New MoO announced

[Zed-F]

If he had commented constructively on balance issues and polishing yet-to-be-done constructively, I wouldn't have felt motivated to reply in kind.

Regarding other approaches to add depth to economic management without adding micro, I tend to prefer approaches that concentrate less on having many decision points and more on making those decision points both impactful and relevant. By that I mean, for example, the difference between a 'guns or butter' decision point should be balanced in such a way that there is a clear difference in result, the circumstances under which each decision is correct should be fairly clear, and both such circumstances should arise in the game with some regularity, so as to minimize the 'one right answer' problem that makes games feel shallow and solvable. Even better if this is more of a 'how many guns versus how much butter' so you can tailor your answer to the situation.

Apart from the micromanagement issues of having a lot of relatively small economic decision points (40,000 movie theaters & grocery stores in all my cities later) and the thematic issues (as galactic emperor should I really be worrying about movie theaters rather than abstracting them out into a less granular system), the other problem with adding too much complexity to these systems is that it often takes a lot of time and effort away to develop AIs that understand how to use them well enough not to embarrass themselves. That time and effort could be more profitably spent on other tasks like making combat fun.

[Zygot]

I was frustrated with the difficulty of determining ship weapon stats (info is spread out between the tech tree, ship design screen, and within tactical combat itself), and the wiki seemed slightly out of date, so I pulled some data together. No guarantee it's accurate, but so far it seems to match up in-game. Attached is an Excel .xlsx file, and there's screenshots for those without or not logged in.

link in case the images break:

http://imgur.com/a/Knn4U

[Windsor]

If he had commented constructively on balance issues and polishing yet-to-be-done constructively, I wouldn't have felt motivated to reply in kind.

I simply don't think the game is in a "needs polish and balance" state. And I'm of course well aware that what I feel needs to be done is much more than what the publisher is willing to pay for. That being said, a new combat system isn't THAT far fetched for an EA title. You can reuse a lot of code and assets. Stardock would probably be willing to do it if Brad Wardell felt it had to be done.

It's true that my post was (very) negative. I had just finished a game and was genuinely surprised that both Zygot and Sullla seemed to have had a much better experience post-patch than me. Because I really didn't notice any difference before and after the patch at all. Having played a 2nd game (as humans in medium sized galaxy) I can at least understand their perspective. With the much slower growth-rate of the Humans compared to Meklar I needed at least some respect for the AI.

Still, the game plays as a very straight forward space-4X with a bad tactical combat (I don't mind it being real time but there's really nothing there) saved by high production values and a legendary brand. If you want a toy that can entertain you for a few hours until you can by a new toy then it good enough. If your looking for a deep strategy game this game doesn't deliver and probably never will.

[Zed-F]

"Probably never will" depends a great deal on (a) how much longer they are willing to let it bake before they need to recoup on initial investment, and (b) take at the box office and hence developer/publisher interest in putting out expansions which add depth to things that need it, such as the combat system. Visible and effective polishing and balancing now would show that the devs are willing and able to put in the work, given time to do so, and thus deserve to be given the opportunity to see what went wrong and what went right, correct the former and build on the latter.

I have seen games before that launched as 'a good start, but a bit shallow' transform over time into real gems that stand the test of time. You can never be certain, as it's also possible that expansions fail to address core problems, but with games that show at least some promise, I find it's best not to write them off too soon.

[Alhazard]

Played a game with Humans on Medium sized galaxy still on VH and the game was definitely more challenging. Did my normal make a colony ship at size 2, and soon was at war with 3 other races. But are missile bases supposed to be OP? I started cash rushing them at my frontier colonies because I was being attacked on multiple fronts and couldn't defend them all with just ships. However the missile bases just obliterated all the attackers even though the bar graph said it was a balanced fight.

However I am sad because now I think the midgame tech choices are more narrower than I thought. It is probably not worth rushing for spaceports, and likely can just ignore the +1 per research cell as well. Instead just try to grow your colonies as big as possible after they get 80% happy and research terraforming and radiation shielding as needed.

[Windsor]

But are missile bases supposed to be OP? I started cash rushing them at my frontier colonies because I was being attacked on multiple fronts and couldn't defend them all with just ships. However the missile bases just obliterated all the attackers even though the bar graph said it was a balanced fight.

I've found them to be very strong too. Only 60 production or 480BC makes them easy to rush in new border colonies that needs defending. If you can't defend with ships at a military outpost falling back to a missile base is a good choice. Star bases seems to be stronger in addition to the 5 command points they give, but cost twice as much and I don't really have that much cash early game.

