Matrix Games Forums

Actually, Solops, the tactical combat system is such that player management of really large fleets is an issue.  This would be a major problem for really large player empires.  There are limits on game scale given the game system.

I am not so worried about the tactical system as I am the empire management/bureaucracy. That, I believe, is what Bob was referring to. I can always stop combat and issue orders and I am not concerned with micromanaging combat here like I do in Sword of the Stars.

About Bureaucracy being a pain, you can always give *all* races the No Bureaucracy trait. [;)]
The game was not really designed for conquest victories, but for VPs. It seems to have been designed so that empires support something like 30 or so colonies. Remove the Bureaucracy penalties, and you can have conquest victories.

ORIGINAL: Tom_Holsinger

Armada works out of the box, and is fun to play. MOO3 could run, but wasn't fun and plain did not work right until a Canadian programmer whose on-line handle is Bhruic fixed most of the broken parts out of sheer genius in the 6-12 month period after it was released. I believe he has helped with many other games too. MOO3 is now great fun for me because I've customized it so much, but is still micromanagement city compared to Armada 2526.

OTOH, you can play the really big MOO3 empires in really big galaxies in less than real time. I suspect few will have the patience to play really big Armada empires in really big galaxies.

ORIGINAL: rosseau

"Emrich's in MOO3 is IMO much preferable to Bob Smith's in Armada."

No offense, but Armada is much preferable to MOO3 as a game! I've been playing them since Chris Crawford's Eastern Front in '82, and MOO3 lasted a few hours on my hard drive. However, the background story written for MOO3 was awesome. Just my opinion, of course.

Agree, with the fixes in place MOO3 turned into a quite enjoyable game, but like you I have modded mine to the point its not recognizable from its 'out of the box' configuration.

And that brings up a key point to keeping any 4x game playable for me...moddability. If I can mod it, I can make it play so differently that there are infinite possibilities...it turns it into a digital sandbox of sorts.

Iceman,

A production penalty that increases with empire size is absolutely essential to extend the duration of relative power parity between player and AI empires. This was THE key design innovation in Master of Orion III and it was wildly successful. Every turn-based 4x game should have something like it. Armada does, but linking it to unrest is IMO a mistake. I advocate eliminating that link, and making bureaucracy a stand-alone feature which can be incrementally modded.

Bureaucracy is the natural friction that has always limited the size of empires in the human experience, which is why no one power has ever conquered the entire world. I consider it quite realistic. Players of these games don't generally prefer simulations but games. A simulation MAY also be fun to play(as is this game), but a GAME that is not fun to play is dead on arrival. MOO3 and Reach for the Stars weren't that much fun to play.
I see no reason why different settings can't be incorporated into this game that make it easier but less realistic to play the huge empires.
Are the effects of bureaucracy lessened on the easier settings of the game?

I like all these penaltys but what's missing is a pop-up when hovering over details giving malus % and source.
I love humans, bring on the malus i can deal with it anyways. Who said you needed mines and industrys everywhere.
 
This game has indeed a logistic system that people dont really use yet , you can setup transport shuttling and use taxes and human growth to expand while researching other stuff.
You have to figure out how to take risks to get bigger gains in the end with the current system, i really like it but it lacks content/details and polishing to make it less generic.
 
I like the game like it is i'm not here for a walk in the park i play at expert anyways.

Shawkhan, nobody questions the need for bureaucracy penalizing empires in some fashion, but in this game it's quite excessive.
 
It reminds me of Civ3 as it originaly shipped out with the horrendous corruption penalties.
 
It's possible to go overboard with this sort of thing. There's a sweet spot...and Armada hasn't hit it.

ORIGINAL: Archy

I like all these penaltys but what's missing is a pop-up when hovering over details giving malus % and source.
I love humans, bring on the malus i can deal with it anyways. Who said you needed mines and industrys everywhere.

This game has indeed a logistic system that people dont really use yet , you can setup transport shuttling and use taxes and human growth to expand while researching other stuff.
You have to figure out how to take risks to get bigger gains in the end with the current system, i really like it but it lacks content/details and polishing to make it less generic.

I like the game like it is i'm not here for a walk in the park i play at expert anyways.

