Jump to content


Hate star lanes? Think Stellaris!


  • Please log in to reply
28 replies to this topic

Dizeit_ #1 Posted 07 May 2016 - 08:33 AM

    Lieutenant

  • Players
  • 33
  • Member since:
    04-20-2016

To all peeps who hate star lanes but like deep, complex games, have you seen any Stellaris gameplay? Star lanes are an option but like TONS of other options, can be turned off. And the gameplay....

 

https://www.youtube....h?v=bhLKM2HPLJQ

 

LITERALLY. BLOWS. MOOcts. OUT. OF. THE. WATER!!  We're talking no contest here, it makes MooCts look like a retarded stepchild.



Prrsha #2 Posted 07 May 2016 - 09:16 AM

    Commander

  • Players
  • 242
  • Member since:
    05-02-2016

I think you are in the wrong place to bash MOO games and promote others here... borders on trolling, and no I'm not going to bite.



JeanBaptisteEmanuelZorg #3 Posted 07 May 2016 - 09:27 AM

    Captain

  • Players
  • 470
  • Member since:
    09-08-2015

View PostPrrsha, on 07 May 2016 - 09:16 AM, said:

I think you are in the wrong place to bash MOO games and promote others here... borders on trolling, and no I'm not going to bite.

 

That's right ! I'm also see no reason to compare MOOcts against Stellaris. Stellaris is simply better. Imo MOOcts have failed to take it's place because of poor game Design.


Edited by JeanBaptisteEmanuelZorg, 07 May 2016 - 09:29 AM.

"Nice pictures, nice UI, balance and a good AI" © "This is no mine, it's a tomb!"

Poll from Zorg : Combat is the Core for MOO Universe 4x Strategy

Poll from Zorg : No LOOT in MOO/CtS


Lucian667 #4 Posted 07 May 2016 - 10:49 AM

    Rear Admiral

  • Players
  • 579
  • Member since:
    10-08-2015

View PostDizeit_, on 07 May 2016 - 08:33 AM, said:

To all peeps who hate star lanes but like deep, complex games, have you seen any Stellaris gameplay? Star lanes are an option but like TONS of other options, can be turned off. And the gameplay....

 

https://www.youtube....h?v=bhLKM2HPLJQ

 

LITERALLY. BLOWS. MOOcts. OUT. OF. THE. WATER!!  We're talking no contest here, it makes MooCts look like a retarded stepchild.

 

Wow, great video, thanks for the link!

 

The big problem with Stellaris is no tactical combat at all. Zero. For some people its not so serious an issue, but for me tactical combat (which involves actual tactics) is pretty important. But other than that I'd agree that Stellaris has MOO 4 pretty effortlessly outclassed in almost every other area. The race creation in the video was awesome, a real testament to what a bit of skill and imagination can accomplish. Kudos to the dev team.

 

I'm still hoping that tactical combat in MOO 4 will be up to par by release time, but it has a depressingly long way to go and not much time left to get there. And of course it will remain saddled with forced starlanes no matter what. If I end up buying, it it will be ONLY for the combat and nothing else, and that's assuming the combat ends up any good. Depressing but true.



Ilserrad #5 Posted 07 May 2016 - 10:49 AM

    Lieutenant

  • Players
  • 98
  • Member since:
    03-17-2016

Sorry, watched all those videos, and the game looks like everything I hate about MoO3 wrapped up in a spiny little bow of real time strategy.

 

No thanks.



JeanBaptisteEmanuelZorg #6 Posted 07 May 2016 - 12:22 PM

    Captain

  • Players
  • 470
  • Member since:
    09-08-2015

View PostIlserrad, on 07 May 2016 - 10:49 AM, said:

Sorry, watched all those videos, and the game looks like everything I hate about MoO3 wrapped up in a spiny little bow of real time strategy.

 

No thanks.

 

Imo the point is not that Stellaris is strong, but rather that MOOcts is poor. It's poor comparing to MOO12 (and a lot of other games).

"Nice pictures, nice UI, balance and a good AI" © "This is no mine, it's a tomb!"

Poll from Zorg : Combat is the Core for MOO Universe 4x Strategy

Poll from Zorg : No LOOT in MOO/CtS


fourteenfour #7 Posted 07 May 2016 - 12:25 PM

    Rear Admiral

  • Players
  • 556
  • Member since:
    01-09-2016
Stellaris looks like a slog. The tactical combat might as well be permanent cinematic with barely any guidance, as in the developers basically acknowledged they can't do a good tactical AI so no one gets to be good
Wargaming Labs, taking the money and running. Abandons MOO CTS after their contract development staff could not deliver without ever one word to players.

