Jump to content


Early Access Phase 4: Development Progress


  • Please log in to reply
34 replies to this topic

GeneralDirection #1 Posted 24 May 2016 - 07:01 PM

    WG Staff

  • Administrator
  • 313
  • Member since:
    08-22-2011
Greetings Explorers, 

One of the great things about Early Access is the opportunity to interact with the development and publishing teams, as well as for the development team to provide progress updates that hone in on changes they are making based on your feedback. To coincide with the release of Early Access phase 4 (version 44.4), we have a progress update from Andrés Chilkowski, CEO of NGD Studios and Game Director on Master of Orion. 

I now turn the keyboard over to Andrés for the remainder of this post... 

As most of you know by now, Early Access is a looking glass into the development of a game. Making games is a complex process and what you witnessed with EA3 was a good example. 

EA3 was us trying to reach feature complete at all costs. Because of that, some features came into it very hot and lacked the necessary polish while other features (like, ahem, Minor Civs...) were not good enough. 

Now that the game is -almost- feature complete we can finally focus on making it better. Things like a smarter and more challenging artificial intelligence, a more streamlined UI and improved pacing and rhythm thanks to a more balanced game will start to catalyze from now on. 

Welcome to EA4! 
 
AI


Although the balance and the mechanics still need more tweaking and improvements, we have now reached a point where we can really start to focus on AI. 

Our vision and objectives for the AI are the following: 

 

  • The AI should play fair and use the same information as the human player 
  • The AI should provide good feedback and a coherent narrative to the users through their actions and diplomatic interactions 
  • The AI should be challenging 
  • The AI should play according to their racial traits and characteristics

 

Our development efforts towards the AI went into these 3 categories for EA4: Global Strategy, Management and Diplomacy. 
 

Strategic AI


This is still a work in progress but we have improved the way the AI is placing its fleets and assessing the overall status of war. 

 

  • Improved analysis to evaluate the war effort 
  • Improved analysis to pursue different victory conditions 
  • Improved overall threat awareness 
  • Improved Offensive strategies 
  • improved Defensive strategies 
  • Improved specific tactics for invasion and bombing 
  • Improved handling of space pirates
 
Management AI
 
  • The AI is more efficient at deciding what structures to build and when according to the type of planet and the stage of progress of each colony 
  • The AI is now much better at handling its finances allowing races to shoot for a bigger empire and armadas 
  • Colonization rules are more aggressive if interesting planets are available 
  • Now the AI can Terraform their planets and use the space factory to build new ones
 
Diplomatic AI

The game provides context and narrative, and good insight into the AI, through diplomatic interactions. Our efforts into the diplomatic AI are focused on making our characters more believable and pushing the player into making interesting decisions. 

The most important change is the AI taking into account Threat Awareness for potential enemies and allies. Now it will be much easier to understand the AI's intentions as they will sweeten a deal that they really want to make and they will react in a more reasonable way if they are afraid.
 
Espionage


Espionage was a highly anticipated feature and feedback seems to be positive in terms of the overall vision but the implementation in EA3 had several UX problems and required a great deal of micromanagement. 

With that in mind, we made the following improvements to Espionage for EA4: 

 

  • Mission tree now allows to add missions to a queue 
  • We improved the feedback for Spy selection 
  • We removed the camera automatic focus upon selection to improve Target Colony selection 
  • Acquire Data mission now reveals enemy colonies offering more colony targets 
  • Decreased spawn rate for spies to improve the game’s rhythm and make the Espionage Training Facility more relevant 
  • New mission added: Steal Charts 
  • Revolt duration capped at 20 turns 
  • Rebalanced duration for certain missions 
  • Other minor UX improvements
 
Tactical Battles


We continue to improve balance for tactical battles according to your feedback. Some of the improvements that went into EA4 are: 

 

  • We increased the size of the map to add strategic depth and open up more chances to perform maneuvers 
  • We rebalanced weapons and shields to increase the survivability of ships 
  • We added range dissipation, shield piercing and armor penetration 
  • We improved overall performance to support even larger battles
 
Ship design

In EA3 we tried a different approach for Ship Design that wasn't well-received. So, we went back to the design board and combined the best elements of the old interface and the new one. We also fixed a lot of the annoying bugs that you reported. 

