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!!!
ShadowWorrior, you've convinced me as i didn't read the rest of your initial long post to concentrate on the "Civilian" principles;
- Diversity on maps can open up HUGE gameplay features, boost context beyond the "conventional" and enhance strategy in many ways. There are pages worth of similar stuff (The map elements that is) right here in EF's thread but a few more in the "Please slam my game" too.
- Mines (defensive) would fit well within the 15x15 per parsec theory i previously suggested simply for edge control, but also for territorial key locations. Military SB aside, it's the next best thing to protect the proverbial Neutral Zone. But lemme explain why in specific terms;
1- A parsec is 3.26LYs and it takes 206,265 AUs (Earth to Sun) to fill up that space. GC2 stars gobble up a whole Parsec, relatively speaking. Their system is then, by a loooong shot, much bigger than ours in reality.
2- Even if i were to put 15 tile squares across, they would still be worth 13,751 AUs each!
3- Now, forget the above & think in abstract terms.
4- What we need somehow is diversified systems which can contain more than five planets & 3 asteroids fields while leaving plenty of room for ships to travel through. Thus, 15x15. On a secondary but independantly zoomable "main screen map" that you can switch from & too and that provides the whole usual spectrum of activities -- Combat, StarBase, range, trade routes, etc.
** To better visualize the above principles here's an extremely well done custom map "features filled" system by SirNastyofTang for you consult;
https://forums.galciv2.com/312077/page/1/#1736812
** and even further below in that thread, threat yourselves with the miracle bunch of many more planets as an illusion!
5- Fifteen AUs (of the bigger kind, real distance wise) to Parsec to Sector to Quadrant. Is a solution.
6- Only then, Bring on the mines.
It is an "HP" interpretation worth looking into more closely - but, i'd still want a number of minimal "Tactical" options (as in optional through personal settings; they all got their silly *No tech brokering* feature in, i should get this!) added into the battle simulator, if only to bother myself to clear defeat or smart Victory & having a sense of responsibility over the outcomes. Let Combat rounds begin and end to make any single fleet battles epic as much as colonizing multiple planets.
Bigger*Numbers*Wins controversy resolved with the above suggestion, AFAIC.
The expanding map system has my support. The hull manouverability system has my support. Civillian craft... I could see that working, but it needs to be fleshed a little.
Maybe in order to negotiate peace treaties, you must send delegates to the other civ.
That could count as civilian craft I think.
This idea could make the diplomacy interactions all that much more interesting.
Only in emergencies do you use the Diplo Screen.
Oh look here come the Dread Lords and the Peacekeepers with their Pirate bodyguards. Better dust off this Diplomatic Translator.......
Maybe have these types of ships:
I knew this was gonna happen - now, we have a Civilian fleet system with many sort of features attached to different ships. I prefer one kind of ship fits all by inserting singular "category" modules (Science, Cargo or Tourist, etc) of one size on the hull (no extra space for Weapons or Defenses, btw), launch for duty, done.
Otherwise we'd introduce another Bigger-numbers-Wins imbroglio.
How many AUs is our solar system.
Not to forget that it is also used extensively for other "tasks" such as trading, analysis, sign a treaty, fleet evaluations, etc
Between 29 to 49AUs based on Pluto's elliptic orbit including a 17° inclination. That would mean about 50AU per parsec instead of the earlier 15x15 grid. Huge area.
Tourist Ships are known as luxary liners here on Earth, in space we would probable call them star liners.
Reintroduce the stargates.
Military and large corporations might be able to afford the 2 trillion dollar hyper engine but civilians and smaller companies couldn't. They would still need to use the stargates to get about the empire and or galaxy.
At times of war these gates could lock out jumps coming from the enemy.
Ok, but isn't the solar system at least double that distance. making it at least 98 AUs large but that is measuring from the sun. So across from one side to another it would then be twice that at 196 AUs large.
Not quite a parsect but getting closer.
One more question where are all of the binaries and trinaniris and other multiple star systems.
Sadly, stargates are "unstrategic" in both nature & what they represent travel wise. We'd simply get a bunch of happy trigger AIs all too willing to show up unexpectably with almost instantaneous combat & invasion.
FTLS is no small engineering process either while naturally occuring phenomenons such as WormHoles (or BH, btw) are a tiny bit more plausible for some tactical simulation.
Sure, i presumed double that much for Pluto distances (but it isn't constant, btw... it's more like 29+49 on wiiiiiidddddde ecliptic trajectories centered on the Sun) - ya know.
They are everywhere and far between or not.
You could simple state that a ship with a hyper drive cannot go into a gate or it blows up.
Stargates:
-Lore states there were one or three (I forget how many exactly, maybe 1 or 3 pairs?) and apparently one or three of those got loldestroyed. I'd guess there's maybe one or two left but that's not going to do anyone much good.-Restricting ships going through a stargate for arbitrary reasons is stupid.-No stargates please; give me wormholes that don't disappear instead, as it serves the same function, but is more consistent with the lore. There's also the exploring factor to take into consideration, so you won't know the map before you scout it.
I have to agree that star-gates would not work, for both tactical and lore reasons.
Add: So you want to move to bettleguise come on up dock with our star liner. We will take care of that little pinto flyer of yours. lol
Maybe also have starlines distribute population to planets. If a planet has too low morale, people leave for other planets. If it has a high economy, more people immigrate. You can control their activity somewhat, but it is mostly a self-governing process.
Which is another reason why i've been trying to design bigger, better Colony & Troops modules for a ship design we already have, call it liners if you must but the "Civilian" principle still somehow applies to it.
True 3D space mapping considerations; at least 3 layers worth of above to below sneak attacks in thick perspectives immersive enough to feel just like cheat mode option CTRL-Shift-U while traveling through real nebulaes!
Connect the dots, geometric distances & goals. Strategy, for real.
If I understood what you were talking about, I would probably agree...
I would like to *also* see civs use alliances better.
Mostly using strategic alliances, like if there are 5 races on the map and two are big while the other 3 are small/moderate... the three could ally up to gain protection from the big civs... And possibly making this an option for the player in the diplomacy screen under treaties... "strategic alliance against..." [pick civ] sorta like WWII.
EDIT: Oops forgot to mention.
Make pirates more dynamic... (not mega event pirates). Like make them a constant nuisance. and give them a module "thief module: robs a trade ship of all its goods, the trade routes value is reset.
I wanted to post something important for 1000 BUT DAMN IT AM NOT DONE!!! Oh well I am a big fat jerk anywho!
There are many great features available to you once you register, including:
Sign in or Create Account
