Master of Orion - <AUTHOR> https://www.filfre.net/2020/01/master-of-orion/ <comment><USER3> I used to love Masters of Orion II; I would play as the Psilons, get a ridiculous technological advantage, and produce massive death-star like Dreadnought ships that could vaporize any target or planet in one mega-beam.

The game had a flaw, though. The AI opponents would mass up hundreds of zergling-like very weak ships, and they would EACH get a turn in combat. So my 4 dreadnoughts would wipe 4 of their ships, then 296 enemies would fire individually and miss onto my mega-shields...then they'd be down to 292 after my turn...then 292 misses...and I'd leave the game for 3 hours until the battle finished.

<comment><USER4> I also enjoyed playing as the Psilons. It's probably nostalgia, but there is still stuff I miss from more modern games like Stellaris, that I think MOO2 did right. It was really only the late game that became tedious.

There were tons of way to get cheap wins in the game. I vaguely recall there being tech (possibly from the Orions), that allowed you to cloak your ship. Enemies could not even target you while cloaked. There was another tech that allowed you to get two turns (for each the enemy had). With a single ship, you could attack, then cloak, and avoid all damage.

<comment><USER5> another cheap trick: in late game after unlocking terraforming & Gaia transformation tech, you could turn any colony into a Gaia world apart from a colony on a toxic planet. But if you had a second colony in the system, you could gift your toxic colony to an opponent, then attack it with a stellar converter equipped fleet, fire the stellar converter to destroy the planet and convert it into an asteroid belt, then get your second colony in the system to start an artificial planet construction project to turn the fresh belt into a terraformable barren world.

It's a bit more Douglas Adams than George Lucas: apologies former citizens, you and your corrosive world needs to be vaporised to work around zoning regulations as part of the empire's galactic terraforming project.

Another fun way to play the early/mid game was to try to advance up the tech tree by scrapping captured higher tech ships. You needed large fleets of disposable ships with lots of room for boarding parties, tractor beams to pin enemies, and if possible weapons with radiation damage to kill the enemy crew before boarding. It was particularly fun and frustrating trying to capture ancient-tech antaran ships in the early/mid game (the game designers were wise enough to equip antaran ships with the quantum detonator tech giving them a very high chance to self destruct nuke their ship's drive when you tried to board them)

<comment><USER6> I used to do a variation of that in Armada 2525. Neutron stars always had very bad planets. I would put a colony there, drop enough work units to build a self destruct, then blow the planet. Artificial planet, now I had a good planet around the neutron star--and every ship built around a neutron star had double defenses. Once I had one such world I used it for as much of my shipbuilding as possible as the ships would almost never be destroyed. I would then go for the other neutron stars, both to increase my building ability and to keep the AI from building such ships. Once I had them all the game was won.

<comment><USER7> Hmm, I'd only consider that if the planet at the neutron star was either Tiny or mineral-poor; with full tech, even an IRR Small is better than the TER Tiny created by an artificial planet...

<comment><USER6> But you could increase the size (admittedly, only one point per turn) of the TER up to maximum, you couldn't an IRR.

<comment><USER7> IRR Small planets could be extended the same two points per turn as other Small planets.

<comment><USER6> But the max you could extend them to was much less. So long as you were doing it for the long term blowing it and replacing it was your better approach.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER8> Maybe someone here can help with this. Back in the late 80s in the days of BBSing games of Trade Wars and Tele-Arena... I have a faint recollection of playing an entirely text-based space adventure game with my brother.

The first computer my brother and I ever had access to was a Wang, I have no idea what operating system it ran. I was 6 or 7 at the time. I'm pretty sure that's the machine we used to play this game, as well as our own instance of Trade Wars, when we weren't logged into Argus BBS over the 1200 baud.

OK, so this game we played. It was like a explore and conquer game, there was a list of worlds I think they were named Alpha, Beta, Gamma, etc. You could choose to send different types of ships to try to capture and control the various worlds, in which case it would contribute to your overall production. I recall there was a way to send spies as well, that would relay information about what kind of units were present on an enemy territory. I recall it being similar in some ways to Galactic Empire, except it was purely turn based, there was no real time component.

I can't for the life of me remember the name of the game. I'm half convinced I dreamed the whole thing up. Any chance this rings a bell for anyone?

<comment><USER9> Solar Realms Elite sounds similar, but Amit Patel wrote it in 1990. It was inspired by Space Empire Elite in 1987 (the programmer was 13 years old at the time).

This article has some screenshots: [https://breakintochat.com/blog/2016/02/02/jon-radoff- creator...](https://breakintochat.com/blog/2016/02/02/jon-radoff-creator-of- space-empire-elite-and-final-frontier/)

<comment><USER8> Thank you! I think it was Space Empire Elite! Or possibly one of the later derivatives.

Man.... now I just have to track down a binary!

