Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Master of Orion

filfre.net

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

81–90 of 102 posts

Re: Master of Orion

#81

Post by beefok »

chaostheory wrote: post #79
beefok wrote: post #74

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I feel the same way, but I also feel the same way about Civilization. I pop open a virtualbox + windows XP just to play Civ for windows edition.. Something I still really enjoy is Deadlock by Accolade, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Deadlock:_Planetary_Conquest You can get it off gog for $7! I recommend that version over the Steam version. It can be finnicky, but again, I play it on the XP Virtualbox!

They’ve massively streamlined modern Civ games. Micromanagement is nearly gone now.

I meant more that I like the original Civ still to this day, but I also love Civ 4+ as well. They definitely streamlined it!

Re: Master of Orion

#82

Post by ahefner »

giantrobot wrote: post #48

I was always partial to Stars![0] though I did enjoy MOO. It looked a lot like a Windows productivity app so I could play it with no one being the wiser. It wasn't as deep as MOO other some other games but I enjoyed it. [0] https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stars !

Interesting. Never heard of that game. Looks interesting, but moreover it reminds me of another game I haven't thought about in years that hasn't come up in discussion yet: Spaceward Ho! Anyone remember that one?

Re: Master of Orion

#83

Post by gbudee »

beloch wrote: post #57

The sequel to MOO, and most 4X games made since then, have always felt inferior to me. MOO was like a game of chess. The rules were relatively simple, but complex enough to give you the "box of chocolates" games this article talks about. MOO2 bogged you down in micromanaging colony buildings, etc. and other 4X games made since have added far more complex systems. The results feels like chess where each piece now has…

You may be interested in Slipways, which boils down the feel of a 4x, while playing more like an elegant engine-builder board game.

Re: Master of Orion

#84

Post by npunt »

beloch wrote: post #57

The sequel to MOO, and most 4X games made since then, have always felt inferior to me. MOO was like a game of chess. The rules were relatively simple, but complex enough to give you the "box of chocolates" games this article talks about. MOO2 bogged you down in micromanaging colony buildings, etc. and other 4X games made since have added far more complex systems. The results feels like chess where each piece now has…

Agree, no 4X game I've seen does a kind of 'scale with scope' gameplay. Ideally the number of decisions and considerations would stay roughly the same for each turn throughout the game, regardless of how big the empire gets. The decisions would simply get larger in scope, and it'd optionally let you dig in and make tweaks to certain parts if you wanted.

I understand why nobody's done this (it's hard to do & requires having AI for each subsystem as well as the whole) but it'd make the whole genre much more fun. Right now almost all 4X games just stop being fun mid-game when their mechanics and flow just bog down in endless notifications.

Re: Master of Orion

#85

Post by ahonhn »

beefok wrote: post #81
chaostheory wrote: post #79

Earlier quoted context omitted.

They’ve massively streamlined modern Civ games. Micromanagement is nearly gone now.

I meant more that I like the original Civ still to this day, but I also love Civ 4+ as well. They definitely streamlined it!

Civ 1 works well in DOSBox too

Re: Master of Orion

#86

Post by bitcharmer »

beefok wrote: post #74
beloch wrote: post #57

The sequel to MOO, and most 4X games made since then, have always felt inferior to me. MOO was like a game of chess. The rules were relatively simple, but complex enough to give you the "box of chocolates" games this article talks about. MOO2 bogged you down in micromanaging colony buildings, etc. and other 4X games made since have added far more complex systems. The results feels like chess where each piece now has…

I feel the same way, but I also feel the same way about Civilization. I pop open a virtualbox + windows XP just to play Civ for windows edition.. Something I still really enjoy is Deadlock by Accolade, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Deadlock:_Planetary_Conquest You can get it off gog for $7! I recommend that version over the Steam version. It can be finnicky, but again, I play it on the XP Virtualbox!

No need for a windows VM these days. Civilization works great on SteamPlay and Lutris.

Re: Master of Orion

#87

Post by Andrew_nenakhov »

FredPret wrote: post #72
JoeAltmaier wrote: post #55

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I liked Telepath and silicoid - you skip all food and ground-combat skills, since you take over planets with your mind! Better than the Psilon who get all tech branches - you don't even need half of them! And can do industrial development on all planets (no wasted population making food)

I do hate those Elerians taking my planets without even a fight!

Btw what I loved in Moo2 was taking planets with their population, you didn't just wipe them out, but assimilated them in your empire, and could use those colonists to settle inhospitable planets.

Re: Master of Orion

#88

Post by tomca32 »

IG_Semmelweiss wrote: post #43
seanwilson wrote: post #20

Are there any games like Civilization and Master of Orion where the number of units and choices in the later game don't get so overwhelming? I usually lose interest at this point but enjoy the early game. It's not the same kind of game or as grand in scale, but I really enjoyed Into the Breach because each turn you only have a limited number of choices and units each turn, and each choice feels important.

Stellaris does a fantastic job at this. Stays relevant until the very end.

The late game crisis is such a good idea to solve this problem.

At that point you're strong enough that you can beat all the other empires but then an extra-dimensional invasion happens that's just so much stronger than anything else you've encountered and it works really well to spice up the late game and make everything relevant again.

Re: Master of Orion

#90

Post by Ekaros »

Sohcahtoa82 wrote: post #62
beloch wrote: post #57

The sequel to MOO, and most 4X games made since then, have always felt inferior to me. MOO was like a game of chess. The rules were relatively simple, but complex enough to give you the "box of chocolates" games this article talks about. MOO2 bogged you down in micromanaging colony buildings, etc. and other 4X games made since have added far more complex systems. The results feels like chess where each piece now has…

I liked the micromanaging of buildings in MOO2 in the early game, but later game, when you're invading multiple planets, it definitely gets annoying. > I haven't really kept up with 4X games. Are there any that have tried to get back to the basic chess of MOO instead of bolting on complications that bog you down in micromanagement? Such a game would probably fail to achieve commercial success in today's world. It wou…

Yeah, it's a certain type of trap. At first it is something to do and some near term goal that exist there. Later when you complete everything in a turn it just becomes exercise of going through a list of actions repeated over half-a-dozen to dozens systems. Maybe games should offer some tools for this, like templates what to build and what ratios and so on. You could automatically set one of these or have custom one made for those needing more special actions.
Post reply on HN