Hi,
I'am a very big fan of long Tech-Trees because I hate it if I have finished all the Techs in the middle of the game.
In the Beta 5.x the Tech Trees was not really long but now, through the specialisation the Trees are shorter than ever before
because its now only the "half" of the whole techs researchable
The Idea is good that you have to specialize you and can't resaurch all the techs in one game but now you are finished with all the techs after
a "couple" of turns. That reduce the fun extrem I feel so...
BTW hope you understand what I like to say because I'am not really a native english speaker
Alphaprior,
I am not a fan so much of the lock out on specialization, however its not really a big deal. It really isnt. Fire up a game, go big and by turn 150 or so if there is a specialization you want that you did not get, just buy it from one of the factions.
I 'picked' better accuracy for my weapon specialization which gives like .01 to your accuracy, but I also really wanted miniaturization (-10% mass to all types). I just stayed with accuracy and when I bumped into the Iconians I noticed they had reduction spec and I bought it and all their other techs and all their colony ships (Since you only get one shot at trade and are locked out for 20 turns).
Got tech!
Having to choose at certain points isn't that big of an effect on the total research time. What is really needed (and I agree with this 100%) is to be able to slow research down.
Well, it has to be done carefully, because there can be side effects. But to me this is the way.
This reminds me of civ 4 and civ 5. I always played on the next slower mode down from "normal" so the units would stay useful for a significant time, and not be outdated before I finished making one. And it seemed like I was always doing future tech research a lot towards the end. Similar here. So on bigger galaxies especially, slow research way down. it makes sense and makes each stage of the game different and allows it to persist for a while.
I don't see GC3 as a half hour romp....it should be a big campaign with long term consequences for choices. I admit I sometimes play a tiny or small game just to muck around, and there is nothing wrong with that, especially with testing out new stuff or even for bug swatting. But (in my personal opinion) that's not the focus of a monumental 4x game, which is what I want GC3 to be, and what I think it is going to be.
People who want to play MP in a reasonable time, I agree there should be options to handle that as possible. (Who knows I might get in myself if it gets stable.) But I see that as a "bonus" thing.
I think the accuracy thing is 0,1 and to me I am guessing that means 10%. That's a big edge, and my choice as well. But I would like it spelled out. Hey, now don't you think it's cool to have to wrangle your way to some stuff you want?
OK, I shut up...for a while maybe.
This is implemented in B6, near as I can tell. Tech rate is now tied to # of habitable planets. The turns to research techs on an Abundant/Abundant/Abundant/Insane map skyrocketed between 5.3 and 6.0. Probably around 2.5 times as much. Maybe more, as it's always a little hard to compare game to game.
I agree that the more techs the merrier, but not to negate specialization.
The obvious answer to this question is that the developers decided it didn't work for some reason, and I think they keep making this stuff from scratch instead of recycling from the other game. I think they should replace something they take out with something else, so at least we have reasonable techs.
Can you be more specific. It can only help the developers if you give them ideas.
.
The ability to turn useless dead planets into something of value, or at least less of an eyesore?
I would like to do something with the class 0 planets.
and in a stratergy game extra strategic choices are good.
agree
I've been fighting for this for awhile.
I like slower maps, but I understand that you shouldn't give a fast option without having enough techs. As far as I'm concerned when a tech tree is fully researched then the game is over.
If Stardock doesn't fix this by release I plan on making my own tech trees that move the current "specializations" to their own lines, like a line for construction efficiency(-5% building costs, -10% building costs, etc), a line for building efficiency(+10% bonus to class type, etc) for example. This still reduces total number of techs so I will have to find out what else I can add in for actual specializations but I'll be happier without collapsing specializations that aren't special.
If you could give as many examples as possibile. I agree specialisations should be kind of civilizations. Like for instance the world could go with electronics, cybernetics, or genetic engineering. Could go more environmental friendly. Rights vs security. Science vs. religion. In space private vs. government owned. As far as leading the way. individualism, nationalism, or business.
I've just released an experimental mod to re-enable specializations. Check it out if you want to.
https://forums.galciv3.com/463831/page/1
I imaging that will stop the techs which are specializations from appearing in the game at all but to be fair I haven't looked at that file.
In your opinion and that of some others, while in my opinion and that of some others again it's a good choice. It's hard to please all of the people all of the time. I don't particularly like the fact you can follow all three ideology trees at once but I'm having to live with it and I'm not going to not play the game because of it as there are lots of other things I like about the game.
There are many great features available to you once you register, including:
Sign in or Create Account