One of the most important improvements is that we finally were able to unify the flow of auto-upgrade with the ship design flow. This means that auto-upgrade will now happen inside the ship design screen, providing better feedback and allowing for more opportunities for you to edit your designs in case you don't like what auto-upgrade has in mind. 
 
Removal of Minor Civilizations (temporary)


As they were implemented so far, they ended up as more of a hassle than an interesting strategic decision, requiring a great deal of attention for little reward. 

We decided that Minor Civs had to be taken back to the design board as this feature is not up to the standards of quality and design that we want for the game. Once we have a new design we will open it up to you to gather your feedback. 

That's all we have for now, you can see a detailed list of changes in the patch notes.


We hope that you enjoy this version. We are anxious to get your feedback and continue to work to make this a great Master of Orion game. 

Best, 

- Chilko & the NGD Studios team 
- WG Labs



Mikko_M #2 Posted 24 May 2016 - 07:09 PM

    Rear Admiral

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

- For espionage PLEASE do as Anguille_1 suggested and:

 
"Dev Team....please play a full game of MOO1 with the Darloks and see how espionnage works there, it's still really the best system in any 4x game i have played...(imho). Thanks"
 
As the current espionage model truly isn`t as great as you seem to think. (It is rather random in stealing techs and sabotaging buildings and requires quite a lot of micromanagement too.)
 
​- For tactical combat you need to bring the tactical battles as close to Master Of Orion 2 level of control and options as possible in a real-time system. (Good UI design is really the key here to allow multiple choices to be made, but easily).​ This is truly an area where you can set yourselves easily above the competing space 4X games, as most of them don`t do a proper tactical combat at all.
 
- As for the AI your goals are good and all that, but at some point it might become necessary to let the AI cheat a little on the harder difficulties to actually make it challenging for more experienced players, and if it comes to that at least I am ok with it. (Just make sure that there are enough difficulty settings for players with different skill levels.)
 
- And one more thing, please don`t make the same mistake that MOO 3 made with colony management and think that any AI can effectively replace the player. The AI can be a good servant to the player yes, but at the end of the day you need to make sure that it is easy for the player to take complete control of his/her colonies if he/she wants to do that without unecessary micromanagement. (The ability save and load building queues could help a lot here.)

 

 

 

 


Edited by Mikko_M, 24 May 2016 - 07:22 PM.

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.


LeadfootSlim #3 Posted 24 May 2016 - 07:27 PM

    Commander

  • Players
  • 220
  • Member since:
    03-27-2016

View PostMikko_M, on 24 May 2016 - 07:09 PM, said:

- For espionage PLEASE do as Anguille_1 suggested and:

 
"Dev Team....please play a full game of MOO1 with the Darloks and see how espionnage works there, it's still really the best system in any 4x game i have played...(imho). Thanks"
 
As the current espionage model truly isn`t as great as you seem to think. (It is rather random in stealing techs and sabotaging buildings and requires quite a lot of micromanagement too.)
 
​- For tactical combat you need to bring the tactical battles as close to Master Of Orion 2 level of control and options as possible in a real-time system. (Good UI design is really the key here to allow multiple choices to be made, but easily).​ This is truly an area where you can set yourselves easily above the competing space 4X games, as most of them don`t do a proper tactical combat at all.
 
- As for the AI your goals are good and all that, but at some point it might become necessary to let the AI cheat a little on the harder difficulties to actually make it challenging for more experienced players, and if it comes to that at least I am ok with it. (Just make sure that there are enough difficulty settings for players with different skill levels.)
 
- And one more thing, please don`t make the same mistake that MOO 3 made with colony management and think that any AI can effectively replace the player. The AI can be a good servant to the player yes, but at the end of the day you need to make sure that it is easy for the player to take complete control of his/her colonies if he/she wants to do that without unecessary micromanagement. (The ability save and load building queues could help a lot here.)

 

I'd agree on some of these points - I think Espionage randomness in stealing/sabotage gave you a choice prompt between two random results. That'd soften the blow considerably.

 

In the meantime, I've got some digging-in to do before I can give useful EA4-specific feedback.



