Forum Home | Login

moo2luv

Join Date 03/2006

What do the other MOO2 fanatics think of GC2?

I have a few concerns/questions about the game before I purchase it. I really liked MOO2 (more than 1) and I use it as kind of a template for the type of space-conquest game I really enjoy.

1. I am worried that GC2 has too much complexity as far as colony/empire management. Having to send freighters to planets manually to start trade routes (managing trade caravans really drove me nuts in Civilization), having to build individual buildings/improvements on individual tiles on individual planets, etc… I thought MOO2 was even a little too complicated with planetary management - I think food could have been eliminated all together and that you should have been able to create/save/re-use custom build queues. What do the other MOO2 lovers with GC2 think – is there too much micromanagement and artificial complexity? As far as ship design goes – I can’t get enough complexity there so I know that won’t bother me. I'm only worried about planet/empire management.

2. How is the combat? As I understand it you cannot issue orders but you can watch a somewhat real-time representation. Is it any fun? The whole incentive (to me anyway) of designing ships is to actually see them in action (not to just admire their avatar on the strategic screen). The way I see it combat should either give you tactical control (MOO2) or give you a nice movie-type experience (Empire at War is a good example of this - the space battles would be fun to watch even without having control).

3. This one is for Stardock – What are the chances of seeing a hotseat patch or expansion? LAN? How many people would you want to be willing to buy an expansion (and at what price) before you decided to make it?

Locked Post

Advanced Search

Watch this post

Do not email me updates for this post Email me updates for this post

Successfully updated karma reason!

I am worried that GC2 has too much complexity as far as colony/empire management.

Well, you don't have to worry about that.

Having to send freighters to planets manually to start trade routes (managing trade caravans really drove me nuts in Civilization),

You know the nice thing in space: there isn't any pen,amty movement. You give a destination to your ship and it will go on auto pilot. More you are limited by the number of your trade routes. So you have won't have to worry about lots of freighters. And they can't be used to speed up special projects

having to build individual buildings/improvements on individual tiles on individual planets, etc… I thought MOO2 was even a little too complicated with planetary management

It isn't has difficult as it may appear since the governors will auto update your buildings. And terraforming imporvement will be added to the queue as soon as they are discovered. So you won't really spend lots of time on the planetary screen.

I think food could have been eliminated all together

No!!!! It is very nice to be able to have an easy way to limit your planet propulation while keeping people happy.

you should have been able to create/save/re-use custom build queues

Since you need to choose the tiles where you are placing imporvements as there are tile bonus that benefit only one kind of improvement, you can't really have savable build queues. More you CAN't build everything on every planet.

As for point 2, I guess it depends from your taste. In any case, it allows you to see how your designer have worked against the opponent.

Successfully updated karma reason!

Double post.

Successfully updated karma reason!

Peace Phoenix is right. The trade routes are easy, you just set an automatic course to the planet you want to trade with, and a few turns later it arrives, you get a permanent increase in monthly revenue, and the route is automatic (Until someone starts blowing up all the freighters and cripples the economy

) The colony thing is easy, you set what you want where you want, governers will see it built and auto-upgraded. The only problem comes when you try to buy everything, which is near enough impossible unless you use a money cheat, and even then it sorts itself out eventually. Food is wonderful to control your pop, they get troublesome and you kill them off by starving them. (Strange how they aren't bothered by this)

And as for battles, You watch them and see how well your designs fair against others. EG, there is nothing better than seeing a single cruiser, equipped with shields and nano rippers, decimate an entire Drengin fleet single handed, without taking more than 2 hitpoint damage

Successfully updated karma reason!

I was a HUGE MOO2 addict. What I can tell you is that in my opinion GC2 is VERY similar to MOO2 but just better in almost every way. I think GC2 has a much superior interface, easy to jump around to where you need to go and also easy to get lots of things done from 1 screen. I wasn't a fan of tactical combat in MOO2 so the lack of this in GC2 doesn't bother me one little bit. I do watch the battles play out about 50% of the time. It is pretty good but I wouldn't say it is the strong point of the game. The game in general is complex but not complicated if that makes any sense (it does to me). It will take a few games to get in the swing but then you really start to appreciate all the options you have.

