Recycle Old Threads Drive Canceled! - Page 13

bostonrpgmania · #**121** May 13th, 2003, 05:00 PM

Quote:

GALCIV - stable - too few especial events - too limited mod capability (cant create my own events!) - very cool graphics - gets repetitive after a dozen plays... - very easy learning curve...

----> well event maker downloadable now

[ May 13, 2003, 16:01: Message edited by: bostonrpgmania ]

Chronon · #**122** May 13th, 2003, 06:03 PM

bostonrpgmania, I may give GalCiv a try over the summer. I'll have a bit more time to play then, and it does sound like the kind of game I like.

Makinus · #**123** May 14th, 2003, 01:40 AM

Comparative SEIV x GALCIV x MOO3

MOO3: bugggyyyy - boring - moddable - poo graphics - steep learning curve......

GALCIV - stable - too few especial events - too limited mod capability (cant create my own events!) - very cool graphics - gets repetitive after a dozen plays... - very easy learning curve...

SEIV Gold - stable - very fun - higly moddable - cool graphics - infinite variations with player mods - my definite choice after playing the 3 games....

Just to add my two cents (three this time)....

deccan · #**124** May 15th, 2003, 05:03 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by eddieballgame:
For example; Military DEAS to help curb "unrest". It does require some in game time which sort of reflects a realistic approach.

This works sometimes. It is clunky but should be fixed in the patch. However, what I mean is that sometimes a DEA that the player puts in gets stuck in the "Planned" phase forever. When that happens, if I take out the "Planned" DEA that I put in, and put back what the Viceroy originally wanted to build, then this DEA gets built.

Quote:

Originally posted by eddieballgame:
To hinder & stop "piracy" I build ships. This does work, at least for me.

Yes, but shields are supposed to be very good at stopping piracy according to the Readme. Another bug.

Quote:

Originally posted by eddieballgame:
I also can build the available buildings when they come up. This has not been a prob.

The player has control over planetary buildings, but not regional ones.

Quote:

Originally posted by eddieballgame:
I am not sure what you mean by receiving immediate feedback.

Immediate feedback means that when the player makes a decision, the game should report back on what the projected effects of those decisions will be next turn, giving the player a chance to adjust his decisions in response. Otherwise, the player tends to be left in the dark, and making decisons becomes a sort of guessing game, e.g. how much of an effect am I really having in the game?

eddieballgame · #**125** May 15th, 2003, 09:14 AM

Actually the Planetary Shields only reduce piracy by 1/10 of there strength. You can also build Orbitals as well as System Ships, etc to all but eliminate piracy for said system.
Occaissionally with newly aquired planets there is some AI "bugginess" going on with the DEAS. The Patch is addressing this. Based on planetary budgeting & pop, the DEAS can stay in the "planned" phase awhile.
Grant it, for most "games" it is nice to get immediate feedback on decisions & choices one has made. I think MOO3 has made an "attempt" at trying to emulate "real life" experiences.
That is, not always knowing immediately if all your decisions are for the better. Is this a good idea to implement in a game? It is different, & as the "bugs" are worked out (as in any new game) I feel MOO3 could be the "1st among equals" for TBS space empire games, particularly in the area of "Online multiplay". Time will tell.

[ May 16, 2003, 04:29: Message edited by: eddieballgame ]

deccan · #**126** May 15th, 2003, 11:50 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by eddieballgame:
Actually the Planetary Shields only reduce piracy by 1/10 of there strength.

It's a bug. Read:
http://www.ataricommunity.com/forums...hreadid=287632

In particular:

-) Planets screen - severity: high - bug
"Planetary shields have a strength of 0"

Quote:

Originally posted by eddieballgame:
Grant it, for most "games" it is nice to get immediate feedback on decisions & choices one has made. I think MOO3 has made an "attempt" at trying to emulate "real life" experiences.

Whenever realism conflicts with gameplay, it is usually a bad idea to stick with realism.

Fyron · #**127** May 16th, 2003, 12:53 AM

Quote:

Occaissionally with newly aquired planets there is some AI "bugginess" going on with the DEAS. The Patch is addressing this.

It happens with every planet...

Quote:

Grant it, for most "games" it is nice to get immediate feedback on decisions & choices one has made. I think MOO3 has made an "attempt" at trying to emulate "real life" experiences.
That is, not always knowing immediately if all your decisions are for the better. Is this a good idea to implement in a game.

No, it is a terrible idea to implement in a game. This is a game, afterall. Why force us to do a lot of work and calculations to see what minor benefit something will have? Such information should _always_ be available to players.

[ May 15, 2003, 23:54: Message edited by: Imperator Fyron ]

eddieballgame · #**128** May 16th, 2003, 02:36 AM

It strikes me, by the "tone" of these Posts pertaining to MOO3, there are going to be some dissappointed people if & when this program's faults have been addressed & "fixed" by the soon to come patch. Again, I am hopefull & feel there is not a lot to repair to make MOO3 a classic.
This is of course, my opinion.

Oh, & it does not happen with every planet.
(not an opinion)

[ May 16, 2003, 02:08: Message edited by: eddieballgame ]

Master Belisarius · #**129** May 16th, 2003, 03:17 AM

Quote:

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.

Krsqk · #**130** May 16th, 2003, 04:17 AM

Quote:

Grant it, for most "games" it is nice to get immediate feedback on decisions & choices one has made. I think MOO3 has made an "attempt" at trying to emulate "real life" experiences.

Yes, but "real life" leaders have a substantial staff to do their research for them. I'm not about to hire people to help me play a game.