FreeOrion

Science all the way.


I've got a stellar converter. And if you steal it i'll blow you up before you can build one... hehehe

Not if I'm so sneaky you don't even know I stole it before I use it on you!

I disagree. I think tech should be the ultimate equilizer. Anything I am deficient in, I should be able to make up for. Sure it will cost me some time, but that is part of the balance for a tech race.

If I have a tech focused race, and I survive to a critical time, i should win. Your goal is to defeat me before that critical time. Your failure means I win.

THink about this, Cavemen are stronger then you or I. However we would win against a caveman using technology. The cost of technology? About 10,000 years. But it allows us to be the dominate force on the planet.

Thus my puny psilons, who suck at everything except reasearching need only survive and expand at a decent rate to succeed. For you to beat them you must take away my advantage by not allowing me to develop it. To beat you I must survive long enough to nullify your advantage.

The balance is the amount of time required for the transistion.

_________________
Aquitaine is my Hero....

In other words it all boils down to map size

_________________
Fear is the Mind Killer - Frank Herbert -Dune

Diplomacy and alliances are the way to go for me. As they say...teamwork is great cause you can always found somebody else to do the job for you ;p

_________________

violence is not the solution until you have the technology to wipe the floor with a mop reconstructed from the remains of your disintegrated opponents.

Well, I tend to go with science, so that I am eventually able to crush any opposition with bold acts of violence, technologically-assisted espionage, superior diplomatic bargaining power, and an uber powerful sweep of galactic domination

_________________
kthxbye.
Also known as "Hadrian", administrator ofThe Hideout Forums.
TheForce.net

Hazies wrote



I agree. It is one of the more compelling factors that made MOO / MOO2 so great. Civ 2 had a similar means to achieving victory and it was fun, too. The science/tech in Civ 3 made it playable (barely / bearly) - but not fun.

_________________
If anything can go wrong - it will!

I`m hopping to be able to my counselors "So all the races have united against me? Don`t worry, I will make them an offer the can´t refuse".

Economic victory should be fun if you could actually DO something with money. But in most games money is only useful for.... mmm.... sorry, money is usually completely useless (or at leat NOT fun).

_________________
My proposals for: Resources - Spies

Complaining isn't enough, you are welcome to introduce some ideas.

_________________
Press any key to continue or any other key to cancel.
Can COWs fly?

If you are searching the way to ULTIMATE victory, it is always conquest in the end. All other options are nice little tools to make that victory possible!

Conquest is the only true victory...

But until then, I'm a lover of science.

The first to declare war on me gets to be my mop.

I tend to ally with weaklings and let them choose my enemies for me. There's only room for one conquerer.


That's a question, would it be possible to have an allied victory?

I think it's balance that wins.

You HAVE to do some research
you HAVE to build some ships
you HAVE to colonise new planets
etc..

The system is very complex with many variables that feed right back into the equation.

_________________
Staying awake and aware is perhaps the hardest thing to do.

any game is badly designed if it becomes apparent that any one strat is in 'I WIN' button. there should be many viable strategies, including teching up only modestly but pursuing an aggressive stance while your opps are too focused on tech and not enough on defense in the early-mid game. personally, i like to try and win with as many different strategies as possible.

_________________
of course i think i'm right. if i thought i was wrong, i'd change my mind