MOO3 finished!

[Fyron]

KlausD, MOO3 combat is designed so that you do not control the units directly. You give orders to task Groups and such before the battle, and watch them fight in real time. The pace of the battles is supposed to be such that the real time does not matter, and you have enough time to give whatever sparse orders you will need to give during combat. SE4 strategic combat is very similar, in that it is designed such that you give orders before combat, and then watch the results as the combat unfolds. This is not really a bad thing. In fact, real time combat for 4X games is far better than turn based, because it eliminates all of the unrealistic problems that come with turn based combat. In fact, I hope SE5 has well-implemented real time combat (and I am fairly certain that it is going to anyways ).

[ February 25, 2003, 19:36: Message edited by: Imperator Fyron ]

[raynor]

Even if Moo3 was unplayable, typically there would be enough people looking for it that at least someone would pirate it. I'm brand new to P2P networks such as Kazaa. But I think they use some sort of ranking so that people who have UP-loaded lots of stuff can get faster downloads somehow. I think...

[Mephisto]

Another not so positive test:
http://www.gamesdomain.com/gdreview/...f_orion_3.html

Seems tester feel overwhelmed with details that have no real or only minimal effect.

[klausD]

Imp Fyron
Sorry, but I dont share your view of RT not at all. (think, you guessed it already... )

You tell me that RT combat is much better for 4X games than turnbased. I am playing 4X games (board and computer) for nearly 20 years since I was a teenager and for me RT combat is something more ...what can I say...fashioned. I mean it appeared just several years ago. All the great classics of 4X (formers like CIV, MOM, MOO and some of todays like the SE series) are turnbased. Thats why your argument above (RT is better than turnbased for 4X) is not really valid for me. The problem is that most of the younger gamers today dont even know about something like "turnbased". (and they did not accept turnbased games because they grew up with RT games)

I did spend some time to inform myself about the MOO3 tactical combat system the Last few months, and I am not convinced at all. Let me explain why:

1. Personally I dont like any type of RT games. I dont even play medievial, harpoon or star fleet battles (the computer game) because they have RT system or a tactical combat system in RT.(although I tested each of them at least several days)

2. You mention that MOO3 is a "soft" form of RT combat. Maybe. But nonetheless even such a "soft" form of RT combat as in MOO3 has one important unacceptable feature. The guy which has a better hand-eye coordination wins more battles than others. Why? Well, simple. In MOO3 you can give orders at any time. (mainly moving taskforce orders) If 2 guys with exactly the same fleets and the same tactical abilities battle another, the guy which is used to play RT games and has a good hand-eye coordination will click at more optimized time moments at this "move taskforce" button and will have an advantage to the guy who just clicks later on it. It plays no role if this advantage is high or not. Its enough that there is an edge to the coordination guy. A good 4X game should be a contest of the minds not a contest of coordination. It should be FULLY FREE of honoring a players clicking abilities.

3. Maybe you claim that Quicksilver introduced a RT system because they have so many ships in their combat that a normal turn based system would not possible.
But to stay with the truth:

-In effekt now in MOO3 there are in about 200 Ships max per side per battle. I had some epic (and very amusing) SE4 Battles with more ships.

-if this 200max are so many ships that the average MOO player cannot handle them with ease in a traditional turnbased manner, they could reduce the amount with some economical or military restraints (making the single ship much more expensive or introducing some fleet point rules like in MOO2) Just a matter of game design.
NO they did not want to make the engine turnbased because they want to make more money if they design a mainstream product like shogun or medievial with a mixed system.(see above my rant about the likings of gamers of today)


4. A further problem is that many people do make the assumption that a 4X game is a simulation of beeing a leader in a pre-specified environment like sim-city in space or so. This is not my opinion. In my opinion a good 4X game is a a computer aided board game and not a simulation. And board games have a long tradition beeing turnbased. Several thousands of years.

I am not totally against sims or RT games. They should have their followers and their share of the big video gaming market. But I dont like if they do occupy every aspect of computer gaming. (especially the 4x games which I really like to play myselfes)

So I am riding against windmills once more....

