take them any way you like.

BACK TO THE TOPIC.

Has anyone actually bought MoO3 and if yes, how is it?

I really hope it's a good game. I have friends that raved about MoO2, but I could never find a copy. It was too old by the time I heard of the series. I found an old Version of MoO(1) Online and DLed it, but never got it to work. (some extended memory issue that I have no idea how to work around. no biggie). I really like the 4x TBS genre' but there is a lack of new games in that. I am really hoping MoO3 is not garbage. I am also looking forward to Stars! Supernova also. I heard that is being released soon too.

[ January 27, 2003, 08:53: Message edited by: couslee ]

couslee

January 27th, 2003 11:00 AM

Re: MOO3 finished!

Lemmy, I read at the MoO3 forum they intentionally tried to keep the requirements low, but still add some nice 3D effects. The target group for this genre' is mostly older gamers and they usually have older or lower end machines. If you play a game for it's playability and not eye candy, then you don't need all the newest hardware.

Fyron

January 27th, 2003 11:12 AM

Re: MOO3 finished!

MOO3 is not out yet. You can't buy and play it.

couslee

January 27th, 2003 11:19 AM

Re: MOO3 finished!

Quote:

Originally posted by Imperator Fyron:
MOO3 is not out yet. You can't buy and play it.

Your right. So I jumped the gun a little with the question. Wouldn't those that pre-ordered it have it yet? No issue. at least the question is there when it does hit the shelves. lol
my bad

Fyron

January 27th, 2003 11:43 AM

Re: MOO3 finished!

Pre-ordering just means that they will be able to pick it up from the store they pre-ordered from on the release date. Or, if they pre-ordered from a web store, copies will be shipped to them first, but still not before the release date.

Graeme Dice

January 27th, 2003 04:29 PM

Re: MOO3 finished!

Quote:

Originally posted by Imperator Fyron:
Because THEY ARE MUSKETMEN, not modern units with mines. Saying they have mines is highly irrational, and an attempt to explain the absurdity of the combat system.

DavidG

January 27th, 2003 05:21 PM

Re: MOO3 finished!

Quote:

Originally posted by Graeme Dice:
<blockquote>quote:<hr />Originally posted by Imperator Fyron:
Because THEY ARE MUSKETMEN, not modern units with mines. Saying they have mines is highly irrational, and an attempt to explain the absurdity of the combat system.

Perrin

January 27th, 2003 05:30 PM

Re: MOO3 finished!

http://www.imagemagician.org/images/...postfu/moo.gif

I have been waiting for this for quite some time.

Ragnarok

January 27th, 2003 06:49 PM

Re: MOO3 finished!

Quote:

Originally posted by Perrin:
http://www.imagemagician.org/images/...postfu/moo.gif

I have been waiting for this for quite some time.

Look! A cow!... Oh wait, wrong thread... Sorry...

Puke	January 27th, 2003 09:17 PM

Re: MOO3 finished!

perhaps this thread should be renamed to

ARGH! Musketmen sank my battleship!

Lemmy

January 27th, 2003 10:50 PM

Re: MOO3 finished!

Quote:

If you play a game for it's playability and not eye candy, then you don't need all the newest hardware.

[rant - not directed at couslee specifically...you just triggered it http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon7.gif ]
Having higher requirements DOESN'T mean the game is all graphics! http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon8.gif
Higher requirements can make the game a lot better by having a complexer and more advanced AI.
I'm so tired of TBSers accusing anyone who even comments about low requirements of being a teenage kid playing Doom3 on their 2.4 Ghz computer bought by their parents, e.g. a graphics hippie.
These low requirements are either unplayable, or are seriously holding the game back a lot. Traditional AIs (which Moo3 has) NEED procesor power if it wants to be any good, how can a game be playable if the AI sucks, because the are keeping the requirements down
[/rant]