Lucian667 #8 Posted 07 May 2016 - 12:40 PM

    Rear Admiral

  • Players
  • 579
  • Member since:
    10-08-2015

View PostJeanBaptisteEmanuelZorg, on 07 May 2016 - 12:22 PM, said:

Imo the point is not that Stellaris is strong, but rather that MOOcts is poor. It's poor comparing to MOO12 (and a lot of other games).

 

I prefer turn based but I can live with RTS as long as it is slow and pauseable. But Zorg have you lost faith in MOO 4? What do you think of the current state of tactical combat? Is there any chance it will be good (like MOO 2) by release or is all lost?

Andruski #9 Posted 07 May 2016 - 01:39 PM

    Lieutenant

  • Players
  • 90
  • Member since:
    05-04-2011

Might as well copy/paste from the other poll thread. Maybe I should've put it here to begin with (it was in response to saying 'no' to Stellaris on the basis of RTS, and Moo:cts not feeling like Moo)

-----

Pausable RTS does not really mean the same thing as traditional RTS (like many would think of starcraft's rapid clicking).  Basically pausable RTS is supposed to give all the same sort of modern advantages that the people who wanted pausable real time combat over turn based. 

 

Its downside is that it has no tactical combat at all. However I think i'm ok with that as the combat is more about effective ship design (designing ships in Moo is currently a chore when it used to be a joy). So design a better ship and get rewarded for it. Of the two, (Stellaris' ship design vs Moo's painful designer + tactical combat) I am somewhat torn, but perhaps you can think of Stellaris as being able to freely auto-resolve all combats without a downside anymore - and this approach will really shine in multiplayer if Moo continues with no tactical. 

 

As far as Moo cts not feeling like Moo, I think I disagree. To me it captured the feel quite well. It was only after I realized that they stripped away so much of the depth and didnt replace it with anything that I started looking elsewhere. (Edit: the espionage implementation is new, with its trees and all...my problem is I loath it -so much micro and it feels required yet unrewarding and then more micro- I literally havent picked up the game again because of it. Unfortunately after seeing their preview for the next big patch, there seems to be no plans for any more major content. We can tweak what we have but it will remain shallow)

 

In the end, In Stellaris I feel like i'll be panicking all the time knowing that things are constantly going on and I can only keep my eyes on a few of them (though i'll play at the slowest pace and pause often), but with the trade off being deep gameplay, race customization, novel new concepts, randomized tech, leaders, governments, end game shake-ups and story making, i'll gladly take it. 


Edited by Andruski, 07 May 2016 - 01:41 PM.


JeanBaptisteEmanuelZorg #10 Posted 07 May 2016 - 02:09 PM

    Captain

  • Players
  • 470
  • Member since:
    09-08-2015

View PostLucian667, on 07 May 2016 - 12:40 PM, said:

 

I prefer turn based but I can live with RTS as long as it is slow and pauseable. But Zorg have you lost faith in MOO 4? What do you think of the current state of tactical combat? Is there any chance it will be good (like MOO 2) by release or is all lost?

 

I did my best to like MOO4. I even accepted the RTS combat idea and starlane idea, but... MOO4 have so many design flaws, that it makes me feel like my thoughts strike against the wall every time i'm trying to immerse into that game. It's bare logic and sci-fi anchors. Here are few examples:

 

1. Some race comes to me and asks for money. WHY ??? They call it Diplomacy;

2. No loot after the battle (loot idea is everywhere: capture a planet with artifacts in MOO1, capture a ship in MOO2 and so on and so of);

3. Small fonts in the research tree so hardly possible to read anything;

4. You have to go through all the colonies to build things as there are no user defined auto-build templates;

5. Silicoids like Inferno worlds aswell as Terrain worlds;

 

All that mentioned above plus poor RTS in general, poor Tech ideas for spaceship design in general, starlanes (they have to do something with it atleast with the help of Jump gates), poor diplomacy and minor worlds... poor game decision machine, poor game performance during combat AND...

 

the only way it's suitable to play combat now is that new triangular-primitive combat map (not because of my steam-machine performance, trust me. and even this way i can't rotate it 90 degrees with a hot key). primitive combat map !!! Year 2016 !!!! It was way better in MOO2.

 

All those design flaws just make me mad. My dreams are becoming destoyed against the wall of constraints called MOO4. No, thanks.