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER10> This game, along with Master of Magic, Civ 1, XCOM: Enemy Unknown, and Dune 2, were the beginnings of strategy gaming for me. It's amazing to see that most of these games have been remade or copied (Stellaris, Age of Wonder, Civ 6, XCOM 2, Star Craft, respectively), and that the genre lives on.

<comment><USER11> Agreed.

XCOM (the original) to this day remains one of my favorite turn-based games. How you grew attached to your troopers! The remake is pretty good, too.

How do you find Stellaris, by the way? I'm tempted by it but at the same time these days I simply don't have time for time-consuming, micro-managed 4X games that feel more like work than fun.

<comment><USER10> I didn't enjoy Stellaris as much as I remember enjoying MOO. However, the latest version of MOO is just okay. MOO 2 and Ascendancy were by far my favorite. I say this, but that was decades ago. How about yourself?

<comment><USER11> Haven't tried the new MOO. I remember enjoying MOO and MOO2 back in the day. And of course, Ascendancy! But would I have the patience to play them nowadays? I don't know...

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER12> I've been playing this since 1993 and can't think of any 4X game that is as tight as this in terms of structure and playability. For those that don't know, there is an SDL re-creation that reimplements the underlying engine (you still need the original assets to play of course). [https://gitlab.com/KilgoreTroutMaskReplicant/1oom](https://gitlab.com/KilgoreTroutMaskReplicant/1oom)

I've beaten it on impossible with nearly all races although I generally prefer to play with 4 races, medium galaxy on the hard setting.

<comment><USER13> This is the more active fork of Kilgore's work:

[https://gitlab.com/Tapani_/1oom](https://gitlab.com/Tapani_/1oom)

<comment> Brave-Steak Hmmm, maybe I'm being dense, but I don't see any exe to run and there are no instructions for compiling it. Am I missing something?

edit: Okay, it's in [https://gitlab.com/KilgoreTroutMaskReplicant/1oom/blob/maste...](https://gitlab.com/KilgoreTroutMaskReplicant/1oom/blob/master/INSTALL) Don't know why that'd be in a separate file, but okay. And they're Linux-only.

At least it seems that the original Kilgore version provides Windows binaries.

[https://gitlab.com/KilgoreTroutMaskReplicant/1oom/-/releases](https://gitlab.com/KilgoreTroutMaskReplicant/1oom/-/releases)

<comment><USER14> Section 3 of your linked file has instructions for Windows.

<comment> Brave-Steak Which is cross-compiling from Linux.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER15> Playable free at [https://archive.org/details/msdos_Master_of_Orion_1993](https://archive.org/details/msdos_Master_of_Orion_1993) if, like me, you got halfway through the article before the urge presented itself.

<comment><USER16> you can also get all of them through Steam if you need an easy means to deal with this, they are around two dollars each. Sadly 1 & 2 are not listed compatible with Catalina (Mac OS)

<comment><USER17> GOG has them, too -- with Linux packaging for us Linux people.

<comment><USER18> I bought MoO Classic and MoO 2 on GOG.com a while ago. I just tried installing and playing them on macOS Catalina, and I can verify that they work. But the stand-alone installers aren't notarized, so you'll have to approve them manually, or use the GOG Galaxy app.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER19> I loved playing Civ 1. I hear a lot of times people say, oh kids should be taught money management in school. To me, playing a strategy game where you have to manage your own money supply was the best education in this sort of concept. If you save up your resources, you'll be able to do more powerful things in the future, which requires the tough emotional work of foregoing something you want now. But, sometimes that thing you want right now really is important, and you need to think hard about the difference.

<comment><USER20> But... money doesn't mean much in Civ 1. The first thing you do is cut the tax rate to the bare minimum, often zero, so that you can route all your trade into science instead.

You need to cover the maintenance costs of your buildings, but any surplus that goes into your treasury becomes nearly worthless -- the things you can spend gold on are garbage compared to science / happiness.

</comment></comment><comment><USER21> Master of Orion was notable in that it was the first game I remember with "meaningful" NPC interactions. Even though interactions were quite limited (make/break alliances, espionage, trade, etc), early alliances could determine the final outcome of the game. But more importantly, it felt emotionally compelling. I found myself getting angry at certain factions when they spied/voted/etc against me. They also took the time to illustrate dispositions IIRC, so you could see when a race was happy or angry with you.

<comment><USER22> Some twenty years ago, while playing Master of Orion, I asked the Humans to ally with me and go to war against the most powerful race. They replied something like: "Yes, we will be your allies. We fondly remember when you gave us +10 Terraforming."... which had happened scores of turns earlier, when in desperation I bribed them with tech so they wouldn't attack me!

</comment></comment><comment><USER23> MoO was a masterpiece.

MoO II was even better, IMO, with more depth. The ability to create your own race alone is huge.

We don't talk about MoO III.

Then the MoO reboot happened...terrible at release, but it got overhauled at some point and it actually made the game enjoyable.

