By now you should have version 1.9 which is easily the biggest update to the game since its original release.
When I joined the GalCiv III team last month, I did a thorough inventory of the code base and decided to focus on 3 things:
1. The AI 2. The Performance 3. The memory use
## Results ## The result was 1.9. I've seen a lot of feedback on it. Mostly good. There's some complaints that the galaxy sizes are a little smaller. This is true, I did make them a bit smaller but I made the number of stars and planets available much much higher. In response, we are going to restore the absolute largest sized galaxy. I just personally don't like the pacing and didn't think others would care if I made the absolute size smaller if I was giving them more planets to play on. Clearly I was mistaken. It's no sweat to increase the largest sizes.
## Whining ## Some people have contacted us to complain about how much I've been complaining about the game and that I am hurting the game's reputation by complaining.
First, let me say that we are grateful that our fans love the game so much that they want to defend it from me.
Second, Galactic Civilizations has been part of my life for over 20 years. I wrote the OS/2 versions back in the 90s and designed GalCiv I and GalCiv II and wrote their AIs. So I do care very much about GalCiv.
Third, just because "other games" have bad AI doesn't excuse GalCiv III from having bad AI. It was unacceptable and had to be improved -- a lot. On larger maps, I would go as far as to say the AI was just plain broken. It couldn't effectively expand beyond a certain point.
The issue with non-expanding AIs is a scourge on the 4X game development community. It has to do with turn performance. The reason most of these 4X game AIs are terrible is because of perf concerns versus what is considered "good enough".
But we live in an age where people 4+ CPU cores. The AI should be doing your taxes while crushing you. So while the 1.9 AI doesn't do your taxes, it does make a lot of use of your CPU cores.
Those playing the game no doubt noticed the pretty massive perf differences. I didn't optimize anything. I just made the game use your hardware a lot better.
## Words and Deeds ##
I thought it pretty important that 1.9 get out before Christmas. Last month I wrote out a litany of complaints about the game. But talk is cheap. I wanted the players to know that we weren't just aware of things we could improve but that we could address them quickly.
## What's next? ## There is more to do. Some of the memory optimizations resulted in some changes to the way lighting is handled so we need to make some aesthetic changes. Not a big deal but needs to be done.
I want to get the Administration feature in. Just not sure the best way to do it that doesn't require a ton of UI work.
## The upcoming expansion ##
The big expansion people have been waiting for is about 75% done now.
It will be handled as a DLC mainly because people threw a fit when we made the Ashes of the Singularity expansion a stand-alone and we don't want to go through that again. So we'll figure out some way to take what is, essentially, a new game and make it DLC.
Broadly speaking: - Espionage - Interactive Invasion system with real strategy involved - New Economy (no more wheels, something much much better - micro managers can micro manage and macro managers can macro and once you see it, you will be mad for no one having come up with this obvious in hindsight system before) - Civilization Builder (Make whatever civilization you want, assign ship designs, dialog, etc. to them and share them, the AI will use it all). - Living galaxy (the lifeblood of the galaxy will be visible) - Tons of other things - New campaign (of course) - New tech tree system
Like I said, it's basically a quasi-sequel disguised (and priced) as a DLC. We will be announcing it next month. Suffice to say, we think this expansion will raise the bar on what people will expect in their 4X games (not just space) and some of the features are things that will become expected in 4X I think as they are too obvious not to have them.
That's all for now.
This doubles-down on making the game feel smaller, triples down really because movement rates are the same. More stuff on smaller maps, it's as if you want us to rush past the eXploration and eXpansion and get right into the eXtermination. Personally, I like the exploration and expansion more than the extermination. This feels more like Civ Vi where you bump into another civ within the first 15 minutes of a game and it's time to start arming up. But I guess it also helps the AI if things are a bit closer and easier to expand into.
The performance improvements are great, but I never saw one post saying "hey, the galaxy is too huge, stuff's too far away, make it smaller." But hey, it's your baby, as long as you're happy. Not everyone is going to like every change.
I wish gamers werent such a hypocritical whiny mob with short term memory. Kudos for trying to make the stand alone a dlc."OMG no single player = no buy!! But omg Overwatch is da best!!!"
