Worst space strategy games you've played and why you hope Stellaris won't follow them

  • We have updated our Community Code of Conduct. Please read through the new rules for the forum that are an integral part of Paradox Interactive’s User Agreement.

FOARP

Field Marshal
49 Badges
Sep 10, 2008
6.137
4.022
  • Crusader Kings II
  • Victoria 2: Heart of Darkness
  • Victoria 2: A House Divided
  • Sword of the Stars II
  • Sword of the Stars
  • Semper Fi
  • Victoria: Revolutions
  • Europa Universalis IV: Res Publica
  • Naval War: Arctic Circle
  • Magicka
  • Heir to the Throne
  • Hearts of Iron III
  • Gettysburg
  • For the Motherland
  • Europa Universalis IV: Wealth of Nations
  • Europa Universalis IV: Conquest of Paradise
  • Arsenal of Democracy
  • Crusader Kings II: Charlemagne
  • Crusader Kings II: Legacy of Rome
  • Crusader Kings II: The Old Gods
  • Crusader Kings II: Rajas of India
  • Crusader Kings II: The Republic
  • Crusader Kings II: Sons of Abraham
  • Crusader Kings II: Sunset Invasion
  • Crusader Kings II: Sword of Islam
  • Darkest Hour
  • Europa Universalis III
  • Europa Universalis III Complete
  • Divine Wind
  • Europa Universalis IV: Art of War
  • Hearts of Iron IV: Expansion Pass
  • Steel Division: Normandy 44 -  Back to Hell
  • Steel Division: Normand 44 - Second Wave
  • Hearts of Iron IV: Expansion Pass
  • Hearts of Iron IV: Death or Dishonor
  • Steel Division: Normandy 44
  • Hearts of Iron IV: Field Marshal
  • Hearts of Iron IV: Colonel
  • Hearts of Iron IV: Cadet
  • Hearts of Iron IV Sign-up
  • Crusader Kings II: Way of Life
  • Mount & Blade: With Fire and Sword
  • Mount & Blade: Warband
  • 500k Club
  • Warlock: Master of the Arcane
  • Victoria 2
  • Europa Universalis III Complete
  • Europa Universalis III Complete
  • Europa Universalis IV
That Star Wars strategy game - virtually unplayable, using spies turned out to be the only way of taking down a planet, lame, disappointing, the only game I've ever taken back to the store to get a refund for (yes, this was back in the days when I'd buy physical copies of the game).

Basically, Star Wars: Rebellion was a roughly-slapped-together strategy turn-based strategy game the developers of which had invested precisely zero thought into making. They thought people would buy it simply because of the Star Wars name (to be fair, this is why I bought it). It had obviously not be play-tested that much either.
 
Last edited:

Pyramid_Head

Banned
29 Badges
Aug 13, 2013
1.517
3.345
  • Europa Universalis IV
  • Steel Division: Normand 44 - Second Wave
  • Age of Wonders: Shadow Magic
  • Europa Universalis IV: Third Rome
  • Stellaris - Path to Destruction bundle
  • Stellaris: Leviathans Story Pack
  • Major Wiki Contributor
  • Tyranny: Gold Edition
  • Hearts of Iron IV: Field Marshal
  • Stellaris: Galaxy Edition
  • Cities: Skylines - Snowfall
  • Cities: Skylines - After Dark
  • Magicka 2
  • Stellaris: Galaxy Edition
  • Europa Universalis IV: Pre-order
  • Europa Universalis IV: Res Publica
  • Europa Universalis IV: Wealth of Nations
  • Europa Universalis IV: Art of War
  • Crusader Kings II
  • Hearts of Iron IV: Expansion Pass
  • Stellaris: Megacorp
  • Crusader Kings II: Holy Fury Pre-order
  • Stellaris: Distant Stars Pre-Order
  • DJ Plantage
  • PDXCON 2018 "The King"
  • PDXCON 2018 "The Emperor"
  • Tyranny - Tales from the Tiers
  • Stellaris: Synthetic Dawn
  • Hearts of Iron II: Beta
Galactic Civilizations 1-3. By far, GalCiv have THE worst possible combat system. Hard counters and rock-paper-scissors all the way. The system makes you hate the very idea of designing a ship. Endless Space had this flaw too, with absolutely horrible hard counter based space combat. This plus complete soullesness and undevelopement of nearly all aspects of the game.
 
