Moo3 Dreams

[Master-Mike]

What is the one thing that you are most lookinf forward to in this game. Only state one item, the most important to you. For me it is being able to micro manage everything and anything if i so wish on a galactic scale.

[DobberDinsdale]

I really loved moo2, the only thing that bothered me was that the game wasnt bigger. I wanted everything to be bigger, more stars, more to research, more everything. So I could keep playing the same game for a longer period of time. And as far as I know, it seems to be just what moo3 is, BIGGER in every aspect. Thats what im looking forward to, everything is grander, bigger and hopefully better.

[Master-Mike]

Sounds like we have a similar wish, i only wish they would do that to BOTF, (Birth of the Federation), that was based on Moo2.

[Llama]

Re: Moo3 Dreams

Originally posted by Master-Mike
What is the one thing that you are most lookinf forward to in this game. Only state one item, the most important to you. For me it is being able to micro manage everything and anything if i so wish on a galactic scale.

You might have problems with multi-player then if the host decides to set a time limit for the turns. Other than that, with IFPs gone, you might be able to do that in single player.

[Xentax]

I'm most looking forward to the new space combat model.

[Craig P.]

I'm looking forward to being able to NOT micromanage everything.

[Xentax]

Originally posted by Craig P.
I'm looking forward to being able to NOT micromanage everything.

Yeah, I hear that. I mean, there will be times where having the micro-managing level *available* will be nice; I may want to override my viceroys from time to time, but by and large, I want to let them do their thing while I concentrate on the higher-level stuff.

[Spaced Cowboy]

Same here, I do not like the micromanagement at the planet level. That is what made MoO1 better than MoO2.
.
.
.
.
I'm sorry, I started drooling again.

Yes and bigger than MoO2 is another plus (Why do these games have limits so small...is memory really an issue?).

[Xentax]

Well, there's an upper limit on how big a game "map" (no matter what the game is) can be, and still have the game be compelling, win-able, etc.

As cool as a 10,000 star galaxy in MOO3 might sound, it would take forever to win, or you'd not become anything like a "Sole Superpower" to win, or the value of an individual system would diminish to practically nothing. None of those is exactly ideal, IMHO.

[gramians]

I'm looking forward to the combat tactics, where you assign ships to certains strategies, like cover, attack etc. I hope there's "hit and run"...

That, and making you kiddies cry when I enslave your worthless home planets
mu wu ha ha

[Comrade Tribune]

I would be looking forward to MOO3 being more of a true EmpireSim than other strategy games like, say, CivIII.

I don´t hold my breath, though, since I am still suspecting the reason why management fired Emrich was managament wanted LESS of a simulation.

[Master-Mike]

I love micro mangaging games on single player but multiplayer is different. I like to know every little facet of the game. Such as if i do this what is its effect in 20 turns from now. I got a good mate who i can play moo3 with all day on our days off so long games spanning days if not weeks are no problem for me, the longer the better.

[Main_Brain]

*envys Master-Mike*

[DATarbell]

...just one more turn...

[Comrade Tribune]

Originally posted by Master-Mike
I love micro mangaging games on single player but multiplayer is different. I like to know every little facet of the game. Such as if i do this what is its effect in 20 turns from now. I got a good mate who i can play moo3 with all day on our days off so long games spanning days if not weeks are no problem for me, the longer the better.

This is great.

Btw, there will certainly be micro-management in Moo3, and probably more interesting decisions than in CivIII, for that matter.

However, this is still not quite what I call 'Realism(tm)'. OK, so what do I mean by 'Realism(tm)'?

My definition of 'Realism(tm)' in a strategy game is to purposefully include those aspects of reality most people tend to not understand or dislike. Example: Vicious circles where, once you turn the wrong way, the situation gets worse all by itself. ('And it went downhill from there.') Such things abound in reality (think epidemics), but they never occur in strategy games, because such games are created for a mass market, and the market department forbids designers to frustrate anybody. Out of the window goes Realism!

The only exception to this rule is Chess. This game does not soften up the blows -because it was not created for a mass market-, but it is still vastly successfull. This may mean that the marketing people are wrong, and (at least some) people WANT a game to be (somewhat) frustrating. But marketing people are too stupid to understand that, and ultimately it is NOT the market that calls the shots but the marketing people.