"Nice pictures, nice UI, balance and a good AI" © "This is no mine, it's a tomb!"

Poll from Zorg : Combat is the Core for MOO Universe 4x Strategy

Poll from Zorg : No LOOT in MOO/CtS


Lucian667 #11 Posted 07 May 2016 - 02:34 PM

    Rear Admiral

  • Players
  • 579
  • Member since:
    10-08-2015

View PostAndruski, on 07 May 2016 - 01:39 PM, said:

In the end, In Stellaris I feel like i'll be panicking all the time knowing that things are constantly going on and I can only keep my eyes on a few of them (though i'll play at the slowest pace and pause often), but with the trade off being deep gameplay, race customization, novel new concepts, randomized tech, leaders, governments, end game shake-ups and story making, i'll gladly take it. 

 

I know what you mean, the exact same thing happens with Distant Worlds which is also pausable RT. There are many things happening simultaneously around the galaxy but I can only focus on one thing at a time so I inevitably end up missing things that I'd rather have seen. Its a serious problem with an RT strategic layer and one I was hoping that Stellaris would somehow have solved. Either way I also agree that the incredible depth and wealth of options are worth it.

 

View PostJeanBaptisteEmanuelZorg, on 07 May 2016 - 02:09 PM, said:

I did my best to like MOO4. I even accepted the RTS combat idea and starlane idea, but... MOO4 have so many design flaws, that it makes me feel like my thoughts strike against the wall every time i'm trying to immerse into that game. It's bare logic and sci-fi anchors. Here are few examples:

 

1. Some race comes to me and asks for money. WHY ??? They call it Diplomacy;

2. No loot after the battle (loot idea is everywhere: capture a planet with artifacts in MOO1, capture a ship in MOO2 and so on and so of);

3. Small fonts in the research tree so hardly possible to read anything;

4. You have to go through all the colonies to build things as there are no user defined auto-build templates;

5. Silicoids like Inferno worlds aswell as Terrain worlds;

 

All that mentioned above plus poor RTS in general, poor Tech ideas for spaceship design in general, starlanes (they have to do something with it atleast with the help of Jump gates), poor diplomacy and minor worlds... poor game decision machine, poor game performance during combat AND...

 

the only way it's suitable to play combat now is that new triangular-primitive combat map (not because of my steam-machine performance, trust me. and even this way i can't rotate it 90 degrees with a hot key). primitive combat map !!! Year 2016 !!!! It was way better in MOO2.

 

All those design flaws just make me mad. My dreams are becoming destoyed against the wall of constraints called MOO4. No, thanks.

 

Thanks for the detailed response, it does look rather depressing. I know its still EA, but the clock is ticking and there's still so very much wrong. Its a pity that Stellaris has no tactical combat, if it did it would be easy to forget about MOO 4 entirely. But good tactical combat in a 4x is so amazingly rare (for some unknown reason) that even MOO 4's half-assed attempt might be worth it. Maybe. I'll see how it looks on release.

MasterOfOrionConquerTheS #12 Posted 07 May 2016 - 03:51 PM

    Captain

  • Players
  • 251
  • Member since:
    03-01-2016
I'm going to buy stellaris, but it's a very different beast from MOO. I'm not sure the argument that one is better than the other holds if you can buy both. 

JeanBaptisteEmanuelZorg #13 Posted 07 May 2016 - 03:59 PM

    Captain

  • Players
  • 470
  • Member since:
    09-08-2015

View PostMasterOfOrionConquerTheS, on 07 May 2016 - 03:51 PM, said:

I'm going to buy stellaris, but it's a very different beast from MOO. I'm not sure the argument that one is better than the other holds if you can buy both. 

 

It doesn't matter how many games a player can buy. It matters how much fun he will get and how much time will spend for a game. And you can't play both at the same time.

"Nice pictures, nice UI, balance and a good AI" © "This is no mine, it's a tomb!"

Poll from Zorg : Combat is the Core for MOO Universe 4x Strategy

Poll from Zorg : No LOOT in MOO/CtS


Endsor #14 Posted 07 May 2016 - 04:18 PM

    Commander

  • Players
  • 118
  • Member since:
    11-01-2015

View PostMasterOfOrionConquerTheS, on 07 May 2016 - 03:51 PM, said:

I'm going to buy stellaris, but it's a very different beast from MOO. I'm not sure the argument that one is better than the other holds if you can buy both. 

