StarDestroyer.Net BBS

Stofsk wrote: I like how you can have huge fleets in MoO but there's a point where you've got a huge fleet and nobody else does, because the AI is stupid. And can't do anything about your fleet dropping antimatter bombs onto their daycare centres and lost puppy homes.

Part of that is that there's a global population limit on ships, so if you build a doomfleet large enough it's literally impossible for anyone else to have any.

The same thing happens in Master of Magic, except there the computer's complete lack of observance of upkeep and the huge starting advantages it gets on higher difficulties means that it will reach the unit cap all on it's own very quickly.

Vendetta wrote:

Stofsk wrote: I like how you can have huge fleets in MoO but there's a point where you've got a huge fleet and nobody else does, because the AI is stupid. And can't do anything about your fleet dropping antimatter bombs onto their daycare centres and lost puppy homes.

Part of that is that there's a global population limit on ships, so if you build a doomfleet large enough it's literally impossible for anyone else to have any.

The same thing happens in Master of Magic, except there the computer's complete lack of observance of upkeep and the huge starting advantages it gets on higher difficulties means that it will reach the unit cap all on it's own very quickly.

There were three kinds of single player strategy games in the 1990s:

1) AI cheats big time and the game is challenging.
2) AI does not cheat, cheats only a little or in insignificant ways, and the game is not challenging.
3) Hard core war games (think hexmaps) with semi-decent non-cheating AI that is reasonably challenging, usually made by SSG or some other fairly obscure small company.

Specifically wider audience games with good graphics, sounds and non-cheating AI that was challenging did not really exist or at the very least were very rare (I can't think of any right now, but surely there most have been some...?)

Also, comparing GalCiv2 to MoO 2? MoO 2 came out in 1996, GalCiv2 in 2006, for fuck's sake. And although AI development has not been as rapid as graphics development, modern strategy games still have on average better AI than games in the 1990s.

Marcus Aurelius wrote:Also, comparing GalCiv2 to MoO 2?

Why not? This thread was started because MoO 2 is available for purchase and download. So is GalCiv 2. GalCiv 2 isn't that expensive at all, especially not for a digital download. Why select MoO 2 over GalCiv 2 for any other reason than stinginess? The former is certainly not superior to the latter, as you pointed out.

It's a ridiculous comparison, but some people venerate MoO and particularly MoO2 for pretty much no reason. The only thing MoO2 has that GalCiv2 doesn't is tactical combat, although MoO2's was pretty awful.

MoM's AI cheating was both huge and really obvious. In games like MoO it was a bit more hidden and you figured MAYBE he had a dozen industry worlds hidden away; in MoM you can see he's got 3 hamlets and still summons more death knights than you. That's why I'm interested in MoM's unit and race variation (and rules approach in combat) but in a modern game that isn't so broken.

Galciv 2s only major problem is that the rules were designed to allow a competent AI player. Ships cant bombard planets for instance. This lets the AI guard its planets more easily. If any ship could attack a planet galciv 2 would be lot more confusing to play for an AI. On the other hand it encourages the immersion breaking tactic of using troop transports as cruise missiles.

Sarevok wrote:Galciv 2s only major problem is that the rules were designed to allow a competent AI player. Ships cant bombard planets for instance. This lets the AI guard its planets more easily. If any ship could attack a planet galciv 2 would be lot more confusing to play for an AI. On the other hand it encourages the immersion breaking tactic of using troop transports as cruise missiles.

This (and the way planets are handled as discrete entities from their parent stars) always got me in GC2, unlike MOO2. Although MOO2's system display window could be a bit clunky when you're moving stuff around the galactic map, I still prefer it to GC2's means of dealing with planets.

Stofsk wrote:

Marcus Aurelius wrote:Also, comparing GalCiv2 to MoO 2?

Why not? This thread was started because MoO 2 is available for purchase and download. So is GalCiv 2. GalCiv 2 isn't that expensive at all, especially not for a digital download. Why select MoO 2 over GalCiv 2 for any other reason than stinginess? The former is certainly not superior to the latter, as you pointed out.

There is no other reason than nostalgia, you are absolutely right about that. I would play MoO 2 if I could get it legally for free, just like I play UQM (which is also a better game for various reasons), but I would never pay anything for such an obsolete game. I think it's fairly ridiculous that they even charge you anything for it. The copyright term for computer games should be limited to 10 years in any case, although with the big media companies running things, there is very little chance of that ever happening.

Does anyone has any experience with Freeorion?

Teleros wrote:

Sarevok wrote:Galciv 2s only major problem is that the rules were designed to allow a competent AI player. Ships cant bombard planets for instance. This lets the AI guard its planets more easily. If any ship could attack a planet galciv 2 would be lot more confusing to play for an AI. On the other hand it encourages the immersion breaking tactic of using troop transports as cruise missiles.