<comment><USER12> I appreciate that you acknowledge both as being masterpieces. I've found that the community is bifurcated w.r.t MOO1 vs MOO2 and it's great to see more people that appreciate both.

I haven't managed to get into MOO2 yet but it's on my bucket list for 202x. If it can yield any semblance of the awe I've had for MOO1 then I'm in for a real treat!

<comment><USER24> I think the best thing about MOO2 by far was the rather memorable audio/music. Especially the unique music they had each time you interacted with another race.

</comment></comment></comment><comment> compiler-guy This is just an amazing game.

I still play it quite regularly. I have an old Mac mini in a back room that I keep explicitly for that purpose. When the original machine gave up the ghost, I shelled out a couple of hundred bucks for a "new" obsolete mac mini just to be able to keep playing.

And I will do it again when this one dies. Such a great game. I also play Civ II on this machine occasionally.

Part of the magic is how simple the game play is relative to more modern games.

<comment><USER25> Don't know if it helps - but it's on Steam, and even behaves on Linux. Hell the emulation is painful enough that even the real waits are part of the game.

</comment></comment><comment><USER26> This game is extremely great, still influencing game design and space strategy games. Strangely, despite so many years and advances in technology, no other game could quite capture the charm of the great original Master of the Orion.

Ironically, the closest was Master of the Orion 2, which had nice features - <USER2> most liked that I could capture enemy population instead of extermination, converting them to be my citizens and creating a diverse empire (long before it was cool!!) - but it kinda lacked the sense of surrounding mystery, great black dread, where the snarks lurk to prey on my tiny empire of three sols....

<comment><USER3> I totally forgot you'd have the conquered people as citizens...you could also replace your people with robots. I don't think it made sense with every playable race, but certain races that were bad on food or the planet had bad food, you could use robots to improve your bottom line. Eerily familiar...

<comment><USER26> We once had a three-player hotseat game. I made an industrial-focused race based on humans, second player made a psylon-based race of super scientists... And the third player wiped the floor with us on first contact. He made a race of silicoids who could eat rocks and breeded like crazy. He took all the maluses for strength gravity etc and easily destroyed us through sheer numbers.

So I guess rocks as food and breeding is THE strategy in moo2

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER27> Glad the blog goes into the board game antecedents.

Having played a lot of board and computer games, what I'm hoping for these days might be called "Dynamicland, but for games." At present we have to choose between real-world sociality and the power of computing for simulation; why not both? If I can play multiplayer MOO with my grandkids while looking at _each other_ , rather than screens, I'll be happy.

<comment><USER28> I have seen tabletop gamers do various things with projectors and/or tokens with QR codes to keep track of things on a computer while interacting with things physically. I haven't seen anything that wasn't a one-off to scratch a single-person's itch though.

</comment></comment><comment><USER29> I played MOO1 for the first time a few years ago, and it's by far my favorite 4x game. The sliders cut down on a lot of busywork present in MOO2 and Civ, the random tech tree is spicy, and the AI is much more interesting than the usual friend-foe modifiers system (major differences are ignoring friend-foe if someone is an easy target, dogpiling the leader, and undeclared early game border disputes).

Highly recommend if you like strategy games and haven't played it. I like it so much that I've tried writing a clone a few times (but the latest attempt got sidetracked and turned into a game about interplanetary rail networks.)

<comment><USER30> I also like MOO the best because of the lack of busywork. In a way, it feels a lot like a Euro board game, with sliders instead of meeples working the planets. Well, like a Euro except for the glassing your opponents' planets part; genocide is kind of rare in cardboard. But it is possible to play and win without doing that, in most games anyway. And then you're playing a game where if you collect enough "points" from your economic engine -- population from terraforming -- you win the game.

Now can you offer further explanation of this "interplanetary rail" thing? Is it Galaxy Express 999 style?

<comment><USER29> You decide what resource a planet produces, then hook it up to nearby planets that provide the resources it wants, which expands how far it can send its resource along the network. The network itself is composed of rail lines directly between planets.

Screenshots on my twitter: [https://twitter.com/LiterallyOwls/status/1218418806520979456](https://twitter.com/LiterallyOwls/status/1218418806520979456)

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER31> I always loved Ascendancy ([https://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ascendancy](https://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ascendancy), [https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kDeXKf6e46I](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kDeXKf6e46I)), which I still play sometimes and still find interesting. It gets a bit boring towards the middle / end of the game though as the AI is not very advanced and easy to beat. Still I found it to be more polished than "Master of Orion".

<comment><USER32> I loved ascendancy but that game is unfinished. Combat made no sense, the AI was super dumb. But it had potential!

<comment><USER31> There's an AI patch that makes it somewhat better though. For me most of the joy of the games was in building up a galactic network, so I still enjoyed it very much even with the "dumb" AI.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER17> Master of Orion and Master of Orion II (they are very, very different games) are two of my all-time favorites to this day. I started playing them when they were first released, and they've never left my game rotation.