  • 3
  • 1
Reactions:

lordashran

Captain
62 Badges
Apr 9, 2006
307
6
  • Tyranny: Archon Edition
  • Europa Universalis IV: Common Sense
  • Crusader Kings II: Horse Lords
  • Cities: Skylines - After Dark
  • Europa Universalis IV: Cossacks
  • Crusader Kings II: Conclave
  • Cities: Skylines - Snowfall
  • Europa Universalis IV: Mare Nostrum
  • Stellaris
  • Stellaris: Galaxy Edition
  • Stellaris: Galaxy Edition
  • Hearts of Iron IV: Cadet
  • Crusader Kings II: Reapers Due
  • Pillars of Eternity
  • Tyranny: Archon Edition
  • Stellaris: Digital Anniversary Edition
  • Stellaris: Leviathans Story Pack
  • Hearts of Iron IV: Together for Victory
  • Crusader Kings II: Monks and Mystics
  • Stellaris - Path to Destruction bundle
  • Cities: Skylines - Mass Transit
  • Surviving Mars
  • Hearts of Iron IV: Death or Dishonor
  • Stellaris: Synthetic Dawn
  • Age of Wonders III
  • Prison Architect
  • Europa Universalis IV: Wealth of Nations
  • Crusader Kings II
  • Crusader Kings II: Charlemagne
  • Crusader Kings II: Legacy of Rome
  • Crusader Kings II: The Old Gods
  • Crusader Kings II: Rajas of India
  • Crusader Kings II: The Republic
  • Crusader Kings II: Sons of Abraham
  • Crusader Kings II: Sword of Islam
  • Europa Universalis III: Chronicles
  • Europa Universalis IV
  • Europa Universalis IV: Art of War
  • Europa Universalis IV: Conquest of Paradise
  • Hearts of Iron II: Armageddon
  • For the Motherland
  • Hearts of Iron III
  • Europa Universalis IV: Res Publica
  • Semper Fi
  • Victoria 2
  • Victoria 2: A House Divided
  • Victoria 2: Heart of Darkness
  • 500k Club
  • Cities: Skylines
  • Europa Universalis IV: El Dorado
My main problem with all 4X games and especially the Sci-Fi ones is how the scale feels.
It feels to small. For me scale is always an important factor in strategy games and how the scale feels can not exactly be defined by number of units/stars or graphical design. My favorite example of this is XCom. In the original the scale felt much bigger then in the remake. In the remake, to me, it felt like I was the commander of a glorified SWAT team rather then commaning the last ditch effort of a whole planet against a invasion of global scale. But achieving the right sense of scale is tricky I admit.

The worst offender within the genre, to me, is the GalCIV series. It always feels small. The map feels small, the conflicts do, colonization does and most of all the ships and fleets do. I think the amount of options you have matters a lot. (this also beeing the greatest difference between the two XComs, you just had so much more tactical and strategic options in the original games.)

WIthin the genre I think Space Empires IV and V gave me the best sense of scale. Fleets started small but would turn large. Colonization was varied and felt important. Distance mattered, a lot. Population growth was very slow and you needed to set up an infrastructure where even after a planet was colonized, to move population to them. Setting up infrastructures actually seems quite important to the sense of scale to me now that I think about it. The most important factor though were the amount of options you had. Unit and ship design, teh different types of those units the whole way in which you could define your empire while expanding it and how you could achive things ina am ultitude of ways... to bad the AI wasn't up for it.

I hope that Stellaris will feel right. Small and individual aspects can always be fixed or tweaked later but if the game does not feel that I am actually exploring and colonizing the vasts of space... well, thats just not a thing that can be easily fixed^^
 
  • 5
Reactions:

