SE:V, I'll be honest

[VanderVecken]

I Loved that song, I sang it in either 5th or 6th grade, then Coke got it in their TV ads and the purity of it's message was forever tarnished with a 'Ka-ching' Cash register sound in my mind. Peace and Harmony should not equal Rotten teeth and Obese teen-agers.
Sorry I went O.T. but did I mention that when I was a kid that I just loved that song.

[Ragnarok-X]

On a scale from 1 to 10, i would rate it with 6.5. I definitly like SEIV better. I was expecting more, especially from

- ground combat (woah, this is bad)
- planet development (look GalCiv 2)

[PDF]

Ragnarok-X said:
On a scale from 1 to 10, i would rate it with 6.5. I definitly like SEIV better. I was expecting more, especially from

- ground combat (woah, this is bad)
- planet development (look GalCiv 2)

Personnally I'd rate at 6-some also, don't care much for Cd combat but agrees on planet dev. But, bleh, GC2 planet development su.. well is not to my taste . If ever we could have a game with a good planet dev system such as MoO2's or Civ-like ...

[Ragnarok-X]

PDF said:

Personnally I'd rate at 6-some also, don't care much for Cd combat but agrees on planet dev. But, bleh, GC2 planet development su.. well is not to my taste . If ever we could have a game with a good planet dev system such as MoO2's or Civ-like ...

Sry, cant follow you here. MoO2 had no system at all...you were just constructing buildings, but a planet itself had absolutly no influence on its productivity, apart from fertility and population.

Thats why i like GalCiv 2`s system. You can actually see a MAP of the planet, and symbols indicate certain ressources. It reminds of Ascendancy, which`s system i like a lot as well.
But ground combat...oh well. I thought SEIV GC was horrible. Then i thought GalCiv2s GC was EVEN MORE horrible. Than i played SEV and thought its the worst GC to be developed, ever. Its like Imperium Galactica, which is already years old, but EVEN older.


To sum it up, im rather dissapointed by SEV. It feels like a real let down, one in a long series, raging from MoO3 to GalCiv, to Sword of the Stars, now to SEV. I was expecting a glorious game, made by a player, for players. I think ~ 3 more months development time would be good

To be honest though, SEV is already the best of the few games i named.

[narf poit chez BOOM]

I think people are getting defensive on wether SEV is equal to SEIV or not, and I've seen some things said on this forum that disapointed me.

Just remember, a game is not worth getting pissed off at your friends over.

[Uncle_Joe]

Ragnarok,

Out of curiosity, what was your take on Sword of the Stars? I gather that you dont/didnt care for it. I have it, but havent really been able to get 'into' it. Its not really a '4x' game IMO, its more like an RTS with a turn-based econ side.

What about it was disappointing for you?

[Noble713]

I've got to agree about the planet development/economic model. Really, virtually every game I've played has had a disappointing economic model. SE5's is a step up from SE4, however, as the inclusion of maintenance costs for structures and populations forces players to put a little more thought into expansion beyond "Colonize EVERYTHING!!!!1111"

I'd really like to have a 4X game with a more realistic, complex economy similar to Supreme Ruler 2010's: raw material concentrations on the planet maps, industry-wide efficiency levels that can be improved, finished goods production that consumes raw materials, international trade on a market, inflation, loans/debt, etc.... I find all this much more engrossing than the simple "Trade = bonus resource production" model of the SE series.

Gee, the Amon'Krie are flooding the market with dilithium crystals and undercutting my profits. Should I improve my production methods to reduce my own costs, or just invade and occupy their dilithium-producing planets, and then ramp up my markup rate to recoupe the costs of the war?

But then again I'm an Economics major, so that probably impacts my suspension of disbelief WRT game economies.

[Ragnarok-X]

Uncle_Joe said:
Ragnarok,

Out of curiosity, what was your take on Sword of the Stars? I gather that you dont/didnt care for it. I have it, but havent really been able to get 'into' it. Its not really a '4x' game IMO, its more like an RTS with a turn-based econ side.

What about it was disappointing for you?

The game is bad. Combat is very bad, research is using an old, outdated system as well. The entire colony/development-system is horrible, actually the worst i have seen. One system is resembled by a single planet, which you develope by TWO sliders ? huh ?!

Ship construction is boring. Diplomacy is non-existant. Ground combat is hilarious, no depth or tactic or anything like that involved. The only thing that is good is that those 4 races are using unique expansion/propulsion systems, but thats about it. Should i compare SotS to SEV, i would say SotS is an even bigger let-down than SEV And that already means something.

I have to admit that a good mod, like Star Wars Mod or Adamant Mod or Devnull Mod could change my opinion about SEV.

[Barnacle Bill]

PDF said:
If ever we could have a game with a good planet dev system such as MoO2's or Civ-like ...

I think it was a mistake for these sorts of games to move away from the more abstract "Stellar Conquest"-based system used in the original MOO, the original (8 bit) Reach For the Stars, etc... Most of the tedious late-game micromanagement of big empires stems from having to mess with all the individual buildings on planets/cities - and is worse in the Civ games (and to a lesser extent MOO2)where you've got to micromanage what the individual population units are doing, clean pollution, etc... Much more streamlined to have production calculated as (population + factories) * (some constant for planet "richness"), with advancing technology just raising the allowed ratio of factories to population. I'd rather spend my time micromanaging ship/unit design & tactical combat.

On the other hand, I do like the separation of resources from production, with resources being consumed proportional to production. This would eliminate the "richness" factor in the above calculation, which would instead factor into resource production (which would be relatively independent of population). The idea would be an economy of relatively few high population industrial worlds being fed by a larger number of low population mining colonies, the former probably being of high habitability and the latter mostly domed. Then some elegant rules to cover resource convoys to be defended from pirates & enemy player commerce raiders to create a military purpose for small ships...

[Theonlystd]

Now i know i dont post often so doubt many care of my opinion

But i start played Se3 empires prolly 6,7 years ago.. Been playing Se4 pretty much non stop for months here latly.


I was excited about the demo and well it was a bit of a let down.

I cringe to think how much time was wasted on horrid 3d graphics.. Ground Combat teh i thought that was lame when i was 13, 8years ago in imperium galactica 2..

And omg how did ship design manage to make it this far in its current shape that'll keep me from playing tell its fixed in some way even i have better things to do than that process? Y cant i double click on a planet to bring up the construction que? Scrolling and stuff seems a bit jerky. I also just dislike the 3d enviroment the zooming in and out.

Tho its not all bad.. I like the new supply and ordance system,the larger tech line, the real time combat could have potential really gotta test it againist Ai's in big battles to know if they can handle it or not.