Recycle Old Threads Drive Canceled!

[Fyron]

but it has the important note that you still design the units...

Yeah, but you always end up with the same small set of units anyways. The design process in SMAC isn't really very broad.

[Chronon]

Originally posted by Imperator Fyron:

quote:

---

but it has the important note that you still design the units...

Yeah, but you always end up with the same small set of units anyways. The design process in SMAC isn't really very broad.

---

That's true in comparison with SEIV or the MoO's, but in comparison with the other Civ's SMAC is light years ahead.

I'm not sure I'd put SMAC in the 4x genre (just one planet), but it is still the best Civ game to date (in my view, anyway). SEIV gets my vote for best 4x game, but I haven't played GalCiv, and have only a couple of hours of MoO3 under my belt (I'm still trying to figure out how to do things. The UI doesn't make it very easy... ) I had high hopes for Stars! Supernova Genesis, but that project seems on permanent hold.

[raynor]

In space-based 4x games with tactical combat, designing ships is a lot of fun because you can actually see and hear the different weapons and so forth. In a terra-based 4x game with no tactical combat, IMHO, a primary advantage of designing units is to tweak the unit cost to suit your individual strategy. So, instead of building one unit that is strong in both attack and defense, you can instead build a couple of good defenders with no attack rating and a whole bunch of units with a strong attack. So, I would say that SMAC is going quite well in the unit design arena. Given that SMAC doesn't have tactical combat, I think they did quite, quite well with their design choices.

[oleg]

I am still very puzzled why so many people here believe 4X means interstellar games only !!! Where did you get this idea ? For God sake, SMAX is arguably the best 4X game ever. Civ2 is a classic 4X game. MoM too is a perfect example of 4X game for me!

[Fyron]

Originally posted by raynor:
In space-based 4x games with tactical combat, designing ships is a lot of fun because you can actually see and hear the different weapons and so forth. In a terra-based 4x game with no tactical combat, IMHO, a primary advantage of designing units is to tweak the unit cost to suit your individual strategy. So, instead of building one unit that is strong in both attack and defense, you can instead build a couple of good defenders with no attack rating and a whole bunch of units with a strong attack. So, I would say that SMAC is going quite well in the unit design arena. Given that SMAC doesn't have tactical combat, I think they did quite, quite well with their design choices.

So? You get the exact same thing in the Civ games. Units with high attack and low defense, and units with low attack and high defense. It all boils down to the same thing. The unit design choices are not much of a choice at all in SMAC.

Oleg:
SMAX has nothing on SE4 for the best 4X game ever. And, I would have to disagree that it is the best Civ game. Civ 2 ToT is a much better game in almost every way. Now if Civ 3 had been ToT + SMAX, it would have been a good game. Hopefully Sid Meier gets shot or something so he can't destroy any more classic game titles...

[Loser]

MoM? What is that?

I had never heard, outside of this board, the idea that 4x is innately interstellar. Civ, as far as I know, was the first true 4X game, though there is no 'research' requirement in the four Xs, so Empire may well be the first. (Not sure about 'eXploitation' in Empire, though. As I recall, you just took neutral cities that were already there.)

How about the Might and Magic series. I have no affection for this game, but they too seems to fit the 4X requirements, the ones I can remember anyway.

Even Civ involves micromanagement, compared to any non-4X game on the market. I suspect that micromanagement is a symptom of a strong 4X game, as it may not be a requirement (see M&M and Empire).

In answer to thread's post: do not buy MoO3 any time soon. It is very disappointing right now. It is like seeing your kid sister, the one who was so promising, the one who excelled in athletics and academics and debate in Junior High, like seeing that kid sister drop out of high school, knocked up by her drug dealer, hooked on smack, dirty, hopeless, and coming to you for money.

[Wardad]

MoM is Masters of Magic.
As old as MoO and by the same people. Microprose and Simtex.
"MoM can be called Fantasy Civ."
It has cities with build ques instead of slider bars.

http://www.mobygames.com/game/sheet/gameId=200/

[ April 22, 2003, 17:18: Message edited by: Wardad ]

[Fyron]

Well... I really meant Space Opera, which is a Category of 4X, in my first post about it...

[raynor]

Originally posted by Imperator Fyron:
So? You get the exact same thing in the Civ games. Units with high attack and low defense, and units with low attack and high defense. It all boils down to the same thing. The unit design choices are not much of a choice at all in SMAC.

Don't forget Clean Reactor, Bombard, Nerve Gas Pods, ECM, etc. There were a significant number of extra design choices to make. Once again, given the limitation of Strategic Combat only, I was pretty happy with the relative plethora of design choices.

I have heard that the primary reason for Civ III was to create a Civ game with absolutely astounding AI.

Master of Magic. I remember playing that game before they disemboweled it trying to give it decent AI. It was fun at first but, oh well...

[Cyrien]

I have heard that the primary reason for Civ III was to create a Civ game with absolutely astounding AI.

If that was the purpose of Civ3... they failed.

The only times I have ever found the AI in Civ3 or its expansion difficult are when they get massive "cheat" style bonuses. Even then it is pretty darn easy to get them to do stuff that is just retarded.