[Master Belisarius]

Originally posted by eddieballgame:
It strikes me, by the "tone" of these Posts pertaining to MOO3

IMHO, many people was waiting 4 years for Moo2.5, but Moo3 is not. I can't blame them.
The problem that makes angry so many people, (my opinion, of course) is that in theory Moo3 was the next step in the saga... but have a very different approach compared with the previous 2 games.

Not everybody like the same kind of games (for sure!). I can bet that most of the people that liked Dune (the old RPG game), doesn't liked Dune2 (the venerable RTS)!!!
Then IMHO, think would have been more sincere that instead the MOO3 name, the game would have been named "The Galaxy Simulator", or something like that, but of course that the MOO3 name can make more profit.

I can't eat the argument that Moo3 has a "High Climb" that need to be climbed to enjoy the game... I have played strategy games for more than 20 years, and think that if a game is really good, you don't need to climb anything more than a little hill to enjoy it.

I hate the game? Nope. But doubt that some day I would really like it (even with patches).
Most the time, I discovered myself only doing clicks over the Next Turn button, and only moving a fleet here and there... and even letting the AI solve the battles, because the tactical combat is in my opinion (again) one of the worst tactical engines that I knew.
I don't liked so much the SE4 tactical combat, or the tactical combat in IG2, but really dislike the tactical combat in MOO3 (tiny ships, can't zoom, can't pause, confuse orders, etc). Even in very old games like Rebellion, Pax Imperia 2 or Ascendancy, the RT combats were a lot better (IMHO!).

Oh well, thanks God I'm not in the MOO3 forum... somebody would have named me a Troll.