Krajzen

Field Marshal
29 Badges
Aug 29, 2014
5.039
8.777
  • Europa Universalis IV: Res Publica
  • Europa Universalis IV: Call to arms event
  • Stellaris: Galaxy Edition
  • Europa Universalis IV: Wealth of Nations
  • Europa Universalis IV: Conquest of Paradise
  • Europa Universalis IV: Art of War
  • Stellaris
  • Europa Universalis IV: Common Sense
  • Crusader Kings II: Horse Lords
  • Crusader Kings II: Conclave
  • Crusader Kings II: Holy Fury
  • Stellaris: Galaxy Edition
  • Stellaris: Galaxy Edition
  • Stellaris Sign-up
  • Crusader Kings II: Reapers Due
  • Crusader Kings II: Monks and Mystics
  • Crusader Kings II: Jade Dragon
  • Crusader Kings II: Way of Life
  • Europa Universalis IV: El Dorado
  • Europa Universalis IV
  • Crusader Kings II: Sword of Islam
  • Crusader Kings II: Sunset Invasion
  • Crusader Kings II: Sons of Abraham
  • Crusader Kings II: The Republic
  • Crusader Kings II: Rajas of India
  • Crusader Kings II: The Old Gods
  • Crusader Kings II: Legacy of Rome
  • Crusader Kings II: Charlemagne
  • Crusader Kings II
My favorite example of this is XCom. In the original the scale felt much bigger then in the remake. In the remake, to me, it felt like I was the commander of a glorified SWAT team rather then commaning the last ditch effort of a whole planet against a invasion of global scale. But achieving the right sense of scale is tricky I admit.

I had no such feeling in xcom:eu, in fact I adored the feeling of commanding global miliary effort and felt the epic scale :D For me it fit the scale, it is not open alien invasion but 'cold war guerilla style proxy incursions', in this case defending a planet with localized elite commando units felt okay for me. Though I didn't play the original game.

As for the scale, I'd really like one super cosmetic detail, if one unit in the military fleet was not 'a ship type x' but 'a squadron of ships of type x'. I don't care they would be 'less personalized' than USS Frog or whatever individual names do ships get, but in this case I'd feel the bigger scale of mass space warfare - I am commanding 30 squadrons of corvettes to orbital strike, not measly 30 corvettes! Feels cooler, right? The exact number of ships in a squadron or whatever measurement unit should be left vague.

If someone doesn't like the 'lack of personality' of names in such system, remember:
A) The game still revolves around personalized and deep leaders, scientists, generals and admirals
B) The ship squadrons still can have their distinctive names - Squadron Blue, Squadron Yevetha, Squadron Anvil etc
C) Few biggest ships could be left solitare and be named 'USS Leviathan' or whatever


I really don't like when the game says me 'this is your GREAT IMPERIAL ARMY' and points at the dwo dozen soldiers or ships. Well this is one of reasons I couldn't really love most RTS games. Total War series avoided that problem for obvious reasons :p (1000-3000 soldiers may still be 10x smaller than in history but it already feels very good, it is a proper scale), many games abstract army numbers and convince me 'dude those are 7 figurines but each of them represents hundreds of warriors', everything is fine as long as my suspension of disbelief doesn't break. One of the reasons I don't like Endless game series is their micro scale - battles between 'empires' consist of like few units beating themselves with 'great commanders' personally participating.
 

D Inqu

General
104 Badges
Jun 20, 2007
2.117
802
  • BATTLETECH
  • Hearts of Iron IV: No Step Back
  • Stellaris: Nemesis
  • Stellaris: Necroids
  • Crusader Kings III
  • Imperator: Rome - Magna Graecia
  • Stellaris: Federations
  • Hearts of Iron IV: La Resistance
  • Age of Wonders: Planetfall - Revelations
  • Age of Wonders: Planetfall
  • Europa Universalis IV: Golden Century
  • Crusader Kings II: Jade Dragon
  • Europa Universalis IV: Cradle of Civilization
  • Europa Universalis IV: Mandate of Heaven
  • Stellaris: Galaxy Edition
  • Stellaris: Galaxy Edition
  • Europa Universalis IV
  • Hearts of Iron IV: Colonel
  • Stellaris
  • Surviving Mars: First Colony Edition
  • Prison Architect
  • Imperator: Rome
  • Surviving Mars: First Colony Edition
  • Age of Wonders II
  • Age of Wonders: Shadow Magic
  • Age of Wonders III
  • Europa Universalis III
  • Impire
  • Hearts of Iron III Collection
  • King Arthur II
  • Darkest Hour
  • Victoria 2: Heart of Darkness
  • Pillars of Eternity
  • Cities: Skylines
  • Warlock 2: The Exiled
  • Warlock: Master of the Arcane
  • Rome: Vae Victis
  • Majesty 2 Collection
  • 500k Club
  • Crusader Kings II
If you want a different selection of races, play a different 4X, one of the main things I hated about MOO3 is that it took MOO2's colorful selection of races, axed half of them, and then added palette swaps of the remaining races to make it less obvious that they reduced the racial diversity. The only genuinely unique race that was added to MOO3 ended up being space zombies which, after Homeworld: Cataclysm, that trope needed to die in a fire already.

