🚀 go-pugleaf

Thanks for the info guys.  I will try Galactic Civilizations first and then 
Space Empires 4.  I tried the demo for SE 5 but it was waaaaay cluttered and 
since I have played SE 4 a little bit many years ago, that seems like a good 
choice.

With regard to Sword of the Stars, if the "tactical combat breaks the game" 
why not just auto-resolve it?  That is what I always used to do with Space 
Empires 4.

_B

-- 
"All right, but apart from the sanitation, medicine, education, wine, public 
order, irrigation, roads, the fresh water system and public health, what 
have the Romans ever done for us?"
---John Cleese (terrorist, "Life of Brian")
"Peter Huebner" <no.one@this.address> wrote in message 
news:MPG.205e053f325e4c23989c43@news.individual.net...
> In article <12v5mivpqm8r2fd@corp.supernews.com>, briggs@surewest.net 
> says...
>> For the next several weeks I am going to have a lot of free time and I 
>> have
>> decided to immerse myself in a 4X Space game.  I thought maybe you guys
>> could help me narrow down an appropriate game.  I am not a fan of
>> micromanagement (though I like that option in specific instances.)  I do 
>> not
>> care about graphics though there is plenty of computer horsepower 
>> avaiable
>> if necessary.
>>
>> I have the following choices readily available for immediate play (I 
>> would
>> consider others but these are the games I have available.)
>>
>> Reach for the Stars
>
> The last patch at least made this playable. But I just haven't immersed 
> myself
> in it further than to find out that much ... nothing like the original 
> rfts
> (should you have ever played it).
>
>> Gallactic Civ 2:  Dark Avatar
>
> Very good indeed, and no micromanagement from hell. If you are into combat
> heavily this may not be for you, it's mostly about resource balancing,
> exploring, colonizing and empire building if you want to do well. You can 
> win a
> military victory all right but the battles are automatic (if 
> watchable)((you
> can design your own ships)). Very good 4x in my opinion. Best in the 
> franchise
> so far. Been playing this since the late beta stages. (and GalCiv since 
> the
> OS/2 days).
>
>> Space Empires 4
>> Space Empires 5
>
> Some people contend that SE5 is worse than SE4 Gold. Certainly took me a 
> long
> time to find my way through the interface on SE5. But it's actually all 
> there,
> even though it's much harder to find. Lots more eye-candy in SE5, 
> especially
> with some of the mods already available (Fyron's beta mod for SE5 from
> spaceempires.net is _gorgeous_). You can get a very very good idea from 
> the
> demos of these games, I'd recommend a download and trial. But until you 
> learn
> the keyboard shortcuts it's the UI from some lesser hell, especially SE5 
> :-(
> Great scope to immerse onself into a 4x strategy game apart from that.
>
> ****
> The main difference between the two game systems is that SE is star-lane 
> based,
> whereas in GalCiv you have ships flying through open space. Chokepoints in
> GalCiv only come about through range limitations that are technology 
> dependent.
> Range limitations in SE are dependent on how much supplies your ships 
> carry.
> Diplomacy is quite extensive in both games, Galciv seems to focus more on 
> one-
> off deals whereas in SE you can have re-supply treaties, repair treaties,
> various forms of trade, espionage and political treaties. However, it is 
> opaque
> to me on what basis exactly the AI players react to diplomatic offers in 
> SE.
>
> With Dark Avatar Stardock have taken on board a lot of the things that 
> were in
> SE already, mine-able asteroid fields, different planetary environments,
> limited building space on planets(not new); both have build lists that can 
> be
> saved exist for both unless I am very much mistaken (rarely use that 
> feature)
> and also continuous economic and research treaties (new in Avatar).
>
> What Galciv does have and SE doesn't is the ability to build starbases 
> that
> enhance trade, production and military prowess over an area of influence,
> galactic resources that can be mined to influence your whole Civ (I 
> suppose one
> could argue that the social research tree in SE has the same functionality 
> as
> the latter), the ability to build culture specific and galactic 'wonders' 
> and,
> not to forget, a much cleaner and easier to use interface.
> ****
>
>> Sword of the Stars
>
> The combat breaks this game. We've recently discussed this on
> comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.strategic -- google the thread.
> Well nigh unplayable i.m.o.
>
>> Birth of the Federation (Will this run in Windows XP?)
>
> no idea.
>
>> Stars (will this run in Windows XP?)
>
> It runs fine on my system. I kinda like the game, but I have never yet
> completed a single one. It seems to turn to micromanagement hell the way I 
> try
> to play it and it eventually just sends me to sleep so I've abandoned each 
> and
> every game I've ever tried to play.
>
>> Master of Orion II (will this run in XP?)
>
> The Win95 version runs fine in Win95 compatibility mode. I still play this 
> from
> time to time, I also play MoO 1 in dosbox v0.63 under XP. Great games, 
> both.
>
>> Master of Orion III
>
> Nooooooo! I've never spent a lot of money on a worse game than this. Utter
> crap, I am afraid. Unless you like sitting in front of the monitor and 
> keep
> hitting the enter key once in a while, while the computer plays with 
> itself.
> I count myself lucky that I managed to resell it after one week :-)
>
>> Spaceword Ho!
>
> The CD languishes on my shelf, or in the drawer. Despite the good reviews, 
> this
> game just never engaged me. It most certainly never got that "just one 
> more
> turn" button pushed that makes me want to replay a game.
> I've seen it given away on cover-CDs so it may be available for free 
> download
> some place. (re-reads post - oh, you have it available already <g>).
>
> ***
>
> You might also consider Space Rangers 2. Interesting mix of trading/rpg 
> with
> adventure type puzzles and even rts (turnable off) thrown in. Not so much
> empire building - but clearing the quadrant of invading alien robots has
> elements of that as well, the way holding certain key positions is 
> important in
> Risk or many other map-based games. I turned the rts off - I hate rts - 
> and it
> kept me very interested for a couple of weeks. The I tired of it and 
> haven't
> been remotely tempted to look at it ever since.
>
> There's another one from Russia, Starwolf or Star Wolves or some title 
> like
> that. Not my cup of tea I decided after a brief look at the demo. My
> superficial impression was that of a cross between Freelancer and 
> Battlecruiser
> f.w.i.w. :-\
>
> Both of these have a strong following however so I thought I'd mention 
> them.
>
>
> -P.
>
> -- 
> =========================================
> firstname dot lastname at gmail fullstop com