This (and the way planets are handled as discrete entities from their parent stars) always got me in GC2, unlike MOO2. Although MOO2's system display window could be a bit clunky when you're moving stuff around the galactic map, I still prefer it to GC2's means of dealing with planets.

Plus the MoO2 star map looked like the one in star con 2. Aesthetically it felt like a living galaxy with red giants, brown dwarfs, black holes and so on. Too bad MoO2 immersive feelings could not be equalled by the gameplay. To me the look and feel, the ambient music everything felt just right for an epic game. But the gameplay was a dull and tedious excercise.

MOO2 really is a superior game to GalCiv2 though.

It has just a plain better ship design system. It's unbalanced as all hell, but all those little gadgets really were nice for building a fleet that you wanted. Things such as the Space Monsters and Orion made the galaxy more flavorful to play through, because you go 'Ah, I need to build a task force to defeat the Space Dragon and get that splinter colony!'. MOO2 also had a good research idea (Pick one tech of three! What do you want more?) and the usability of spies and framing was cool. It's not perfect, but I'll take it in a heartbeat over the trainwreck of Galciv2.

GalCiv2 had an obtuse economy system due to how stupid finicky planet development was and how easy it is to run yourself into the ground. I like the idea of what they did with the bases, but their combat was just Civ. Push a bigger stack of ships on the enemy to win. It had a better diplomacy model, but the AI sometimes was just as stupid.

Nephtys wrote: It has just a plain better ship design system. It's unbalanced as all hell, but all those little gadgets really were nice for building a fleet that you wanted.

On the other hand, half of them sucked, and half of the rest were hard counters to things the AI would never use, so unless you played it multi all the time you were down to a fraction of the ship components having actual utility.

Sarevok wrote:

Teleros wrote:

Sarevok wrote:Galciv 2s only major problem is that the rules were designed to allow a competent AI player. Ships cant bombard planets for instance. This lets the AI guard its planets more easily. If any ship could attack a planet galciv 2 would be lot more confusing to play for an AI. On the other hand it encourages the immersion breaking tactic of using troop transports as cruise missiles.

This (and the way planets are handled as discrete entities from their parent stars) always got me in GC2, unlike MOO2. Although MOO2's system display window could be a bit clunky when you're moving stuff around the galactic map, I still prefer it to GC2's means of dealing with planets.

the ambient music

I love the MoO2 sundtrack. It simply has those atmospheric songs I never got tired of hearing.

Hahahaha! It's a better game because you can build imba ships the AI can't use, even though basically nothing else works!

Ladies and gentlemen - fatty nerds. The idea that GalCiv2 combat is 'push a bigger stack' when even the AI can manipulate the weapon system to outsmart your defence just shows how learning is too hard.

In short, system that is sploitable and the AI can't use properally = makes up for rest of broken clunky game. System the AI can use to analyse and outsmart players while setting prices on purchasing units from other players = JUST LIKE CIV LOL

In MoO2 sometimes I found letting the AI build massive doom fleets was a sure way to win.
What'd happen is the AI would build 1 or 2 massive fleets and only those 1 or 2. They'd go straight for my home system which would hold them off for a bit, while I sent my Doom Star fleets to their systems, blew up their planets meeting pitiful resistance and win that way.
In the meantime my homeworld gets bombed out of existance, but the AI just loses everything with their fleet on the other side of the map. Quite fun.

Yeah, a games is good when you have to contort around to have fun.

Oh I forgot 'has funny flavour text' = 'is good'

For the guy that asked, freeorion is balls. MoO, MoM and XCOM are great examples of why open source nerd-driven software sucks. How hard is it to replicate a twenty year old game? Apparently, nearly impossible!

Stark wrote:Yeah, a games is good when you have to contort around to have fun.

Not really, it's that the AI did a stupid thing. But it was a fun stupid thing.

At least one think MoO always did well, space monsters. Unlike GalCiv 2 where the Dread Lords appear then do absolutely fuck all or Sword of the Stars and those goddamn Locusts that kill absolutely everything and never stop spawning.

Stark wrote:MoO, MoM and XCOM are great examples of why open source nerd-driven software sucks. How hard is it to replicate a twenty year old game? Apparently, nearly impossible!

You're forgetting the fundamental design requirement of enshrining the original's flaws to the point that you can't take advantadge of current computer technology to make improvements.

Gramzamber wrote:Unlike GalCiv 2 where the Dread Lords appear then do absolutely fuck all

Funny, when the Dreadlords showed up as a random minor race in sandbox games (latest expansion), and decided I was the largest threat, they kept sending their small fighters of DOOM all across the galaxy just to ruin my day. It was funny seeing those red tadpoles raping my crude Borg Cube fleet, though.

Ha, I had a single planet go dread lord in a sandbox game and it killed three sides n a massive war, all of whom decided to end the war due to losses.

Instead of just persisting with 'kill the player kill the player' like every other 4X game... hell, I even saw some AI sploit econ starbases on MY trade routes while at peace to buy ships from someone else to defeat by shield defence and declare war.

