Not true, its just things like economy, diplomacy or espionage usually turn the games into spreadsheet simulators and most people (including me), dont like that. I wanted to buy Stellaris the other day, cause the whole idea of Babylon 5-esque War in Heaven was so awesome in my eyes - until i watched some utube videos and realized the game would completely fail to immerse me, since 99 percent of time i would be looking at tables, columns and spreadsheets and whatnot. 

When the 4x games find a way to introduce all this abstract stuff in different manner than spreadsheets, one that is actually visually attractive, easily understandable and immersive (hint - diplomacy in Sins requires you to construct and send out Envoy Cruisers, so its not completely happening in some separate window, but its somewhat integrated into the rest of the game), that will be the moment i will give them a chance.

Easier said than done, i guess. Until then, its sadly just Sins for me.

Are we sure Frogboy is not a Yor?

I think tech specializations was one of the more "original" ideas that GCIII had over the previous games.  I like it.  You can't have it all in life.  The different specializations are different strategies.  This is STRATAGY GAME.  I don't know why this is such an issue.  And yes I have used different mods to play around it on occasion.  

As for the food issue.  Some planets are not going to be able to support as many people as others no matter what you do.  Mars wound never be able to support as many people as Earth.  Shipping food through space might make it so expensive people can't afford it.  But, replicatiors you say.  Again probably expensive for making food.  Something has to regulate population size.  This is probably the best mechanism.  If you want to share food between planets.  I think there should be a penalty and only a percentage of it would benefit the receiving planet.  Plus maybe the giving planet has to build some kind of food freighter that establishes routes to the receiving planets.  Maybe you could build a freighter and sell food to a nearby civilization. 

You got to the gist of it but I think you missed the race. He has often stated that he identifies closely with the Drengin. (At least, that is what he has said. )

I'll be looking forward to buying your finished game, several years from now, when you have an ultimate collection on sale, rather than drop feeding the features through DLC! 

(But it is great to hear that there are plans for more of the internal politics features I was hoping for when this game was announced)

Do we take that to mean that elections are going to be coming back to certain government types, then? Because that would be quite cool to bring back and I've wanted it in GC3 since release day.

Particularly if the party dominance (and subsequent political pluses/minuses) changed based on who was in power...so warmonger factions would get War Party who boost military prod and public order (military fervour - which could decrease as wars drag on and public lose stomach for it unless you're winning) but domestic prod/food prod get worse as military takes priority of all things. Meanwhile a universalist party would gain power based on your policy decisions of building embassies and influence generating buildings but because they are lovely nice people their weapons and defences take a hit?

In case you didn't see it (and not to toot my own horn):

https://forums.galciv3.com/471498

Constantly updated everytime the tech trees are changed.

Sounds awesome, I'd love to see the Frog come back. And a quick cheer for AI!

Oh MOO2, how I loved you. MOO2 was an example that sometimes simple just works. MOO2 for global food was so simple:

1) Every unit of food above what a planet produced came from the global pool.
2) Each of these extra units took 1 transport.
3) Transports had to be built but otherwise were completely in the background. You didn't have to direct them, guide them, protect them. They just did their business.
4) If your global pool was positive, you gained extra money. If it was negative, some of your planets lost population.

Simple and effective, and it just worked.

Same with the planet screen UI. It seems so "visually crude" now, but my god the elegance. I can see all of the resources my planet produces instantly, I can move workers around instantly. That mixing of races Frog was talking about? So ridiculously easy to do. Oh, and did I mention instead of 1 planet you could see multiple planets (and do all the manipulations I just described) on one elegant global screen. I wish someone would show Civ VI designers that screen and say "why does it take my so many damn clicks to do things in your game, we had this 15 years ago!"

Ultimately that's what they game so great. Your choices were extremely simple to understand, and yet had great importance. And I think that's what a lot of games miss nowadays. They try to give you all of these dials and little tiny decisions. But you don't need that. Get me a suite of clear and yet important decisions, and I'm a happy man.

If you want to point out an elegant UI then look at the original Master of Orion. Master of Orion 2 was a pain in the ass if you had more than 10 planets,

Also its food system was extremly boring after a few  turns.

