OT, galactic civ II

[RonD]

I think "pretty awful" is harsh. (I'm not saying you shouldn't think that or express your thoughts here, by the way - I'm just disagreeing with you)

cjx said:
The depth of strategies in GalCiv2 boils down to which overpowered strat do you want to cheese the computer with. If you're satisfied bumbling around in the dark and never trying to understand the game you're playing and never actually formulating a strategy, GalCiv2 is for you. If you've played and liked Dom2 (MoO2) you'll be disappointed.

Winning SP by applying cheeze strats most certainly applies to dom2 (see SC's recent post advocating summoning all the blood uniques - we all know full well that the AI can't handle that). As for Moo2, the AI's "intelligence" consisted entirely of giving the computer overwhelming resource advantages.

Sure I'd love MP galciv2 (if they could implement it so that the game actually moved along at a decent pace). But for SP, comparing gc2 to dom2, it is a lot easier to have fun by choosing to not use cheeze strats in gc2. Even the civ4 forums are full of ideas on ways to make victory all but certain on most of the difficulty levels. Maybe that makes me a "bumbler", but I really cannot think of any SP TBS games (discounting chess, etc) that cannot be beat by exploiting AI weaknesses.

Yes, I prefer MP TBS games for that reason (but very very few other than dom2 implement MP in a way that fits my schedule). So I won't knock gc2 just because it has not fully overcome that inherent weakness of SP strategy games.

Finally, while you may or may not like Brad Wardell and his style, I find it refreshing that he is putting himself right out front - not just in the stardock forums, either. He regularly answers questions in places like OO and QT3 as well.

[OG_Gleep]

Yeah, you could say the same thing about a lot of games. Gamers will always find a way to outsmart the AI, thats why MP is for the most part much more challenging.

That said, I don't take most of the threads *****ing about that kind of stuff to heart this close to release. I'm not saying this is the case here, but I have found that a lot of people complain about "challenge" when they are playing on easy, then come back and say the game is too hard when the bump up the difficulty settings.

And anytime I see a developer in a forum, it is a good thing. I don't care if he is an ***.

[Gandalf Parker]

Decent multiplay and decent soloplay have always seemed to be to be anti to each other. Too many good features of one tends to ruin the other. Id much prefer that a developer pick one or the other to concentrate on, and then add whatever they can of the other without compromising the focus of the game

[Oversway]

Winning SP by applying cheeze strats most certainly applies to dom2 (see SC's recent post advocating summoning all the blood uniques - we all know full well that the AI can't handle that). As for Moo2, the AI's "intelligence" consisted entirely of giving the computer overwhelming resource advantages.

I read cjx's post as being unhappy that you can exploit the ai reasoning in sp *because there was NO mp alternative*. I didn't think he was merely lamenting lack of good ai alone. Which makes sense to me. Its one thing to have bad AI when you can do something about it - either play mp or script a better ai, etc. It is quite another when you cannot.

[PrinzMegaherz]

I would like to post a short review of my last game against that awful AI most of the other posters here keep complaining about.

After some successes on smaller maps, I decide to play a huge map with normal difficulty setting. I chose the Altarian Republic to bring peace to the galaxy

Early Expansion
I'm lucky and start the game in a corner of the universe with enough stars around to expand, but with enough distance to the other empires. This will give me some time to prepare for first contact. While expanding, I focus my research on improving my diplomatic skills, because I (playing a good nation) would prefer to win the game by allying with everyone else.

The Drath Wars
Everyone likes me, even the evil Drath Legions. I have remained neutral for most of the time, but now I have to make a decision: The Drath Legions (stongest fleet at that time) have invaded my neighbour, the Iconian Refuge (weakest empire around). Being good, I can't stand bullying and have no choice but to intervene. After diplomatic channels fail to produce a solution, I declare war on the evil Drath. After some initial defeats, my fleets manage to hold their ground and the war comes to a hold.

First universal war
The largest nation, the Torian Alliance, rules the center of the universe. They have common borders with all other nations. Their influence has spread into the territory of their neighbours, and some planets have started to break away from their empires to join the Torian Alliance. Of course those empires have no love for someone stealing their planets, and war errupts. The Torrian Alliance, due to it's delicate position in the middle of the universe, needs a strong ally and secure borders. They chose to ally with the Drath, joining the two separate wars into a big mess. I take the chance and attack the Torian Alliance, snatching some planets next to my borders. Crippled by the attack, the Torian Alliance slowly begins to lose the war, even with the help of the Drath. After some time they offer me peace, grudgingly handing me the control over two more planets. I again declare war and hope to bargain another peace for even more planets. It shall not be, as the Torian Alliance realizes it's defeat, and surrenders all it's remains to the Drath, which are now both the largest and strongest force around. Just as the war comes to another hold, with forces on both sides being depleted, the Dominion of Korx enter the war, it's untouched fleets rampaging through the Drath territory and conquering a large part of the Drath empire. The Drath finally agree to cease fire, and peace returns to the galaxy.

The aftermath

The war leaves me in a mixed position. While I have a massive fleet, many ships are old and not much of a use in future wars. At the same time my people are starting to revolt because of the high taxes I had to collect to keep the war going. I thought my security granted by my three allies. Killing two birds with one stone, I ordered a large part of my fleet to be dismantled, providing the credits to lower my taxes and to buy an alliance with the last neutral empire: The Dominion of Korx. While the Korx had joined the war against the Drath, we never became friends enough to become allies. It would require some time to earn their friendship, or so I thought.