Bottom line, GC2 is a fantastic game. It is MOO2 done better - and that is a HUGE compliment. Unless tactical combat was what you loved best in MOO2 then you can not go wrong. The icing on the cake is Stardock support and interaction with their customers. Go ahead, buy the game, read the begginer startgey that was just posted a few days ago, and have at it. And plan for some long nights...

Successfully updated karma reason!

Its not nearly as elegant a design as MOO2. The game is fun, but the ship design feature remains a complete mess and the persistence of bugs mars the game.

Furthermore, information is displayed in an esoteric way in Galciv 2. The interface is inferior to MOO2. The races lack the personality of MOO2 races. There is no tactical combat. Techs, while more numerous, lack the variety of MOO2 techs (what happened to the Terror Star or a similar planet destroying weapon; no Galciv 2 tech has any wow factor).

Galciv 2's major advantages are larger map sizes, more political options (though the different government types don't make any sense; why you would wearn more tax revenue as a decentralized v. a centralized state is beyond me, just look at the Articles of Confederation v. the Constitution), a committed design team, and better graphics. If you liked MOO2 buy Galciv 2, but its not a better game relative to the fact its release date is 2006 and MOO2 is nearly a decade old.

Successfully updated karma reason!

I think Stardock did a fantastic job for GC2 in it's time, because nowadays 3D graphics is the norm. Back when MOO2 was the reigning turn based space civ game, 3D was in its early stages. There's a bit more features in GC2, but not a whole lot. Some graphics in MOO2 is still better than GC2, because it's 2D. I can still play MOO2 any day but of course would to try something different now. The features I like for GC2:

*good/neutral/evil decision making - making the game a bit spicy and makes it run in line with your ethics...
*upgrade starbase - a bit of a chore, but you have lots of choice how strong your starbase to be.
*3D ship design - people with good imagination will have fun at this.
*customizable race, race name, leader name, face, symbol, abilities, appearance. lot's of personal tastes. you can also customize number of computer opponents, their difficulty settings (knowledge/relations)
*Influence - this is like cultural power in Civ3/4
*music is mp3, you can change it to your own mp3 but have to rename the mp3s... keep back up of original.
*like MOO2 system requirements not a big deal. I don't know at Gigantic map, because in MOO2, the gigantic map can be slow at end turn if almost all of the planets are occupied. But again, my computer is more advanced now compared to when I was playing MOO2.
*I like the map of earth on the planet earth as Terran, where I can place different buildings/industry on any green square on the planet map - this is like designating a large region on earth to specialize in providing a type of planetary/civilization benefit/ability.
*The GC2/Collector's Edition desktop theme is great. My windows XP desktop looks so cool. I strongly recommend this if you like a different taste/theme for your win desktop. Just get latest patch first before you install this extra.

Things that could make GC2 a little better:
*technology tree research points? There's no research points per technology, or are they all the same at the same level?
*Hall of Fame at main menu missing
*the Main Theme music is weird with the lady-like singing. The trumpet/trombone music is cool, like a grand welcome to galactic leader, but when the lady voice entered, it's like, no this is just an opera play. Is there a better them song MP3?
*I like the idea in MOO2 that you can drag & drop the workes, scientists and farmers to different occupation fields to reduce or boost production in that field.
*Also in MOO2, the appearance of workers, scientists, farmers are unique for each race, there's not even an race avatar in GC2 when reporting technological breakthrough, or survey discoveries.
*diplomacy screen, not easy interface, there's no option to make peace, trade, non-agression, alliance, break treaty etc... Or may because there's no such thing here GC2?
*espionage, there's no specific task of, sabotage economy, steal tech, insite rebellion, etc... like in MOO2

Again I'm quite new with this just bought it 2 days ago. So this is just initial observation. So maybe I still have to discover a lot in the game. Even if I miss some features from MOO2, I still think GC2 is a fantastic game , a unique game on it's own, and I will enjoy it like playing MOO2, it's been a while. Good Luck playing .

Successfully updated karma reason!

Two other large factors to consider. The AI for MOO2 is antiquated and on higher difficulty levels 'cheated' to remain competitive, but was still beatable thanks to Tactical Combat. Don't get me wrong, I would love Tactical Combat in GC2, however, I believe that it's impossible to have a fair Tactical Combat system playing vs. AI. Gal Civ 2 has a much more sophisticated AI that offers a much better challenge.