Mikko_M #4 Posted 24 May 2016 - 07:41 PM

    Rear Admiral

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

View PostLeadfootSlim, on 24 May 2016 - 07:27 PM, said:

 

- I think Espionage randomness in stealing/sabotage gave you a choice prompt between two random results. That'd soften the blow considerably.

 

Well in my opinion it would be great if we could actually try to achieve strategic goals with our spies, instead of just randomly getting/blowing something. As this is a strategy game after all.

 

Also the more limited and random the espionage system is, the less there is reason to play races like the Darloks.


Edited by Mikko_M, 24 May 2016 - 07:46 PM.

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.


OrionSol #5 Posted 25 May 2016 - 02:25 PM

    Captain

  • Players
  • 431
  • Member since:
    06-12-2015

I'm sure your customers appreciate you listening to the feedback. 

 

I think after completing many games, the overall judgement is this.  

 

The Strategy component is extremely lacking, large in part due to star lanes.   I know they were implemented to give strategy, but in the end - hurt it.  

Diplomacy - is wonky.   I suggest Stellaris and Total War games.  = they did diplomacy a lot better.  

Research = still not creating enough diversity.  We need so many choices that by late early game / mid game races are really starting to show differences in tech. 

Combat = please go play a Total War game for RTS or MoO2 or XCOM for turn based for examples on what is awesome. 

Spying = MoO1 / 2 was great at spying.  

 

So, unfortunately = this game is just not firing on ANY cylinders, let alone ALL of them.  I would say take another year to finish it.  


Jedi Master Or-ion Sol

Founder of THE JEDI ORDER | Community of Guilds 

www.jediswtor.com 


JeanBaptisteEmanuelZorg #6 Posted 25 May 2016 - 04:44 PM

    Captain

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

Yeah ! And that game isn't smart enough even for my kids. They can't learn resource management skill from it, sadly.

 

One more tip, but i'm sure you won't use it anyway. Just in case it is RTS tactical and a player cannot control everything during the battle, make behavior patterns as a "ship size X weapon type" or fleet behavioural policies like "small ships attack big ones" that player can select from the list of orders.

 

if yoiu are stuck on how to do this with multipal type weapons use maxmin and minmax or a "balanced" behavioral profile. Ahhh... what i'm talking about... You can't make an autobuild user template so far. Invite good AI architects, pls. 

 

Invite people who *like* sci-fi, but not all that mambo-jumbo magic stuff.


Edited by JeanBaptisteEmanuelZorg, 25 May 2016 - 04:59 PM.

"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


The_StormWraith #7 Posted 25 May 2016 - 06:43 PM

    Lieutenant

  • Players
  • 81
  • Member since:
    03-10-2016

I always like the idea of Spies being able to Steal Ships - but I suspect that that is because I am a pirate at heart, and as per my sig/persona t is often the only way to get good tech/boats.  Then I try to convince myself that it is COMPLETELY REASONABLE for my seven-foot-three massive lizard to fit into the 1960's VW size seats of a Psilon Frigate just because "He's a Spy! Surely they've got special training for that!"

 

Not to mention my Trialaran fish-monster trying to desperately retro-fit a Silicoid Battlecruiser so he can survive in the hot, radioative hell that is their preferred biome in the time taken up by a James Bond end-fight - maybe by turning up the Humidifier?

 

So, um, yeah. Please be willing to ignore *too* much common sense when working with Spies - it makes for a more fun, if less reasonable, game.

 

StormWraith, Feudal Sakkran Researcher

and Broadway Award Winner for the Gilbert & Sullivan Parody of Sakkrans vs. The Klackons "The Pirates of Penned Ants".



Mikko_M #8 Posted 26 May 2016 - 06:10 AM

    Rear Admiral

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

View PostOrionSol, on 25 May 2016 - 02:25 PM, said:

I'm sure your customers appreciate you listening to the feedback. 

 

I think after completing many games, the overall judgement is this.  

 

The Strategy component is extremely lacking, large in part due to star lanes.   I know they were implemented to give strategy, but in the end - hurt it.  

Diplomacy - is wonky.   I suggest Stellaris and Total War games.  = they did diplomacy a lot better.  

Research = still not creating enough diversity.  We need so many choices that by late early game / mid game races are really starting to show differences in tech. 

Combat = please go play a Total War game for RTS or MoO2 or XCOM for turn based for examples on what is awesome. 