As it happens, I've been playing the original MOO again for the last couple of weeks!

<comment><USER33> It was difficult to play MOO for a while due to driver/emulation shenanigans but it got easier again thanks to the emulation community's improvements. Now you can play it in the browser or get it on Steam. Such an amazing game. For the past 20 years I have been using this endgame quote [1] as a quip in casual conversation. My favorite way to play is to build a nuke fleet and wipe out enemy colonies that cross me.

[1] [https://www.filfre.net/wp- content/uploads/2020/01/orion_019....](https://www.filfre.net/wp- content/uploads/2020/01/orion_019.png)

</comment></comment><comment><USER34> I loved Moo2 as a child and I played a lot of hours with a friend of mine back in the DOS days - was one of the only hotseat playable games back in the day (and Worms of course).

Later when I became a programmer I was also fascinated by the fact that there were several "community patches" \- patches that enhanced gameplay (larger galaxy sizes etc.), added new artwork and such without the availability of the source code - people reverse engineered the game and wrote binary patches that would contribute a lot to overall gameplay. To this day I can't fully understand how they did it - i get the theory, but not what tools they used, and how they got the motivation to do machine level changes to the game. Overall, good memories.

</comment><comment><USER35> I love this blog, even if it is a little weird at times. Some of the best and most well documented history of video games I've come across.

<comment><USER36> Define "a little weird" – I've been following Jimmy's other blog, The Analog Antiquarian [1] (and also read a few of the non-gaming focused posts on this blog), and so far nothing "a little weird" has stood out to me. Not refuting you – just curious to know what you mean.

[1]: [https://analog-antiquarian.net](https://analog-antiquarian.net)

<comment><USER37> Not to put words in OP's mouth, but I'd guess the weirdness is in a couple of things:

1) Jimmy can go deep on some extremely obscure corners of the industry (e.g. interactive fiction movements that maybe only a few dozen academic acolytes are even aware of).

2) The occasional deep tangent. For example, I don't think a month-long mini- biography of Edward Mannock was really necessary to appreciate the Amiga game _Wings_. But then again, I loved that tangent, so it's the kind of weirdness that I can personally embrace. I'm guessing the Analog Antiquarian is going to end up ultimately absorbing that energy anyway.

<comment><USER35> You've explained it better than I could, although in retrospect I should have included an explanation originally. Esoteric would have been a better word than weird, but I guess my coffee hadn't kicked in yet.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER38> There is a really well-done, faithful-to-the-original but still slightly expanded-upon open source Java clone of MOO1 called Remnants of the Precursors: [https://www.reddit.com/r/rotp/comments/eew3hs/guide_to_the_r...](https://www.reddit.com/r/rotp/comments/eew3hs/guide_to_the_remnants_of_the_precursors_alpha_test/)

It compiles in IntelliJ and is very fun to play and mod.

</comment><comment><USER39> [https://kilgoretroutmaskreplicant.gitlab.io/plain- html/](https://kilgoretroutmaskreplicant.gitlab.io/plain-html/) is an exact replica of the original Master of Orion engine, and requires original game data to be played.

</comment><comment><USER40> Space Empires I. II and III should be mentioned, IMO. Great games. Edit: and especially Space Empires IV

<comment><USER41> III was the first 4X that I got way way too into. Really great "arcadey" experience that lets you focus on blowing shit up and not resource management as much.

IV is probably the apex of the series, much deeper and more complex. That's when you shift from 1 resource to 3. Ship combat has more depth as well.

I think V got a little too into the graphics and missed the mark on the mechanics, although the weapon mount system is pretty interesting.

edit: SE4 is currently $2 on GOG

<comment><USER42> It's too bad that SE3 isn't sold anywhere. It still works fine on Win10, provided that you can get past installing it (which can be tricky, because the installer is a 16-bit Windows app!).

<comment><USER41> Maybe it's on the Internet Archive somewhere?

I'll set up an XP VM and extract it and upload it. It's shareware, so I don't see the problem with repackaging it and distributing it unaltered. I thought I might have a copy where I'd done that but I guess not. edit: from [https://archive.org/details/SpaceEmpire](https://archive.org/details/SpaceEmpire) to [https://www.dropbox.com/s/rac1gouedkjqxve/se3.7z?dl=0](https://www.dropbox.com/s/rac1gouedkjqxve/se3.7z?dl=0)

To be honest - I think the shareware game actually has better play than the full version. Having a fairly shallow tech tree, limited to light cruiser sized ships and no super OP weapons, without any of the stellar manipulation or planetbase/battlecruiser tier endgame ships is actually a pretty fun ruleset for casual play. It's a more arcadey game than SE4 (with just one "construction point" instead of 3 materials) and cruising around with big fleets having pew pew battles of massive task groups and crushing each other's planets really suits it well.

