wosung wrote:In DW you can automate nearly all the minor minutes events in a clever, finetuned way and save and re-use your personalized rules. Like, colonial bulldings triggered by population number. It's by the way one of the very few RTS games which imo are playable. Same with the Command Ops series, but this is tactical/operational.
You nailed it man as to why Distant Worlds works so well. The key is in choosing what to automate and what to manage. It's interesting though in that early on it feels like the game is playing itself, but as you move forward you start making tweaks here and there to make your presence felt. This is very realistic though, as in real life you would be an imperator, not a god.
By contrast, I tried the Canadian Indie game 'Hegemony: Wars of Ancient Greece' and absolutely hated it. I swear I think the fans of this game must be gluttons for punishment. The RTS engine made the game the worst case of information overload I've ever seen. It required way too much micromanagement in an environment where too much was going on. Even with frequent pauses I found it practically unplayable.
Come to think of it, the modern nation simulator 'Rulers of Nations' (also by a French developer

works very well as a pausible RTS, though it suffers a bit from not having your economic advisers giving you suggestions on how to manage the economy (which can be complex in the extreme).
As I think I mentioned before, my biggest issue with turn-based is that very large empires can be tough to manage. Sid Meier's Civilization series is a case in point. Early on with a small empire it is great, but in the late game I often find it a bit tedious, and feel drained by the end. To be fair though, I think AJE works fairly well as a turn based game with large empires (the epic Caesar vs. Pompey scenario comes to mind), although I do find myself occasionally forgetting important things I meant to do. Wish I had some automated Roman advisers to remind me.