 

The argument holds if one game is better than the other in every way, then there is no need for the inferior game even if you can afford the costs. MooNew is only better maybe in tactical combat, but if buggy or busted or weak then it is not even useful for that one purpose. They must do good job with combat, it is the only reason to buy otherwise very inferior MooNew over Stellaris.

MasterOfOrionConquerTheS #15 Posted 07 May 2016 - 09:32 PM

    Captain

  • Players
  • 251
  • Member since:
    03-01-2016

View PostEndsor, on 07 May 2016 - 04:18 PM, said:

 

The argument holds if one game is better than the other in every way, then there is no need for the inferior game even if you can afford the costs. MooNew is only better maybe in tactical combat, but if buggy or busted or weak then it is not even useful for that one purpose. They must do good job with combat, it is the only reason to buy otherwise very inferior MooNew over Stellaris.

 

I don't care about your argument, it's my money and i'll use it to buy whatever i want! 

 

View PostJeanBaptisteEmanuelZorg, on 07 May 2016 - 03:59 PM, said:

 

It doesn't matter how many games a player can buy. It matters how much fun he will get and how much time will spend for a game. And you can't play both at the same time.

 

Well the steam police is gonna need a warrant if they want to tell me how to spend my gaming hours!



Mathias_Zealot #16 Posted 07 May 2016 - 11:23 PM

    Captain

  • Players
  • 286
  • Member since:
    04-12-2011
I'm generally in agreement, but:

Block Quote

 Star lanes are an option but like TONS of other options, can be turned off.

 

I was under the impression that they can't be turned off any more than wormhole stations or jump drives can be turned off. You can choose your starting mode of travel, but other empires will use a random travel tech. You can also research the other forms of travel during the game, so the hyperlanes are still there even if you don't choose to start with them.

 

Unless I've missed it mentioned somewhere that they can be disabled completely (though I'm sure there will be mods to do just that after release if not, but the same could be said of MoO:CiS)


EA4 Weapon Data (5-27-16)

Eji1700 #17 Posted 07 May 2016 - 11:29 PM

    Commander

  • Players
  • 100
  • Member since:
    02-25-2016

View PostMathias_Zealot, on 07 May 2016 - 11:23 PM, said:

I'm generally in agreement, but:

 

I was under the impression that they can't be turned off any more than wormhole stations or jump drives can be turned off. You can choose your starting mode of travel, but other empires will use a random travel tech. You can also research the other forms of travel during the game, so the hyperlanes are still there even if you don't choose to start with them.

 

Unless I've missed it mentioned somewhere that they can be disabled completely (though I'm sure there will be mods to do just that after release if not, but the same could be said of MoO:CiS)

 

At the beginning of the game you can choose if each race will have a random travel tech, or force everyone on the map to use the same tech (so all hyperdrive, all wormhole, or all warp drive)

Rustypipe_2016 #18 Posted 07 May 2016 - 11:38 PM

    Lieutenant

  • Players
  • 24
  • Member since:
    02-26-2016

View PostLucian667, on 07 May 2016 - 10:49 AM, said:

 

Wow, great video, thanks for the link!

 

The big problem with Stellaris is no tactical combat at all. Zero. For some people its not so serious an issue, but for me tactical combat (which involves actual tactics) is pretty important. But other than that I'd agree that Stellaris has MOO 4 pretty effortlessly outclassed in almost every other area. The race creation in the video was awesome, a real testament to what a bit of skill and imagination can accomplish. Kudos to the dev team.

 

I'm still hoping that tactical combat in MOO 4 will be up to par by release time, but it has a depressingly long way to go and not much time left to get there. And of course it will remain saddled with forced starlanes no matter what. If I end up buying, it it will be ONLY for the combat and nothing else, and that's assuming the combat ends up any good. Depressing but true.

 

LoL, so what is the difference here exactly?  The "tactical combat' in Moo is pretty well just a cinematic version of the battle with a few options like what you can attack and what range you want your ships to stay at.  For all intensive purposes the "tactical combat" isn't even worth using and is just the illusion of control.  I see no difference here.

 

Honestly if anyone wants an updated Moo2 type experience the closet thing I have seen to it is Stardrive 2.  Now keep in mind it is buggy and will crash on you here and there as its a 1 man dev team, but the over all feel of the game, depth, and replay-ability is waaay higher then the current iteration of this Moo.  Also they still have RTS combat system but its done properly where it actually engages you and it makes a difference.  You can actually do things like turn your ship broadside to take more hits, open up new weapons, fly around enemy ships while dodging there attacks to go after their engines, etc, etc.