I dunno if the guy who wrote it is still attached to it at all. Apparently Strategy First bought Malfador in 2006?

Erm, confession time. This was one of the first games I ever ""cracked"", in a stunning triumph of sysadminery for 8 year old me or whatever. Malfador originally used the "send me a check in the mail" business model. then it suddenly popped up on a publisher's site - called Crystal Interactive or similar. They offered a "30 day free trial" that (in hindsight, surprisingly) actually worked and installed a legit key, then presumably was going to pull it when the trial expired. I pinned down where it was writing the key with registry editor and exported the key, then just used it with the normal game. I actually found that og .reg file a few months ago, it is probably the single earliest file that I've got saved.

(I also learned to use the "Executor by ARDI" macos 7 emulator so I could play escape velocity by Ambrosia Software on my windows PC. Executor had a 30 day trial... but you could delete the registry key and reinstall and use it forever. hackerman! )

(Executor is actually a very interesting "hybrid emulator" that attempted to replace the MacOS rom/mac toolkit with a windows native reimplmentation in native C and is now open source if you'd like to take a look - [https://github.com/ctm/executor](https://github.com/ctm/executor) )

To this day I don't know if Crystal Interactive was legit or not - was that a legit indie publisher providing a framework for licensing and CC services (a not-trivial burden in the years before Steam) or did they pirate these games themselves and resell them? The registration had the legitimate username "REGISTERED USER", and they disappeared into the ether very rapidly, like within 6 months every trace of them on the internet was gone.

I'd gladly buy a copy, but I don't think there's a way to get it anymore either. I thiiiink you might be able to track down a copy of the Space Empires Collection disc? That one was registered out of the box.

Malfador eventually ended up with Strategy First, who was a legit indie publisher and sold their stuff for a lot of years. Again, it looks like Strategy First bought them in 2006, but he continued developing more stuff after that.

Space Empires Starfury is actually an interesting Escape Velocity/Starfleet Command kind of crossover. It is the tactical mode for SE V turned into an open world game. From what I remember it plays better than the actual SE V. Again, weapon mounts are cool, the actual gameplay sucks and is way too slow. Even SE 4 really needs a "move ships faster" mode. [https://archive.org/details/SpaceEmpiresStarfury](https://archive.org/details/SpaceEmpiresStarfury)

FYI if anyone else ever played Warlords 3: Darklords Rising, that game is now available on GOG too.

Also while I was looking on Archive I found this Turkish clone (lol) of SE3 from 2003 with an Apple II aesthetic? Crazy. [https://archive.org/details/MiniSpaceEmpires](https://archive.org/details/MiniSpaceEmpires)

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER43> It took me forever to read this article. Because I got distracted when the article mentioned VGA Planets still existed and was actively maintained. That game was incredible back in the BBS days. Delightful to find a memory like that lives on.

</comment><comment><USER44> One thing I find odd about the Space 4x genre is that it remains popular and new games or expansions for existing ones come out fairly regularly but there hasn't been a genuine hit in it, seemingly since MOO II or so.

<comment><USER45> I would agree with you that there hasn't been a genuine hit since MOO 2. I would say, however, that one game, Distant Worlds: Universe, was a huge leap forward in redefining what's possible in the 4x genre (i.e. deep and immersive gameplay in a real-time context). Most of the other 4x games since 1996 have been a variation on the gameplay mechanics of MOO 2.

DW:U is the only 4x game that I would unequivocally say is as good as the original MOO2.

<comment><USER46> Real time sucks, but I'll have to at least check it out.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER47> Does everyone agree with me here that the modern remake missed the mark?

[http://masteroforion.com/news/legend- reborn](http://masteroforion.com/news/legend-reborn)

<comment><USER45> It was a remake of MOO2, not MOO 1. And yes it was terrible.

Remakes (or games very similar to MOO 1) are Dominus Galaxia and Remnants of the Precursors.

<comment><USER23> > It was a remake of MOO2, not MOO 1. And yes it was terrible.

Have you played it recently, or just at launch? At some point, they did a pretty big overhaul and made a lot of improvements.

I still prefer Stellaris because it has more depth, but MOO is certainly playable.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER48> +1, played when I was a kid, picked it up again a few months ago for nostalgia, I must say it holds up really well. It's feels well-constructed, put together from simple concepts/components, in a way that makes it quite replayable. Many decisions have big-ish consequences, and there is not too much micro managing, unless you play really big galaxy and want to exterminate everyone. Very tight UI as well for the era. I like it much better than Moo2. I only wonder what would have to be different if there was multiplayer.

</comment><comment><USER49> Anyone else later transition to the heavily moddable 4X Space Empire IV?

<comment><USER50> I played SEIV for years, and it was a wonderful game. I even built a "Play by Web" system that allowed remote turn based multiplayer for it via e-mail and web that lived for years, even after I handed it off to others to continue. What a great game.