The second universal war

The Korx sensed my weakness and immediately declared war. Much to my horror, only the Iconian Refuge, bound by years of common struggle, honored it's alliance and declared war on the Korx. My other two allies remained neutral, waiting for the right moment to make their own moves. The Korx, who were neutral for most of the first universal war, had a state of the art fleet. Were it not for the Iconians, I would have been overrun in the first few turns. However, I only lost some border colonies and had time enough to rebuild some strength to reconquer those planets. At the peak of the war, my two allies which had remained neutral so far decided to act. The one next to the Korx declared war upon me, fearing that the Korx would destroy it else. The other declared war upon the Xorx, attacking the traitor's flank and grapping some border colonies.

With a diplomatic victory out of reach now, everything seems possible. Who will win this war? Will the Drath use the time to recover? Can a diplomatic victory be achieved? I'll find out later.

[NTJedi]

One really nice feature about GAL_CIV_2... no copy protection on the CDs. THUS you install the game... and even if the CDs are damaged you're fine!
Sure enough this method hasn't seemed to affected their sales either... it's one of the hottest PC selling games. Copy_protection software does almost zero... the hackers only see it as a challenge and always beat it. Personally I dislike hackers because when they steal games it only encourages developers to move to the console games. GAL_CIV_2 is definitely ahead of their time for knowing copy software doesn't make a difference. If the game goes multiplayer I will definitely buy the game... also the developers of GAL_CIV_2 might be making MoM_2 !! Thus this GAL_CIV_2 might be the fuel for that game.

[Agrajag]

NTJedi said:
Personally I dislike hackers because when they steal games it only encourages developers to move to the console games.

Than those developers are quite stupid, seeing as console games can and have been cracked.
Granted, you'd need more expensive equipment (a DVD burner), but it doesn't change the fact that console games can be cracked.
If anything, it drives developers to MMOGs. While MMOGs can be cracked as well, the quality of the pirate servers is far inferior to that of the official servers, and so people are willing to pay for higher gaming quality.

As for GalCiv2, I played a bit at my friend's house and it seems quite fun. Maybe I'll report back after I try a bit more playing, maybe even buy the game myself.

[cjx]

RonD said:
Maybe that makes me a "bumbler", but I really cannot think of any SP TBS games (discounting chess, etc) that cannot be beat by exploiting AI weaknesses.

If the AI had no weakness there would be no beating it would there? Some things you consider cheese, some you don't, but all in all winning a single player game is about finding and exploiting AI weaknesses (or could be conversely considered finding and exploiting your own strengths).

My problem with GalCiv2 is that it seemed like there was a multitude of strategies that the computer just couldn't cope with so it wasn't about choosing not to "cheese" it; you could only choose to cripple yourself or put your head in the sand OR crush the AI. In addition to that there is no multiplayer so there is little reason to continue to improve yourself and/or develop new strategies. In addition to that the Metaverse (aka high score list) was undocumented and arbitrary in its scoring; you will always score higher with a military victory AND (this is a rumor I have not confirmed) you will gain more points in a game that goes past 10 years everytime, no bonus for finishing early with a great strat.

I liked the atmosphere of the game. I liked their distribution model/copy protection scheme (or lack there of). I appreciate that they were releasing updates very frequently... though it would be nice if a lot of those issues were addressed BEFORE release.

I don't know. It drives me nuts because I think I like the game despite everything, but I can't bring myself to play it for all the frustratingly bad things that seem to get revealed daily.

This is getting long, but... well, let's just keep going Dom2 players have a higher than average attention span I think.

NTJedi said:
Also from what I've seen of GAL_CIV_2 this game appears to have lots of strategic depth. Not sure why you see this lacking/missing.

I have to disagree. The opening of the game does not allow any military rush so there is only one thing to do at the start of the game: Land rush, Econ/Tech. Then build small ships with high firepower and blitz nearest most vulnerable AI, repeat. If you allow games to go longer/go different, that's your CHOICE and nothing else.

Oh, and yes, the randomly generated universe/nation placement is REALLY bad. I mean, I don't mind it sometimes, but more often I'd like to pick different set ups like Civ4 allows. Maybe a Land rush: all nations start horizontally situated and rush outwards, Ring: all nations start on the outer boarders and rush inwards, Core: all nations start centrally located and rush outwards, Balanced: all nations start at maximum distance from eachother and have an equal amount of resource near them (though not necessarily the same kinds of resources).

I firmly believe multiplayer was not included in this game because multiplayer highlights exploits (the -2000 max debt "feature" exploit) and weaknesses much faster and much more harshly.

cjx

[alexti]

cjx said:
I liked the atmosphere of the game. I liked their distribution model/copy protection scheme (or lack there of). I appreciate that they were releasing updates very frequently... though it would be nice if a lot of those issues were addressed BEFORE release.

I don't know. It drives me nuts because I think I like the game despite everything, but I can't bring myself to play it for all the frustratingly bad things that seem to get revealed daily.

I feel the same way. Good news is that Brad is promising to add "no tech trading" option which I think should make things more interesting in term of variety (and I hope it won't make things harder for AI).

[Cainehill]

Yeah - no tech trading, also, an option for the spheres of influence to not be known, making for rather a more interesting game - if the AI also doesn't know the sphere of influence then, and, mmm, one other gameplay affecting option is coming soon.