posted 06-28-99 02:33 PM ET        

Space-Based
Birth of the Federation
Master of Orion (1 and 2)
Ascendency
Stars!

posted 06-28-99 02:39 PM ET            

More specific about what qualifies:

Turn-based is specified because it allows for more detailed planning, and micromanagement if you like that kind of thing.

Try to fit in all 4X. Star General would count, because you had to build structures on your planets to support your fleet (even if it was simplistic), but Panzer General would not.

posted 06-28-99 06:43 PM ET            

Heroes of Might & Magic (1-3)
Mission Force: Cyberstorm (1-2)
Deadlock (1-2)
Outpost (1-2)

Games I'm not sure about as far as 4X:

Railroad Tycoon?
Star Control?
Dungeon Keeper?
Conquest of the New World?
Imperium Galactica?

posted 06-29-99 12:01 PM ET            

Starcraft

Total Annihliation

Warzone2100

Total Annihilation Kingdoms

posted 06-29-99 02:07 PM ET            

That is why I said that Rebellion would have been better as a turn-based game, at least at the strategic level. There should have at least been an option to pause the game and give orders.

I don't know that games like Starcraft really fit the 4X category -- the Expand/Exploit pieces are too simplistic -- and an argument could be made that resource management (whether it is gold, minerals or water) doesn't really belong in a tactical simulation, which is why it is so simplified in these games.

In deference to Dreadnaught, however, I will say that if there are real-time games like Rebellion or Age of Empires that COULD have worked as TBS, then go ahead and mention them.

posted 06-29-99 02:09 PM ET            

I'm remembering a game called Utopia that was on the Intellivision system. It was real-time, I think, but it may fit the "could have been turn-based" definition, as well as being a good 4X game.

posted 06-30-99 01:34 PM ET            

Anacreon
Ascendency
Birth of the Federation
Civilization 1/2
Civilization: Call to Power
Colonization
Conquest of the New World
Deadlock 1/2
Emperor of the Fading Suns
Empire
Heroes of Might and Magic 1/2/3
Imperialism 1/2
Imperium Galactica
Imperium Galacticum
Master of Magic
Master of Orion 1/2
M.A.X.
Mission Force: Cyberstorm 1/2
Outpost 1/2
Reach for the Stars
Rebellion
Sid Meier's Alpha Centauri
Star General
Stars!
Utopia
X-COM 1/2/3

posted 07-01-99 07:56 AM ET            

I think Command HQ qualifies.

I'm also going to need categories to analyze these games with. I'm thinking of the following:

Diplomacy
Research
Tactical Combat
City/Colony Development
Unit Types (Variety, balance, etc.)
Major Protagonists (Sides you can play.)
Major Antagonists (Sides you cannot play.)
Atmosphere/Uniqueness
Economic Modeling (Includes trade, military logistics/support, and maintenance of infrastructure.)

posted 07-01-99 10:12 AM ET            

Some ideas on games, with the Scenario Creation stat added:

HOMM I, II, & III
Diplomacy- pre-set at beginning of scenario. However, good map-makers can create the illusion of changing diplomacy quite easily.
Research- Building bigger and bigger mage guilds in towns, I suppose, to get more spells. Requires lots of rare resources.
Tactical Combat- Yes. AI good, but predictable (a lethal downfall).
City/Colony Development- Considerable. Castles that can be built up but require resources from the map, which in order to get requires you to spend gold on units instead of your town. A fine balancing act, especially in HOMM III with the separation of castle and town hall.
Unit Types (Variety, balance, etc.)- Tremendous variety and flair. Balance in HOMM III matter of style, in HOMM II slightly unbalanced toward Warlock and Sorceress, against Knight/Barbarian.
Major Protagonists (Sides you can play.)- Any. Play any of the castles in a scenario, or choose the good or bad side in campaigns.
Major Antagonists (Sides you cannot play.)- Don't exist.
Atmosphere/Uniqueness- Definitely a 10. A good scenario or campaign drips atmosphere. Great music, great graphics.
Economic Modeling (Includes trade, military logistics/support, and maintenance of infrastructure.)- You can spend money on, to put it very basically, creatures, new heroes to lead them, town/castle improvements, town improvements that help you earn more money themselves, certain map locations, and surrendering in battle. No trade or maintenance.
Scenario Creation- Easy, and very very powerful.

MOO II
Diplomacy- Yes, but aggravating. Alliances are useful but annoying.
Research- Yes. 8 categories independet of one another.
Tactical Combat- Yes, but AI is only so-so and predictable.
City/Colony Development- Strong. Many buildings and planets to colonize.
Unit Types (Variety, balance, etc.)- Unbalanced units, but still fun. Some variety as well.
Major Protagonists (Sides you can play.)- 14 pre-set races, or make your own.
Major Antagonists (Sides you cannot play.)- The Antarans, ancient banished bad guys who are ridiculously easy to beat.
Atmosphere/Uniqueness- Not really. The novelty of the races quickly wears thin.
Economic Modeling (Includes trade, military logistics/support, and maintenance of infrastructure.)- All 3. Fairly strong, though economic race bonuses are useless since it's not too hard to balance your budget.
Scenario Creation- Nonexistent.

posted 07-01-99 12:21 PM ET            

Here is Birth of the Federation:

Diplomacy: Focuses on treaties. Each level of treaty does have a different impact. It seems as though the primary means of influencing attitude is bribary, which seems a little simplistic. Major and minor powers have hard-coded predispositions which match those in the Star Trek universe. Each major power has territory based upon colony/outpost proximity. Different treaties can confer right of passage. Sectors between major powers can be considered contested.

