Worst fears coming true: Quarter to Three Review

[billybaruch1]

they didn't even wait until the clock went to 0

http://gamespot.com/gamespot/stories/previews/0,10869,2899021,00.html

[booje]

Hey so what's up with Antaran X's?? All you do is send some ships out and that's it?

[darcy]

What did you eXpect?

[CharlesBHoff]

Originally posted by Grumbold
If your Supreme Overlord is obviously incompetent, the best thing clearly would be to quietly marginalise the impact of his deranged rantings. Not that I'm suggesting that you will be one such "observer".

Now is my moon sized hot fudge sundae built yet, or do I have to incinerate another advisor for interpreting it as a request for a death star? Well, speak up!

All system of government that worked over the long haul have than way to deal with incompetent leader. Even than competent leader cannot run everything, he needed good man and woman under him or her to run thing. In the milkly way galaxy there may-be about 200 million planet that can or can be make to support human life or other life form that can live on our planet type. If I want to rule all these planets I cannot do so directly by micro-mangenment but only indirectly by given general order to be carry out and or disokey if my command will cause more problen for the vicroyal. In WW2 Churchhill sent than order to the Viceroyal of India to kill Gandie , the Viceroyal disobey that supid order as killing Gandie would have lead to masive unrest and posible revolt in India. The only Nation that doesnot have than way to deal with incompetent leader is America. Look at JRK and
the Bay of Pig fiaso and LBJ and the Vietman War and Ronald Regan and Star War.

[Kc7mxo]

What did you eXpect?

I don't know about everyone else, but I was expecting to have to go find some paticular star system, fight a guardian or maybe ground forces to get an X. Not just deploy ships. It lacks. . . .control.

I would have just had you get random clues from traders or something, kinda like what happened in Imperium Galactica 2. And then I'd have either a large guardian defending the world, or extensive hostile ground forces. I wouldn't let you do any bombardment from orbit either, as that would "destroy" the X. And I'd also have the several of the X's duplicated, so you'd still have a shot at getting them all, even if your enemies found a few. But only a few duplicates, so sometimes you'd still have to fight for them.

[kalbear]

Deploying ships is one way of finding the Xs. There are others.

[booje]

I am running an experiment: I don't do anything except hit the 'Next Turn' button. So far after playing for 1+ hours I am at turn 200 and have not lost yet.

How long will it take for me to lose?

[Craig P.]

I can understand, even after three or four hours of play, why Tom Chick wouldn't like it.

I don't share his opinion, mind you, but based on what he says he doesn't like about it, I understand why.

[ChaotikVisions]

I did a similar experiment. Impossible Level/Default AI settings/Small Cluster/16 Civs/Playing as Sakkra.

I lost on turn 150. I think the AI may not be as aggressive if it can expand, and it may not launch ground assaults alot. I had been getting bombed since about turn 60-70, slow annihilation of my population. They could have easily invaded me I think, not sure why they didn't. I personally would prefer a more aggressive AI, but this myth about winning without doing anything is just that, a myth. If you want to even have a remote chance of winning you need to tweak the AI to at least colonize other planets for you, not to mention the fact that you'll only ever get the default system ships that way, since you aren't deploying your fleets either.

[booje]

Doesn't it seem kind of odd (scary?) that I could be at game 200 without doing anything except hit the next turn button and not have lost yet?

[TrainWreck20]

Is your civ colonizing? Or are you staying in your home system? If you are small and your neighbors don't even like your type of planet, I am sure you are not worth their while....esp. in a one of the larger galaxy options when there are other worlds.

Besides, maybe you haven't lost, but are you in last place? There are more ways to lose than to get wiped out.....

[Pax]

I have played the first rfts,armada 2525, moo, civ, moo2, civ2, smac, civ3 with varying degrees of satisfaction. eu2, the second rfts and ig2 have mainly stayed in my CD case. The former games pulled me into what was going on. I was disillusioned with games that lacked character. In Civ2 I was Carthage and hated the Spanish for challenging my control of the med. I loved the Morgan Faction's business principles and the social engineering aspects of smac that allowed me to build my perfect society.
After the original rfts and Armada2525, I was amazed by MOO's ability to take the numbers and visualize them. Supreme Leaders have to have parades, kiss babies or hatchlings. Societies have to have a face of there enemy. When I purchased the second rfts I was supremely disappointed. I want character in my games and complexity.
That being said. I am reserving my opinion of MOO3 until I personally find lack of character.

[darcy]

I think the AI may not be as aggressive if it can expand, and it may not launch ground assaults alot.

If you are small and your neighbors don't even like your type of planet, I am sure you are not worth their while....

You're trying to find excuses for an AI that is probably just malfunctioning. This is reminding me of a funny post by Brad Wardell I read today:

In defense of fanboys everywhere..

Early on in the beta of our current game, during the "United Planets" security council meetings, civilizations would vote randomly on resolutions. This was place holder stuff until the AI for it could be put in.

But some of our fans would come up with impressively complex explanations as to why the AI voted a certain way. "Ah! You see, the Drengin were trying to psyche out the Arceans by voting in a way that seemed to go against their better interests.." when in reality it was just ulVote = rand()%5.

Of course, voting now has AI behind it and so the votes by the AI make more sense but we no longer get that cool "Ah! The Yor are sucking up to the Altarians by voting their way even though they're at war.." anymore.

In other words, there's nothing that unusual about IMOO. Fans tend to give something the benefit of the doubt.

Remember: Whenever something that doesn't make sense happens, wizards did it.

[Antonin]

Originally posted by Stuie
Funny that he loved EU, which to my mind did the same thing: much of the calculations are running under the hood and it's your job to just shut up and move the pieces around, leaving all those numbers alone to do their own thing.....

But then, I never took the time to learn how to play EU. A lot of people did, and really enjoy. Looks like MOO3 may be the same type of game.

When I bought EU2 I tried to play it and it seemed like a completely opaque mess. I put it aside and then 8 months later tried it again, spent some time trying everything, failing, losing, etc, and then suddenly everything clicked and now it is one of my five favorite games of all time.

I'm not saying all strategy games should be like this. I understand that a game like this will turn off a lot of players. But if MOO3 is the "same type of game" as EU2, then it is definitely something I want to own.

[booje]

Hmmm....maybe you're right TrainWreck...

I SO want to like (love) MOO3! I will try again some more tonight.

Gotta say though when I popped in Medieval Total War it was pretty much love at first sight.

Maybe I just need to give Moo3 more time and chances...