Are there bugs? Yes
Should Galciv be like MOO2? No
And I disagree with most of your comparisons between the two games.

On a side note. If you were given the choice which ship to choose, you would choose to target the highest possible attacker with the lowest defense (i.e. first take out the one that could do the most damage to you) - that's what this sytem does anyway, so 99% of what your choice would be under any given scenario is already done for you without the extra checking to see which ship has what and then issuing orders, this equals less micromanagement.

And yes, in my opinion, the last paragraph was fairly meaningless and politely rude!

i cant agree that moo2 had better AI - i won without exeption every game on the hardest level - the AI had big flaws and the tactical AI especially. the research was weak - i always picked the same techs and ran trough it with a 100% foolproof strategy... thou a good AI patch for moo2 could still squeeze some fun out of the game

i love gc2, i hadnt the first one but i like the realism in the techtree and the good AI, its just all i want

Oh god please no. Don't allow minors to conquor or expand to more than 3 planets. Thats the main reason I stopped playing GalCiv1 - minors taking over the universe. If you have minors competing in every aspect in the game and they start 'conquering' they aren't really that minor anymore, are they?

About the Minor Races... it might be bad for them to get competitive and expand. Most of them have some extreme ability bonuses. For example, the Akilians have a Base +70 Military Production Bonus, in addition to +25% in Influence, Research, Trade, Hitpoints, and a +50% in Diplomacy, amongst other minor bonuses.

What can I say. As a hard-core gamers, I played alot of games. Sometimes I felt the games were really good, yet somehow I could enjoy playing them. Sometimes I enjoyed games that I knew were really horrible. It's all a matter of personal feelings. Sometimes you just can't enjoy a game, no matter how hard you try, and that's that. Sometimes you pass judgment about it way too soon, only to realize you kinda like it at the end.

This game is like any other to that extent. You might not like it for many reasons. But don't blame the base of the game itself just because of it. There's really nothing wrong with GalCiv2, it's a great 4X game, the greatest we've seen in a while. It's not a shell. It's not too buggy (it's a bit too much "driver-sensitive", I agree, though). And for every bad thing you don't like about it, there are at least ten things the game does superbly. Some people prefer different things, but if you like turn-based-strategy games, even a little bit, you'll find plenty of things to enjoy in it. Open your mind.

Greetings,

Having played a few 4X games, here is my take from 1 to 5 of the ones I know most:
MOO2 SEIV GalCiv2
Trading 2 4 5
Space combat (tactic) 3 5 1
Graphics 2 2 5
Tech tree 3 5 3
Complexity 2 5 2
Strategy 3 5 4
Races 3 4 3
AI 2 3 4
Enjoyability 4 4 3 (Here, MOO2 was the first, if it would be today, i think it would be 2)
Espionage 3 5 2
Bugs 2 4 3
Modding 0 5 5
Interface 2 4 4
Economy 4 4 4
Governors 0 5 2 (However, SEIV governors are quite dumbs too, but there are a lot more)

Until I see the next two other patches, I don't mind about the bugs. They have quite a complicated software engine with many parts and they have to deal with a great deal of different hardware and operating systems implementations. If they can work out 80% of the bugs in the next 2 patches, they will have done a good job.

Frankly, I thought Galciv2 would be a better SEIV Gold. Our friends, makers of Galciv2, should work on the next version to add some more complexity to the game (Carriers, mine, satellites, tactical combat, events, biggest tech tree). Don't take me wrong. it is a nice game, but it lacks some polishing. I really wish they will make tons of money to work on another verion or expansions sets that will make that game really the #1. Their "no copy protection" is a great plus for me and it is why I support their game and efforts. It is sure that I'll buy any expansion or other version (even if I prefer SEIV) to support their efforts to make it better.

I think they are on the right path.

Thank you

I have to admit that I really dislike it when people cry about a game not being like an old favorite game. I mean Galciv is it's own thing. It was inspired from board games and civ4 and the like. They were not making "MOO2 the return". Enjoy it for what IT is and not what you wished for. Just because it 4x and in space doesn't mean it has to be "MOO2 resurection" I mean go play moo2 then. It's like watching the movie "Serenity" and getting pissed because it's not like star trek or star wars or because they didn't have something like the force or Darthvader or Klingons. Think about it for a moment. The game is very good for what it is, how does the lack of having a hero element, guardian, or space monster other than superficial reasons and NOT being MOO2 ruin game play and the design vision of the game you have before you?

One of the goals from the first Galciv was to create a fast moving streamlined 4x game with an almost board game feel. That is still somewhat the goal for this version too. Sure it would be NICE if they did more to flesh things out on the fluff side of the design and they probably still will, but it's not required. Besides Brad seems commited to adding major new features to the game in the future for free.

It's obvious someone does need to make an updated MOO2 Clone as they would make a killing, but we can blame Moo3 for ruining that for us. In the mean time get full enjoyment from what you have and appreciate it for what it is rather than looking back nostogically at your favorite game and wishing everything was like it. You will miss out on some good stuff.

And as for the AI and ship battles...... I dont know if you and I were playing a different MOO2 or something but that was by far the weakest aspect of MOO2

I agree that the AI is pretty weak there. The combat system itself (without AI) is pretty brilliant. And the design decisions between ship attack and ship defense components seems to be more balanced than in the current GalCiv2 which suffers because of the 1-shot-for the attacker problem. Initially Moo2 had also this problem but after they released the 1.31 patch (implementing their shipinitiative rule) it was fixed.

Each one is entitled to his own opinion, as far as it is expressed without insults, and I've insulted no one.

That would be incorrect. Insinuating that Stardock is not standing behind their product and that they only published it as a way to get a larger corporation to be interested in them is by its very definition an insult. Just because you don't use swear words or direct your comments toward a specific individual does not mean that they aren't insulting.

Also, just to clear up a misconception of yours, the ability to make graphics for a turn-based strategy game is not an exceedingly rare talent and spending hundreds of thousands to make a virtual resume that - according to you - only displays this single talent makes no sense.

The game is phenomenal, and in time the remaining bugs people are experiencing will be ironed out.

MOO2 SEIV GalCiv2 Trading 2 4 5 Space combat (tactic) 3 5 1 Graphics 2 2 5 Tech tree 3 5 3 Complexity 2 5 2 Strategy 3 5 4 Races 3 4 3 AI 2 3 4 Enjoyability 4 4 3 (Here, MOO2 was the first, if it would be today, i think it would be 2) Espionage 3 5 2 Bugs 2 4 3 Modding 0 5 5 Interface 2 4 4 Economy 4 4 4 Governors 0 5 2 (However, SEIV governors are quite dumbs too, but there are a lot more)

This voting seems to be heavily biased towards SE4 for me.
Should look more like...

MOO2 SEIV GalCiv2 Trading 2 2 2 Space combat (tactic) 4 5 0 Graphics (at time of release) 3 2 3 Tech tree 3 3 2 Complexity 3 5 2 Strategy 3 4 2 Races 4 3 3 AI 2 1 3 Enjoyability (again at time of release) 5 3 3 Espionage 3 3 2 Bugs 1 4 4 Modding 0 4 3 Interface 4 3 2 Economy 2 3 3 Governors 1 3 2