Spying = MoO1 / 2 was great at spying.  

 

So, unfortunately = this game is just not firing on ANY cylinders, let alone ALL of them.  I would say take another year to finish it.  

 

​+ The multiplayer = Doesn`t have the tactical combat option available, so it really doesn`t offer much to get excited about. Now I personally don`t know about the multiplayers in the Galactic Civilizations series or Stellaris, but if they actually have them I would imagine that they currently offer exactly the same as this MOO offers now. Just empire management. (And that means that this MOO has NO real competitive advantage over them what so ever when it comes to multiplayer.)

 

Overall I would advise the following:

 

- Take a look at MOO1 for spying. (The current espionage model really isn`t that great to tell you the thruth.)

- Take a look at MOO 2 for tactical combat options and control, and try to figure out how to bring as much of that into this game as possible. (This is an area of the game where it will be the easiest for you to clearly separate from the competition.)

- Take a look at Andruski`s technology idea to actually make the tech game + the trading and stealing of techs interesting:

 

http://forum.masteroforion.com/index.php?/topic/1233-lets-talk-about-tech/ 

 

- Add that tactical combat option to multiplayer to make that part of the game interesting. (Currently almost half the game is missing in multiplayer.)

- AND IF/WHEN YOU NEED SOME HELP WITH THE DEVELOPMENT OF THIS GAME, PLEASE ASK IT FROM WARGAMING!

+ Keep listening to the players feedback as there are some really great ideas there.

 

 

 

 

 


Edited by Mikko_M, 26 May 2016 - 06:35 AM.

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.


Arent11 #9 Posted 26 May 2016 - 07:27 AM

    Commander

  • Players
  • 185
  • Member since:
    11-30-2015

View PostMikko_M, on 26 May 2016 - 06:10 AM, said:

 

Overall I would advise the following:

 

- Take a look at MOO1 for spying. (The current espionage model really isn`t that great to tell you the thruth.)

- Take a look at MOO 2 for tactical combat options and control, and try to figure out how to bring as much of that into this game as possible. (This is an area of the game where it will be the easiest for you to clearly separate from the competition.)

- Take a look at Andruski`s technology idea to actually make the tech game + the trading and stealing of techs interesting:

 

- Add that tactical combat option to multiplayer to make that part of the game interesting. (Currently almost half the game is missing in multiplayer.)

 

+ Keep listening to the players feedback as there are some really great ideas there.

 

(1) Agree. Espionage is for me like ~star lanes. It doesn't break the game, but it's not the best you can do. A good espionage system was civ4: You build "intelligence" buildings that of course cost maintenance. These intelligence buildings produce intelligence points per turn that you can invest in espionage/counter espionage etc. Even simpler was moo1 where you simply invested money/bc in espionage/counter espionage, however, this system doesn't simulate the 'infrastructure' of intelligence and the time you need to create it.

 

(2) Agree. I think the decision for real time tactical combat is a good one & moo cts could easily stomp the competition here. However, I want to point out that real time combat *is* different from turn based. For example, boarding actions are difficult to implement, it plays more like the ~stacks of moo1 and less like the single ships of moo2. Some weapons of moo2 make less sense in real time, on the other hand real time calls for new weapons that were not present so far.

 

(3) As I said, Andruskis suggestion could be very easily implemented by using the 'alpha centauri' civ-like tech tree: Simply give every tech a 'rating' that measures how much it belongs to a certain category (exploration, industry, weapons, pure tech etc.). Using this rating you can both program a better AI and implement a 'blind research' were you only choose an area to research but not a certain tech.

 

(4) Agree. Simply make it an option. Even in our LAN Party we would wait for the other players to resolve their battles. In the meantime the waiting players can do diplomacy, tech brokering etc. If people really don't want tactical combat in multiplayer they can switch it off.

 

(5) Don't listen to the community ;) Simply do what you think is right. It's your success or your failure and you have to know what kind of game you want to create.

 

 

 



diehardtwinsfan #10 Posted 26 May 2016 - 05:59 PM

    Rear Admiral

  • Players
  • 510
  • Member since:
    10-05-2015
I'm curious if the uses of space factories have been upped?  I'd also like to know if tactical combat has been improved to significantly boost the planetary defenses.  As they are they don't do much.

