I would like to take this moment to announce, once again, that I am one of five people who liked MOO3.
I liked it for my first two games. Then I realized that I was unable to get the computer to attack me, even by leaving undefended systems open right next to them.
They probably fixed many things with patches, that would have improved it. However, the big problem that MOO3 had, imo, was that the economic system was buried at too deep a level, and there is no way that you have time to control any of it. You dont make any decisions regarding it, except for a few key worlds, where you pretty much just decide what to build. And at the very start of the game, you control your homeworld's development for a short time. The best thing about MOO1 was low micromanagement. You didnt have to micromanage, but you had control and you made the decisions. In MOO2 there was more micromanagement, but the system worked well and was very interesting, and the race customization was great. Both were excellent games. MOO3 changed micromanagement to NO management. You didnt even bother anymore to look down into the economic details of the game, and you didnt control them. The result was the loss of the most interesting part of a 4X game (to me).
Of course this all has nothing to do with Homesteaders.
I would like to take this moment to announce, once again, that I am one of five people who liked MOO3.
I liked it for my first two games. Then I realized that I was unable to get the computer to attack me, even by leaving undefended systems open right next to them.
They probably fixed many things with patches, that would have improved it. However, the big problem that MOO3 had, imo, was that the economic system was buried at too deep a level, and there is no way that you have time to control any of it. You dont make any decisions regarding it, except for a few key worlds, where you pretty much just decide what to build. And at the very start of the game, you control your homeworld's development for a short time. The best thing about MOO1 was low micromanagement. You didnt have to micromanage, but you had control and you made the decisions. In MOO2 there was more micromanagement, but the system worked well and was very interesting, and the race customization was great. Both were excellent games. MOO3 changed micromanagement to NO management. You didnt even bother anymore to look down into the economic details of the game, and you didnt control them. The result was the loss of the most interesting part of a 4X game (to me).
Of course this all has nothing to do with Homesteaders.
Never played Homesteaders... Played MOO3 for a few hours before giving up on it. I thought the space battles were horrible.
Reading all this just makes me way too excited about receiving my pre orders of Homesteaders and Terra Prime. I know they won't likely arrive till 2010 but it will be like a second christmas. Weeeeeeeeeeeeee.
Anyone who loves games like Puerto Rico, Caylus, Le Havre, Goa, and Agricola will probably love Homesteaders too. It shares many aspects with those games (and shares them well) and, at the same time, brings some of its own unique flavor and mechanics to the table. I've only played it once so far, so I am not yet sure where it will settle for me ultimately among the giants I mentioned, but I can say that I am anxious to play it again. In fact I demand an online version, since I don't get to play with people face-to-face frequently enough to sharpen my skills as quickly as I would like!
hehe.
