What would you want in a (real) MOO game?

Me?

  1. MOO, with MOO2 technologies and racial customization
  2. GalCiv AI
  3. Alpha Centauri diplomacy

That’s it.

I want a game that mixes the macro with the micro. 1942: Pacific Air War had an admiral mode that did this splendidly.

Say all you want to do is manage the empire, or the big picture ala MOO or SE4. This game would have the option to do that.

Say, however, you wanted to focus in a little and be a fleet admiral, commanding your ships to face dynamic threats, and leave the big picture to the suits in the capital…you could do that too.

If, however, you wanted to get really down and dirty, you could either be a starship captain or a fighter pilot, taking orders from above and putting your life on the line. When the action commenced, you could switch from the Admiral’s position to the cockpit of a fighter and mix it up, going back to being an admiral or an emperor when the fight was over.

THAT would be my dream game. Mixing all of these elements together would simply rock, IMO.

Yeah or at least a diplomacy systems that isn’t on crack.
I agree 100 percent. I recall somebody saying that players were expecting Moo 2.5 in MOO3 and you know what? that wouldn’t have been such a bad thing :)

And Derek is paying you HOW MUCH to come in here and pimp his shit?

:-)

I found the original MOO to be more fun than MOO2. I think the reason the amount of micromanagement introduced by MOO2. I think it added complexity without enhancing game play.

I would welcome the return of the abstraction. So to add to your list of examples, I would like to see the ease of empire management that was found in Imperialism.

MOO was a better game. I think what MOO 2 lacked was simplicity - they tried to roll the elements popularized in MoM into the game but broke a few things like stacking ships.

Moo2 did have the stellar converter though…

And Derek is paying you HOW MUCH to come in here and pimp his shit?

:-)[/quote]
I ain’t pimpin’ nuthin’, beeotch. ;)

Seriously, this game goes WAY beyond the BC3K design. It basically allows you to zoom out way farther than command of a single ship. Imagine playing SE4, for example, and when a ship enters a battle, you can zoom in on that battle and personally take control of the ship. THAT’S what I’m talking about.

MOO was a better game. I think what MOO 2 lacked was simplicity - they tried to roll the elements popularized in MoM into the game but broke a few things like stacking ships.[/quote]

I loved MOO2, thought it was the best game in the series, but I do know what you’re saying. I used to play against a good friend of mine who’s an electrical engineer, the micro-management got out of hand. he would take half hours turns. THE BASTARD

  1. Scaleable tactical combat

Unmanageable combat in the mid to late game of MOO2 was a big problem. The task force idea in MOO3 is a good one, but it sounds like the implementation is lacking, to say the least. I’d like something where you could assign ships to different groups and give them limited commands. You could start out with “Assault,” “Escort,” and “Defend,” and more maneuver options could get unlocked by a combination of fleet commander experience and tech advancement (shipboard equipment). Sort of like in STUN. So an experienced fleet commander could have “Flanking Maneuver” unlocked and a task force equipped with cloaking devices would have “Cloak” available. Ideally, the basic combat mechanics would be relatively simple, understandable on the level of chess (i.e., a fighter group can move 2-6 spaces (dependent on impulse drive tech) forward and make 180-degree turns, while a capital ship group moves one space and can only make 45-degree turns) – with complexity resulting from the interaction of player choices – and the system would be simultaneous turn-based.

The tech tree design in MOO2 was great. It was really a series of separate branches instead of a tree, but I liked the fact that by pursuing one tech at a given level you couldn’t pursue the others. It gave trading for tech a very different meaning than in other Civ-like games. Combine that approach with an actual tree structure that includes cross-discipline prerequisites and I’d be psyched.

Also, more characters with character! I love all of the characters (heroes/leaders) in MOO2 and MoM, with their great variety of traits. If they could be programmed to have some degree of independence, or just interaction (like actively giving advice), like Brad was talking about in the MOO3 Rebuttal thread… wow.

After we’ve played GalCiv to death, maybe in the years to come we’ll be looking forward to Orion: Total War from Creative Assembly…

Fuck Master of Orion.

How constructive…and also LAYERED with multiple levels of intellectualism. Boy, wumpus, you REALLY know how to stay in character. Thanks for sharing.

Fuck Counterstrike and Deus Ex.

We’ve had to listen to your goddamned incessant and sociopathic bitching and whining about anything that rubs you the wrong way for – has it been years now? – and you can’t even do us the favor of skipping these threads. Thank you, wumpus, for proving that the depths of wumpussy behavior truly know no limits. Just when we think you couldn’t get any wumpussier, you go to 11. We will all have to recalibrate our wumpussometers now.

[size=2]Edit: To add the stuff about goddamned incessant bitching and whining.[/size]

I want an O.G. alien with phat gold chains.

Fuck all FPSs. Too boring for words.

MOO was my favorite game ever.

We will all have to recalibrate our wumpussometers now.

Jason, welcome to the club. BTW, a wumpussometer works best when you just switch it off and ignore the guy.

 -Tom

I made this for everybody to use. The link is:
www.coregamer.com/stuff/stfuwumpus.gif

Feel free to whip it out any old time.

MOO was my favorite game ever.

Fine. Go play MOO then, and let’s talk about that.

My point is that MOO3 isn’t worth discussing. It’s a bad game. By all accounts it is a horribly broken game. People should simply avoid it and move on to other games which are actually worthwhile. Do you honestly think a game this bad merits this much discussion? If so, I’m starting sixteen motherfucking threads about Daikatana, and I plan to post hourly in each one.

Or, we could actually spend our time talking about games which are actually worth playing. Imagine that. It’s easy if you try.

C’mon. Regale me with tales of the fabulous wonder and beauty of Dark Cloud 2. I dare you. In fact, I double dast dog dare you. I won’t complain in the slightest, because you know what? I love reading discussion about GOOD games. Hell, that’s why I come here.

Actually, some of the best discussion of the last few months has come out of Moo3. It can be interesting to analyze a failure just as much as a success.

And last I checked there were about 3 Dark Cloud 2 threads floating around…

I performed a quick search of the forums over the last two weeks. I count FOURTEEN individual threads about MOO3, with probably ~500+ posts in aggregate.

That’s a rough, off the cuff, two minute effort. Feel free to count 'em yourself. I’m probably missing one or two, so if anything, these numbers are a bit low.