Brad Wardell's site for talking about the customization of Windows.

Greetings!

So the team is starting work on the next major expansion pack.  But we also want to keep an eye on the base game.

Right now, the recent Steam reviews for GalCiv are pretty awful with most of the people reviewing it doing so because they don't like some of the changes in v2.5.  So if there are changes you would like in 2.7 and beyond, this would be the place to ask.

The Steam review system is something I have and will continue to complain about because frankly, it absolutely destroys games.  When it's less than 70, a game might as well not exist.  So I'll be explicit, if you want us to keep working on GalCiv III, please leave a Steam review.  If not, don't. If you already have, thank you!

As many of you know, I am AI biased. But I know I'm in a minority because there is another space strategy game outselling GalCiv III and, suffice to say, AI is not its focus. 

It is clear that narratives in games matter.  GalCiv has a quest system ala Fallen Enchantress/Sorcerer King.  But we have tried to avoid doing that because we don't want the game to be a series of scripted narratives.  We don't plan to change that position in the base game but we are looking at releasing DLC that will do that if players want it. 

Now, the next major expansion pack focuses on politics and government.  So we'll set all that aside for now.  Otherwise, it's all open. What would you like to see?


Comments (Page 2)
on Oct 03, 2017

Scenarios: Perhaps it is along the lines of quest system, but scenarios or a scenario editor might be fun.  For instance, permanent alliance set at the start (good vs evil, 2v1, 3v1, 2v2, 3v3, etc.), different starting conditions (different number of starting planets, resources, technology, etc) so perhaps a single planet highly tech race versus the vastly more numerous lower tech race (becomes a competition between how fast the high tech race destroys, versus the low tech defending and outgrowing thru science and production).  

 

 

on Oct 03, 2017

lyssailcor

- Rework ground invasion. The current system is a step in the right direction, but stuck halfway (or rather, a tenth of the way) there. I wrote a ground invasion simulation some months ago that I posted here with how I imagine the current system could be enhanced, but not very many people were interested at that time, or at least didn't bother to comment on my proposal. Anyway, there is much room to improve in that area

I have to agree.  In GC2, ground invasion was much more exciting.  In GC3, there's no suspense.  You bring up the screen and know whether you're going to succeed or not.

lyssailcor, please provide a link to your old post.  I'd like to see your suggestions.

 

on Oct 03, 2017

Some narrative for third age, or fourth, content would be nice, sortof like the "Last Big War" from MoO 2.   By then, you're already further along with your victory goals where there's no challenge left against the balkanized galaxy with your superior empire.

on Oct 03, 2017

I'd be interested

zuPloed


Quoting Uncle_Joe,

Also, each major iteration requires ‘re-learning’ what to do again. This isn’t ‘strategy’ per se, it’s simply puzzling out the mechanics…again.

The worst about it is, that puzzling it out is not even stimulating because it is so easy.


Quoting Frogboy,






Quoting tungchiawah,



I like the removal of sliders. I HATE the game imbalance.  here are some of the  issues.

Improvements: Never build Factories, Laboratories, or Banks.  Spam Farms and Cities and Colonial Hospitals. Win. 

Citizens: Select Administrators and Leaders, Ignore everything else.

Trade Resources: The scarcity is fine, but everything is either useless or too expensive. For example the 25 Antimatter Manufacturing Capital or 20 Prometheon Civilian Promotions.



Some good feedback but it's pretty obvious you are focusing on large galaxies.  

Because of the citizen comment? ... Big deal, then large galaxies means empires with 5+ planets.

The other two notes have nothing to do with galaxy size. And they are on point.

Not really.  We are changing the way farms work in 2.6 but ultimately, unless you have quite a few planets, the strategy you outline isn't that good.

If you play on larger maps, you should choose leaders.  The specialists are specifically there for tall players.

 

 

on Oct 03, 2017

Sorry managed, that a bit.  I'd be interested in what you guys would like to see in a more detailed ground invasion.

on Oct 03, 2017


So we'll set all that aside for now. Otherwise, it's all open. What would you like to see?

BTW, wasn´t there new DLC mentioned, with some added features?

on Oct 03, 2017

1: The ideology system still stinks and is WAY too dependent on colonization events.  Ideology points should be tied into the influence system.