The second factor is replayablity. The sheer number of random events far outstrips MOO2 (you see all the random events after a couple of large galaxy games). I have yet to see all the strange premutations that are allowed thanks to the huge number of random events available in GC2.

I will agree with some of the posters however when I say that MOO2 did boast better and more characterful races. I don't dislike the races of Gal Civ, but they are a bit too stereoptypical for me. Given the choice between Drengin or Darloks, I'll take Darloks!

Successfully updated karma reason!

Annekynn

Join Date 06/2004

What I REALLY miss about MOO2 was the fact that the enemy didnt send a billion ships at you from all different directions. Instead they would send big fleets at a time. That made combat, and defense, much more fun.

Successfully updated karma reason!

The only thing I don't like is the entire starbase sub-system. 90% of my time is spent building constructors and slapping 50 or so upgrades per starbase to keep them defensible and up to date. But I've always hated that implementation since the OS/2 version (yeah, I'm that old).

All in all, though, it's actually pretty good. AI gives you a really good run, and usually kicks my butt. The micro-management nightmare is in the constructors/starbases - not in the other game elements.

Frankly, IMO, if you toggled the starbases off entirely, the game would work just fine. But if you opponents have them, you need them.

Successfully updated karma reason!

As a big moo2 fan, I admit I'm disapointed.

What made moo2 fun for me was the control I had over ship design that had a huge impact on it's functionnal role and tactics, this was the ONLY game that gave me creative control over tactical compbat units. That's all irrelevant now in galciv2. I have no interest in playing fashion designer barbie on ships that have little functionnal difference.

GalCiv2 2 is geared to please the galactic accountant, not the galactic admiral, but if you like bean counting, it's great. Mind you there are lots of other great strategic 4x games, but NO other games that give you creative tactical unit control.

GalCiv2 is like a crippled Moo2 done better. If you strip away the strng AI I don't feel the games compare favorably.

But the thing that really gets me, the thing that I can't get over, is the effete tech tree.
All the improvements are buffs on existing abilities, you never get any new ones. Going to the top of the beam tech tree means you have a bigger version of the exact same thing at the bottom. Big whoop. Instead of getting 50x 1 beam you get 1 x 50beam. YAWN. No range increase, no planet killing, no shield peircing, no orbital attacks with ship weapons...no - no - no

This trend is endemic to all the tree branches. You can never asteroid belts into planets, you cant cloak, you can't teleport you can't capture enemy ships .. on and on.

Yes, the diplomacy and trade options are much better, the geingis khan in me is nonplussed and playing Alan Greeenspan is low on my fun things to do tonight.

And for the people who are going to tell me to go buy another game, you're missing the point.
I would gladly have paid twice the price for this game had my desire for a rich tactical combat and a revolutionary tech tree been fulfiled, but now it's not and I'd be willing to give my money to the company who can. And I will warn my friends who expect the same to stay away from this game.

For those of you who were on the MOO3 forums, I'm a little shocked at the similarity of the reaction to negative feedback. Now i'm not comparing galciv2 to the utter disaster that was moo3, galciv2 is a fine game if you dig beancounting, but you would do well to learn from the mistakes made by Alan Emerich's team and LISTEN.

BTW, For all those that harp about tactical AI, and it being too hard and all that. Why don't you make tactical available only in multiplayer for an expansion pack? That would shut up "four legs good, tactical baad" group who already shelled out their money and are already happy as a clam now and the rest of us would be more than willing to shell out another 50$ to get our fix and recommend the game to our freinds?

Or does that make too much sense ?

Successfully updated karma reason!

But the thing that really gets me, the thing that I can't get over, is the effete tech tree.
All the improvements are buffs on existing abilities, you never get any new ones. Going to the top of the beam tech tree means you have a bigger version of the exact same thing at the bottom. Big whoop. Instead of getting 50x 1 beam you get 1 x 50beam. YAWN. No range increase, no planet killing, no shield peircing, no orbital attacks with ship weapons...no - no - no

I don't see what you mean. After all, at thebottom of the tech tree, lasers are both heavy and weak. So, at the end of the game, instead of having 2x 1 laser damage, you get 10 x 6 phaser damage on the very same ship (not counting miniaturisation)

Successfully updated karma reason!

