I think the tile is discriptive enough.
But for those of you who like to be specific ....
What new features do you want to see in Gal Civ 3?
Is there something that you want to see from Gal Civ 1 or Gal Civ 2, only you want it to be better?
Do you want it to have Real-Time, Control Your Warships, Space Battles?
Etc.....
So please respond.
ROCK ON!!!
The same goes for Conservatives/Republicans (same party, different names).
-
And since you've posted again...let's not get into politics in here again, shall we?
Agreed.
What I want to see in Galactic Civilizations 3 is version 3.01.
Nice one Heft.
And sorry about (once again) branching off-topic.
I'll try to keep those anti-political thoughts in my head for another post.
A text or Word document works as well-so that when you're ready to create the post, you're ready to fill it.Maybe it'll help prevent overflow, too.
Yep, that's the one. Thanks! (karma earned, karma given for good reasons...)
Thanks Zyx.
I'll send some of that Karma back your way once the post dies.
It won't die until GC3 is released, i guess, EF!
I wanted to start another thread for the following but i figured might as well mention it all overhere, sooooo....
Espionage - as in Ultimate rather than Enhanced.
1-- we've got mp, tp - let's consider ep.
2-- Information gathering should be pulled off these points on demand; every last statistics about opponents must be bought off and spent.
3-- Stellar Cartography should reveal Stars locations only, not planets... indirectly, the previous fourth level could be turned into an 'individual' surface scan per #1 eps above.
4-- Exploration, investigation modules for ships.
5-- Theft of trade cargo on routes BCs, boarding an enemy ship, capture some populations off a colony in travel, sabotage missions of surface buildings... again per #1 eps.
6-- Infiltration (as in diplomatic deals & UP issues).
7-- The current Side bar details about Ships/Planets, should hide everything but names unless clicked for... again for a number of #1 eps.
8-- Keep going, i wanna know about your possible features.
Espionage IS strategy.
(And, to make this all coherent and easy to follow ... you must put a (along with reasons, questions, alternatives, etc) beside the ref numbers you don't want, and a (along with comments, suggestions, etc) for something you'd approve... eventually we'll endup with a clear list to formally submit to devs -- once we all can agree on a *new* system.)
And if someone inserts such a thing as #8: ... then, we'll presume that they want to keep the current system as is.
15-- Cities in Civ#x = Planets in GC2, no matter how much you spin it away from facts or interpretations.
19-- "i described", i must have skipped it somehow.
20-- What Trade idea, exactly? Tech trading in CivIV and GC2 work exactly the same. Techs, almost. But i'm going after Trade * (of everything, resources by Camels/Civ VS. nothing of that sort in GC2) *and* Diplomacy as a whole when i observe both games.
22-- GC3 needs tactical combat features to evolve beyond Civ4&5&6. Fine, YOU don't want it. We know. Life goes on. Sometimes, innovation hurts & changes are scary.
26-- Yep, but WHAT do you describe?
27-- No it hasn't & by far.
Before I reply to these, it is important to note something: this thread of conversation is supposed to be about how my ideas are intended to turn GC2 into Civilization. Which means that arguments not on that point are irrelevant. So:
15: Yes, it is an independently verifiable and irrefutable fact that cities in Civ and planets in GalCiv are analogus constructs: they are both the centers of resource production and consumption. However, my idea had nothing to do with cities in Civ. It did not involve the Civ analogy at all. It simply says that GC3 should make an effort to have more viable planets.
20: GC2 very much had trading resources. Not in a 1:1 manor, but establishing a trade route gets you money. And money is the foundational resource that becomes all others. Now yes, both sides benefit (trade routes magically create money rather than shuffling resources around), but it's still trade.
Furthermore, my idea had a clearly defined result, one not seen executed in any Civ game: mimick the "soft power" excercised in the modern day by trade. If one side is dependent on exports from another, they will be highly unwilling to go to war with that other side. Also, they will be interested in keeping that other side alive, so they will attack anyone who attacks their partner. Eventually, it may come down to a pre-WWI situation, where there is a network of trade pacts and alliances that ensures that, if you go to war with someone, then the entire galaxy goes to war in a battle of grand alliances.
22: This thread has clearly laid out arguments against tactical combat that have nothing to do with Civ. GalCiv doesn't need tactical combat to "evolve beyond Civ; having tactical combat doesn't make a game a priori better than a game without tactical combat.