Probably the only good thing about MOO3's racial selection is that they had some interesting twists on some of the classic races, such as silicoids, but for the most part it was a giant step back compared to MOO2.
To me MOO2 felt so much blander in race selection. Precisely because so many races looked the same, silly "man in a costume" look, and played very similar. In MOO3 you had a colorful selection of races, which felt very different and acted different and played different.
 

Safehold

69_Yin_Yang
22 Badges
Jun 28, 2011
1.237
1.063
  • Magicka
  • Crusader Kings II
  • Crusader Kings III: Royal Edition
  • Crusader Kings III
  • Age of Wonders: Planetfall Deluxe edition
  • Age of Wonders: Planetfall
  • Imperator: Rome
  • Imperator: Rome Deluxe Edition
  • BATTLETECH: Flashpoint
  • Age of Wonders III
  • Surviving Mars
  • BATTLETECH
  • Cities: Skylines - Natural Disasters
  • Stellaris Sign-up
  • Stellaris: Galaxy Edition
  • Stellaris: Galaxy Edition
  • Stellaris: Galaxy Edition
  • Stellaris
  • Cities: Skylines - Snowfall
  • Cities: Skylines - After Dark
  • Mount & Blade: With Fire and Sword
  • Cities: Skylines
In my opinion any 4x game that is mainly about galaxy conquest and that include tactical ship combat are always destined to fail because they quickly become boring to play with too little to do between wars. All the things you do is only to gear your civilization into the next war and any tactical combat just make game balance worse and turn the game into several games in one package.
The worst thing about almost ALL game in this category is the almost linear progression forward, it is so boring.

It might also be my tastes that have changed over the years and I'm a more mature gamer and feel less urges to wage war as my main goal to have fun. I want an interactive environment that react to what decisions I make. I don't want a soulless population that follow my every command like robots. I want people to be enraged if I obliterate an enemy planet from space just because they care about such matters (or if I don't). I want internal politics to matter and empire management to be an important part of the game not just the next conquest.

All this put a higher focus on things other than the military and the means to wage war. Space combat will always be an important part of any space strategy game but should not be the main focus. The main focus should be to explore space and manage a civilization and make that interesting. That is the kind of game that I like to play. I still enjoy the military side of it all but not to the exclusion of politics, economy and ethics.

I suggest giving Last Federation a try, by arcen.

It does directly address the issues you listed. Watch the youtube review by Total Biscuit, it's a good intro.

I had no such feeling in xcom:eu, in fact I adored the feeling of commanding global miliary effort and felt the epic scale :D For me it fit the scale, it is not open alien invasion but 'cold war guerilla style proxy incursions', in this case defending a planet with localized elite commando units felt okay for me. Though I didn't play the original game.

As a tactics squad game, the new Xcom 1 (so weird to call it that) passes the bill. But the old Xcom Enemy Unknown, simulated more layers of a base commander. Things like "money". The world was "larger" logistically because your one base does NOT cover everybody. You need to build more bases, so you need to "expand" and take territory. Later on, I used specialized fighter bases to use cheap Earth jets to swarm enemies, using an alien saucer as the heavy hitter. Full scale dps. Saved up a ton of elerium that way. Then the aliens jack you up because they notice your base, that isn't defended well. So the game progresses, logistically, tactically, and strategically to different phases. Even if you lose funding from nations, you can begin funding yourself by taking enemy ships intact, making weapons with it to sell, or selling alien plasma weapons on the black market to govs and militaries. Although it's not a good idea to lose "everyone"... so the end game felt much like CK2, it was much much more open ended, in that you could keep it going for as long as you could win battles.