[Hail]

It's true that my post was (very) negative. I had just finished a game and was genuinely surprised that both Zygot and Sullla seemed to have had a much better experience post-patch than me. Because I really didn't notice any difference before and after the patch at all. Having played a 2nd game (as humans in medium sized galaxy) I can at least understand their perspective. With the much slower growth-rate of the Humans compared to Meklar I needed at least some respect for the AI.

your negativity is fair. the new MoO is a shallow space 4x with visual real-time tactical combat. some people point out that the races are not unique enough. I feel that such shortcoming can be easily amended. however, build orders for every planet are the same and a player would want to terraform all plants to Gaia. Can that be fixed? do devs see the lack of specialization as a problem? I do.
uber planet types (biomes) somewhat alleviate this issue. still, the game needs wonders, national wonders, and more solar system uniques. I am not excited about diminishing returns, but why limit prod/food/research slots on a planet?

some thoughts on MM:
I detest the way pollution works in this game. if the devs want a pollution mechanic, it should work exactly like in civ4.
In addition to building/rushing the same buildings on every new world, the One Right Choice is to send pop to the new worlds from those at the cap. hm... alright, the AI will almost definitely not be programmed to use this mechanic. a subtle human "cheat" to overcome the bonuses the AI gets. cool! but how about multiplayer?

the bottom is line that new MoO devs play(ed) too much civ5 and not enough MoO1. the game has excellent visual & audio presentation but falls flat on its face during gameplay. in the saturated market, presentation & legendary brand may not be enough to give the game momentum to reach the life cycle (people play it -> the gaming media gives coverage -> more people discover the game and play it -> the game receives more attention -> etc.). obviously the game will add depth through complexity and fluff, but that's not my cup of tea.
here is an idea! add an archeologist space vessel that will browse the vastness of space in search of "ruins". it will "dig" them up to discover artifacts that can (should) be placed in a space museum on a planet near you for space faith points. yeah! cool!

[Psillycyber]

build orders for every planet are the same

Note that this is largely the case in the original MoO1 (aside from those odd circumstances where I want to slow-build an early missile base in a hostile zone before putting down any factories). But I think that the reason this doesn't feel like a problem in MoO1 is because this is not where the focus of the gameplay is designed to be in the first place. MoO1 is not really a colony management game. It is a space empire game where colonies are a means to getting a better fleet that will win you the game. All of the emphasis is on the fleet. Once you get a game-winning fleet, your colonies cease to matter. It's like the MoO1 game designers realized this because their slider system, along with the ship relocation waypoint, makes it so that, when you reach that stage in the game where your fleet has become decisive, you don't have to worry about your colonies. You can spend all of your time working with the fancy toys in your fleet that you have attained. That's where the fun is.

a player would want to terraform all plants to Gaia

Once again, true for the original MoO1 too, but in that case it worked because planets are not unique gems to be decorated and refined (unlike in Civ4, where I've very much had the feeling of nurturing a growing city, filling it out, protecting it, inventing fantasy stories in my head about what those citizens would be experiencing, etc.). Your planets in MoO1 are just faceless mass-production assembly lines for building your fleet. Now, your fleet is where all of that attention and love and care goes in MoO1. Pretty much every ship design I've ever made (outside of some habitual early-game designs) has been different and memorable. Planets? Bah! I couldn't tell you whether my second planet was named "Spica" or "Denubius" or "Yarrow" or something else entirely during the last game I played.

the game needs wonders, national wonders, and more solar system uniques

I disagree, unless you want to take Master of Orion in an entirely different direction and make it more like Civ or Galciv. No thanks for me. Those games already exist.

What I would like instead:
*More interesting tactical combat choices.
*More interesting ship design choices. More qualitatively-different ship specials. Also, for example, does anyone find it odd that missiles never miss unless jammed with an ecm jammer? Wouldn't it make more sense for some sorts of beams to never miss? I mean, beams move at the speed of light. Missiles, last time I checked, don't. This could be a way of balancing beams with missiles better than it is now.

[HansLemurson]

Yeah, missile-bases are amazingly powerful. Only with shields and plentiful PD can you hope to survive its barrages. The AI loves them so much that they prioritize them above any economic buildings, thus sabotaging their development.

[Alhazard]

Well based on my playthroughs I really don't think you should bother Gaiaing any of your planets since it doesn't increase your pop cap. The real growth tech is from Astro Biology that actually increases the pop cap.

EDIT: Hmm civil transports do not move striking pop, which makes it weaker than I thought.