eXplorminate is a group of die-hard 4X and strategy fans. Whether it's classics like the Civilization series, or more recent newcomers like Endless Legend, Endless Space 2, Humankind, Old World, or Stellaris, we are obsessed with everything around our favorite genre.
Our KZread channel doesn't always feature "expert play", so be warned.
Want to be a part of the group? Have a unique take on 4X or just want to say something about strategy? Come to our site at www.eXplorminate.co or on our Discord at discord.gg/Z5uwCT5H3x and drop us a line! We're all-inclusive and eager to grow our numbers!
You can also find us on Steam - both as a Group and a Curator - here: steamcommunity.com/groups/explorminate and here: steamcommunity.com/groups/explorminate, as well as Facebook, Twitter, and Twitch. Find us on the Epic Games Store as Creator Code "EXPLORMINATE" - please use that code when purchasing games there to support our channel and brand! Thank you!
Пікірлер
Thanks for the very detailed explanations of how a 4X game works. I'm new to 4X and thought it was best to start with ROTP before moving on to either Stars in Shadow or Endless Space 1 or Space Empires 5. Probably Stars in Shadow might be easier to learn for a newbie?
did you forget making a playlist for your gladius adepta sororitas walkthrough ?
no naval units either...nah i'll pass
too many female leaders and too much like a glaius skin. at least have different leader choices per faction. kind of no room for variety.
Then try Open Imperium Galactica! And you see what is a true 4X space RTS!
Diplomacy? It is something that I hate. I only like resource management and strategies, EXCEPT for diplomacy. LOL
Does this guy do multiplayer at all? I usually play single player games but look at it as training wheel to eventually be able to play well in competitive multiplayer. Havent played most of these games and am looking forward to picking up a new game. From the games covered here I've played and really enjoyed Dune and Stellaris multiplayer. I think they're really top tier. I love the unpredictability of end game Dune and the ridiculous depth of mechanics and diplomacy in multiplayer Stellaris.
the weird part I went looking for the first vid to rewatch it to see if I had most of the games by now and now u are doing the update so I think I have every current update for all the titles so time to revisit all of them at some point in the near future. good vid by the way like your are spit balling with buds vs a scripted "thing" as it were good stuff
I thought about giving the original a try a while back, but I was into dominions 4 at the time and didnt have it in me to learn another deep stratedgy game.
Not having Imperium Galactica II and Stellaris on here is Heresy.
we do not. boring.
Hearts of Iron 4 is the most complicated game I've ever played. Huge pay off tho
"The request is at your discretion, though it is mandatory." Hmm... :)
I love the asymmetric drives every race has. I really, really, hated when Stellaris removed that feature, I loved playing as the center-point species.
Cool game! Is this a playable demo? I'd definitely watch future episodes of this playthrough.
The game that tops my list for ship building and customizing is Space Empires. Version 4 was the best imho. You even can build Black Hole Generators and Star Destroyers to totally remodel a sector or use warp techology for new warp lanes. In the very late game you even can construct sphere worlds which house incredible amounts of people.
It's amusing to me how Civ : Beyond Earth was just erased from memory when, by today's standards, it's a much better game than most. Civ: BE was criticized for having "dull" leaders. Nowadays, many 4X games are soulless "shells" of options and variety and mix-and-match replayability--but they're all vacuous experiences, like AoW4, Humankind, etc. Civ: BE, with its interesting victory conditions, unit evolution, planetary biomes, expanded civ 5 gameplay, etc., is just a more cohesive experience and really feels like it was ahead of its time. Yet, it doesnt even get a ranking on any tier list.
Great list
SOTS 1 is all about space dolphins. ...well, hivers are interesting to play also. and humans are unorhodox with their drive tech. OH HECK I GOTTA PLAY SOTS1 AGAIN.
SOTS2 ship design, mechanics and customization were ahead of its time. Hell, it still is even now. Maybe less so on depth but definitely when it comes to scale. Haven't seen any other game that lets you build a ship with 100 turrets with independent targeting & arcs, various modules and mission sections. Oh and the Suul'ka were epic. If it had more time and budget for polish and refinement, it could have been a hit.
Yeah A real travesty.
We need more games like these, with proper support from the publisher. :)
Instead of SotS3 we get another soulless remake of their mildly successful 'The Pit'...
They went broke trying to fix SOTS2 without any support from their publisher, and sadly The Pit series is all they had the money to make.
@@Trifler500 Paradox are a super evil company
Man, what I would give for a SoTS III.
Oh man... Me too!
Only if it's SotS 1-like and not 2-like. For me personally.
Used to love this series. How have they held up over time and do they run well on modern rigs?
The first game runs fine on modern computers if you don't use a 4K screen. Neither game has UI scaling. In general, the second game runs fine if you aren't affected by a certain bug that makes it not run on some computers. You'll know right away though, and can return it if it does affect you. The second game does have a lot of odd design decisions and a clunky UI, but it adds more to the ship design. Probably the first thing you'll notice is you can no longer simply move individual ships like units on a board. The second game requires you to create a fleet and send them on missions, rather than just saying "move here". They then automatically return to base when they complete that mission.