As for Moo3, I actually liked the UI there, last patch Silver did, and found the races, as others mentioned, very special in their play style. Well, compared to the Distant Worlds ship design micro and the Gal Civ 2 strategy micro expansion, Moo3 felt much easier to play. Then again, I had no idea what the hype was, I didn't even know they had made a Moo3.
 
Last edited:
  • 1
Reactions:

FOARP

Field Marshal
49 Badges
Sep 10, 2008
6.137
4.022
  • Crusader Kings II
  • Victoria 2: Heart of Darkness
  • Victoria 2: A House Divided
  • Sword of the Stars II
  • Sword of the Stars
  • Semper Fi
  • Victoria: Revolutions
  • Europa Universalis IV: Res Publica
  • Naval War: Arctic Circle
  • Magicka
  • Heir to the Throne
  • Hearts of Iron III
  • Gettysburg
  • For the Motherland
  • Europa Universalis IV: Wealth of Nations
  • Europa Universalis IV: Conquest of Paradise
  • Arsenal of Democracy
  • Crusader Kings II: Charlemagne
  • Crusader Kings II: Legacy of Rome
  • Crusader Kings II: The Old Gods
  • Crusader Kings II: Rajas of India
  • Crusader Kings II: The Republic
  • Crusader Kings II: Sons of Abraham
  • Crusader Kings II: Sunset Invasion
  • Crusader Kings II: Sword of Islam
  • Darkest Hour
  • Europa Universalis III
  • Europa Universalis III Complete
  • Divine Wind
  • Europa Universalis IV: Art of War
  • Hearts of Iron IV: Expansion Pass
  • Steel Division: Normandy 44 -  Back to Hell
  • Steel Division: Normand 44 - Second Wave
  • Hearts of Iron IV: Expansion Pass
  • Hearts of Iron IV: Death or Dishonor
  • Steel Division: Normandy 44
  • Hearts of Iron IV: Field Marshal
  • Hearts of Iron IV: Colonel
  • Hearts of Iron IV: Cadet
  • Hearts of Iron IV Sign-up
  • Crusader Kings II: Way of Life
  • Mount & Blade: With Fire and Sword
  • Mount & Blade: Warband
  • 500k Club
  • Warlock: Master of the Arcane
  • Victoria 2
  • Europa Universalis III Complete
  • Europa Universalis III Complete
  • Europa Universalis IV
As a tactics squad game, the new Xcom 1 (so weird to call it that) passes the bill. But the old Xcom Enemy Unknown, simulated more layers of a base commander. Things like "money". The world was "larger" logistically because your one base does NOT cover everybody. You need to build more bases, so you need to "expand" and take territory. Later on, I used specialized fighter bases to use cheap Earth jets to swarm enemies, using an alien saucer as the heavy hitter. Full scale dps. Saved up a ton of elerium that way. Then the aliens jack you up because they notice your base, that isn't defended well. So the game progresses, logistically, tactically, and strategically to different phases. Even if you lose funding from nations, you can begin funding yourself by taking enemy ships intact, making weapons with it to sell, or selling alien plasma weapons on the black market to govs and militaries. Although it's not a good idea to lose "everyone"... so the end game felt much like CK2, it was much much more open ended, in that you could keep it going for as long as you could win battles.

As for Moo3, I actually liked the UI there, last patch Silver did, and found the races, as others mentioned, very special in their play style. Well, compared to the Distant Worlds ship design micro and the Gal Civ 2 strategy micro expansion, Moo3 felt much easier to play. Then again, I had no idea what the hype was, I didn't even know they had made a Moo3.

I loved the original X-COM. You're right that it felt so much bigger and full of options, there was so much more you could do in it than in the remake (which wasn't bad, but I didn't feel the need to play-through again after finishing it).

The battles in X-COM were another example of this: the maps felt bigger, you felt like you had less idea where the enemy was likely to be, since you had more soldiers you felt like you could afford loses, you could be ambushed from more directions and the game really made you pay if you let one of your guys go somewhere unsupported. It also sprung "Oh F%^&!" moments on you more - the time when a whole squad of troops bumped up against a single Muton armed only with laser rifles, ordinary grenades, and ordinary launchers (not the big heavy launchers which might actually take one down): it was like something out of Predator, with my guys just unloading on this single Muton with everything they had only to find that they didn't even leave a scratch. Eventually one of them managed to get close enough to use a stun-stick, but only after half of my guys were killed/wounded.