</comment></comment><comment><USER51> Some UIs from back in that era hold up really well, in my opinion. From the article, check out this UI: [https://www.filfre.net/2020/01/master-of- orion/orion_013/](https://www.filfre.net/2020/01/master-of-orion/orion_013/)

It also reminds me of the original X-COM UFO Defense UI, which I think also holds up incredibly well decades later.

</comment><comment><USER22> Ah, Master of Orion!

I had a ritual when I was 13 or so: when I got home on the last day of school before vacation, I would play Master of Orion nonstop until 3 or 4 am.

I still enjoy this game and play it a few times every couple of years.

</comment><comment><USER52> The first MoO is superior compared to the second. You can terraform your planets from useless 25M population to 200M gaia planets. The fleet limit in MoO II was so annoying.

</comment><comment><USER53> What is the best semi-modern moo type game for someone who hasn't played the orginal but would probably enjoy it.

</comment><comment><USER26> Btw, in the late 1990s, Russian sci-fi writer Sergey Lukianenko had written two novels ("Line of dreams", "Emperors of illusions" [1]) set in MOO universe, which are quite entertaining.

Too bad he had turned a fascist and Putin's fanboy who viciously supports Crimea annexation and war with the Ukraine...

[1]: [https://ru.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/%D0%9B%D0%B8%D0%BD%D0%B8%D1%...](https://ru.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/%D0%9B%D0%B8%D0%BD%D0%B8%D1%8F_%D0%B3%D1%80%D1%91%D0%B7)</comment>


Ask HN: Whatever happened to Google pulling out of China? - <AUTHOR>

Google.cn is still up and running and it's definitely still censored.<p>Anyone have updates on what's going on with the story? Is Google still planning on carrying through with the following threat?<p>"We have decided we are no longer willing to continue censoring our results on Google.cn, and so over the next few weeks we will be discussing with the Chinese government the basis on which we could operate an unfiltered search engine within the law, if at all. We recognize that this may well mean having to shut down Google.cn, and potentially our offices in China." (1/12/2010) <comment><USER2> I do not think they can run an uncensored google.cn as per the law stands. All the posting say is that they will spend few weeks trying to find a way to do that. These things take time. Let's hope Google is trying.

</comment><comment><USER3> Censored how? I was wondering the same the other day, and looked for Tienanmen square. I did get a few results from the protests.

<comment><USER4> That's always been true if you spell it like a westerner.

If you think about it at all, it's a very organic result. Chinese people don't link to stuff about what happened on the square 20 years ago nearly as much as they link to stuff going on there normally, because they live there and it's an enormous public plaza.

Americans, on the other hand, don't mention it for any reason other than in the context of China's embarrassment.

Aren't the censored results always annotated as such anyway?

<comment><USER5> "If you think about it at all, it's a very organic result. Chinese people don't link to stuff about what happened on the square 20 years ago nearly as much as they link to stuff going on there normally, because they live there and it's an enormous public plaza."

Good point! No one ever "links" to things that happened in the past! That would just be stupid!

"Americans, on the other hand, don't mention it for any reason other than in the context of China's embarrassment."

Exactly! Americans are a bunch of pricks, yo!

"Aren't the censored results always annotated as such anyway?"

Exactly! Oh, wait, no they're not. Nice try though!

<comment><USER6> The poster makes three claims:

1\. The search was spelled wrong. True, although the Western media often spells Tiananmen, Tian'anmen is more correct in untoned official pinyin.

2\. People in China would not link to "Tiananmen" in reference to the twenty- year-old historical incident as often as to the place, which is the site of many contemporary events. In 1989, the same year, San Francisco experienced a very strong earthquake that killed and injured thousands. Yet a search for San Francisco on Google returns only one reference to this in the two two pages. Is that censorship? Or is it that San Francisco has been in the news since then and is more commonly linked to for the thousand of events that have happened since?

3\. The connection between the protest and the "Tian'anmen" name is stronger in English than in Chinese. True. For example, if you go to the English Wikipedia page for Tiananmen incident, and click on the Chinese version of the page, you'll notice it's called 六四事件 "The event of June Fourth." The name "Tian'anmen" is not associated with the violence and the protest in Chinese, whereas it is the only reason the word is ever printed in media outside the country.

