Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[sambojin]

Stars! is kind of complex. Or it can be. It's a turn-based 4X from yesteryear, and quite a good one.

The complexity comes from the turn-based side of things and that if you want to play optimally, you're expected to micro-manage everything. This, coupled with a horrible UI and the fact that you'll be continuously doing some quick head maths on lots of things (mostly squares and roots, but a few other things as well), makes it complicated.

Maybe complicated isn't the right word. Horrendously repetitive in a MM sense might be a better description. It's still a really good 4X, it just makes your brain and mouse fingers cry about 60-100 turns in. If you want to play it "well", that is.

Anything with 100+ strategy articles, all of which must be backed up with a decent chunk of maths to be taken seriously, gives it the "complex" rating to my mind. Lots of strategies, lots of math, a big game that looks small.

Basic overview of game:

http://wiki.starsautohost.org/wiki/What_Is_Stars!

Strategy Article library: (there are more on other sites)
http://wiki.starsautohost.org/wiki/Article_Library

[WakeMeUp]

Stars! is kind of complex. Or it can be. It's a turn-based 4X from yesteryear, and quite a good one.

The complexity comes from the turn-based side of things and that if you want to play optimally, you're expected to micro-manage everything. This, coupled with a horrible UI and the fact that you'll be continuously doing some quick head maths on lots of things (mostly squares and roots, but a few other things as well), makes it complicated.

Maybe complicated isn't the right word. Horrendously repetitive in a MM sense might be a better description. It's still a really good 4X, it just makes your brain and mouse fingers cry about 60-100 turns in. If you want to play it "well", that is.

Anything with 100+ strategy articles, all of which must be backed up with a decent chunk of maths to be taken seriously, gives it the "complex" rating to my mind. Lots of strategies, lots of math, a big game that looks small.

Basic overview of game:

http://wiki.starsautohost.org/wiki/What_Is_Stars!

Strategy Article library: (there are more on other sites)
http://wiki.starsautohost.org/wiki/Article_Library

Is Stars! more complicated than Aurora? Kinda doubt that.

[sambojin]

Nope. But this is about games, not game. It's a strong contender, but after Aurora.

Stars! was also one of the first 4X games where the AI opponent doesn't cheat. It does things stupidly and doesn't focus too well sometimes, but it doesn't cheat. It only does what the player *could* do. Not as well, and there's plenty of exploits against it (that are usually banned in MP games as well, even without AIs), but a decent amount of AIs can be an actual challenge. All without them cheating (although they do share information if it's a "you vs the galaxy" type game, which most vs AI games are).

If you hex-edit some competently designed races in for them to use, it can get quite scary. While you use up resources fighting 1-2 of them, another 5 might be expanding and teching you out of contention. All without insta-resources or free unit spam at any time.

When you win, you win. When you lose, the computer actually did beat you.

[WakeMeUp]

What about a question like this - are there games that are more complex than DF?

[sambojin]

Not that I'm aware of. The main thing currently is that DF doesn't have an actual win condition, let alone multiple. It's certainly a game, not a software toy, because there's definite lose conditions. It's very simulationist too. And very fun.

You *can* play DF pretty simply if you want, almost like a text based RTS vs zombie hordes.

Or you can literally attempt to raise hell and fire as much of it as possible out of a magma cannon at random elves.

The choice is yours, and losing is fun.


Sandbox/game/software toy is hard to define.



(military simulations, the ones they actually use to train pilots etc, certainly aren't games. They're very complex, with win and loss conditions in varying scenarios, and are excellent simulations, but they're not games. Flight sim games that we play for entertainment are though. It gets even more complicated from that point onward)

[WakeMeUp]

So what kind of complex simulations are there that are more complex than DF?

[sambojin]

In some ways, F-22 Raptor: Total Air War is more complicated from a simulation standpoint in many respects.

It's more narrowly defined in its simulation, but it's more complex with certain things too. It's a game. It can tell a story too.

[forsaken1111]

So what kind of complex simulations are there that are more complex than DF?

Define 'more complex'. Something like Orbiter is 'more complex' in terms of what it models but the scope is much more narrow.

[Erkki]

So what kind of complex simulations are there that are more complex than DF?

Is DF a simulation? Many war games for example are much more complex. Aurora complex or beyond. Though I don't think Aurora is all that super complex either in terms of what all the player must learn and remember, just very slow paced and with a horrific UI that wants you to click 5 times before you get anywhere while the blue-green-gray color scheme bores into your brains.

[WakeMeUp]

So what kind of complex simulations are there that are more complex than DF?

Define 'more complex'. Something like Orbiter is 'more complex' in terms of what it models but the scope is much more narrow.

I mean any game, simulation and what-not that is very deep and complex in depicting some area - both large and small like both the whole fantasy world like DF or small like SAM Simulator which is all about SAMs.

[sambojin]

It's like asking "How complex is Kerbal Space Program?"

It kinda is. Sort of. Is it DF complex? No.

It's a totally different sort of complex, but kind of sandboxxy and simulationist as well.

[WakeMeUp]

It's like asking "How complex is Kerbal Space Program?"

It kinda is. Sort of. Is it DF complex? No.

It's a totally different sort of complex, but kind of sandboxxy and simulationist as well.

KSP is fine, it is kinda more complex than DF I think. What else?

[sambojin]

as mentioned, F22: TAW.

Even Romance of the Three Kingdoms series "does a thing". Define complex, or I really can't answer the question.

[WakeMeUp]

as mentioned, F22: TAW.

Even Romance of the Three Kingdoms series "does a thing". Define complex, or I really can't answer the question.

Mostly about having a lot of different features but also how well it depicts something.

[sambojin]

By that definition, Tyrian is a complex game, because it accurately and realistically depicts Trent Hawkins' battle against Microsol's attempts at galactic domination, and his slow regression into apathy against the conflict and being used as a tool to further other's ambitions.

There were lots of options and features too. And a few mini-games!

I'm pretty sure Tyrian doesn't meet the OP's requirements of "complex" though.