The characters in the game also developed more organically - they weren't rail-roaded into a specific speciality with hard-coded limitations, but instead could be jacks of all trades. The fact that there were more of them meant you felt less of a compulsion to save-scum every time someone got hit.

EDIT: I often felt the levels in the X-Com remake looked like they had been pre-set and weren't procedurally generated. Having checked the Wiki page I now see that this was true.
 
  • 1
Reactions:

Vanhal

Lt. General
58 Badges
Nov 19, 2009
1.582
2.990
  • Empire of Sin
  • Surviving Mars
  • Surviving Mars: Digital Deluxe Edition
  • Crusader Kings III Referal
  • Crusader Kings III
  • Stellaris Sign-up
  • Stellaris
  • Stellaris: Galaxy Edition
  • Stellaris: Galaxy Edition
  • Stellaris: Galaxy Edition
  • Stellaris: Digital Anniversary Edition
  • Stellaris: Synthetic Dawn
  • Stellaris: Leviathans Story Pack
  • Stellaris - Path to Destruction bundle
  • Stellaris: Megacorp
  • Stellaris: Humanoids Species Pack
  • Stellaris: Distant Stars
  • Stellaris: Apocalypse
  • Stellaris: Ancient Relics
  • Stellaris: Lithoids
  • Stellaris: Federations
  • Stellaris: Necroids
  • Stellaris: Nemesis
  • BATTLETECH
  • BATTLETECH - Digital Deluxe Edition
  • BATTLETECH: Season pass
  • BATTLETECH: Flashpoint
  • BATTLETECH: Heavy Metal
  • Crusader Kings II
  • Crusader Kings II: Sword of Islam
  • Crusader Kings II: Legacy of Rome
  • Crusader Kings II: The Republic
  • Crusader Kings II: The Old Gods
  • Crusader Kings II: Sons of Abraham
  • Crusader Kings II: Rajas of India
  • Crusader Kings II: Sunset Invasion
  • Crusader Kings II: Conclave
  • Crusader Kings II: Charlemagne
  • Crusader Kings II: Horse Lords
  • Crusader Kings II: Reapers Due
  • Crusader Kings II: Way of Life
  • Crusader Kings II: Monks and Mystics
  • Crusader Kings II: Jade Dragon
  • Crusader Kings II: Holy Fury
  • Imperator: Rome Sign Up
  • Imperator: Rome
  • Imperator: Rome Deluxe Edition
  • Imperator: Rome - Magna Graecia
  • Age of Wonders: Planetfall Sign Up
  • Age of Wonders: Planetfall
EDIT: I often felt the levels in the X-Com remake looked like they had been pre-set and weren't procedurally generated. Having checked the Wiki page I now see that this was true.

Because they were pre-set.
On a side note, i liked the new Xcom more than old one. True, it have lot of faults, like the useless and costly gene enchancement as opposite to overpowered mech troopers, the obnoxious satellite system and functional cut-off of the air combat (bacause what is there is placeholder at best), but the few things also totally won me out - lack of multiple bases is just god-send, i hated this with passion in every x-com version and clone, also the lack of chasing last alien in some weird places in combat. About the TU's i'm rather undecided. They were functional, but the realtime of Ufo:whatever series worked good too and the remake x-com 2 action points is good too. If anything, it make the combat faster and no less tactical (at least until you are able to steamroll everything, but old X-com had that moment too).
 

Safehold

69_Yin_Yang
22 Badges
Jun 28, 2011
1.237
1.063
  • Magicka
  • Crusader Kings II
  • Crusader Kings III: Royal Edition
  • Crusader Kings III
  • Age of Wonders: Planetfall Deluxe edition
  • Age of Wonders: Planetfall
  • Imperator: Rome
  • Imperator: Rome Deluxe Edition
  • BATTLETECH: Flashpoint
  • Age of Wonders III
  • Surviving Mars
  • BATTLETECH
  • Cities: Skylines - Natural Disasters
  • Stellaris Sign-up
  • Stellaris: Galaxy Edition
  • Stellaris: Galaxy Edition
  • Stellaris: Galaxy Edition
  • Stellaris
  • Cities: Skylines - Snowfall
  • Cities: Skylines - After Dark
  • Mount & Blade: With Fire and Sword
  • Cities: Skylines
I loved the original X-COM. You're right that it felt so much bigger and full of options, there was so much more you could do in it than in the remake (which wasn't bad, but I didn't feel the need to play-through again after finishing it).