But nah, game sucks because it has no space horse.

The saddest thing about freeorion and all the UFO ripoffs is that UQM is such a resounding success. They ported, improved, and added features. If the UFO clones just CLONED UFO and changed the art, they'd have a successful project. Instead of introducing 'fixes' and 'added features' and 'improvements' that all suck balls and covering it in fluff nonsense.

LordOskuro wrote:Funny, when the Dreadlords showed up as a random minor race in sandbox games (latest expansion), and decided I was the largest threat, they kept sending their small fighters of DOOM all across the galaxy just to ruin my day. It was funny seeing those red tadpoles raping my crude Borg Cube fleet, though.

Maybe I'm just unlucky, every time they've turned up they either potter around the world they spawned in or they don't appear at all, presumably the AI killed them before I could see them.
I do like the AI in GalCiv 2 overall though, aside from their annoying tendency to spam colony ships into my space which will just flip over to me eventually anyway.

Well, there was that time they popped up and didn't do shit until I parked a DeathStar on their system, and then it was too late (and those move at 1 parsec per turn), but they are generally quite the pain in the ass for what they are, a semi Deus-Ex-Machina minor race meant to outgun all opposition and force them into alternative tactics.

I hate them having bioships, though. Butt-ugly bioships, at that. The ones on the opening cinematic looked better, and had close combat tentalces.... of DOOM!

Stark wrote: For the guy that asked, freeorion is balls. MoO, MoM and XCOM are great examples of why open source nerd-driven software sucks. How hard is it to replicate a twenty year old game? Apparently, nearly impossible!

That's because roughly 99% percent of the open source developers who have real skills are not interested in games development and the 1% that remains only have time to do it for about two hours a month. Nearly all of the skilled game developers and artist either work for the gaming industry, or get fed up by the bullshit working conditions (although they have been improving a little) and go off to work for CGI SFX companies or some other less shitty part of the IT industry. Either way they won't do much open source development.

Games development may be cool in a very superficial way, but it's not prestigious for most serious programmers in the same fashion that operating system, programming/scripting language or even desktop user interface or 'serious' end user application development is. There are plenty of good developers doing open source development in those areas and nowadays many even get paid for it by Red Hat, IBM, Mozilla Foundation, Novell etc. but nobody gets paid or receives an undying nerd fame for doing open source games.

That's all true, but it's just sad that the few with the motivation to try to do these things (that nerds want) are those with serious preconceptions around what the result should be.

Gramzamber wrote:Not really, it's that the AI did a stupid thing. But it was a fun stupid thing.

At least one think MoO always did well, space monsters. Unlike GalCiv 2 where the Dread Lords appear then do absolutely fuck all or Sword of the Stars and those goddamn Locusts that kill absolutely everything and never stop spawning.

The Locusts are supposed to be big-scary-boss type. As opposed to the Swarm which spawns a queen every ten or fifteen turns. Though they can be a bit scary if you crank up how many systems they can occupy. Locusts are more in the same class as the System Killer or Puppetmaster, as opposed to asteroid monitors, Crow ruins, Slavers, blasteroids, etc. But I do agree.

OTOH if you can keep the AI from being entirely wiped out by the Swarm, and get them to keep trying to attack a small cluster of worlds that you use, you can make some pretty insane forgeworlds that way. All you need are a lot of ships with point defense and good armor to keep the Locusts off you and some Impactors to blow the shit out of them from far enough back. Don't think any of the MoO monsters provided benefits like that.

Stark wrote:Hahahaha! It's a better game because you can build imba ships the AI can't use, even though basically nothing else works!

Ladies and gentlemen - fatty nerds. The idea that GalCiv2 combat is 'push a bigger stack' when even the AI can manipulate the weapon system to outsmart your defence just shows how learning is too hard.

In short, system that is sploitable and the AI can't use properally = makes up for rest of broken clunky game. System the AI can use to analyse and outsmart players while setting prices on purchasing units from other players = JUST LIKE CIV LOL

It's really not just the combat. Much of it is how obtuse the econ system is. With the way upkeep and taxes and pop and whatnot work and what the hell buildings like farms and entertainment centers 'really' do, it's damned well easy to build yourself into an economic black hole.

I really will take MOO2's imbalanced as shit but diverse in your options over GalCiv's push stack armed with rock, paper or scissors. I even found Sword of the Stars quite tolerable because I like options, even if half of them suck.

For the guy that asked, freeorion is balls. MoO, MoM and XCOM are great examples of why open source nerd-driven software sucks. How hard is it to replicate a twenty year old game? Apparently, nearly impossible!

Seriously. There's at least nine separate 'current' new X-COM Projects, and none of them have been anywhere near completion. The ones that have (UFO:Ex, UFO:Alien Invasion) suck so miserably as to be utterly unplayable garbage. The damning things really are piss-poor 'accept everything' art usually, and downright flawed fundamental design. Sprinkle in some retarded UIs and you've got a sourceforge remake!