Background info on rant:
The other day on i was on IRC with a computer game reviewer, and we started talking about Moo3.
Well...here's the log.
It starts with me commenting on the fixed resolution:
[21:35] Lemmy> ugh...800x600 http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon9.gif
[21:35] JonahFalcon> Tough noogies, Lemmy
[21:35] JonahFalcon> This is a strategy game, not DOOM III
[21:35] JonahFalcon> I still have fun with MOO2.
[21:35] Lemmy> smac is strategy, which is 1024x768
[21:35] JonahFalcon> And features lower res, too
[21:36] Lemmy> yes, but moo3 is 800x600 max
[21:36] JonahFalcon> I hope you don't think strategy games need hot graphics to be good. LOL
(this is when i sort of annoyed...assuming i only care about graphics because i think 800x600 is a low resolution)
[21:36] Lemmy> resolution isn't about graphics
[21:37] Lemmy> il ike SMAC, smac has arguably the worst graphics of ant strategy game
[21:37] Lemmy> bigger resolution = more info = less windows
[21:38] Lemmy> less windows to click through
...
[21:46] JonahFalcon> If MOO3 is DESIGNED for 800x600, your argument about interface are invalid
[21:46] JonahFalcon> Plus, much more visibility with 800x600
[21:50] Lemmy> ehm, i'd say much more visibility at 1024, 1280
[21:50] Lemmy> or*
[21:50] JonahFalcon> Says who?
[21:50] Lemmy> you could see a lot more of the map with a higher res
[21:50] JonahFalcon> This isn't HOMM4
[21:50] JonahFalcon> Says who?
[21:51] JonahFalcon> You do understand the concept of resolution, RIHGT?
(had absolutely no idea where he was trying to go with this...)
[21:51] JonahFalcon> 800x600 does not mean "less info".
[21:51] JonahFalcon> It only means "less detailed"
[21:51] Lemmy> yes, as a computer science student, and programmer, i understand the concept
[21:51] JonahFalcon> As in, the # of pixels used to create an object
[21:51] JonahFalcon> Obviously, you're getting an "F" in classes LOL
(so now he's trying to be funny..without even reading my arguments)
[21:51] Lemmy> with more pixels, you can show more objects
( ^ see, my argument)
[21:52] JonahFalcon> I've been reviewing games for 15 years, and playing them for 25.
[21:52] JonahFalcon> How old are you?
(and that is his defense!? http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/image...s/rolleyes.gif )
[21:52] Lemmy> lol..
[21:52] Lemmy> i'm 20
[21:53] JonahFalcon> So, I've been reviewing games since you were in preschool?
(by now i just wanted to end the conversation, since this obviously wasn't going anywhere, but i didn't want to give him the satisfcation of feeling like he was right, so...)
[21:53] Lemmy> and...?
[21:53] Lemmy> you can't deny that a higher resolution can show more objects, at the same detail level
[21:53] JonahFalcon> No
[21:53] JonahFalcon> Wrong

well, after this the conversation just went downhill...but it did annoy me, since i was disconnected, and he left after some great monologue...and now he thinks he's right about the resolution thingie, and that i'm just a 20 year old scriptkiddie who plays Doom3.

(sorry for the long post)

[ January 27, 2003, 20:52: Message edited by: Lemmy ]

Fyron

January 27th, 2003 11:02 PM

Re: MOO3 finished!

Quote:

Originally posted by DavidG:
<blockquote>quote:<hr />Originally posted by Graeme Dice:
<blockquote>quote:<hr />Originally posted by Imperator Fyron:
Because THEY ARE MUSKETMEN, not modern units with mines. Saying they have mines is highly irrational, and an attempt to explain the absurdity of the combat system.

You're the one who has the problem understanding how high-tech units can be defeated by low-tech units over the course of a battle that Lasts an entire year or longer, not I.<hr /></blockquote>Actually I think he understands it perfectly. It's a flaw in the game. A phalanx attacking a battleship should lose 100% of the time. Why can't you just admit the game has a few flaws that just don't happen to bother you?<hr /></blockquote>Yeah... that part is even worse than musketmen defeating tanks. So what if the battleship is in harbor? What are pointy sticks going to do to it? Nothing. Those phalanx have pointy sticks and some primitive armor, nothing else. Otherwise, they would have been upgraded to different units.

Krsqk

January 28th, 2003 12:22 AM

Re: MOO3 finished!