The battles in X-COM were another example of this: the maps felt bigger, you felt like you had less idea where the enemy was likely to be, since you had more soldiers you felt like you could afford loses, you could be ambushed from more directions and the game really made you pay if you let one of your guys go somewhere unsupported. It also sprung "Oh F%^&!" moments on you more - the time when a whole squad of troops bumped up against a single Muton armed only with laser rifles, ordinary grenades, and ordinary launchers (not the big heavy launchers which might actually take one down): it was like something out of Predator, with my guys just unloading on this single Muton with everything they had only to find that they didn't even leave a scratch. Eventually one of them managed to get close enough to use a stun-stick, but only after half of my guys were killed/wounded.

The characters in the game also developed more organically - they weren't rail-roaded into a specific speciality with hard-coded limitations, but instead could be jacks of all trades. The fact that there were more of them meant you felt less of a compulsion to save-scum every time someone got hit.

EDIT: I often felt the levels in the X-Com remake looked like they had been pre-set and weren't procedurally generated. Having checked the Wiki page I now see that this was true.

The new Xcom 1 tactical battle maps were very finite in variety, to the point where I memorized most of their tactical layouts in one play through. And I was playing on slightly hard. Well, part of the reason why old Xcom 1 players don't find a lot of replayability in new Xcom 1 is that their strategy and tech is almost exactly the same... which basically means if you remember your old Xcom 1 strategies, you could basically start playing on hard or what not and go exactly into the tactical configuration you need to fight escalating alien threats. The fact that the research, production, and upgrades of soldiers and alien tech got easier, just means you didn't get surprised by the difference in game mechanics.

The mutons were definitely hardy, and the stun whatevers came in handy, since they produced fatigue faster than some weapons ate up hp. I seem to recall there was a ranged weapon stun... oh yeah, smoke. I just threw demolition charges in 3 point ambushes, and smoked those mutons out, while frog footing backwards with my squad. It was a pain in the a carrying around those huge charges though, but very useful for breaching house walls and sometimes even alien alloy hulls (if you weakened it with some plasma fire first). Hard to remember, but it was the snake peeps that I fought with lasers, and that was similar to your muton fight. And the biggest scare was the damn saucer tanks in terror missions. Their accuracy was not normal... and the sound of their engines freaked me out, and the first time I encountered them was at night, so I couldn't even see them properly.

Next after that would definitely be the chrysalids.

Another funny thing is psionics. That was the big "secret tech" upgrade, that nobody knew about, except old xcom 1 users. That changed the tactical situational immensely, especially since I was getting mind controlled in my sky ranger in old Xcom 1 and did not realize where it was coming from. I was blowing up half the alien ship trying to stop it too. And the thing is... psionic potential was completely random back then, and I had no idea who was strong or weak, except for those guys that kept getting mind controlled.

There were also situations where the sky ranger or the upgraded ones landed, and the aliens surrounded me with an alien launcher, basically mini cruise missile with multiple stage rockets to change trajectories and using some kind of super explosive, or anti matter, blowing people up. I was always scared of being trapped in that gang plank like Saving Private Ryan at a beach. One time I put all 12 of my super commandos at the bottom of a large alien battleship lift, thinking I would go straight up to the command center.... I took so long doing so, that the alien up top launched a missile below and killed almost everyone in powered armor. I was like.... "maybe I was being too cautious there". He "heard" enemies down below and must have seen a single glimpse. Next time I was in that situation, I decided to breach the command room externally, from outside the ship, using my own alien launchers: then fly up to the level with jet packs. I was trying to save elerium and alien ammo though... last time I tried that I think my charges blew into the ship and blew up some valuable stuff.

