My impressions... Reactions?

[John Hough]

quote:

---

I said this in the 'other forum':
Having read a few good reviews, I checked out the SE4 demo, and I was pretty disappointed. They all said stuff about the game being amazingly complex, and I just didn't see it. At all. Having to worry about logistics was kinda nice, but didn't make it all that deep.

And then it hit me: The combat parts of the game are wonderfully complex, with myriad options for various sorts of weapons and such, each with their advantages and disadvantages, and many with special effects, making thoughtful ship and fleet design an important part of the game. Or would, if the AI weren't such a sucker in tactical combat. As is, the complexity there is wasted if you don't have the patience to play a several hundred turn game by email.

Unfortunately, the other parts of the game, the expanding and building and research, aren't nearly so complex. There's a few basic types of planetary facilities, and a small number of either absolutely necessary or completely unnecessary facilities with special effects. So there's very little to actually decide about how you want to develop your colonies.

The star systems have way too many habitable planets, imo, and the choice about where to colonize is easy: everything you can within range. Once you've conquered a few people, there's some choice about matching race to atmosphere to get more space for building on the planet, but it doesn't really matter, because by that time, you should be out-producing everyone else anyway. Planetary populations, which you can move around to get maximum growth for your empire, unfortunately, just don't matter that much, giving you a small bonus to the productivity of your planetary facilities, so you might as well not bother with that part of the game.

The tech tree, alas, is a tree, not the interconnected tangle that made Civilization work so well, letting you research one type of technology way ahead of the rest and gain a decisive advantage. Which might break the game, if it weren't already broken by not needing any sort of advantage to crush the AI in tactical combat.

That said, I still enjoyed playing the demo, despite being easy and shallow, and it'll go right beside the Horse and Musket demo on my hard drive, for when I'm feeling like playing something kinda fun and way too easy. And so I can't entirely recommend against buying the game, but I'd suggest playing the demo and seeing if the AI gives you a bit of a challenge.

-John

---

I posted this earlier on the Combat Mission forum in response to a question about this game. Being curious, and this being a better place to talk about it, I reposted it, and ask: Am I right? Does this view of the game, gotten from playing the demo, accurately reflect the full game? Is there something I'm missing here? Is it worth buying if you don't like playing this sort of game by email?

Thanks,

-John Hough

[This message has been edited by John Hough (edited 17 December 2000).]

[Freyland]

Hi John

I won't bore you by re-writing my statements about the "complete" Version of the game.... my commentary and the expected reaction are scattered about the forum. An easy search will provide you with hours of reading time.

Jonathan

[Talenn]

John:

As Freyland mentioned, all this stuff is floating around here already, but I'll give you my impression based on the demo and the game so far.

Personally, I didnt care much for the demo either. I just couldnt get into it. I kept feeling like I was missing something too. I ordered the full game simply because I knew that anything I didnt like I could simply edit away.

With the full Version, I think the game shows tremendous potential. Yes, it has some issues, but with MM's commitment to getting it right, I'm sure it will live up to the potential in the near future. It plays fine out of the box, but it does seem lacking in some areas. I would have preferred some additional time spent on the AI, but as long as it is getting done now, I'm not worried. At least I've been able to play and tweak the game for the Last month or so as opposed to having to wait if they had decided to delay the game again. Also, I feel as if my opinion has counted in adding features and changes to the main code as well.

I think you somewhat hit it on the nose in that the bulk of the 'complexity' is indeed involved in researching and designing (and using) the ships/fighters/stations/etc. It does seem to be the highlight of the game and rightly so IMO.

The colonization aspects are detailed enough to allow for some strategy but dont require the micromanagement and hassle of the MOO2 type engine where you have to babysit every colony. I'm much happier with the SE4 model for this as I think MOO2 concerned itself too much with the tedium of running the empire. It was fun at the beginning of a game, but rapidly lost its appeal as the number of colonies increased. SE4 is set up to allow for a more 'empire' type feel. You can
easily manage 30+ colonies with little effort.