@@Trifler500 I hated that mission system so damn much. Combined with the general clunkiness and lack of polish, and the devs basically abandoning the game, and the devs' shitty attitude toward fans on the forums, I gave up on it.
@@vahnn0 They didn't give up on it. They went bankrupt. At the time, Paradox (the publisher) was in the state of mind of holding developers rigidly to the release date no matter what. The game clearly wasn't ready even for a beta phase. When Kerberos asked for an extension, Paradox refused. Since then, the Paradox CEO issued a public apology, saying that SOTS2 was the turning point for them that changed their procedures to hold off on releasing games if they are not ready. At least, until Cities Skylines 2. If you do a deep dive, it was a huge thing. The Kerberos CEO also issued a public apology, saying that after the huge success of SOTS1, he got carried away with wanting to experiment with new ideas, and went way beyond what the time and resources available could get done in time. This is quite common after a developer's first hit. When Paradox abandoned them, they spent a little over a year working on SOTS2 before they went belly up. They fixed a ton in that time. When it released, it would crash as soon as you hit the End Turn button. Did it need more work? Absolutely. However, I don't think it's fair to say they abandoned the game.
@@vahnn0 They didn't give up on it. They went bankrupt. At the time, Paradox (the publisher) was in the state of mind of holding developers rigidly to the release date no matter what. The game clearly wasn't ready even for a beta phase. When Kerberos asked for an extension, Paradox refused. Since then, the Paradox CEO issued a public apology, saying that SOTS2 was the turning point for them that changed their procedures to hold off on releasing games if they are not ready. At least, until Cities Skylines 2. If you do a deep dive, it was a huge thing. The Kerberos CEO also issued a public apology, saying that after the huge success of SOTS1, he got carried away with wanting to experiment with new ideas, and went way beyond what the time and resources available could get done in time. This is quite common after a developer's first hit. When Paradox abandoned them, they spent a little over a year working on SOTS2 before they went belly up. They fixed a ton in that time. When it released, it would crash as soon as you hit the End Turn button. Did it need more work? Absolutely. However, I don't think it's fair to say they abandoned the game.
@@vahnn0 Having trouble getting KZread to let me post. Trying splitting this into two: They didn't give up on it. They went bankrupt. At the time, Paradox (the publisher) was in the state of mind of holding developers rigidly to the release date no matter what. The game clearly wasn't ready even for a beta phase. When Kerberos asked for an extension, Paradox refused. Since then, the Paradox CEO issued a public apology, saying that SOTS2 was the turning point for them that changed their procedures to hold off on releasing games if they are not ready. At least, until Cities Skylines 2. If you do a deep dive, it was a huge thing.
The asymmetric racial diversity and detail in this game really made it something special, nice review of the different races.
100%, and thank you. :)
I had such high hopes for SotS 2 but they went the wrong direction for my taste. Maybe eventually someone can make a SotS 3 which is again like 1?
@@Godwinsname SOTS 2 has some truly bizarre design decisions, but ultimately I ended up liking it (in spite of its _many_ flaws) more than SOTS 1.
@@kerravon4159 That's cool. I didn't.
I honestly enjoyed SoTS2 more than SoTS1 too. Updated gfx and designs. Some of the new mechanics & other changes were questionable but most of it grew on to you. However SoTS2 caused way more frustration than SoTS1, it was buggy as hell, also plainly obvious it was unfinished and there was a sizeable amount of cut content.
I love the first game could not get into the second one they made it overly complicated
Yeah. First one was great. I really wanted a campaign, but otherwise, they did a lot of really cool things. The UI of the second was was indeed unnecessarily complicated. I stuck with it early on and learned to enjoy it. I have over 600 hours in Steam, but it could have been better.
BTW, if it wasn't clear, all of the info except the Loa and the ship skins is for both games.
26:34 - I do like watching full playthroughs, but IMO I'd wait until the game is at least in early access.
yay, ultra wide gameplay! Finally I won't have black bars on youTube.
You need assault shuttles to invade and you need bomb racks on a cruiser or larger ship to do this. I am certain you have already figured this out.;
Game looks nice but that dwarf is hideous.
What about Europa Universalis? It is technically a 4x. Just that it is a Historically based 4x. Meaning the only new cities you will build will be the ones you Colonize in the New World or Africa or South East Asia.
Nope.
Sadly, I did end up forgetting to show the Morrigi beam design at the end of the video that I talked about, as well as a couple of Hiver designs. This was already my third time recording this. I didn't have it in me to do it all again just to show an all-beam cruiser in the Ship Design screen. Maybe I'll do a "Turn 0 Guide" one of these days, which could include that kind of stuff.