<comment><USER7> Your second point is the wrong comparison. Searching for "San Francisco" is not equivalent to searching for "Tiananmen 1989." If you search for "San Francisco 1989" the Loma Prieta earthquake is indeed the dominant result.</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment>


Iowa Caucus Voting App Stirs Security Concerns - <AUTHOR> https://www.wsj.com/articles/dems-iowa-caucus-voting-app-stirs-security-concerns-11580063221 <comment><USER2> This is insanely concerning... Here's what we're looking at:

* An application with an unknown developer/development team * Running on completely non-verified devices with questionable security * As the "preferred method" for precinct managers who are largely laymen when it comes to operational security in regards to software * That's only been reviewed/approved by the DNC

You have folks out there making outrageous claims like:

> Democrat Ruth Thompson, who will chair a Des Moines precinct, said she was > not concerned about security risks related to the app. "The Russians don't > care what's on my phone"

Given the importance of the Iowa primaries this is outrageously concerning.</comment>


Ask HN: How many people do you know that use Linux and don't work in tech? - <AUTHOR> Except for Android, how many persons do you know that use Linux on their personal computer?<p>I have this feeling that Linux only plays a role for programmers and sys admins. There also is the administration of Munich, which uses its own Linux distribution, but in my personal circle all Linux users are either dev and admin. <comment><USER2> I know a lot of people that use Raspberry Pi computers for home projects.

I've made a version of their Raspbian OS just for my older, not very techie, friends to replace their old Mac/Windows PCs when they die.

There isn't an affordable new Mac now and I've spent less than 10 hours on a Windows box in the past 20 years so I can't help them when they die, but I can set them up with a brand new Pi for around $100 (+ or - a few bucks) and they all love them. All they want to do is surf the web, FB, email, and YouTube.

The latest versions of Raspbian have incorporated so many of the mods I worked on over the years that now I really don't have to do anything much more than hide what they'll never use.

Aside from those, I don't know anyone off hand I can think of.

<comment><USER3> That's a really neat use case for Pi boxes!

</comment></comment><comment><USER4> My first 'windowing system' was actually AT & T UNIX. So I was already in the Unix/Linux windowing space before MSFT Windows 3.0 was released.

My first reaction to Windows 3.0 and 3.1 was horror. It was so primitive and so far behind the X11 Windowing System that I was never able to accept Windows as a personal system, but only used it when forced to at various work-places.

I used UNIX with X11 (AT&T, USL, then Solaris) solely as my personal system until 2001 when I changed to using Linux.

I could be considered as a techy, but was never a true computing/programming professional.

</comment><comment><USER5> Two. My parents.

When their laptops were getting too old for the latest Windows, I switched them to lightweight Ubuntu releases - Lubuntu and ChaletOS - after a trial period and feedback. I configured both to be as close as possible to their old Windows workflows. I gave them the choice to stay with Windows if they wished, but both said they prefer the faster Ubuntu experience. Thanks to Dosbox and Wine, my father can even run his 1980s BASICA math programs on it. They don't have any problem whatsoever.

</comment><comment><USER6> In 2017 the local government of Munich announced that they are moving to Windows 10 by 2020, which is a real shame: [https://www.theregister.co.uk/2017/11/13/munich_committee_sa...](https://www.theregister.co.uk/2017/11/13/munich_committee_says_all_windows_2020/)

I think one of their biggest issues is that they had made their own Linux distribution. That is really surprising, and is not the sort of forward- thinking and trendy project that a government organisation anywhere in the world would normally undertake.

If they used something like Ubuntu with paid support from Canonical, many of the issues they were facing might have been more easily solvable.

In regards to your question, a few years ago I set up Ubuntu Linux for a young family friend (still a child), and they have been fine.

They had never really gotten used to Windows and picked up the bad habits, so the transition was pretty easy. They don't do anything 'advanced' though, they just use the software that I pre-installed for them (Chrome, Steam, etc) and install updates when they are prompted. They never touch the terminal or anything.

</comment><comment><USER7> Define "in tech". About half of the physicists I know have Linux on at least one of their personal computers.

But whether scientists are "in tech" seems to depend on who you talk to. In Silicon Valley these days, a Youtube marketing influencer is in "tech", but a person who designs and builds particle accelerators is not. Go figure.

<comment><AUTHOR> Valid point. I was specifically thinking of people who earn a living by working on software or hardware or operating them.

</comment></comment><comment><USER8> Lots of nontechnical people at google used Linux. Of course it was supported by IT, so less hw problems.

I also made a few Debian box like 15 years ago for a nonprofit I interned with. Seemed to work just fine for basic web stuff.

</comment><comment><USER9> ChromeOS is what Ubuntu was trying to be but failed to be and its absolutely a great OS for consumers.

Android you excluded but its single handedly responsible for linux being the main way consumers access the internet now.

The year of the linux desktop is already here. The year of the FOSS desktop is a long time off.

</comment><comment><USER10> Do persons that used to work in tech but don't anymore count?

<comment><AUTHOR> Let's say yes, so you can tell us what made them stay with Linux.

<comment><USER10> Believing in the open source ethos.

<comment><AUTHOR> That's a good reason for going through all the struggle.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER11> I'm a criminal defense attorney and I use arch.

</comment><comment><USER12> My children (ages 8-12) all use Linux on their personal computers. Web browsing, Libre Office, and a few games from the Ubuntu repository.

</comment><comment><USER13> Anyone that owns a Google Home device. They run Linux.