26: Again, has nothing to do with the topic under discussion (that being how my ideas are supposedly pusing for a more Civ-like GalCiv).
27: I don't know what you're refering to here, but again, this doesn't have anything to do with the topic under discussion.
15:
20: Gotcha! Civ had particular items to move around (wheat, diamonds, beads, etc) while GC is dealing in BCs... and yet, the commercial aspect is somehow discarded to layout Trading principles as if they were profitable activities unless destroyed in GC. Simple, direct, efficient, obvious. All of which can affect Reputation, and this is where fragility can brake the system "too" much as of now. Commerce or Economy are not WAR driven agendas (not in a sense of some Pacifist theory, at least) unless both are directly tied with the supply lines through spent BCs towards -- hold on to your hats -- Manufacturing as a whole. We've got taxes or productivity. As for Trade, it ***CAN*** supplement to the amounts of both BY decisions.
As a result, we then agree on that specific definition of Trade.
22: Adding a new feature (be it Tactical Combat on both Surfaces & in Space - or not, btw), can either have (a;) positive effect on those who like the "gameplay variations introduced" concept as a whole or (b;) negative impact on those who prefer familiar principles. The risk is there, i agree... but innovation must happen for any given title to remain competitive enough in an everchanging market of offers. Tactical stuff is a strategy principle which can tilt balance too much, unless appropriate and fun to have - that's a given, but i "think" it may work if only to introduce some variety.
26: Invasion tactics (oooops, the T word, again)... of Civ & GC are entirely different beasts. You hit a city with a gauntlet of Units until it falls. You send a Troops Transport and your Soldiering ability determines a dice roll until the planet becomes yours FROM a serie of variable Invasion choices made for BCs.
27: Diplomacy is a complex issue. As long as players (AIs, included) are conscious of many things such as; Ethics, Reputations, Treaties, Collaboration, War & Peace... there's simply no way for you or me to grasp the entire consequences of a simple elimination of any aspects (even if just ONE) as it pertains to the current gameplay balance... that's what i meant - by my earlier "Far" comment.
So far, so good.
1
2 I am not entirely sure what you mean...
3 , and maybe have a tech after that that reveals planets, then one that shows (ROUGHLY) planet quality, and a surface-revealer after that. Would dovetail nicely with WILLY's varying improvement sizes.
4 What would these do? More details, please!
5 Maybe have the ability to hire pirates...
6 Again, more details!
7
8: Trading Eps and intelligence info on the diplo screen, permanently sabpotaging (destroying) an imp, putting spies on ships that would clear YOUR FOW wherever the ship goes and could destroy the ship if you gave the word, may think of more later.
I agree. For me, other than a few of the "named" races for story reasons, no race in the sandbox should be given a major or minor designation beyond the merits of their "play". IE if a race gets neutered but not annihlated or otherwise doesn't progress, it's a minor race. If they expand strongly and/or conquer their neighbors they are a major race.
Though personally, that goes into my problem with the endgame...in that there IS an endgame. There should always be more on the horizon at least to an entire galaxy, and then...other galaxies.
MY dream game in this hypothetical future would be a game where you start out as a nationstate, try to conquer your world by whatever method you choose. Either way at some point you move on to the stars whether as a united world or not. Colonize the system. Proceed to be a local stellar power. Repeat previous expansion just now using star systems rather than geographical locations (IE tiles).
Continue on to pan galactic with even larger fish (like say the Dominion, Borg, Vardwaur, etc as an example) in farflung regions of space. Repeat, this time with local clusters in place of individual stars.
Move on to intergalactic where galaxies take the place of sectors.
What keeps this fresh is that moving on to the next larger level has no requirements other than the lifesupport and FTL needed to get there. IE you can bite off more than you can chew if you go out there with phasers and photon torpedoes and stumble onto the Borg (as an example). But you also need to advance fast, because your stellar rivals will be doing the same, and THEY might clue in some bigger power as to your collective presence or sic them on you by joining them as a client state. Basically, YOU become a minor power if you decide to build up your current infrastructure, defenses, what have you too much.