KlausD

PS. sorry for my bad english

[Baron Munchausen]

Originally posted by raynor:
Even if Moo3 was unplayable, typically there would be enough people looking for it that at least someone would pirate it. I'm brand new to P2P networks such as Kazaa. But I think they use some sort of ranking so that people who have UP-loaded lots of stuff can get faster downloads somehow. I think...

The latest Version of Kazaa (only) has a sort of 'exchange ratio' rating, yes. But other clients which can use the same network do not. So it's only Kazaa Users who stick with the latest thing who are currently limited. I guess as new features are added the old client will be less attractive and people will start to get sucked into the participation control system. Of course, if you just recently joined up you probably downloaded the 'latest' one, like me...

But I've got a pretty hefty 'erotic images' collection, so I can get plenty of credit by just leaving my system Online. I've hit 1000 (the max) credit/rank more than once in the past couple of months. Even with my current rating of 800+ I don't see anything but the MOO 3 'demo' that that stoopid Australian IG exec gave to a magazine Last year. I have been searching every day for the past week. That says to me that it isn't out there yet. I expect it will show up in a few days though. But it'll be a 600+ MB CD image, a bit large for 56k connections. I'll probably wait for the patches and then actually buy it -- if the word-of-mouth is not too ugly and the patches improve on the commonly reported faults.

[klausD]

mephisto:
IMO this is rather a bad review. I know Brett Todd from other reviews in GD but I never liked his approach to games very much. He often scratches only on the surface of a reviewed game. Significant for this is that he dont even mention the RT tactical combat system, spies etc. but many thanks for the link.
KlausD

PS. Kriegt Ihr Deutschen jetzt eigentlich kubanische Zigarren billiger?

[Baron Munchausen]

Originally posted by klausD:
Nobody mentions that the combat system of MOO3 is only real time. Is this real time crap so much accepted in this forum, that no one is complaining about this important issue?

Everyone who had issues with 'real time' has already vented on the MOO 3 forums. Everyone. Believe me, there can't be a person left on earth who resents real-time and has not posted a rant to the MOO 3 forums.

Since it's only combat it's not such a problem, really. You expect combat to be hairy, and many people have also complained about how unbalanced 'I go U go' combat has been. Many people here want to see SE V move towards 'impulse' combat with lots of tiny 'sub-turns' anyway. Add some way to execute blocks of 'impulses' automatically, as some people will want to speed things up, and you're almost running real-time mode. It's just interruptible.

Of course, it looks like MM has already decided to go real-time for SE V combat anyway...

[klausD]

Everyone who had issues with 'real time' has already vented on the MOO 3 forums. Everyone. Believe me, there can't be a person left on earth who resents real-time and has not posted a rant to the MOO 3 forums.
I know - I have posted there myself
I was wondering just about this forum.

Of course, it looks like MM has already decided to go real-time for SE V combat anyway... Sorry to hear this. Are you sure? (it would be a significant reason for me not to buy the game) I am glad that there is SE2-SE4 for people like myself.

Since it's only combat it's not such a problem, really. For me tactical combat is VERY important in SE4. At least so important as the tech or economical system.

klausD

[Gryphin]

Real Time Combat
What does that mean?
I infer from the conversation that it means:
I give instructions while combat is taking place.
Currently I give various Strategies to my ships and fleets and they do more or less what I want.

If RT Combat is going to require I need to react as fast or faster than my opponent I will not buy it.

[Baron Munchausen]

The point is that tactical combat is only part of the game. The clock is only ticking when you're watching ships shoot at each other, not while you're choosing facilities to build on your system garrison world, composing diplomatic Messages, designing ships, etc. It's only the one part of the game where real time can have a positive effect that it is being applied. Sure, there are problems with it. Many people would prefer an elaborate initiative/impulse system like many table-top miniatures games have. But that would require learning more complicated rules and interfaces, which would limit the market for the game. Not everyone is a micro-management fanatic like us nerds on these forums. So I can see why they went with real time.

[ February 25, 2003, 23:39: Message edited by: Baron Munchausen ]