I love how one can customize one's own ships in Galactic Civilizations II. However, I find ground battles to be quite boring. I would like to be able to customize my ground troops and vehicles. I would also like to actually watch them fight. How about everybody else? What would you like to see?
Multiplayer, even if only hotseat and LAN.
I would especially like to see Science and Technology separated.
Science should be researched in different fields and lead to break throughs which should then make new technologies available for development. Certain technologies should open new fields of scientific research as should certain Scientific achievements themselves.
This would mirror the way Science and technology interact in the real world. Scientific research should be the same for all races although some races might have an advantage in certain fields because of how they experience the universe. Technology is influenced by culture so should be species specific like the technology trees in GC2.
I would like to see interactive turn based space combat, and multi-turn ground campaigns for control of planets.
I would also like a make your own alien editor similar to the ship editor but with animated contactable deformable parts. These could be animated for the break through screens. Actually a variation on the unit building engine in Elemental should be able to manage something like this by treating some body parts like it does clothing.
In Combat I would like to see ship damage that exceeds armour applied to the ships systems causing systems to randomly fail as the ship takes more damage. I would also like to see combat drone carriers.
I would also like to see an end to so many humanoid races, but I know this is part of the lore in the GC universe so I guess that is unlikely.
From what I've heard they intend to use a version of the Elemental engine so I expect great things.
I would like to see a GalCiv3, but i want the following features in it for me to buy it with no second thoughts:
1: Good, Neutral and Evil ethics need to be balanced since neutral is better then good or evil, since you get better research facilities, more bonuses to invading all non-neutral races. (and be honest, how many neutral races are there in this game?)
2: Designing Ships should be far more easier, i might be just used to Master of Orion 2's way of doing it, when you get a better weapon or shields or armour, you went to a colony that has a shipyard and pick a design and click on 'upgrade' and then the design comes up in the ship designer with all the currently equiped equipment and you can either place the new piece yourself or just click on 'auto-equip' and it replaces all the stuff on the design with something better, then you click on 'ok' and bam, the design is upgraded.....but not on GalCiv2, you have to rename the design each and EVERY time you upgrade the design, so by the mid-game phase, i have over 100 designs...give or take and i find that off-putting.
I have had to resort to just letting the AI do all the designing automatically, GalCiv2 ship design is so terrible.
3: Ship weapons and Defences need to be streamlined, i am quite annoyed with the shields, armour and point, why can't it be just shields and armour, where all weapons need to get past the shields, then the armour, after that, the health goes down, that would be far more better then what GalCiv2 is currently using, once again, by Master of Orion 2, which uses a far better system.
4: More Aggressive AI when at war, even on the easiest setting, as well as more peaceful Good races and more violent and warmongering evil races.
5: Good Races have good Defenses, but poor offenses, Neutral Races have a balanced defense and offense and evil races have better weaponry and poor Defenses.
6: More Diplomacy and more helpful allies, i have played over 5 games so far (recently bought GalCivII Ultimate) and i have yet to see a need for alliances beyond to keep them away from me while i take out the evil races, they never help and i think that they should and when we help them with combat situations it increases our relationship with them.
7: More Allied Combat Situations where you can come to the aid of an ally that has a planet that is being invaded and you have a set amount of turns based on how fortified the planet is to send transports and warships to help your allies out and they do the same to you, which would make having allies worthwhile.