Fully agree. I like this tactical way of 4x space gaming. Maby its because i play on small maps and games that only takes 1 evening. I don,t have time to play games like MOO3 anymore.These games don,t bring me the joy anymore. It took me to mutch time in RL to get fun out of these games. I told before to TOM that i,m a tactical gamer. I took a risk with this game but its great and i,m happy with it.
I think the problem is lack for information in the manual. My fleets are contains only aprrox 40-50 ships. And the great thing is you dont need to control the galaxy to win a game. I choose my systems with care.
What ever change they gone make in this game i don,t care. But i realy hope that we can choose with settings how we can play this game after changes. So every 1 can play this game he wants.

In my third game as humans, I was able to reach over 500k in cash reserves, build an 80 ship fleet(DestroyerIIs,BattlecruisersIIs, missile cruiserIIS,DoomwingerIIs) and become an almost unstoppable force by turn 300 of the 12 player game. Bureaucracy is quite playable as it is. Hint: As human don't upgrade mines, and only build shipyards on Rich worlds.

ORIGINAL: Shawkhan

In my third game as humans, I was able to reach over 500k in cash reserves, build an 80 ship fleet(DestroyerIIs,BattlecruisersIIs, missile cruiserIIS,DoomwingerIIs) and become an almost unstoppable force by turn 300 of the 12 player game. Bureaucracy is quite playable as it is. Hint: As human don't upgrade mines, and only build shipyards on Rich worlds.

We know all this and it falls apart on larger maps.

Try something other than the 12 player game.

ORIGINAL: Tom_Holsinger
Iceman,
A production penalty that increases with empire size is absolutely essential to extend the duration of relative power parity between player and AI empires. This was THE key design innovation in Master of Orion III and it was wildly successful. Every turn-based 4x game should have something like it.

I disagree. Upkeep and Bureaucracy can do the job, if implemented properly. Artificial penalties not only are not intuitive, they're unnecessary IMO.
It's a good thing that different people have different opinion though.

ORIGINAL: Zakhal

Overpopulation is another problem. Ten of my planets hit overpopulation last turn and I have no idea what to do with them. It has a big minus happyness and my planets are filled with people.

I wish I would be able to kill them or somthing. Just continiously bombard my own planets populations so that they dont go over. Got to check today if there is som tech that could fix this.

I know, in GC2 you could just dump them in space, not here.
There's no "game design" solution, so deport them en masse to some crappy planet where you'll build nothing, and let them rot or be taken over by the IA powers - which will *weaken* them ! [:D]

This game amazingly supports gulag empires...Chances are it'll be a hit in N Korea [X(] [:D]

Has anyone else found that when your home planet is destroyed most of the bureaucracy penalty disappears? Had that happen in one of my early games when the Klurgu destroyed Earth. I was just learning the game and was almost bankrupt. Earth died and my income shot up!

IIRC Bureaucracy has to do with pop size more than anything else. Maybe Earth had most of your total pop at the time?

ORIGINAL: PDiFolco
I know, in GC2 you could just dump them in space, not here.
There's no "game design" solution, so deport them en masse to some crappy planet where you'll build nothing, and let them rot or be taken over by the IA powers - which will *weaken* them ! [:D]

Not exactly true. Build a lot of transports, load them up with the pop, and then scrap those transports. [;)]
Yep, a bit expensive, but the Bureaucracy decrease and happiness increase might be worth it.

ORIGINAL: Iceman

Not exactly true. Build a lot of transports, load them up with the pop, and then scrap those transports. [;)]
Yep, a bit expensive, but the Bureaucracy decrease and happiness increase might be worth it.

A variation of what I do. Instead of scrapping the transports, I add them to my battle fleets to give the opposing forces something else to shoot at. You get the added benefit of lower naval losses in battles.

Yep, you just have to pay the upkeep of all those ships until you get into battle. If yuo want to get rid of them quickly, or you have loads of transports, it's easier to scrap them.

BTW, pop aboard arks and transports doesn't count towards Population Killed in the Charts, but if it ever gets to count, doing that will look bad in your record (and good in your opponent's) [;)]

Whatever, this is totally nonsensicaland should be fixed ![:-]

I wasn't making any excuses, mind you. Just talking. [;)]

In a way, you wonder if it's not best to colonize only those systems with zero (or low) pop growth so that you don't get galloping bureaucracy, and have a couple ideal systems growing pop - and then selectively send pop to the inhospitable ones, only enough to open up construction slots. Of course, happiness is not good in those systems, but then again, as long as you keep to what you really need, and with some strong Security, you might just be ok.
If you can keep a strong income through trade, you're good to go.