I do happen to agree that planets are bit too available and that population is none too important. Fortunately, items like this can be changed and I have already done so in my set. And that is the TRUE beauty of this game IMO. Everyone can set the rules to fit their view of what it should play like. I have reduced what planets can hold and made it more necessary to expand earlier in the game. I've added more population 'breakpoints' and the lower pops really are hamstrung when it comes to building and producing. These two changes alone really alter the feel of the game. And they probably took me all of 15 minutes to implement.

As far as the Tech Tree is concerned, I'm glad its not as interconnected as Civ's. IMO, Civ's web of interconnected items pigeon-holed the player into set patterns. I almost always researched in the same general way game after game because so many things were necessary to get other items. It didnt pay to try and specialize. SE4 allows specialization at a price. Also, cranking up one or two areas while neglecting others really doesnt help you all that much IMO. There is just TOO much that is necessary for a good fleet design. In SE4 I find myself trying different strategies and methods of approaching my goals. This is made possible by the much freer research tree. I suppose this is only a matter of opinion, but I'm fairly happy with SE4's research model. In my 'perfect world', each tech would have a minimum research time so that even late in game, you couldn't go back and quickly grab a ton of new techs from a neglected science. I'd like to see a certain amount of time be required to mitigate that some, but its not a major issue IMO.

One area that I (and many people here) definately agree with you on is the weak AI. It can perform basic tasks fairly well, but its overall effectiveness is sorely lacking. Fortunately, this seems to be a priority issue at this point and I'm quite sure it will be addressed. SE3's AI was challenging for quite a while.

Anyways, I'd recommend taking a look at the 'fix list' that will be released early next week with the next patch. I'm sure the game will warrant a closer look by you in the near future as issues are resolved.

Finally, TCP/IP play is on the list for the near future as well. You waited 6 months for it in CM, so a few here for this wont kill ya either. I'm actually really looking forward to this. I hope that tactical combat is an option though I'm not sure at this point.

Hope this helped a bit.
Talenn

[Puke]

I should probably post this to another thread rather than biting for a troll that was continued from yet another thread but here goes:

I actually like the research tree. many people complain that its not a meshed web like civ or other games (why does pax imperia come to mind? what a disapointment.) because those games dont really give you a choice in research. Oh! I get to take tech A1 before B1 and then C1 then A2... i cant just take A1 A2 A3.. less realistic? maybe. on the other hand it lets you have two races with the exact same research infastructure have totally different technologies after a few turns since they are not required to take all of the same things.

sure a couple more prerequisites might add some more flavor to the research, but trying to ballance that would probably also destroy the ability to specialize. all things considered, I think MM went the right way, all the way.

as for the other points brought up, i have a 10 foot pole right here, and im not letting it get near 'em

[This message has been edited by Puke (edited 17 December 2000).]

[Puke]

I should have put more thought into what was being discussed on this thread rather than on other places on the board. John was not trolling, and actually had some very good questions. Talenn had some excelent answers, most all of which I agree wholeheartedly with. Just thought Id get that out, regarding my other post below.

[Instar]

Well, the demo lacks a couple facilities (I should say a good deal of them, but thats more of a personal viewpoint)
Populations DO matter a whole lot in production. You have to have population to make stuff in the first place. The bonuses are pretty powerful (that Atmo Modification Facility can take up to .8 years without bonuses, on a really good planet, about .5, or if you're lucky and own a sphereworld, it could go as low as .4)
The AI is being worked on, and I think its probably tougher in the full Version than in the demo.
"The star systems have way too many habitable planets, imo, and the choice about where to colonize is easy: everything you can within range."
Well, actually, no. You're pretty limited in which planets you can colonize. (Sure, you can colonize everything you're capable of technologically, but who would colonize a planet that could only hold 1 facility? You can only build one facility on a Tiny planet which you dont breathe.) The three types of planets (Ice, Rock, Gas) divides it up pretty well.

[John Hough]

Thanks for the comments, guys, I think I'll hang around here for a while, see if the AI gets patched up to a reasonable level, and if it does, buy the game.

-John

[Jubala]

Instar, I do colonize everything in range, although the tiny one facility planets are on the bottom of my list unless they are in a strategicially important position for a resupply depot.

[DirectorTsaarx]

If you think there are too many planets, try playing in an "Ancient" galaxy. LOTS of nebulae, black holes, asteroid-only systems; not so many planet systems.

Long live the Moebius Consortium!