Thats what i would like added to the game
I think the thing that's always bugged me the most about GC is the great (mostly tactical), mostly in depth economic, and space faring part of the game. And THEN you go and land a transport on a planet and what you get? Either a) A bunch of troops on a 2d screen charging at each other in DL, or in ta, the same thing, just more flashy and symbols, but hey, least there's smoke now! ... There's no tactics to it, there's no effort. Just mass driver the planet to hell with 2-3k troops and ur ALWAYS gonna get the planet. Really sucks alot of the fun out of it. Or if you wanna preserve the planet? Use tidal. Same thing. (But that's not my point)You know how some people would kill for a klondike bar? Well I'd give up my klondike bar to see a real-basic, turn based invasion mini-game for planetary assaults. What I have in mind, is keep the already given invasion bonuses for choosing mass drivers, tidal, info war etc but THEN go to planet and wage war with some basic units (Possibly even based on research into lasers, and, missiles for attack/defense scores) to take over some basic points on the planet, ie the colony, spaceport and maybe all the planetary factories? Either capture them all, or eliminate all resistance.Of course, if its to long it'll piss some people off, so have a "skip battle" button on the bottom of the screen and allow the comp to do some basic algorithms to calculate. Just expect the cpu to do a tad worse then you prolly would -----------I also like the:- Deterioration of ships with heavy damage - This almost seemed like a duh when I saw it. Someone tell please me why HP are NOT directly associated with the effectiveness of the ships components? "If its venting atmosphere, it should be able to launch neutron deathbeams at full power without itself ripping apart..." - better fleet improvements/modules - Pretty straightforward. I'd love to see more improvements and modules for fleets. Stuff like "fleet scanners" (Sensors), "fuel tankers"(Range), and possibly weapon/defense bubbles aswell. But you gotta watch how you do those, or you'll make Military RB's obsolete. Already hard for me to find a purpose for as is.- Carrier Module - Now, I like everyone know stardock hates the idea of carriers. But the idea seems so simple. Have a series of modules (ex:1/2/3), that allow you to hold (x) amount of "Tiny" (yes only tiny) ships within the hold(Up to 10 or until max logistics of fighters(in carrier)). One module per ship, and it should be big and costly. The module would in effect work like a planetary orbit thingy... Just it moves. And has smaller range from which the fighters can operate. (Lets say 5-10 parsecs in "deep space" for consistency ) In fleet battle, the fighters in the carrier would be deployed as part of the carriers logistics (so basically you gain little bits of awesome for less logistics) and could be destroyed like normal ships. (However, if you loss your carrier, the fighters would be destroyed, maybe?)In theory it would work. You'd just have to figure out how to make the AI use it effectively.- some basic "pre-battle" options for fleet combat - Prioritizing targets is a great stategical idea. Especially if you have that randomizer for hits I read somewhere in the thread to, when weak ships are hiding in a big bad fleet. But it should be only available to the attacker. Making the defender pay attention to how they deploy their fleets when their trying to hide their logistic forces.- Evasion/Accuracy bonuses - Great idea that will help ungodly amount in getting those tiny little spitfires we all know in love back in the game. Though I suggest engines should also play a (small) roll in evasion. - "Piercing" weapons - This is on the low rung of what to add, but it would be interesting to see what would happen if you threw in a handful of "guaranteed hit" weapons on the techtree here and there. I'd just worry about exploitation. (perhaps a module limit) - Galactopedia - YES!!! PLEASE!!! I love worthless filler information (honest!) . Briefs on civ history, a section on rings and moons, perhaps even auto updates when galactic achievements happen? And lets not forget a "modern war" history! (Like why did the Korx and Dregin team on the Death 6 months ago?) Gives the game a little bit more depth. And I think that's something we ALL want (For the most part)- Constructor Spam - Lemme put it like this: If I wana spam 1029823729872 constructors to make one half way decent starbase, let me. If I just wana build one constructor, with the same number of modules, lemme do that. But make the MODULES go away one by one until their used up. Then my ship disappear. Hell, with the way it is right now, I'll take it if even i it get at that at one location only! (till the sb modules are full, then it goes boom. or till you cancel, i want multiple uses dang it!)- Space is Empty - But not that empty! We got nebula, blackholes, rouge planets, pirates, lost fleets(like in starwars, anyone remember the katana fleet? ), and a billion and one other space phenomena, not just anomolies, planets, suns and astroids... More variety stardock! You went in the right direction with the Extreme Colony gibit, though it woulda been much better if only particular factions could research particular colonial things for particular worlds (Barren being the only universal one, perhaps?) Ex: Only Torians, Drath can get aquatic worlds, while only Korath and Yor can get Toxic. These planetary restrictions would give more realistic, unfair advantages. Adding to the variety of gameplay. (OH! And before you ask "But what if we invaded those worlds and we can't have the right tech to colonize it? Simple. You nuke the colony and leave it burn asunder . Only culture revolts could give you these planets (Because the people there would technically be them...I guess))
PRODUCTION MUST DIE!
So much newb confusion, bad economic management and bad AI comes from the existence of the production mechanic for social and military development. it is a totally superfluous level of complication. everyone ultimately (often painfully) finds out that the production slider must be at 100% for an efficient economy. this effectively makes maintenance and construction costs the same thing. the balance between building manufacturing generators and buildings that apply % modifiers is effectively a production time vs. production cost decision, as bonus construction is cheaper.
if that's the only decision you're making when designing worlds, then wouldn't it be simpler just to be direct about it? ditch paying for production in a round about way and just make us pay for the buildings or ships themselves as we want them. the buildings on the ground will either reduce construction time or construction costs. EASY. there is therefore almost no way for a player to get the economy wrong. skill is all well and good, but the current economy does not give you any room to succeed, only for new players or bad AI to muck it up unnecessarrily. the only interesting approaches it leaves open are the ridiculous ones, like the all-factory strategy.
the only production that should be kept is research production. your totally installed capacity determines what you can spend and how much you get for it: you then drag the slider as far up as you wish to allow.