I'm amazed that after two major expansions the ideology system is still as primitive as it is.  It really needs to be tied into an existing system like influence generating buildings in the same way that the CIV series social policies are tied into culture generation.   I don't object to colonization events and other events as a means to augment your ideology points; but it shouldn't be the driving factor behind their creation.   I think influence point generation should be the main way that you earn ideology points where influence gives you neutral ideology points that add onto the ones made by your choices in colonization events with the neutral points being able to be spent on any branch (benevolent, pragmatic, malevolent) of the ideology system.

 2: More Planets should be locked behind colonizing tech in order to slow expansion.

 I feel like colonization spamming is still an issue that screws with the pacing of the game.  Has any consideration been given to expanding the concept of extreme worlds to slow expansion? Like initially all you could colonize would be planets that are a lot like your race's homeworld (Normal planets and breadbasket for carbon based, Aquatic planets for aquatic races, etc) and there are more tiers of colonization techs to unlock planets that at present can be colonized from the start (desert, thin atmosphere, etc).   This would slow the need for colony spamming early on and make you feel less cheated by the AI beating you to a world you wanted.

 3:  Extending your ships range should be tied into building shipyards, starports, and starbase modules in order to slow expansion .

 As it is I think that the limitations on ship range don't do enough to slow expansion.  Colonizing a planet or building a starbase on its own should only expand your ships range slightly, whereas building a shipyard and a starport on planets or resupply modules on starbases would be necessary to significantly extend a ships range.  This would likewise serve to slow the player and the AI's rate of expansion.

 4:  Give the player more control over generation of citizens by tying their generation into morale.

 I like the citizens; but I feel that just throwing one at the player every 10 turns is a pretty arbitrary way to dole them out.  I'd like to see their generation be tied into the morale system so that a high morale increases their generation while a low morale slows it.  Likewise I'd like to see more ways for the player to increase their rate of generation by building improvements.  I really like the buildings that let me train citizens later on in the game and I'd like to see that concept expanded.   This would also make the morale system more significant.   On a side note I'd like to see the morale boosting improvements on starbases make a return.

 5:  Espionage could use some work.

I'm not really thrilled with the way spies are deployed to planets.   Disabling an enemy building seems like a weak way to spend a citizen and having to use spies to remove enemy spies from your buildings is an annoyance to the player.   I'd prefer some sort of mission based system where I can send my spies to steal credits or tech, lower morale, or blow things up (buildings, ships, maybe even starbases) which takes time and has a variable risk of the spy being caught depending on the difficulty of the mission and the spy's skill; but doesn't expend the spy unless they get caught.

 6:  Minor Races (city states) should be expanded not removed.

 I was disappointed to see minor races being pushed to the sidelines with the recent updates.  I realize they weren't working very well in their current form; but I like the concept behind them and was hoping they'd be fixed and expanded not removed.   For an example of what I had in mind, I'd point at Star Trek:  Birth of the Federation a game that had a different system for interacting with minor races as opposed to major powers.   This system allowed you to form trading relationships, alliances and even convince the minor race to join your empire (if you don't choose to conquer them) and if you could get them on board it would allow you to build special improvements that only that minor race could build.   At the very least you could just give them all some rare resources to trade (nanites, techapods, etc.).

7:  Improve Military Starbases.

As is I can rarely see a reason to build a military starbase instead of an economic, cultural or mining starbase.   By default I think they should get a buff to their weapons defenses when they're first built.   I also think their default area of effect should be larger than the other starbases since the buff they give to ships is their main purpose with tech unlocking further expansions to military starbase area of effect in addition to the expansions that effect all starbases.

8: More things for constructors to build aside from starbases.

Roads: Not actual roads obviously; but an improvement that lets you travel faster along a set path like hypergate lanes or what not.  They can be built and destroyed at a set distance apart (10 tiles maybe) to greatly boost your ships rate of travel between them and would add an extra layer of strategy.

Minefields:  You build them in a tile and when an enemy passes through they inflict a set amount of damage relative to tech level and they drastically slow down the number of tiles an enemy can move in a turn.