Good comment uncle_bob

The tactical mode can be a great deal to tactical players which is missing. Having it as an option is better than none. Maybe the majority of players don't have the patience or mind to play the tactical battles. It would be nice to have an option of controlling the battle 100% knowing that with your genious you can outsmart the opponent (computer AI) the first few or critical battles, but after 10s or 100s of battles, it would be better to let the computer automate it, or you'll make the entire game 20x longer.

I agree the weapons&defense tech tree is not too descriptive/informative, when you click on a higher tech, it doesn't give suffient note of technical (points) improvement and description, like attack, damage, range, armor, shield, effect etc... just say better then the last one.

But for the most part, I'll just play game man, have not finish it yet, and I think it's going to take a few weeks, hehehe (I'm a slow player or not enough time player).... Don't worry too much what's missing, just enjoy what's there to play. I don't think there's any other games nowadays of this genre having good reviews...

The other sort of equivalent space X4 turn-based game is X3:Reunion, review is 7.2 of 10 from gamespot.

Successfully updated karma reason!

The game is okay, but MoO2 is still better. GalCiv2 cannot decide whether it wants to focus on the micromanagement or the big picture, and that indecision hasn't made for a better game.

Successfully updated karma reason!

In many ways GC2 is superior to MOO2 - as others have elaborated on above. Perhaps it's biggest strength is the strong AI that doesn't need to cheat economically to be competitive. That has been probably the biggest problem for many turn-based games in the past, so that makes the game worthwhile for me right there.

That said, there are some issues with GC2 that could be improved upon. The biggest for me is the lackluster tech tree as uncle_bob pointed out. Whereas MOO2 had some unique and different techs that added not only flavor but interesting strategic options, GC2 weapon and defense techs basically just offer a small x% improvement over the previous tech for each level. That improvement being in size, damage/defense, and/or cost. But, other than the animations and sound effects that play during the battle scenes (which are VERY nice btw), there is no real differences between how any of the military techs work.

And there are no real options to customize weapons as MOO2 offered (armor piercing, heavy placements, auto-firing, etc.). There are also no military techs that give any type of special ability. No cloaking - no repair bots - no advanced targeting computers - no mini-fighter bays - no tractor beams. Nothing. Nada.

Beyond the aesthetic design choices (which are nice if you are in to that), there really is nothing to customize about ship design. You basically always simply load up the biggest gun, beam OR missile you have, and as many of them as will fit based on the hull size and your desired defense and speed (engine) level. Because of the way the tech trees work, it is very rare (and actually detrimental) to have advanced tech in more than one of the three weapon trees.

So, although GC2s starship design is a lot prettier than MOO2, in many ways it falls short of that set by MOO2 or even the original MOO in terms of customization and the ability to make interesting designs.

Successfully updated karma reason!

And there are no real options to customize weapons as MOO2 offered (armor piercing, heavy placements, auto-firing, etc.). There are also no military techs that give any type of special ability. No cloaking - no repair bots - no advanced targeting computers - no mini-fighter bays - no tractor beams. Nothing. Nada.

Well, it isn't suprizing since there isn't any tactical battle. Those techs are useful only if there is a tactical battle.

Successfully updated karma reason!

(GC2 AI + graphics) + (MOO2 everything else) = best 4X game possible.

Successfully updated karma reason!

It's better. In every way.

Successfully updated karma reason!

Well, it isn't suprizing since there isn't any tactical battle. Those techs are useful only if there is a tactical battle.

That is hardly true at all. There could be a wide variety of specials that could still be of effective use even without tactical battles. Many of these specials could provide passive benefits, or 'auto-fire' at the start of combat, or perhaps even every combat round. Matter of fact, of those I listed, all could be made to work:

Cloaking - Allows defending ships to get in the first attack, since the attacker can't seem them until they uncloak (Which would also open the door to a cloak detection special that negates this)
Repair Bots - Increaess repair rates outside of combat, and/or perhaps repairs back something like 1-3 hp (depending on hull size or tech level) between combat rounds
Advanced Target Computers - Adds +x to all combat rolls, no matter the weapon type (and perhaps an equivalent Defense Computer that adds +x to defense rolls)
Mini-Fighter Bays - Launches 2-4 tiny fighters with 1 hp each that feature x% of the motherships offense ratings but no defense; auto-launches at the start of combat
Tractor Beam - Limits the targeted ships defensive manuevering, decreasing their defense rolls by x