Quote:

Originally posted by Imperator Fyron:
Yeah... that part is even worse than musketmen defeating tanks. So what if the battleship is in harbor? What are pointy sticks going to do to it? Nothing. Those phalanx have pointy sticks and some primitive armor, nothing else. Otherwise, they would have been upgraded to different units.

Umm...They're swimming in the harbor, and their pointy sticks are, umm, armor-piercing, and they happen to get a couple thousand lucky hits below the waterline? http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon12.gif

Fyron

January 28th, 2003 12:34 AM

Re: MOO3 finished!

Quote:

Originally posted by Krsqk:
<blockquote>quote:<hr />Originally posted by Imperator Fyron:
Yeah... that part is even worse than musketmen defeating tanks. So what if the battleship is in harbor? What are pointy sticks going to do to it? Nothing. Those phalanx have pointy sticks and some primitive armor, nothing else. Otherwise, they would have been upgraded to different units.

Mephisto

January 28th, 2003 12:35 AM

Re: MOO3 finished!

Yea, well, I think we all know the CIV3 combat system by now. How about discussing MOO3? http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon12.gif

Suicide Junkie

January 28th, 2003 12:44 AM

Re: MOO3 finished!

Quote:

The other day on i was on IRC with a computer game reviewer, and we started talking about Moo3...

Hehe what a stubborn, deluded fool.
Next time, ask him if he thinks a 27" screen shows more detail than a 14" http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon7.gif

Or ask him to set his desktop rez to 640x480 and tell you with a straight face that he still fits the same amount of info on the screen http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/tongue.gif

Desdinova

January 28th, 2003 12:51 AM

Re: MOO3 finished!

what http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/shock.gif ?!? you mean it doesnt? oh well so much for buying a 42 inch screen just to play video games. http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon9.gif guess i will just have to stick with my 10 year old 21" screen and upgrade the rest of the system. http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon7.gif

Fian	January 28th, 2003 01:59 AM

Re: MOO3 finished!

In regards to the questions about comparing MOO3 versus SE4, I can give you what I have heard from the MOO3 beta testers and my couple of days experience with SE4.

The big complaint about SE4 that I have heard is that it requires lots of micromanagement. MOO3 is supposed to minimize this. This can also be a drawback, however, as MOO3 apparently doesn't offer as wide a variety of options as you find in SE4. For example, you won't find Dyson Spheres or ring worlds in MOO3.

MOO3 offers an engaging storyline (I imagine like Alpha Centauri) that SE4 lacks. The AI is supposed to be good, while most seem to feel that the SE4 AI is weak (I have only played it personally on its easiest setting).

Combat is also an interesting feature of MOO3. While MOO3 is a turn-based game, the actual combat is real-time. It isn't supposed to be a click fest, however, as you have already divided your forces into multiple fleets before combat, and only give commands to fleets during combat. Combat also seems to have an interesting tactical mix. Like SE4, you have missles and fighters, plus you need ships equipped with point defense to defend against them. MOO3 also introduces two other styles of combat - short range versus long range beam attacks. Short range attacks are much more deadly than long range attacks, however the drawback is that you must get close to use it. To help you get close, stealth plays a major factor in battles. You don't see everything in the battle automatically, but you have to scout to see where the enemy ships are located and plan accordingly (helped by having scout ships with good scanners).

Graphics and sound will be, of course, much better than SE4, although people aren't exactly writing rave reviews about the graphics. Part of this is due to the game taking so long to develop. If this game was released when it was originally slated (2 years ago? I don't know to be honest), the graphics would have been better received.

Btw, you don't need a big computer to run a powerful AI. Chess programs have been beating me regularly with 1 second to think since at least the 486, so a Pentium 300 should present a decent AI. In fact, I have heard a lot of good things about the AI (like it was too tough and they had to tone it down for the easier settings). Of course, until people play it, we won't know for sure how good the AI is.

As for the CIV3 game conversation, I played the game a couple of times, and then got bored of the game. I won't say it was a bad game, but I certainly played CIV2 and SMAC much more. I didn't have crash problems with it, although there were balancing issues that they had to address in later patches like corruption penalties being too steep. I do find the Pro-Civ3 person's argument's lacking. I find one crash a week acceptable, maybe more if I play it tons, and most applications that I use meet that expectation. The arguments used to explain how a phalanx guy can ever defeat a tank are also quite lacking. It doesn't take a tank 4 months to defeat one phalanx unit. While the phalanx might not be 1000 years old, the technology that they are using is. On the other hand, if you said that 10 phalanx units managed to defeat a tank, I would believe it, due to running out of ammo and guns overheating. Russians and Chinese tried that tactic with a little success I think, but for the most part even the zerg style approach failed.