Mikko_M #11 Posted 27 May 2016 - 11:00 AM

    Rear Admiral

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

View PostArent11, on 26 May 2016 - 07:27 AM, said:

 

However, I want to point out that real time combat *is* different from turn based. For example, boarding actions are difficult to implement, it plays more like the ~stacks of moo1 and less like the single ships of moo2.

 

It might be difficult to implement the kind of boarding that we had in MOO 2 (with detailed lists of what was destroyed), but I don`t think that some sort of boarding would be that difficult to implement.

 

A boarding attempt could just either cause damage to the ship being boarded or the ship would be captured based on comparing the numbers of the attacking and defending marines + their racial traits (probably ground combat rating) and technology.


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.


Vahouth #12 Posted 27 May 2016 - 11:44 AM

    Vice Admiral

  • Players
  • 1,288
  • Member since:
    10-03-2015

I see no problem with RTS boarding actions.

Battlefleet Gothic Armada has boarding actions. Assault Boats, Boarding Torpedoes and even Teleporting actions. 

 



Arent11 #13 Posted 27 May 2016 - 07:20 PM

    Commander

  • Players
  • 185
  • Member since:
    11-30-2015

View PostMikko_M, on 27 May 2016 - 11:00 AM, said:

 

It might be difficult to implement the kind of boarding that we had in MOO 2 (with detailed lists of what was destroyed), but I don`t think that some sort of boarding would be that difficult to implement.

 

A boarding attempt could just either cause damage to the ship being boarded or the ship would be captured based on comparing the numbers of the attacking and defending marines + their racial traits (probably ground combat rating) and technology.

 

Assault shuttles should be no problem, however shooting a ship immobile, navigating several ships near it & boarding it before the enemy player clicks "self destruct" is of course really difficult ;)

 

 

 



Mikko_M #14 Posted 28 May 2016 - 03:02 PM

    Rear Admiral

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

View PostArent11, on 27 May 2016 - 07:20 PM, said:

 

Assault shuttles should be no problem, however shooting a ship immobile, navigating several ships near it & boarding it before the enemy player clicks "self destruct" is of course really difficult ;)

 

 

 

 

​Does the ship even necessarily have to be immobile? And as far as I know there is currently no way to self destruct your ships in the game so that shouldn`t be a problem either. :)

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.


Mikko_M #15 Posted 28 May 2016 - 04:21 PM

    Rear Admiral

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

View PostArent11, on 26 May 2016 - 07:27 AM, said:

(5) Don't listen to the community ;) Simply do what you think is right. It's your success or your failure and you have to know what kind of game you want to create.

 

It might very well be their success or failure, but you can find some pretty amazing things here in the MOO forums for example to avoid that failure:

 

As not only is there the Andruski`s great tech idea, which could also improve many other parts of the game as well:

 

http://forum.masteroforion.com/index.php?/topic/1233-lets-talk-about-tech/

 

But over here you can find for example Vahouth working on giving the races more personality and distinctiveness, just like it should be in a proper MOO game:

 

http://forum.masteroforion.com/index.php?/topic/1563-race-balance-feedback-ea-4/

 

And here kwm1800 and Mathias_ Zealot among others are discussing both weapon balance and weapon mods:

 

http://forum.masteroforion.com/index.php?/topic/1199-weapon-mods-the-list-of-workingnot-working-new-thread/

 

http://forum.masteroforion.com/index.php?/topic/1575-lets-talk-about-weapon-balance-again-and-again-for-ea4/

 

Also, there have been several discussions already on how the tactical combat could be integrated to the multiplayer effectively, most recently in here for example:

 

http://forum.masteroforion.com/index.php?/topic/1578-developers-two-questions-yes-or-no/

 

And over here you can find MOO2MOD suggesting how to make the Orion guardian more interesting:

 

http://forum.masteroforion.com/index.php?/topic/1201-the-guardian-star-lanes/

 

And this list goes on and on and on...

 

So yeah, if the developers want to be another Quicksilver Software then sure, just ignore everything the community is saying to you, but if they truly want to make a great MOO game then use the community`s best ideas to your advantage in making that game. Since if you know where to look you can find all the ingredients of a great MOO game right here on this forum. :)

 

 

 

 


Edited by Mikko_M, 28 May 2016 - 04:24 PM.