 

Long story short, I have a strong feeling when Moo does go full retail it will be a highly polished watered down Moo experience with low replay-ability.  Now this will probably appeal to a lot of people who want a nice streamlined 4x space experience, but for the ones looking for something a little deeper, I fear this will not be it.  I hope they make me wrong but we'll see.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 


Edited by Rustypipe_2016, 07 May 2016 - 11:45 PM.


Mikko_M #19 Posted 08 May 2016 - 12:32 AM

    Rear Admiral

  • Banned
  • 536
  • Member since:
    06-18-2015

View PostLucian667, on 07 May 2016 - 10:49 AM, said:

 

Wow, great video, thanks for the link!

 

The big problem with Stellaris is no tactical combat at all. Zero. For some people its not so serious an issue, but for me tactical combat (which involves actual tactics) is pretty important. But other than that I'd agree that Stellaris has MOO 4 pretty effortlessly outclassed in almost every other area. The race creation in the video was awesome, a real testament to what a bit of skill and imagination can accomplish. Kudos to the dev team.

 

I'm still hoping that tactical combat in MOO 4 will be up to par by release time, but it has a depressingly long way to go and not much time left to get there. And of course it will remain saddled with forced starlanes no matter what. If I end up buying, it it will be ONLY for the combat and nothing else, and that's assuming the combat ends up any good. Depressing but true.

 

​Pretty ironic that the tactical combat and ship design are about the only aces that this current MOO has to really differentiate from the other modern 4X games out there and being developed, and we have a project lead here who doesn`t understand the importance of tactical combat at all. Chris " the research" Keeling might turn out to be a really costly hiring for Wargaming at the end of the day.

Moreover, I advise that the tactical combat must be made more player controllable and informative for this to become a proper MOO game.

 

​The long lost formula for space 4X game success = Good tactical combat + good empire management > than just good tactical combat or good empire management alone.


Lucian667 #20 Posted 08 May 2016 - 02:27 AM

    Rear Admiral

  • Players
  • 579
  • Member since:
    10-08-2015

View PostMathias_Zealot, on 07 May 2016 - 11:23 PM, said:

I was under the impression that they can't be turned off any more than wormhole stations or jump drives can be turned off. You can choose your starting mode of travel, but other empires will use a random travel tech. You can also research the other forms of travel during the game, so the hyperlanes are still there even if you don't choose to start with them.

 

No he's right, if you check out the video the guy shows a setup option where you can turn starlanes off so they are unavailable for any race. Basically if you dislike starlanes you can just play every game with free moment only, aint options great? Its so refreshing to see a game where devs allow players to play the game the way they want. If only all devs thought that way we'd be a lot happier and they'd be a lot richer.......

 

View PostRustypipe_2016, on 07 May 2016 - 11:38 PM, said:

LoL, so what is the difference here exactly?  The "tactical combat' in Moo is pretty well just a cinematic version of the battle with a few options like what you can attack and what range you want your ships to stay at.  For all intensive purposes the "tactical combat" isn't even worth using and is just the illusion of control.  I see no difference here.

 

Sadly at the moment you're 100% right, there's not much difference at all. I'm still hoping for a miracle in the last stages of EA where they suddenly get their act together and actually provide us with good, player-controlled tactical combat worthy of the MOO name. Surely the devs must realize they're totally outclassed by the opposition, and good tactical combat - the one thing Stellaris doesn't completely ace them on - is the only way MOO 4 can possibly stay relevant. They have to know that right?

 

View PostMikko_M, on 08 May 2016 - 12:32 AM, said:

Pretty ironic that the tactical combat and ship design are about the only aces that this current MOO has to really differentiate from the other modern 4X games out there and being developed, and we have a project lead here who doesn`t understand the importance of tactical combat at all. Chris " the research" Keeling might turn out to be a really costly hiring for Wargaming at the end of the day.

 

Not sure exactly who's responsible but I totally agree that whoever it is better wake up SOON to the fact that tactical combat is their only selling point when compared to a competition which totally outclasses them at literally everything else. Because one thing is certain, MOO 4's simplistic, casual-friendly, starlane-infested strategic layer holds zero interest for me. I stopped playing RISK when I was 12 and if they're not going to fix the starlanes the only reason I would have left for buying this game is GOOD, hands-on tactical combat IF they can provide it.




3 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 3 guests, 0 anonymous users