DavidG

January 28th, 2003 02:46 AM

Re: MOO3 finished!

Quote:

Originally posted by Fian:
MOO3 offers an engaging storyline.

Awww Crap!! Based on the games I've played computer programmers seem to confuse the term "engaging storyline" with "Intensly lame story that makes me want to jab an ice pick into my brain." The classic example of this being Metal Gear Solid. I hope they don't bombard us with 30 mintues story line clips (or more) like Metal gear does. http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/image...s/rolleyes.gif

Edit: Wow do people actually complain the SE4 has too much micromanagement? I thought it was pretty low for a 4x game which is one reason I like it.

[ January 28, 2003, 00:48: Message edited by: DavidG ]

DavidG

January 28th, 2003 02:48 AM

Re: MOO3 finished!

oops (see what happens when you try to edit a post so Fyron won't give you hell http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon9.gif )

[ January 28, 2003, 00:49: Message edited by: DavidG ]

Fyron

January 28th, 2003 02:53 AM

Re: MOO3 finished!

Quote:

Originally posted by DavidG:
oops (see what happens when you try to edit a post so Fyron won't give you hell http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon9.gif )

Great, now you are making me sound like some sort of post-nazi or something. http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/tongue.gif j/k

[ January 28, 2003, 00:53: Message edited by: Imperator Fyron ]

DavidG

January 28th, 2003 03:13 AM

Re: MOO3 finished!

Quote:

Originally posted by Imperator Fyron:
Great, now you are making me sound like some sort of post-nazi or something. http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/tongue.gif j/k

Ooops sorry. http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon9.gif http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/tongue.gif Well what do I know, I can't distinguish the 'Quote' button from the 'Edit' button

[ January 28, 2003, 03:47: Message edited by: DavidG ]

Fian	January 28th, 2003 06:21 PM

Re: MOO3 finished!

No, I don't think the storyline will be like Metal Gear Solid. I expect it to be more like the storyline you had in Alpha Centauri. Personally, I think it is a great idea, but unfortunately when it comes to a strategy game, you play the game countless times, but get the same story each time. Maybe they will figure out some way to present slightly different stories based on how you progress in the game.

Lemmy

January 28th, 2003 08:09 PM

Re: MOO3 finished!

Quote:

but unfortunately when it comes to a strategy game, you play the game countless times, but get the same story each time. Maybe they will figure out some way to present slightly different stories based on how you progress in the game.

GalCiv has found a way to do that, by some sort of random events, but not random events like in SE4.

Gargantua

January 28th, 2003 09:13 PM

Re: MOO3 finished!

Quote:

Originally posted by Fian:
No, I don't think the storyline will be like Metal Gear Solid. I expect it to be more like the storyline you had in Alpha Centauri. Personally, I think it is a great idea, but unfortunately when it comes to a strategy game, you play the game countless times, but get the same story each time. Maybe they will figure out some way to present slightly different stories based on how you progress in the game.

Actually, its already been figured out, there's a great strategy game that generates different stories everytime you play : King of Dragon Pass.

spoon

January 28th, 2003 09:29 PM

Re: MOO3 finished!

Quote:

Originally posted by DavidG:
Based on the games I've played computer programmers seem to confuse the term "engaging storyline" with "Intensly lame story that makes me want to jab an ice pick into my brain.".

Amen. I suspect, though, it will be more like Starcraft where you have the option to play through the story (campaign) but the replay comes in with storyless mayhem..

Quote:

Originally posted by DavidG:

Edit: Wow do people actually complain the SE4 has too much micromanagement? I thought it was pretty low for a 4x game which is one reason I like it.

There is a lot, I think, but it's avoidable by shying away from Large galaxies and units... Man, I hate it when I have to spend like 15 minutes launching mines. I'd rather have my worlds destroyed, I think...