Research: Six categories, with ten levels in each category. There are no dependencies across categories. There really isn't much advantage to focusing research down a specific path, as the most interesting structures and ships tend to require broad advancement. Each level doesn't really seem to relate to the advancements available at that level -- the descriptions of technologies are just decorative.

Tactical combat: Modeled for starship-starship combat. Game uses a set of three order types at either long- or short-range, resulting in a scissors/paper/rock-type combat resolution. Combat looks pretty good, with 3D ships moving in a mostly 2D grid (though ships can pass by each other within the same 2D coordinate). Weaponry is either beam (short-range) or torpedo (long-range), without any real differences in effect from ship to ship. Defense is based on maneuvering, shields and hull hit points.

Colony development: Very SLOW. It takes a long time to build things, and upgrades to facilities must be done in mass. Population growth rate is sluggish. A colony consists of a solar system. Generally, the planets in a system have to be terraformed before they can be used, but are grouped into the total system value once they are. Planets provide population space, special bonuses to food or production, or environment types required for certain structures. Aggregating planets into one colony is convenient, but the slow pace of development means that you'll still be micromanaging things. Automation of production is OK but far from perfect, and a little awkward. Generally, the only way to quickly develop a colony is to buy production.

Unit Types: Starships, all based on the Star Trek universe. The classes are fixed. Weaker ships are available at lower tech levels, stronger at higher levels. Not completely realistic, but required due to the licensing involved. There are only three basic unit types -- combat ships, colony ships and troop transports. You can build stationary starbases and outpost for defense and to extend range (and these can be built in empty sectors).

Major protagonists: Five Star Trek races, each nicely varied and balanced.

Major antagonists: The Borg, which are very tough. Other special encounters of varying degrees of dificulty. Minor powers, which can engage in diplomacy and join your empire.

Atmosphere/uniqueness: Filled with Star Trek references, different music and interfaces for each major race, good diversity among powers. The minor races really play a unique role not seen in other strategy games. Interface is a bit awkward, and the game lacks some standard summary screens (like a fleet summary). The map is difficult to use effectively. Random events can be devestating, and are too frequent.

Economic Modeling: Colonies within the same empire cannot trade with each other. They must be self-sufficient in terms of food and energy. Colonies can trade with other empires or with minor powers. This trade generates money, and usually requires the proper treaty before it can be done. The military is supported by population, but if the population is exceeded by support costs, then the excess is made up from cash. You can spend more than you have in a turn, but all of your production goes to making up the difference until you are out of the red.

Scenario creation: No.

Multiplayer: Internet and LAN, no hotseat or e-mail. Internet access is somewhat buggy, according to the forums.

Customizability: There are options at startup for map size, layout of systems on the map, starting tech level for each player, automatic combat resolution, number of minor races, on/off switch for random events, and turn time limits. Other than starting setup, there is no provided ability to customize the game.

Documentation: Poor. The online guide only lists your race's structures and ships. The separately sold strategy guide is almost required to play the game.

Espionage: Espionage can be divided between spying and sabotage in fields like research, military, economic, etc. This is very flexible. Your empire has structures which produce intel points which you can allocate to each of these for each major power. With sabotage, you have the opportunity to frame other powers, steal enemy ships, destroy buildings, eliminate research, etc. This section is very nicely done.

Overall:

Positives: Varied and detailed espionage options, excellent Star Trek atmosphere, minor races really add to game play, major powers are very different and yet still balanced, borders are present and enforced between major powers.

posted 07-02-99 08:16 AM ET            

Picture MOO2 (generally considered a good game) with the nice things from Ascendency (generally considered a mediocre game) added, and the game improves. That's the point.

Snowfire, thanks for the input. Could you add the sections to your that I've added? I'm especially interested in the highlights and, er, lowlights?

Would anybody like to write up SMAC's section, or Civ:CTP? We seem to have a number of experts on these in the forums here (I wonder why? ).

Likewise, if you know any of the games on the list in detail, please provide at least the broad overview, if you can.

Thanks

posted 07-06-99 03:05 PM ET            

Space Empires 3

i haven't really ever played played MOO2 but i'm assuming Space Empires 3 is similar to it. It's a shareware game and it has a version that is completely playable without paying for it, (you just don't get advanced techs) i haven't played it in months but it is a really good game in some areas.

diplomacy: B+
research: B+
tactical combat: C-
colony development: B-
unit types: A (fabulous unit workshop)
major protagonist: B (you can be any race)
major antgonist:N/A
atmosphere/uniqueness: C+
economic modeling:C-
scenario editor: N/A

some thoughts about the game. eventhough it doesn't have a scenario editor, setting up the game gives you a wide ability to create the game you want. you have lots of options for setting up the game. so check it out