This game is an expensive coaster

Wolverine · #1 May 25th, 2001, 10:05 AM

Kagetora is entitled to his opinion as is everyone else, however his only argument seems to be screaming "I was promised TCP/IP play, I was promised TCP/IP play.......". It doesn't look as if he's spent much time actually playing the game and investigating all the excellent mods out there.

This game appeals to virtually all the people on this forum because not only is it an indepth game with vast complexity/variability (i.e. there's no one way to win), but it allows you to get involved with the development of the game as well (AI/Shipset Creation, Mods etc.).

Compared to other games I've purchased(Activision should rot in hell for Call To Power II!!), SEIV is one of the best games I've ever purchased. TCP/IP play would be a useful option, but it shouldn't be prioritised in sacrifice to AI improvements, Bug fixes.

It's obvious that it's the majority against Kagetora. Therefore instead of continuing to justify Kagetora's singular argument by responding, I reckon we should stop posting to this thread and let it slip down into the archives.

That's my 2 cents, I'll shut up now and go read the threads which have something constructive about the game in them.

jowe01 · #2 May 25th, 2001, 11:42 AM

Read this threat and it really upset me. Not because of Kagetora's post but because of the answers. Guys, is this "La court du roi" where everybody tries to please King Aaron the best he can, or is criticism still allowed ?
Kagetora made two very valid points:
1. TCP/IP was promised
2. The AI is still weak.

O.K., he chooses rather extreme formulations but nothing which I feel would leave the area of civilized complaint (until HE got flamed). In return you call him "dick", "idiot", "troll", etc.. Well, I personally do not feel that his complaints are so absurd and so absolutely unjustified that his post can only be understood as the deliberate provocation of a troll who is looking to be flamed. This forum has always been an extremely civilized one. Please do not forget that freedom is always the freedom of somebody who thinks differently !

Concerning Kagetora's two points: At least I second them:
1. TCP/IP was repeatedly promised and I am waiting for it. I also do not have the time to play 10 hours in a row but I want to use it to play some regular "Wednesday night SE4 sessions" with old friends from school who are now living all over Europe. If contrary to what was promised TCP/IP does not get implemented, SE4 would still be a good game, but it would loose significant value, especially with regard to 2.

2. Yes, I know the AI was improved after release. However, I also feel it is still pathetic. On "No bonus" I would beat it with my eyes shut. On low bonus and using the (excellent)mod pack, I still always win if I get past turn 30, despite the fact that I cripple myself in various ways. On medium and high bonus I may sometimes have difficulties, but, hey, is this a sign of a good AI ? Tell me, in the weaker strategy games you know, would the AIs not often win if you gave them three or four times the normal production ? I am looking to be challenged by the AI's campaigns, not to be squeezed by sheer weight of numbers.

So in some respects I must share Kagetora's complains: SE4 was an unfinished product when it was released. It has improved since then but is still lacking features which were originally promised. Worse, there is not yet a sufficient challenge if you do not give the AI outrageous unfair advantages.

Still, SE4 has a great ruleset. If now, they would only get the AI right (and/or allow me to play against HI) ...

[This message has been edited by jowe01 (edited 25 May 2001).]

Elmo · #3 May 25th, 2001, 02:46 PM

Kagetora is none other than BillB who has been beating up Richard about SE4 over at cdmag. Nice to see you took Bob's advice and moved your criticism over here. Your Posts are always a fun read.

Elmo

Taqwus · #4 May 25th, 2001, 04:10 PM

quote:
Originally posted by jowe01:
Tell me, in the weaker strategy games you know, would the AIs not often win if you gave them three or four times the normal production ? I am looking to be challenged by the AI's campaigns, not to be squeezed by sheer weight of numbers.
[/b]

Ever play an RTS scenario? Most of them operate with the "sheer weight of numbers" approach, giving AIs complete bases, significant forces and often most of the map at the beginning of a level. Others, such as Civilization-type games, rely primarily on cheating at all levels from production bonuses to a "penalize the tech leader" cost model to making AIs handle diplomacy with people in a far more one-sided model (getting angrier faster, making idiotic demands and then declaring war if you fail to bribe them every few turns). _Shogun:TW_ is another game that needs to blatantly discriminate against human players to pose much of a challenge to an experienced player, through such details as deficit spending, production and combat bonuses, and not-exactly-simultaneous moves.

Also compare and contrast complexity, customizability and detail with, say, traditional counter wargames ala TOAW:COW. The differences are obvious... and the computational cost and theoretical difficulty are incomparable.

------------------
-- The thing that goes bump in the night

LeTharg · #5 May 25th, 2001, 04:12 PM

I agree with jowe01. I think there is room for criticism especially the AI. I don't play solo because it is no fun. The Rage may be difficult at a 5X bonus but that doesn't seem fun to me. An idiot with a big enough club may be dangerous but he's still an idiot. And 5X is a huge club.

Don't get me wrong, I've gotten tremendous value from this game playing PBEM games. I'm amazed at what MM hasw accompished with so little in resources. I think there is a cooperative way we can improve the AI so I'm pushing a previous post on this issue to the front.

Kagetora · #6 May 25th, 2001, 06:08 PM

Kagetora is none other than BillB who has been beating up Richard about SE4 over at cdmag. Nice to see you took Bob's advice and moved your criticism over here. Your Posts are always a fun read.
Elmo<<<<<

Well I tell you what. I am not BillB although I do know who he is. He informed me that Richard in a misplaced and just wrong attempt to for whatever reason pretend he and I are the same person released my real name on the other board. This is in my opinion private information they recieved by my purchasing their game. I take great offense that it has been released particularly in so cold and callous a manner and for so base a purpose.

Kagetora · #7 May 25th, 2001, 06:19 PM

Richard has totally crossed the line. Not only has he rationalized that this game was never really intended to have TCP/IP which anybody that has been here for any length of time knows to be false but he is now lying and acting like it was a couple months after the demo before it was even brought up. I was reading these Boards prior to the demo even being released and I am quite certain implications were made here that this game would eventually have TCP/IP capability long before the demo. This was my primary reason for purchasing the game in the first place. I knew from the demo the AI was terrible. I loved the design and figured it would be fun to play against other humans. However, this is still impossible in any reasonable manner.