The tedious micromanagement concerning planetary building is exactly what I absolutely hate about MOO2, because it saves no purpose (MOO showed how this can be avoided perfectly). The tactical battles do take quite some time, but they are useful.

I've played a MOO2 a few times again in the last few days, and there is one downpoint I'd like to add to my previous list: it's way too easy! Playing on 'impossible' difficulty (the hardest level), I won within the first 100 rounds by being elected 'master of the universe' without ever having fought any war or building any ships half of the time. I just colonized a few planets, signed trade and research treaties as well as non-agression pacts with every other race I came into contact with and that was it. This 'peaceful' attitude apparantely got me loved by everyone. The only way to avoid this was to abstain with my own votes - and even that didn't prevent me from being elected in one case.

I agree it will be for more effective to fight them manually but it does seem labourious.

Having said that, when I play Civ I micromanage to a degree you wouldnt believe, I suppose thats the same as always doing tactical battles in MOO2.

MOO3 is a complete loss of time in all aspects unless you are looking for something really different. I bought it, would be glad to sell it back at the same price...

Of course I do. I hate to have my carefully designed ships blown to pieces by these silly automatic battles which always turn out way worse than the same battles fought manually. In the later game, it doesn't matter much anymore, of course, because my fleet is so technologically superiour to anything else that my ships can't be destroyed anymore anyway

Do you make use of the tactical battles?

I havent played MOO2 in a while, but from what I remember they take an ice age to complete, especially towards the end of game when fleets are bigger.

I've played the first sequel.

Pros:
-solar system model (several planets per system)
-race designer (like in Master of Magic)
-heroes (planetary and ship commanders)
-tactical battles
-interesting concept about technological 'groups' (hard to explain, but it ensures nobody can really get all technology without trading)

Cons:
-screwed up diplomacy (when asking an ally to attack someone you're at war with, you'll usually get the response: "no, we won't do that, and for suggesting such a thing, we'll attack you now" - eh?)
-building actual buildings (like in Civ or MOM -> fussy and silly)
-simplified ship designing

That's what comes to my mind right now. Overall, a tough choice. A good game for sure, but especially the first two cons are major gripes.

Edited by Mr Creosote at 10:49 on June, 17th 2004

I know there are several MOO fans here, so I think this is a good place to ask this:

Has anyone ever played one of the two sequels?
And are they any good?