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.


Arent11 #16 Posted 28 May 2016 - 08:23 PM

    Commander

  • Players
  • 185
  • Member since:
    11-30-2015

View PostMikko_M, on 28 May 2016 - 04:21 PM, said:

 

It might very well be their success or failure, but you can find some pretty amazing things here in the MOO forums for example to avoid that failure:

 

As not only is there the Andruski`s great tech idea, which could also improve many other parts of the game as well:

 

http://forum.masteroforion.com/index.php?/topic/1233-lets-talk-about-tech/

 

But over here you can find for example Vahouth working on giving the races more personality and distinctiveness, just like it should be in a proper MOO game:

 

http://forum.masteroforion.com/index.php?/topic/1563-race-balance-feedback-ea-4/

 

And here kwm1800 and Mathias_ Zealot among others are discussing both weapon balance and weapon mods:

 

http://forum.masteroforion.com/index.php?/topic/1199-weapon-mods-the-list-of-workingnot-working-new-thread/

 

http://forum.masteroforion.com/index.php?/topic/1575-lets-talk-about-weapon-balance-again-and-again-for-ea4/

 

Also, there have been several discussions already on how the tactical combat could be integrated to the multiplayer effectively, most recently in here for example:

 

http://forum.masteroforion.com/index.php?/topic/1578-developers-two-questions-yes-or-no/

 

And over here you can find MOO2MOD suggesting how to make the Orion guardian more interesting:

 

http://forum.masteroforion.com/index.php?/topic/1201-the-guardian-star-lanes/

 

And this list goes on and on and on...

 

So yeah, if the developers want to be another Quicksilver Software then sure, just ignore everything the community is saying to you, but if they truly want to make a great MOO game then use the community`s best ideas to your advantage in making that game. Since if you know where to look you can find all the ingredients of a great MOO game right here on this forum. :)

 

 

 

 

 

All good ideas the devs should read. But it in the end, they themselves have to decide what they think is "good". If you want your moo you have to buy the ip, gather a team and create your very own moo.

 

 

 



Arent11 #17 Posted 28 May 2016 - 08:27 PM

    Commander

  • Players
  • 185
  • Member since:
    11-30-2015

View PostMikko_M, on 28 May 2016 - 03:02 PM, said:

 

​Does the ship even necessarily have to be immobile? And as far as I know there is currently no way to self destruct your ships in the game so that shouldn`t be a problem either. :)

 

Blasphemy! That is a dumbed down, shallow version of boarding! I want Mrrshan autofire lasers that shoot a ship immobile and then move up to it (all in a single turn) and board it before the turn of the enemy player begins & he hits "self destruct". Everything else is a shallow game suited for casual "civilization" players and not serious gamers :P

Mikko_M #18 Posted 28 May 2016 - 10:48 PM

    Rear Admiral

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

View PostArent11, on 28 May 2016 - 08:23 PM, said:

 

All good ideas the devs should read. But it in the end, they themselves have to decide what they think is "good". If you want your moo you have to buy the ip, gather a team and create your very own moo.

 

 

 

​If I had the money available I probably would have done that, but sadly still not rich enough to compete against Wargaming. :( (As there is no other game that I can currently think of that I would like to see a new great version made over MOO.)


Edited by Mikko_M, 28 May 2016 - 11:04 PM.

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.


Mikko_M #19 Posted 31 May 2016 - 04:24 AM

    Rear Admiral

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

View PostEmP64213, on 29 May 2016 - 09:40 AM, said:

 

Or make up your own IP, gather a team and create your very own MoO clone.

 

​Which takes a lot of money too, although most likely less than bying the MOO rights and making a MOO game, but still.

Edited by Mikko_M, 31 May 2016 - 04:24 AM.

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.


Mikko_M #20 Posted 31 May 2016 - 02:17 PM

    Rear Admiral

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

View PostEmP64213, on 31 May 2016 - 02:08 PM, said:

 

If you go by what Wargaming considers as the scope of MoO IP, names (of game and races) and that few elements of lore not mechanics, then making up your own IP would take less then 1% of programming effort.

 

​But why would I be interested in creating another average space 4X game when the market is already full of them? ;)


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.





1 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users