-spoon

Desdinova

January 28th, 2003 09:35 PM

Re: MOO3 finished!

there was also a microprose game called Darklands that was fun to play. it had random encounters and even the main story lines did not always appear in the same locations. it was an adventure/phantasy rpg game base in ancient germany i think.

Wardad

January 28th, 2003 09:44 PM

Re: MOO3 finished!

Quote:

Originally posted by Fian:
MOO3 offers an engaging storyline.

Danger! Danger! Will Robinson!!!

They could be saying: The game play is lame, but you can amuse yourself by using our eyecandy to prop up a daydream.

If I wanted a lame story line with eyecandy I'd rent a movie for 3 bucks!!!

PvK	January 28th, 2003 10:03 PM

Re: MOO3 finished!

Quote:

Originally posted by Gargantua:
<blockquote>quote:<hr />Originally posted by Fian:
No, I don't think the storyline will be like Metal Gear Solid. I expect it to be more like the storyline you had in Alpha Centauri. Personally, I think it is a great idea, but unfortunately when it comes to a strategy game, you play the game countless times, but get the same story each time. Maybe they will figure out some way to present slightly different stories based on how you progress in the game.

Actually, its already been figured out, there's a great strategy game that generates different stories everytime you play : King of Dragon Pass.<hr /></blockquote>Yes, this is a very well done and unique design!

PvK

Puke	January 28th, 2003 10:14 PM

Re: MOO3 finished!

gonegold links to several good previews. while i think the whole 800x600 thing is retarded, and the irc chat with the developer displayed complete asinine immaturity on behalf of the developer, the game its self shows promise.

it looks like they kept the cultural / political system that they had originally proposed, where different government types can do different things with their domestic / forign policy.

it looks like the orion senate gives you alot of international relations and trade options, which sounds cool.

it looks like planets have alot of detail

i like the whole warp lanes idea, and it looks like they kept that.

on the down side, it looks like you have to play head to head, no emailing turns. no auto-resolving combat, as far as i can tell. fleet combat looks to be structured well though. build fleets, and give orders to them rather than to ships.

on the weapons front, there are missiles, fighters, short and long range weapons. thats all you REALLY need in life. a balance between short and long range, and a few different types of things to create a rock-paper-scisiors effect. stealth / ecm is supposed to play a big role in those ships being able to get up close to use the short range weapons.

no word on mod-ability, or customization outside of the in-game options. without the ability to play via email, i dont know if i will ever get to play this one multiplayer. without the ability to customize or mod the game, i dont know if i will play it longer than a month or two. might be one of those that you keep coming back to after periods of shelf time.

Baron Munchausen

January 28th, 2003 11:47 PM

Re: MOO3 finished!

Best of all, they DROPPED QUICKTIME! No hard choice of whether to give up an entire machine to be a QT player just to have MOO 3. It's got plain old Bink video like many other games.

Shadowstar

January 29th, 2003 02:37 AM

Re: MOO3 finished!

The best storylines have always been, and always will be, those that are created and continually orchestrated by a human gamemaster. If you want to create a game where people can participate in an ongoing plot that changes as they play, and adapts to them and what they do, design the game to allow for a gamemaster who can have complete and total control over the universe, so that he can tell the story and the players can participate.

That's the one thing my Starscape mod does that no other mod does. It was designed from the ground up to be more of a Gamemastering (or storytelling) tool. The gameplay and strategy is the surface, the game that the players play, but beneath it, and at the heart of the experience is the story, being told in real-time by the game-master (I like to use the term "host"), who interacts with the players through roleplaying to create a plot no script-based or AI-based game could ever hope to.

All this in the comfortable environment of SEIV, too.

Sorry for the shameless plug everyone, but it seemed somewhat relevant to the current conversation... http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon7.gif

Captain Kwok

January 29th, 2003 08:32 AM

Re: MOO3 finished!

Shadowstar:

I agree. One of the directions for the Star Trek mod website once the actual mod is released and doing well is to add a large section dedicated to a storyline based on actual events in an 'official' game of some sort.

All times are GMT -4. The time now is 03:53 AM.

Page 2 of 4

Show 50 post(s) from this thread on one page