Sensor Buoys:  I frequently find myself building ships just to station them to keep an eye on an area.  It would be nice if I could just build an improvement to do the job for me at a cheaper cost.

9: More things to Survey unlocked by tech advances.

Like the archeology sites in CIV 5 basically hidden goody huts that don't appear until you've unlocked the tech that makes them appear.  Maybe some of the dead planets could be scanned for research points or credits.  Salvage anomalies appearing after a battle should be more common and I'd like the events where I find random derelict ships in anomalies or get flung somewhere by a wormhole to make a return.

on Oct 03, 2017

Frogboy

Not really.  We are changing the way farms work in 2.6 but ultimately, unless you have quite a few planets, the strategy you outline isn't that good.

If you play on larger maps, you should choose leaders.  The specialists are specifically there for tall players.




I guarantee that no matter how few planets you have,, Farms and Cities are absolutely superior to any strategy involving Factories or Laboratories. I'm not talking about building Farm planets and City planets. You just spam as many Farms and Cities as you can fit on every planet. By the end game, the Homeworld has 50+ Population and every other planet has 20-30 Population.  

Suppose I wanted  a Research planet. I could build a bunch of Laboratories OR I could just build Farms and Cities. With Farms and Cities, I'll definitely end up with more Research. I could add a Scientist and get +30% Research instead of building those Laboratories. Or just set all my Leaders to Research. There's never any reason to build Laboratories.

on Oct 03, 2017

tungchiawah


Quoting Frogboy,

Not really.  We are changing the way farms work in 2.6 but ultimately, unless you have quite a few planets, the strategy you outline isn't that good.

If you play on larger maps, you should choose leaders.  The specialists are specifically there for tall players.




I guarantee that no matter how few planets you have,, Farms and Cities are absolutely superior to any strategy involving Factories or Laboratories. I'm not talking about building Farm planets and City planets. You just spam as many Farms and Cities as you can fit on every planet. By the end game, the Homeworld has 50+ Population and every other planet has 20-30 Population.  

Suppose I wanted  a Research planet. I could build a bunch of Laboratories OR I could just build Farms and Cities. With Farms and Cities, I'll definitely end up with more Research. I could add a Scientist and get +30% Research instead of building those Laboratories. Or just set all my Leaders to Research. There's never any reason to build Laboratories.

And this is the main reason for not radically changing the econ every major update...it throws everything out of whack until a few balance passes have happened and/or it's scrapped a whole new system is implemented.

As I said with the wheel-no wheel-back to wheel situation way back when...pick a system and stick with it. Most players don't want to back to square one multiple times in either knowing how to play or waiting for the inevitable balancing needs.

on Oct 03, 2017

Frogboy

Sorry managed, that a bit.  I'd be interested in what you guys would like to see in a more detailed ground invasion.


I don't like complex ground invasions. I liked how GalCiv 2 did invasions. It had minimal micromanagement.

When invading planets, I aim to keep as much of the planet intact as possible. I don't like using invasion tactics that destroy planet improvements or lowers the Planet Quality.

Frogboy
So if there are changes you would like in 2.7 and beyond, this would be the place to ask.


I would like improvements for the ship designer. I want to be able to design blueprints that the game could use when making ships for me.

I have that and other ideas posted here:
https://forums.galciv3.com/485189/page/1/#3690460

An idea I would like considered is allowing starbases to serve multiple roles. For instance, a starbase having both economy and military starbase modules. If I have to use administrators to build starbases, I want to get as much mileage out of them as possible.

Maybe you guys can make it possible for ships to use military or influence starbase modules. It was hard to justify using those kind of starbases before administrators... I definitely don't want to waste admins on temporary starbase stuff (such as near an enemy planet) or stuff that might not get used (such as near your homeworld).

on Oct 03, 2017

....  I'm curious about the Quest System that you say you have but have not implemented....

I think quests that directly impact the Bene/Prag/Mal options would be cool...     "X planet will be destroyed in  30 turns..."    Build slaver ships to "save" the refugees and add them to your population..
Sell Evacuation ships...
Give them colony ships to aid their evacuation to a new planet....     