You should make notes and cross out what you said/did and what didn't, as you talk. As in Morrigy: Very good at beams 🗹 Best at gravity tech 𐄂 Fastest if you maximize fleet 🗹 Best trade but lower income from planets 🗹 Cruisers are very expensive 𐄂 Best drones that they love to shove into non-drone sections 🗹 second best at psionics 𐄂 fast survey (sots 2) because CnC/tankers have drones which improve survey speed (honestly I always thought that Morrigy update maps from archives then actually create new ones) 𐄂 Show a few beam desigs 𐄂
@@Poctyk Believe it or not, I made a detailed 6-page outline, with a fully scripted intro and closing. Dozens of revisions. I did three full recordings, and about six of just the intro. Just like my previous videos, each try has some problem or another, and I have to pick my poison. Preparation can only help so far. I suppose I could just not tell you guys what I forgot. Usually I prefer to add the info to the comments, but in this case, it was visual. Since I would have to reconfigure the whole list of factions each time, which I customized the look of before recording, I opted to do show the designs at the end, rather than for each faction. There really were just a couple though. Making something like a Let's Play recording is MUCH easier. lol
Paradox need to make a fantasy version of Stellaris. There's so many fantasy trope they could use.
Very helpful. Thanks!
MOO4 was a terrible 'in name only' game.
Accuracy should work like it did in Gladius. It increases the hit chance for each shot which in turn increase their over all damage since they are more likely to hit.
I respect the list. With that said these kind of list are highly subjective.
Endless Legend the best and most beaultifull 4x <3
Human Kind literally has the best political structure / trading in any 4 x game. The culture change is fine. Also they buffed staying as the same culture. So for those civ purest who enjoy being abrhaham lincoln for 800 years can do that to. Combat is very good as well. Definitely not C tier lol. A or B yes.
We’ll agree to disagree!
lovely Gladius
15:42 you only get littel longdead or souless. Not worth it.
Nice list. I would put master of orion CTS a C tier (bad game with good graphics) master of magic A tier (i love that it stayed close to the original), ES2 is B tier for me. Civ6 would beC tier for me. Totally agree with endless legends it rules.
Idk I never really managed to like the world map combat of Gladius. It just feels weird and unsatisfying. And I tried this during the steam next fest and it felt like I'm just playing Gladius again, but that might just be because the graphics and at least the units of the fallen soldier are so similar to the ones in Gladius. But maybe for people that liked Gladius, they might see a better version of it?
Ya same here. I'll pass.
Great list and the only one I'd bump up is Endless Space 2 to S tier. I think your critique of Civ 6 is on point. Civ 5 is still a better game.
the game looks and plays great, but it will be a pass for me if their monetization will be same as gladius, more than 150 euros for a game with full DLC is just a HARD PASS
I mean nothing to wrong with this as long as the DLC is worth it. They do this to provide long term support for their productions. The key word is if they are worth it. I can name a few games that crank out DLC like crazy and what you get from those DLC is just bad...no names...sims.
The base game of Gladius is complete. I just add a DLC here and there when I feel like playing it again. You don't have to buy them all at once. All but one I got on sale.
@@JD-vj4go No no no. They expect people to time travel and some how see the future and take all the content they made in the future so when the game is released it a "complete game". Anything else made past the release window invalids it release.
gladius was obviously a dlc machine. this one looks copy/paste so i'll pass.
This looks identical to Warhammer 40k Gladius Relics of War.
It does at first glance but their are a number of changes that I know off off the top of my head that really make it a much more enjoyable experience compared to Gladius.
they basically copy and pasted gladius and also have the same muddled graphics and boring environments. i'll pass.
I would create S+ category and put Shadow Empire alone in it. :-)
Played Zephon beta in 2 builds before, it has potential, hope it develops well until release and they choose a good price point so it reviews well.
I wish they'd use a different palate for their terrain. They used something similar for Gladius and even for Pandora First Contact. Far too washed out in all three games.
I really love the terrain graphics. Really easier to read than Age of Wonders 4
I have kind of fallen away from 4X games, mostly frustrated with the lack of challenge with the AI, and as such I actually prefer combat systems where its more abstracted with less direct control. It becomes too easy to become so much better than the AI at the tactical combat systems it almost feels like cheating.
Have you tried Shadow Empire? It's considered to have strong AI.
Old World has remarkably challenging combat A.I. So much so that the developers have and to make continued tweaks on the lower difficulties of the game because there isn't really a way to make "easy" a.i. mode, so when players get into wars they get their asses kicked. Devs had had to limit the a.i. use of forced March at lower difficulties, and even limit the a.i. ability to attack and take your cities. In fact just a few months ago, the devs added a new difficulty to the game; an even EASIER one than all of the previous ones that existed. If you're a skilled player you'll probably need to bump up the difficulty a tad to find the right spot, but in terms if combat A.I. I haven't found a game that matches Old Worlds.