Also, you have no requirement in defeating all the other powers at your current level. So you could readily get a Battletech, Inner Sphere where a divided humanity succeeded in colonizing and conquering known space. Or the extreme example of an intergalactic power that somehow still has a divided homeworld. That's not likely, especially against an AI over the length of time that would take (someone is going to make a critical error), but it would be possible and make for interesting scenarios
2-- Example from the Statistics screen where the comparitive bars allows for a quick glimpse between races level of achievement; there is also a general panel which indicates Military, Economy, Planets, How many Ships etc -- percentages & values revealed straight ON these. Say, you start a game with 5000 ep (and that panel is actually totally blanked off any figures!) and you're only concerned about knowing what they are researching for the rest of the game & not what is the populations of their planets (as an example only. btw) -- you'd allocate 100eps (+/- evaluation based on the relative importance of key info) to the 'information gathering' about some specifics.
3--
4-- Indirectly, Sensors on steroids; You go by a planet you're curious about and pouf, a popup shows some important statistics about it if you want to (Pre-Invasion inspection, so to speak). You're getting closer to a Trade Route, bang - you get its current BCs value. Etc.
5-- Yep, that one too! Why not...
6-- Influence points exchanged or bought from the eps "vault", before a UP meeting to tilt decisions in favor of whomever i or they AIs pleases. An indirect equivalent to the Super-Diplomat ability but fine-tuned to specific gameplay elements. Subdue X race to truly declare war (and demonstrate it through Actions for a deal (not far from your Pirates above, btw) and a reputation hike (in Evil/Good/Neutral terms too) between *really* Allied races or declared *permanent* enemies) to Y.
8-- Except that sabotage was already inserted in my #5.
Andromeda, here i come!
Well it likely already had a "resident", but if you come bearing enough gifts....or guns, you can make it yours.
Obviously the timescale changes somewhat here. But if we are going with epic space combat, exploration, etc, why limit it conceptually?
I mean technical reasons keep my idea from being easy (if not impossible for now), but I'd still love to take Canada or something into an intergalactic power...fighting off the Argentinian/Drengin alliance
What about spontaneous supernovas, where the star explodes and destroys the local system while spraying valuable resources on neighboring systems. (I think this would have to be a rarely occuring mega event).
Sounds good. Same thing with a Terror Star. Might also be nice to see new galactic resorces (you know, that you can build Starbases on) spontaneously appear like anomalies do. Maybe to counteract this, have the ones you mine eventually run out, forcing you to go elsewhere.
I so totally agree.
Minors should deffinately be able to become Majors in the long run.
The way it is now just sucks.
The only way to get them to colonize planets, is by selling them your own colony ships.
It works, they actually use them for their designated purpouses if you do sell it to them.
It has been proven, I got a Karma from Motikhan (I think that's how you spell it), who tried it out himself and found that it actually worked.
Try it yourself if you wish.
That, you can do already by modding the current game as it is - we're all talkin' GC3 and how entirely "new" concepts & features should be offered to StarDock devs for consideration. And 30 pages of 25 posts each later, it's still chaotic enough that nobody will dare digging for some clear hints or final facts. I prefer a coherent strategy of persuasion (by the many) than random luck (of the few).
4b-- I meant to add an important principle to this; the UI (main galaxy map) drops down tiny boxes on the left side (in a similar fashion as the blue ships ready, green PI completed, etc) that you can purchase for eps - as the "Espionage_Module(s)" equipped ship (think of it as a costly specialized SurveyShip that is rather unique or VERY hard to come by, almost invincible.) travels through space *instead* of having to click for the entire usual Ships/Planets sidebar listing (which in turn would also have a restricted access to key info).
Right now, i *can* determine if an AI would beat me to any TG or GA completion, just looking at their turns line -- sort_of_reasoning behind having such a feature added.
What about the UP electing a leader before each vote. The leader would be chosen automatically based on the most popular race as well as some other properties, most of which are probably already figured into relations.
When the vote comes up the leader ghets to pick out of a list, what the others will be voting on. Not completely game changing but still adds something. Something to shoot for if you don't want to be fighting wars and gives more use to diplomacy. Also gets you to avoid some votes you don't like.
And cut-scenes of the Fertility Clinics
Would you like me to send you a link there Yar?
This is Yar when he will see that "cut-scene".........
...............
(Just joking there Yar)
Are you SURE about that? I mean, if you're playing as the Drengin...
Hey, it is a Building not a fielding!
There are many great features available to you once you register, including:
Sign in or Create Account