Very angry feelings, is still better than the cold machinations of the Cylon-kind. It is safer not to feel, perhaps. That's why I stick to the Yor myself. But it is of course not recommended to advance humanity as a whole. Just can't go into that Drengin place, it disturbs the sleep, and create ( even greater ) hair loss! It is like that place you cannot go in the "Dune series". Well, apart from Paul Atreides! And obviously all the Drengin players out there. You know who you are!

This is not to say it is bad race design or anything, just trying to be as boring as ( humanly ) possible here, and stick to the utterly familiar. And complain when things change, of course. Like clockwork. Really.      

@Frogboy

I blame Paul ( ͡° ͜ʖ ͡°)

Jokes btw ! Love you guys at Stardock and happy to hear your on the ball


TLDR:
I went on a rant(in a good way), I probably am wrong and didnt think though all my ideas and they are full of oversights. Keep up the good work! And I hope for future discussions between Stardock and the community
---

I really agree with the need for a better late game mechanics. I had this long post I was writing with suggestions or ideas for the late game but this probably isnt the best place to post that lol. It basically was saying that early game you have many choices and decisions to make from exploring to expanding but as time goes on slowly the choices become obsolete and the issues is there is nothing new to replace them. Mid/late game its almost like brand new game changing mechanics need to be added to refresh the game experience and give you goals to aim for again. I dont know of any game that has tackled this common problem successfully.

Edit: Ok... its still long.. i removed anything that was directly related to your 7 points.. sorry about that 

1. I Agree. I think part of that could be more that so many games have "bad" AI that people really dont have anything to compare it to. Likewise im sure there are alot of bad AI choices you as an AI programmer would notice that a average player wont, they may feel like 'something is wrong" but cant place there finger on it.

2. Sort of like above I wonder if thats a symptom of bad AI in some game where there is no challenge that people are having to "invent" there own style of gameplay in order to keep themselves interested. Speaking of Simcity Space... if you do decide to make that I would buy it

3. It feels to me that noone is breaking the mold, its as if its expected 'this is how game economics must work" therefore no one has really considered changing the formula. Tho if they have im sure it comes down to fear that if its to different people wont buy it :/.

4. Never played it :/

5. Espionage! PLS look into the idea of a special trait for the Drath Legion utilizing there shape shifting abilities. I dont know if this was just a fan rumor but I believe thats what they can do in lore! Also a interesting way to bring them back, hiding in plain sight all this time

Im really curious what you guys plan to do with Espionage, it can really be something special if done correctly. My two cents on Espionage is that there needs to be a difference between a good Espionage spy/race and a bad Espionage meaning instead of having a flat % Espionage bonus maybe have some other factors.

Clever/Popular Higher Diplomacy also better chance of your spys being able to hide there true selves
Economical/Handy - Can spend gold to bribe
Brutal/Tough - Easier time Assassinating spys or people in power.
Traders/Adventuresome - easier to blend in an hide
Ect, ect.

In regards to bribing and stuff I want to feel like I have done something to contributed to the success of failure. Maybe on rare occasions they can be tied to the event system where its like "You can learn this tech but u will lose your spy and be found out, what do you do?" Could also tie it into the Ideology system aswell so mid/late game you have more ways to gain these points as planets become more rare. Eg: Kill some civilians to hide your tracks or plant evidence about the Drengin to incite a war/tension. I guess kinda like black-ops


6. Politics, its one of those things you notice when its gone. I wonder, and its probably a pipe dream of mine. If some of the late game political parties could signify a fundamental changes in race outlook and a shift in consciousness of what they want there empire to be like. EG:

Startrek Politics, no one earns money any more. Taxes are not a thing and you gain a lot more 'government' money for ships, ect. You get higher happiness.

Your race decides that they want to start augmenting themselves with robotic technology, even perhaps following the path of the yor where they upload there consciousness to machines. It drastically increases there production needs but lowers food costs and ups there research.