TACKED ON FEATURES SHOULD BE INCORPORATED INTO GAME MECHANICS
I'm talking about you ethics system. Ethical alignment should be determined based on real ingame decisions like the use of inhumane invasion tactics, massacring planetary populations, starting war without provocations or declarations, not by arbitrary screens with bad art design.
political change should be properly encorporated: if you choose to allow elections then they should be totally independent of you, rather than you choosing a party that succeeds based on approval. elections shouldn't limit the player, only encourage certain approaches: ie, if the pacifists get in, the cost of warmaking might increase, but diplomatic abilities would be improved, encouraging a peacefull solution.
the UP should respond to galactic developments, make peace treaties and empose sanctions, not just generate a random event every month.
minor races should not be arbitrarily different. if a civ is less expansionist or fundamentally born to loose, then model this with AI and racial abilities, rather than arbitrarily saying they can't colonise.
SPACE SHOULD BE INTERESTING AGAIN
when you think of all the possibilities that have been discussed in sci fi and real science, the way that planets are boiled down to just one number and a tacked on environments system is just sad. the game needs to get away from huge lists of effectively identical planets with different capacities, and back down to unique, interesting places that the player actually cares about. this can be done in a way that is just as user friendly as the current system. i'd give each planet both a capacity rating and a habitability rating. the first determines how much you can build, the second effects morale and determines the rate of population growth and the point at which population stops increasing (along with farms, taxation and other factors, see the total war games for a great example of how this is done). habitability is determined by the planet, racial factors and technology, capacity is inherent. factors like gravity, atmosphere, tectonic activity, temperature, and orbit, all of which can vary independently, making every world a unique place to explore. each factor has a corresponding tech tree branch to improve habitability. every planet should be colonisable, even if it is just a tiny outpost. when a world is unlikely to be self sustaining with current technology, the player is warned before colonising it. very few worlds should be as habitable as your home world: you evolved there afterall! this makes civ power much less proportional to empire size, helping smaller civs and slowing the steamroller effect.
THE CARTOON ART STYLE AND ATTITUDE HAS TO GO
there are absolutely no screens for GC2 i want to show my friends. plenty of other strategy games like SOASO get this better. a way must be found to keep ship design whislt keeping the ships looking sensible. i feel like i'm playing a board game rather than defending an empire. GC has no atmosphere. lots of the flavour text destroys the fourth wall. how am i supposed to care about the game world when i'm talking to a race of aliens that look likesquirrels? this attitude may be acceptable for an indie game, but not if you want to be taken seriously as a developer.
there is loads more i can say but i'll leave it there for now. despite it all, GC2 is a great game and i know GC3 will be better.
The best thing about Master of Orion (the original) was ship design + tactical combat.
You actually get to use the designs that you've created, to fly into combat the lethal cocktail -- or fizzling dud -- that you've concocted.
Then the AI comes out with a counter and you design something better. But you only have 5 (or is it 6?) design slots, so you'd better make your new design count. You can actually have a doctrine, a specific role for which you design with specific tradeoffs to get there, like an unarmored missile ship that needs a move speed of exactly 2 to get its missiles into range on the first round, or a tiny ship with a single bomb designed as an expendable basecracker -- against an opponent that doesn't have scatter missiles or that design is a loser.
MoO became easy to beat even on Impossible once you learned the ins and outs, but that's true of any game. In the meantime that feeling you get when you finally build a ship that will stop those seemingly unstoppable Alkari fighter-bombers from wiping out your colonies is unmatched in strategy gaming experience.
In game after game -- at least on Impossible -- you're constantly fighting these losing battles with obsolete ships against overwhelming odds, then you turn it around with that one scrap of stolen technology that saves you. (Or you manipulate the AI's into fighting each other, give them gifts, and win without firing a shot. Once you learn how to do that it's time for something new.)
I've had a technological breakthrough deliver me from near-certain extinction because I knew how to use it in combat, and that has happened in numerous games. The repulsor beam, the warp dissipator, the Inertial Dampener, merculite missiles, every drive technology up through fusion, it has all mattered in some game I've played at some critical juncture between victory and defeat. I've even delivered myself from near-certain defeat by a runaway Psilon civilization by taking my Mrrshans against the Guardian with ships so crude no other species could've done it then unleashed Orion's technological secrets to come from behind and win the game. That was pure awesomeness, and no other strategy game has delivered the goods like MoO did.
Dreadlords comes close -- fighting the constantly losing battle and hitting their non-combat ships to buy time to tech up -- but ship design without tactical combat is like building a model airplane that won't fly. Sure, it looks good, but flying it is so much better. And GC2 makes it all the more enticing because it's almost impossible to design a ship that doesn't look really cool. I'd just love to fly those for myself.
There are many great features available to you once you register, including:
Sign in or Create Account