I'm going to hazard a guess and say that the Amazon Echo* devices probably run Linux too.

</comment><comment><USER14> My wife uses a Chromebook and so do all students at my son's high school.

<comment><AUTHOR> I forgot that ChromeOS is also based on Linux.

</comment></comment><comment><USER15> 2 people:

\- German translator

\- Canadian broker</comment>


Google+ Circles - Thunderbird didn't want to implement it in 2009 - <AUTHOR> https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=524354 My friend just sent me a feature request he made for Thunderbird which sounds similar to Google+ Circles idea. <comment><USER2> This was certainly the right decision. Mozilla and Google have much different goals, and it would have been silly for Mozilla to commit the necessary resources to this idea when the benefits to Mozilla and the customer are not guaranteed. Implementing this properly could take over a year and the end result may not even improve the product.

Google decided to go forward with this project because the corporation will greatly benefit if it succeeds. Mozilla does not have the correct payoff to take the risk.

</comment><comment><USER3> I don't think anyone is claiming that the concept of "circles" is a radical innovation. It's quite natural, and similar (if not identical) ideas have been expressed many times before (from what I've heard about "circles" anyway).

What's news is that Google is putting its full weight behind the idea, including a slick implementation. And it might turn out to be a better alternative to Facebook, which would mean a big shift in the markets over the next few years.

<comment><USER4> Exactly. Just like this company called Beluga - <http://belugapods.com/>. They use 'pods' instead of circles.

</comment></comment><comment><USER5> As is often reiterated on Hacker News:

Ideas are a dime a dozen. Implementation is everything.

<comment><USER6> Patenting is everything. Until that is fixed - innovation is a tarpit.

</comment></comment><comment><USER7> The title's a little suggestive. It was an 'enhancement' bug request, and the response was that it should be implemented as an extension. Then it was marked WONTFIX. The assignee thought it sounded cool.

<comment><USER8> Yeah, the bug report wasn't closed because they didn't want the feature, it was closed because they decided it made more sense as an extension.

</comment></comment><comment><USER9> <http://info.lycos.com/releases.php?id=1550>

"LYCOS KEEPS YOU IN THE LOOP WITH CIRCLES, A UNIQUE, NEW SOCIAL SHARING PLATFORM" -- from 2004.

</comment><comment><USER10> Does anyone know if GNU Social shares similarities with Google+?

</comment><comment><USER11> That's the last straw. I'm switching back to Lynx and Mutt!

</comment><comment><USER12> Haven't various sharing models that look very similar to Circles been around for some time?

I have LOTS of friend lists on Facebook. I have Close Friends, Family, Teacher/RA/Restricted, Strangers and then my cohorts broken down by class for various reasons. Now, sometimes Facebook extrapolates from privacy settings for a post and changes my global privacy setting which is annoying but it's trivial to keep an eye on it.

But basically, my geeky posts get my cohorts, my funny posts get posted openly and my rants about drug policy or whatever are blocked from my family.

</comment><comment><USER13> As someone who hasn't tried Google+:

Is it implemented as a UI of Gmail, or is it its own site?

<comment><USER14> Own site. Vaguely similar to Facebook, but less "formish" and more interactive. Black bar at top.

<comment><USER15> I now have the black bar at the top, too. But I am not using Google+. I wonder if the black bar is getting rolled out to everyone.

<comment><USER16> It is. It will be on all Google's properties. You won't see anything about Google+ on it until you get an invite or it goes public, though.

<comment><USER17> No black bar on Youtube

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER18> Mozilla doesn't want to do something? Shocking!

This is the same organization that feels that producing a MSI installer for Windows or providing some other way to customize the installation/patching experience is a waste of time.

<comment><USER19> Not to repeat the same "then do it yourself" thing, but if it were really so important to so many corporations, wouldn't one of them have done it (or hired/sponsored someone to do it) by now? I'm just getting the impression that, for all the yelling, it's not that big a deal.

<comment><USER18> Yeah, sure. Expecting a third-party to maintain an installer is not a recipe for success. A few projects try to do that and provide some sort of group policy support -- but they're trying to fit a square peg in a round hole. It just doesn't work well.

Security updates are a bigger deal. Auto-update doesn't cut it with large networks with constrained bandwidth or where users don't have admin rights. When you use sane installers, that problem magically disappears.

My previous employer was willing to invest some $ to give back to Mozilla for just this purpose, but was unable to contact anyone at Moz who gave a crap.

My current employer gave up -- we automatically uninstall Firefox as it appears. Our primary browser is now Chrome -- 80% of intranet hits are Chrome today. Chrome addresses most of these issues, and my users are happy. (Except for the users of some Oracle app that uses IE6)

The Mozilla people are fat and happy because of the ad deal that they have with Google. When Google decides that they don't need Firefox anymore, the Moz folks will probably wish they hadn't given a virtual finger to all IT folks.</comment></comment></comment>