Here are a few others that I thought up in just a few minutes:

Weakness Locator Module- Gives an x% chance each combat turn that weapon rolls will be doubled for that turn
Adaptive Defenses - Gives an x% bonus to a ships defense if their opponent's weapon type is mismatched
Combat Manuevering Engines - Gives an x% chance each combat turn that defensive rolls will be doubled for that turn
Combat Teleporter - Gives an x% chance each combat roll of negating damage entirely (obviously, a very small % chance each combat roll)
Sacrificial Strike - At the moment the ship is destroyed, the crew re-routes all power to their weapon systems, giving them one final strike against their enemy; i.e. an additional combat roll

Yeah, these names need work, but there could easily be quite a few more, and each of these could also have various tech levels that improve the benefits, or perhaps are simply bonus techs that are unlocked when other research is completed. The idea would be to make ship design an interesting exercise in analyzing opportunity costs of these various benefits, as well as those from standard systems already in the game. This would add a tremendous amount of replayability as well since there would be so many more possible combinations of ships vs. just seeing how many guns/beams/missiles can fit on a hull.

Successfully updated karma reason!

GC2 is an amazing game; however, in my opinion, MOO2 still remains the over all the most addictive space 4x games ever made.

Here is what GC2 is missing. I’m not bashing GC2 mind you, this is more a constructive criticism for Stardock developers to think what gamers like myself want.

Tactical
Anyone who loves designing ships wants to control it and see it in action. MOO2 gave us that. It also gave us an ability to defeat an enemy with better tech through tactical skills and unique variables such as heros or unique weapons.
Massive fleets
I want to control armadas into battle and pit them against other large fleets.

Smart Weapons
I need more than the paper, rock, scissors battle engine. I want to think outside the box to defeat my enemies, not upgrading my ships to max def against beams cause that’s what my enemy ships have. Upgrading your ships anywhere makes it easy for you to “cheat” in GC2.

Invading and Occupying Enemy Planets
It’s too easy in GC2. Once you conquer a planet, you can move on without worry of riots.

If I see a game that offers all the cool things GC2 has, in addition to the things I have mentioned above, then I would say there is a new 4X champ.

Successfully updated karma reason!

Tactical
Anyone who loves designing ships wants to control it and see it in action. MOO2 gave us that. It also gave us an ability to defeat an enemy with better tech through tactical skills and unique variables such as heros or unique weapons.
Massive fleets
I want to control armadas into battle and pit them against other large fleets.

Smart Weapons
I need more than the paper, rock, scissors battle engine. I want to think outside the box to defeat my enemies, not upgrading my ships to max def against beams cause that’s what my enemy ships have. Upgrading your ships anywhere makes it easy for you to “cheat” in GC2.

Invading and Occupying Enemy Planets
It’s too easy in GC2. Once you conquer a planet, you can move on without worry of riots.

Tactics.. tactics. It's a turn base strategy, too much focus on the tactic part make the game less strategic. Then again, playing moo3 where nothing you do seem to influence the result also sucks.

I think if we are talking about the 'strategy' aspect, the current weapon system and combat is fine. Of course, everyone wants to be the galactic ruler AND the military general, so gc2 would seem a bit lacking.

I would agree that invading and occupying enemy planets is too simplified. Though in MoO2, you could also bombard the entire planet and reduce it to near nothingness, then build from the start. GC2 is weak here in that there is no option to assimilate the aliens and you are forced to exterminate the entire population.

Successfully updated karma reason!

Welcome Guest! Please take the time to register with us.

There are many great features available to you once you register, including:

Richer content, access to many features that are disabled for guests like commenting and posting on the forums.
Access to a great community, with a massive database of many, many areas of interest.
Access to contests & subscription offers like exclusive emails.
It's simple, and FREE!

View all recent posts

Mark all posts as read Delete cookies created by the forum Return to Top

Stardock Forums v Server Load Time: Page Render Time: