Anyone have an opinion on SE IV?

[DrSpike]

This game is very low profile in the UK, but I played the demo for a while. It seems pretty good if you're into the 4x genre.

[Scouse Gits]

Very low profile indeed - my copy is an import - I have NEVER seen it available here...

SG[1]

[DrSpike]

Yes it wise to keep an eye on games not released here. The great Combat Mission had no UK release that I recall, and for a strategy gamer to miss it would be a shame.

[MariOne]

Originally posted by Osweld
SEIV is, as far as I am concerned, the king of multiplayer strategy games

Read the SE V thread about my "newborn" approach to SEIVG (after perusing the Demo sometimes ago).
I'm enjoying it, although it's not the best of games I saw.
I'm just halfway thru my first game.
But I already wonder (the same usual MP question...):
How is combat resolved in PBEM????

I think I already know the answer: in PBEMS, combats are *forcibly* resolved in *strategical* mode.

For games like Stars!, which *from the start* renounced to tactical combat, there was nothing you felt you were losing in MP/PBEM.
But the games which DO offer *tactical* combat, have a GREAT problem in PBEM. That:
- if you happen to *LIKE* tactical combat in the middle of a TBS game ( I *DO*), then a PBEM is a *mutilated* game mode in that sense. (that's imho the *paramount* downside an MP MoM2 would have to face)
- with the albeit very limited experience I have in SEIVG, I saw that THANKS to controlling a combat in tactical I can win 90% of the combats with *0* damage against 2-level-higher ship calsses. The same forces matching, fought in "strategic", would see me losing at least 65% of the times, and alweays with relevant losses ("Optimal firing Range" and "Don't Get Hurt" combat policies just don't work as their names should suggest, in the hands of the AI)