Either way the choice takes action.. it is not a  one momentary choice..  There are a lot of things that could be done here especially with a lot of the mega events.

2nd thing.    Mega Event love...

The mega Events need to be properly balanced.   Some of them like the Jagged Knife or Peace-Keepers should only show up late game as a possible break on a player that would otherwise run away with a win.


3rd thing

Map size balancing.     This one is something that has been begged for from the beginning...     Things like influence spread, research speed,  resource production/cost  are painfully unbalanced between smaller and larger maps. 

4th thing  More Merc ships

5th thing   UP Love  https://forums.galciv3.com/485064/page/1/#3689622

6th thing:   Bring back Miner ships.    I love that we can click build the asteroid mines in our territory...  But honestly it is painfully tedious to do so.   If we had automated ships that went out and built the mines  which would then expand territory.. that would be much much cooler.

7th thing   Influence projects

8th thing   Morale balancing

9th thing.    Additional tech steps for City, Metropolis, Megalopolis   +2 pop  +4 pop  +6 pop

10th thing  More wonders....

11th thing.  The ability to destroy wonders/planet/civ unique buildings on planets I have invaded.   I don't want your stupid deep core mine there... but noooo I can't destroy it   soooo annoying.


I think that's enough things for now...


 

on Oct 03, 2017

tungchiawah

I guarantee that no matter how few planets you have,, Farms and Cities are absolutely superior to any strategy involving Factories or Laboratories. I'm not talking about building Farm planets and City planets. You just spam as many Farms and Cities as you can fit on every planet. By the end game, the Homeworld has 50+ Population and every other planet has 20-30 Population.  

I agree on that.  In 2.6 you can only build 1 city and 1 metropolis.  This still lets you go from say 3 population to 11 population (more than tripling) but you won't be able to go unlimited.

on Oct 03, 2017

Some really good ideas in this thread.  I suspect some of this would be saved for a future GalCiv IV.  

Right now, we're still really smarting over the negative steam reviews people have given to 2.5.  No matter how good a given set of changes are, you will have people who are married to the existing system.

on Oct 03, 2017

As many others have stated:

1) Balance. Tons of balancing needed. Tons of small things are just not really sensible right now. Including the Mercenaries.

as I have not seen people mention yet:

2) /Ship/Fleet design is sad right now. The roles don't work as intended, the only roles that matter are Escorts and Capital (with Support for carriers). Defenses are generally pointless, more weaponry is almost always better. 

I think the game would be vastly improved if I was encouraged to create more balanced fleets, where I need a mixture of different hull sizes. Right now... my "ships" are not really fighting... its really just my "components" fighting... and what level hull I've crammed them into is basically a function of technology. There is no compelling reason to take tiny hulls or such and there is no compelling reason to mix hulls in a fleet.

I think the game should reward balanced fleet compositions... big battleships surrounded by smaller pickets who are necessary to protect you from enemy carriers and their fighters/etc. etc. etc. Realistic or not.

A lot could be done by marrying roles to hull sizes, or giving hull types certain base advantages versus other hull types. It would create another layer of Rock/Paper/Scissors to the game, that the Roles were probably meant to do, but did not.

 

 

on Oct 03, 2017

For ground invasions, I don't really have any new inventive ideas, which is why I wanted to see those of lyssailcor. 

But recalling GC2, I think there are two things missing.  First is, we have no (or very little) idea how strong the target is in terms of abilities.  One could discover those by espionage; not so in GC3.  Second, RNGesus was right out front.  It was like waiting for the GM to roll them dice - "You need a 11 or better."  The odds were roughly known, but not Conventional = 5%, Biological = 100%.  Third was the brief wait for results.  The graphics were window dressing, at best, but better than nothing

Now, as for micromanagement, I think there's a real opportunity there.  Perhaps invasions could become a micro-game, sold as a DLC (what does that mean, anyway, DownLoadable Component?).  You want to play through the invasion?  Here is the option.  I, for one, would like it, I think.  I micromanage my planets; ground combat occurs much less frequently so I could hardly find that objectionable.

 

A question, please.  Why do I have to conquer a planet to get any idea of what's on the surface?

 

Meta
Views
» 69071
Comments
» 299
Sponsored Links