[raynfala]

Originally posted by Dan C.:
Anyway, here is the link: MOO3[/QB]

Just read that review and glanced at some screenshots, and when you compare MOO3 with SEIV Gold, nothing about MOO3 exactly "blows up my skirt".

A few interesting things that MOO3 seems to offer:

* Specially trained spies (using the "hero" model)
* Multiple regions on a planet (which should give micromanagement fanatics a good time)
* Distinction between "warp" drives and "impulse" drives, allowing for more beefy local patrol vessels

Things about MOO3 that sounded really bad:

* No ability to perform field upgrades on ships when new technological breakthroughs are made
* No counter-intelligence, short of oppressing the population
* Lackluster combat F/X
* Braindead rules that make allied presence a pain rather than a blessing
* Forcing ships into a function-specific task group (read: fleet) before it can do any sort of movement, and imposing time penalties for regrouping
* Didn't read anything about fighters (my personal fav's in SEIV)
* Somebody else mentioned that the combat model doesn't seem to include component damage, just "hit points". If true, then that REALLY sucks

Stuff in MOO3 that the reviewer breathlessly described as exciting, new and innovative, when, in reality, SEIV Gold has "been there, done that, bought the T-shirt":

* Theoretical research necessary before applied research can produce results
* Varied ground combat troop types (pretty generic in MOO3, too)
* The "SitRep"
* Maps with 50 to 200 stars... biiiiiiig deal
* Wormhole-like connectivity between star systems
* Ministers
* Multiplayer

At this rate, MOO3 is going to look like a "me-too" game next to SEIV.

--Raynfala