OT: Stardocks Fantasy TBS

[Meglobob]

Well looks like I am an exception in this thread, in that I loved GalCiv2. There's nothing quite like playing on suicidal level on a gigantic map being attacked by 4 other races at once, desperately trying to survive in a very hostile universe.

Personally, many times playing the game its given me the, 'star wars' or 'Babylon 5' feeling of a truely epic space conflict.

Perhaps its the interface that gives the impression of no soul? But I would say its polished, slick, user friendly and very funtional. So functional and easy to use, you can run a 100+ planet empire before the game starts to drag. Running a 100+ province empire in Dom3 is certainly considerably alot more micromangement.

The tech tree contains alot of humour, the races have different, 'personalities' (different AI scripts), do you really not have any fun designing and redesigning your ships from fighters to mainline battleships? Then orgainising them into fleets, deploying those fleets for a first strike on a enemy empire? Or building up a massive economic and trade empire?

Surprised so many people don't like it!

I suspect Elemental will be equally polished, slick and user friendly with decent AI. I have not really been paying much attention to its development but have high hopes and I will be buying it once its officially released, personally not keen on playing alpha and beta versions.

[Calahan]

Originally Posted by Meglobob

....do you really not have any fun designing and redesigning your ships from fighters to mainline battleships? ......

I know one of the major beefs I have with Gal Civ 2 is the severe lack of variety when it comes to ship building. Do I use weapon type A, B, or C. Oh I forgot it doesn't really matter because the opponent can just use shield A, B, or C to counter it. Call them missiles, bolts or whatever you like, it's still an actual carbon copy of paper scissors stone. And the early version was pathetic in that little ships over big ships was a no brainer, since even if a ship had all the firepower in the universe, it could only kill one small ship each round. It's better now, but still pretty awful IMO.

MoO was great in that department because you had to decide weapon arc, close range defence, enveloping weapons, heavy or light mounting. Good missiles choices, as you could decided whether it best to fire lots of missiles but for only a few rounds, or fewer missiles for many rounds. Troops boarding tactics, energy absorbing shields. Proper space combat where you had to decide if you wanted more powerful ships that turned slowly, or lighter fast turning ship, or just not bother with turning and have all weapons 360. Basically, a whole host of options to design any type of ship you like. Obviously there were optimum designs, but it was always a joy to re-design my ships in MoO. In Gal Civ 2 it's always just a case of "Extra miniaturization. Great. Now I can have 5 type A weapons instead of 4 type A weapons. How exciting."

One game I did find quite enjoyable recently was Starships Unlimited. It has a pretty unique combat system which I liked a lot, plus ship design that took me back someways to MoO days

[Warhammer]

GalCiv 2 was a great game. Bob hit the nail on the head. I have never played another game in SP where I had 3 or 4 people go to war against me and actually be able to break up the coalition or be threatened with extermination. It was much different than Civ where eventually all the AIs team up against you "just because".

Regarding the weapons, I think there are several reasons for this:

1) It is much easier to make an effective AI when you are dealing with aggregate defensive and offensive values.
2) As a ruler, you really don't get involved with determining what arcs the weapons on your ships have.
3) It makes the game much easier as far as micromanagement in the late game.

[MaxWilson]

Originally Posted by Warhammer

Regarding the weapons, I think there are several reasons for this:

1) It is much easier to make an effective AI when you are dealing with aggregate defensive and offensive values.
2) As a ruler, you really don't get involved with determining what arcs the weapons on your ships have.
3) It makes the game much easier as far as micromanagement in the late game.

My understanding is that from Frogboy's (i.e. Brad, the designer's) perspective, #1 is the reason. GalCiv was designed around the AI, and making tactical combat simple and symmetrical was the only way to make strategic choices computable for the AI. Imagine trying to create an AI that can predict combat outcomes for ships in MOO2 or armies in MOM or Dom3!

Unfortunately, it also makes the games flat and uninteresting for those who are more interested in playing with neat toys than in abstract strategy. I happen to be one of those who would rather have rich tactical options and an AI opponent which "cheats" around strategic choices by getting 8x my resources[1] than a world-class AI who can beat me every time at tic-tac-toe. Obviously I'd really like rich tactical options and an AI which doesn't NEED to cheat, but for me, the interestingness of my own armies is paramount.

-Max

[1] Being strategically clever is only necessary when you're dealing with scarcity. If you've GOT a bigger hammer you can just use it.