Xcom 1 old soldiers were definitely more layered and unique. The skill rpg system in the new Xcom was designed for people used to a simpler, more abstract system. Crusader Kings 2 simulates dynasties using a variety of traits and skills, some are good others are horrible. And in the old Xcom 1, because you could just keep hiring soldiers depending on time or money, what you got was this clump of clay that you would mold over time. Because the new Xcom 1 allowed you to directly influence the soldier's perks and skill trees, they didn't feel simulated characters. More like weapons in and of themselves. The roles they did have, were pretty cool and felt really nice to play, like sniper. It just didn't take as much work. In Ck2, you need to painstakingly educate your future heirs, if you want the edge. That attention to detail, that work, separates out what humans place value in.

Because they were pre-set.
On a side note, i liked the new Xcom more than old one. True, it have lot of faults, like the useless and costly gene enchancement as opposite to overpowered mech troopers, the obnoxious satellite system and functional cut-off of the air combat (bacause what is there is placeholder at best), but the few things also totally won me out - lack of multiple bases is just god-send, i hated this with passion in every x-com version and clone, also the lack of chasing last alien in some weird places in combat. About the TU's i'm rather undecided. They were functional, but the realtime of Ufo:whatever series worked good too and the remake x-com 2 action points is good too. If anything, it make the combat faster and no less tactical (at least until you are able to steamroll everything, but old X-com had that moment too).

I figured out early in old Xcom 1, that I only needed bases to intercept and shoot down alien ships. The actual landing site wouldn't disappear for a day or so. So my sky rangers and important facilities were kept at the primary HQ, with everything stockpiled in one central location, making it easier to defend against alien incursions. But the outlying bases only had to fit hangers and supplies for them. This reduces the micromanagement. People who tried to put soldiers or workers at two bases... that was probably not a good idea. I only ever needed 1 primary, 1 secondary, and 1-2 tertiary fighter bases. The secondary was my second squad, but came very late in the game.

Xcom Apocalypse, the third one, used real time for tactics, but the previous 2 were always turn based, but real time on the strategy map.

Xcom 2, Terror from the Deeps, was almost like a total mod of Xcom 1. The game mechanics didn't change much, but the background and new enemies were so interesting I didn't pay much attention to the popular criticisms. And I loved my melee weapons, it was so risky getting close to those enemies like the crabs, but so satisfying to cut them down in one or two shots, while ranged weapons were taking forever. 5+ shots.

On the topic of Moo2, it mostly reminded me of Master of Magic. I played MoM and Moo1 at about the same time, but they probably overlapped. I looked at the gameplay of Master of Magic from my current pov, and while the tactical battle is just as good as I remembered it, the OCD clicking on turn button isn't something I can tolerate easily now a days. Probably why I prefer real time grand strategy games now.

The chasing down enemies, especially in tight CQB situations like ships or cities in old Xcom, was pretty difficult. Since one had to maintain combat formations or else "surprises" may happen like an ambush. I started adapting and changing my combat formation into a broad sphere, and sometimes that single alien gray survivor would sneak around behind my search perimeter. So when I went back to check my skyranger, he shot my guy running out of TUs in the head. At day time, this wasn't so bad. At night time in farms without flares, it could get unnerving.
 
Last edited:

SolSys

Paradox Wikis
Community Ambassador
127 Badges
Apr 26, 2013
2.428
1.810
  • Crusader Kings III
  • Europa Universalis IV
  • Victoria 2
  • Hearts of Iron IV: Cadet
  • Stellaris
  • Major Wiki Contributor
It is really popular to bash MoO3, and granted, it did not turn out the way anyone hoped, but it did a lot of interesting things (and promised even more interesting things), so I wouldn't say that it's the worst 4X Space Game, just one of the more disappointing ones.
It deserves all the bashing it gets [that tech tree/column-row or whatever still haunts me to this day].

At least the remake is shaping up nicely [Stellaris will be out first so no worries here].
 

Novacat

Khajiit
5 Badges
Oct 9, 2010
9.193
743
  • Crusader Kings II
  • Europa Universalis IV
  • Hearts of Iron III
  • Semper Fi
  • 500k Club
To me MOO2 felt so much blander in race selection. Precisely because so many races looked the same, silly "man in a costume" look, and played very similar. In MOO3 you had a colorful selection of races, which felt very different and acted different and played different.

...because MOO3 turning 9 races into 16 by use of pallette swapping is such variety. MOO2's races could have been better presented, but each of them were at least unique concepts. Having three flavors of lizardpeople is not very diverse.