Yor, decide that want to "Assimilate" races that they invade. (borg)

Basically something that isnt just having a +% or +X as a bonus but an interesting new game mechanic depending on what you choice to make your race distinct from other races as well as change up the strategies of yourself and others based on your choices. The problem with late game as that everyone gets "samy" as the early differences and bonuses become less distinct. It would also help to shift the balance of power.


7. Agreed! Although I think the way food/population is handled will need to change in order for that to work. I think early on it should be based on some form of cargo system you need to implement as a player. eg: need to buy a Freight Cargo ship and send it to a planet in order to "link" it to the food network. The planet can of course make there own food but a cargo ship would supplement there food per turn with the global food value. So the global food is basically a different value which is any excess food your faction is creating that is sent off to other planet. Would also make "food production" planets a high sort asset. Trade nodes from space stations could also do things like increase the network distance or amounts of food from your trade network, similar to a ship factory where there is decay unless you bolster it with planets in between or stations between the large voids of space. It would also be interesting as a war mechanic where you could interrupt the flow of food to a planet before you attack creating some interesting strategic points in war.

One other suggestion I have with food if it was a global resource would be a value per planet that is basically stored food. Similar to population in that manor. You have a minimum food you need per turn before you get any negative effects. You can buy a Storage building in order to increase the max food stores (could be attached to current food building) that way if the flow is stopped instead of your pop instantly dieing off in 1 turn and everyone being unhappy you could use that stored food as a few turn buffer before you send help. Likewise the Colony ships could maybe not only take pop but also take with them starting food amount. It might be interesting to decide  "I have 2pop on this ship I need at least 6 Food to give me time to set up there food income"



Side note:
Paul and I think yourself? Have said you had thought about having population being tied to race, so if you make a planet it could have population from that planets race as the primary, you could also do things like purge the race or embrace them improving relations. Im paraphrasing but I thought it was an interesting idea that could really effect the late game.


---

Im Terrible at ending a post so ill just say I look forward to what you come up with

One request: more variation across the AI players:

For example:

- enemy ships are all built similarly across factions
- generally all have
    - same speed (base speed/slow) 
    - one main weapon type
    - one main armor type

Since all of the enemy ships are similar with similar strategies, it's possible to:

- build ships that have better engines and always intercept enemy attacks
(after building a few picket ships with large numbers of sensors)

- look to see what weapons and armor an enemy has, and build ships directly designed to counter them
- knowing that the enemy won't adjust

- it's common to have an enemy ship with 12 attack/12 defence where a human player can cram many more weapons and armor on the same ship. The human ship is more expensive, but *far* more survivable

Because of this, war with an AI isn't as interesting as it could be.  Given an equal # of planets/resources, the human player will currently always easily win.

--------

Would be great to have more variation in ships and strategy:

- some races building fast (speed 6? 8?) ships, heavy weapons, light armor
with a focus on raiding and lightning attacks

- some races with a focus on heavily armored, durable ships (more armor/less weapons)

- some races that try to maximize the load on their ships

- some races with a preference for large numbers of small cheap ships (and a bonus for them working together)
to overwhelm larger ships

- having the AI player adjust to the type of ships that the human builds (weapons/armor)

- etc....

Ideally every AI would have the potential to play and fight differently (and have the capability to surprise the human player)

One flaw I have noticed with the AI is the fact that the more dominant factions do not gobble up the weaker ones like they did in GalCiv II. Oh sure, they go right to work on destroying all the minor races that are close, but not the other more dominant AI civ's.  They will by pass weaker factions between them and I, not bothering to attack just sail through and go to war with me.  I doesn't make a lot of sense.  An evil race by passing a good race, when the evil race used to go to war with the good or neutral races around them first.  A lot of the time I have not even found out exactly were they are on the map and they are attacking.  In GalCiv II you got the feeling that the other factions didn't really know for sure who the players faction was.  Not the case in 3.  There is no doubt in my mind that they all "know" which one is the human.  In GalCiv II I would try to help a weak race to keep a more dominant one in check.  Yes there is the random few races at war, but those seem less important than they were in GalCiv 2. 

Galciv2 is THE example that shows that good AI in a 4X game is possible. If you can recreate that, well that might set the bar higher for other games in the genre.