SE:V, I'll be honest

[Ragnarok-X]

Raapys said:
Did any game ever really have a better planet development system and economy model than MoO3? Looking past the bugs, I can't really remember any that even came close. All other games have such simple systems, MoO3's is *complex* and rather realistic.

Yeah, that was pretty much the best system. Each planet had several regions, all with different fertility and mineral richness, plus regional AND planet-based extras. Plus DPAs which were influenced by the amount of people working each region. VERY good. It wasnt even as bugged as the rest of the game.

[AngleWyrm]

An hour of work by the guy who mows my lawn and an hour of work by a cardiovascular surgeon do not have the same market value (especially to the guy needing bypass surgery).

Or the guy needing a lawn mowed.

And here I wonder if the original reason is simply that there are a lot of lawns to mow, so a fella could make a living at it. But bypass surgery is a skill needed only rarely, thus we make up for it by paying him a full wage for a few hours' work.

Then of course greed set in.

[Xrati]

OK, you've divided the game into two separate issues. I’ve played Reach for the Stars and MOO3. MOO3’s economics are a game within the game and could stand on its own. RFTS is a basically simple game with all the economics factored in. Has anyone ever played any game that had economic micromanagement and space combat in it that was any fun to play? If you want economics the get a game based on that and if you want planetary development then go get something like SimCity. You cannot get all those factors into ONE game. Somewhere, if you want combat and ship building you have to regulate the economics and planetary building. Do you really want a game that will take you hours to do one turn. You just can’t have it all!

In MOO3 when you get large the economics become unmanageable, as at that point you want the computer to take over the many planets you now have. The AI is flexible but still has problems taking over where you leave off. What you are all asking for is four separate games in one that run well. When you find one, please let me know.

[Ragnarok-X]

Xrati said:
OK, you've divided the game into two separate issues. I’ve played Reach for the Stars and MOO3. MOO3’s economics are a game within the game and could stand on its own. RFTS is a basically simple game with all the economics factored in. Has anyone ever played any game that had economic micromanagement and space combat in it that was any fun to play? If you want economics the get a game based on that and if you want planetary development then go get something like SimCity. You cannot get all those factors into ONE game. Somewhere, if you want combat and ship building you have to regulate the economics and planetary building. Do you really want a game that will take you hours to do one turn. You just can’t have it all!

In MOO3 when you get large the economics become unmanageable, as at that point you want the computer to take over the many planets you now have. The AI is flexible but still has problems taking over where you leave off. What you are all asking for is four separate games in one that run well. When you find one, please let me know.

I want at least to be able to actually manage my economy. In Moo3, i was managing my planets almost ALL the time. It wasnt that hard. Of course its a matter of taste.
Click on a region, see its mineral value, and build mining or industry DEAs. Or research. Or gouverment. Or military.

In SEV, i have exactly 5 things to value, mineral %, organic %, radioactive %, pop, size. THats it. Again, should i grade those 2 eco models on a scale from 1 to 10, i would give MoO 3 a 7-8, and SEV probably a 4-3.

One thing you are missing in your comparion to Reach for the Stars is that that game was about macromanagment. You usually had fleets of douzens, maybe hundreds of ships, which you just send bulk against hostile fleets.
Research was very simple as well, same goes for colonization. There was only planet size and atmosphere/temperature to keep in mind, of thise the last two were indicated by a colorcode (yellow, blue, green..)

The entire game was more about big view. SEV offers a lot of micromanagment though, because of that i want to micromanage my economy as well.

btw Are there any news of Aaron liste to the suggestions, like double-click-opens-the-planet-window, or rightclick opens-component-details, another rightclick-close-component-details ?

[Barnacle Bill]

AngleWyrm said:
Or the guy needing a lawn mowed.

And here I wonder if the original reason is simply that there are a lot of lawns to mow, so a fella could make a living at it. But bypass surgery is a skill needed only rarely, thus we make up for it by paying him a full wage for a few hours' work.

Then of course greed set in.

I wouldn't call it greed. It is a matter of (1) the investment in training time and expense to produce a cardiovascular surgeon is a whole lot higher than that to produce a lawnmower-pusher and (2) the percentage of the population that is mentally capable of getting through the training to successfully perform open heart surgery is a lot lower than the percentage of the population mentally capable of mowing a lawn. Why would anybody go through all those years of medical school, residency, etc... and pay all those big tuition bills if at the end he got paid the just same as a non-skilled laborer?

The value of anything (including an hour of your labor) is exactly what somebody else will pay you for it, and not a penny more or less, and if the market price isn't high enough to justify the investment then suppliers exit the market (which in fact is happening in the US medical industry as malpractice insurance rates continue to rise and insurance reembursement continues to fall).