...really bad crutch that developers put in once they notice that their fancy combat takes up way too much time. That is why Civ, Moo 3 are the superior 4X, you don't have influence on combat aside from how you designed your ships, battle orders and fleet order. Every combat is thus on equal footing with the AI and every combat requires the same (very short!) time. Same for stacks in Civ 4 or how it works in Civ 5... these games do not put any micromanagement on each combat engagement, they put micromanagement on the 4X aspects of combat.
So in one game autoresolve is a really bad crutch, in the other where it's forced, it's intelligent design. What? How does that even make sense? Are you also arguing that a 4X game can't have an interesting combat system? It has to be a quick rock-paper-scissors affair? Then I guess Endless Space really IS the perfect 4X.
Ehm, my point was that combat has no place as a
separate element in a 4x game. I am looking at this maybe differently than you, so my point is maybe lost in translation. To me combat that doesn't change screen/instance to another ruleset is "inside the 4x element" while combat that brings you to an entirely different ruleset is "outside of the 4x element". And CIV4/5 has no auto-resolve, combat is executed directly in the main gameplay element. So I have no idea how you got the wrong idea there
Endless Space with it's rock paper scissor nonsense and auto-resolve that compares HP values is thus exactly the opposite, it is among the WORST 4x. Because the AI plays by the auto-resolve rule only, every combat between AI's is resolved the same way, meaning the AI fights a different ruleset in the entire game against other AI's and pirates than the one you encounter when YOU fight manually. This is BAD game design to the extreme. Because it means you design fancy ships, but unless you fight EVERY battle manually you gonna have a
really bad time. Or a really easy time... which is then already an exploit, because the AI can't counter you when it has to work in a broken combat system in auto-resolve but still face you in manual battle with completely different rules.
My point was that there is a distinct disconnect between AI vs AI and AI vs Player in most 4x games, and that automatically means that gameplay is gonna suffer, because it means you have to either auto-resolve everything, or fight everything manually. And focus your "designs" of ships, armies or whatever, towards
2 different gameplay rulesets.
And yes, I maintain that auto-resolve in ALL 4x games with optional manual combat is a broken gameplay element and if it there, means the disconnect between manual battle and AI vs AI battles is SO huge that there is no way to connect both gameplay elements properly. The list of games that commit this sin is endless indeed, and goes even into Total War games. The disconnect between AI vs AI and AI vs Player (even simmed) is so absurd that at no point you are playing the same game as the AI. Not even when you fight the AI manually, since you are quite likely much smarter than the AI.
What maybe I didn't make clear, is that to me CIV4/5 is the only good 4x game made so far. There is no good space 4x game with the exception of the galciv series, whose only flaw is that it is generic sci-fi to the extreme AND that is has way to few gameplay features
Ps.: And auto resolve in Mount and Blade, by the gods, don't remind me. This is even worse in that game because you later on have lieges that fight in the AI vs AI ruleset, but when you join the fray, everything is suddenly different ruleset, your presence (not your actions!) can completely alter how combat of equal forces turns out in Mount and Blade... but MB is not a 4x, so I grant it that flaw
Manual combat in MB is great fun and there is really never a reason to skip it ^^