"OMG game is too easy! But Endless legend is so beautiful, despite AI being braindead"
"OMG microtransaction! You're ripping us off!! but CK2 with $100+ of dlc is totally awesome!""OMG microsoft is anti-gamer with their draconian XB1 policies, but they gave us mods on Skyrim? Totally amazing ppl!"Not that I dislike any of the above games, but it goes to show how gamers can drive developers insane.
This feature is crucial right now. We just need more options based on tall strategies?
Why don´t you implement it like a another resource, which is required for starbases etc.? Shouldn´t take much of the UI work, me guess
Politics would be also in, right? Factions, governments, ministries, elections...?
I am looking forward to talking to you guys about Tall strategies.
In fact, I think I'll make another post just on tall 4X because I think that is going to be the feature of the expansion that makes GalCiv III the go-to 4X.
Frankly, it kind of bugs me that I can't talk about it now but marketing would have me killed. And I really like being alive. It's my favorite form of existence.
Yes, more please
I was hoping for expansion (price) [even though founder] you deserve more $$ (even though I complain too much). Either way can't wait to see it, any beta testing on this?? lol
Here's the main problem of a tall strategy. It's the current class system with limited terraforming. I don't mind the game favoring wide empires. If you could find something else to work the class system, and do the build que like civilization then it could favor tall. I was also thinking of being able to put people into buildings to multiply building bonuses. it would be nice to eventually territory all land tiles. This would help a tall strategy.
Well, maybe you can post severel sneak peaks into the vault?
Hey, internal politics are coming back, aren't they?
I definitely hope so!
Personally, I think you should make a formal official company policy that the Insane map size is not supported. Any support ticket or forum post concerning any factor or issue involving an Insane map will be ignored, forever. People can have whatever fun they want on any "reasonable" map size. After that, they are on their own. Given that I am often one of those Insane people, I should make that "we" are on "our" own.
I am really doubtful of making a Tall strategy work in the GalCiv economy. It seems contrary to everything I have observed in the game so far. It will be interesting to see the discussions and how you intend to prove me wrong.
Otherwise, I am in the "mostly good" category of feedback and eagerly watching for further developments. "Living galaxy" is an evocative phrase that stands out for me amongst all the other very good goodies. A great AI should be wearing a great set of clothes to show off in.
We are opposed to having your SSDs reformatted.(I am reasonably certain he is AI)
Since he mentioned elsewhere administration will limit starbases as well as colonies, I think wide empires will be many colonies and tall empires will be a system or two with many starbases. Given how it played when the separation radius was only 3 I think this may be working out with some tweaks.
Ooh, ooh, or maybe the asteroid belts, dead worlds and gas giants will take more of a role besides having a chance of spawning thulium, promethion and durantium! Prospecting?!
I love speculations
Yes, please. I've flirted a little recently with Stellaris. It left me wanting to play GC3 again and imagine that the political economy was almost entirely different than it has been so far.
I tend to sympathize with the "tall" concerns above about both the habitat designs and the economy. Some of the things I've read here & in other forum threads recently make me want to speak up again for the idea of space-based habitats.
Would any other players be interested in a system perhaps loosely modeled on the Culture orbitals and/or mega-ships that Iain M. Banks imagined. A sufficiently advanced technology should be able to transfer planet-based terraforming methods to scalable structures outside planetary or even stellar gravity wells. (That could even lay groundwork to putter with a post-scarcity economics in GC4.)
My interest in Stellaris is growing again now the developer is starting to focus more on the political aspect of the game.
They also said in the last dev diary there would be a new stat or resource called 'unity.' How much you have of it will determine how stable your empire is tall versus wide.
With the release of 1.9 and going forward, how do you think the AI's capacity for expansion has been improved? Will reverting some of the map size changes impact their ability to expand beyond a certain point?
AI sitting around and doing nothing to push their borders and interact with the map has been a criticism of mine for some time. I am playing my first game with 1.9 on a huge map currently, and so far it seems that the AI do interact more, which I think is positive, but I am curious as to what you think, Brad?
We are talking about the expansion.
The economy of GalCiv III is being totally thrown out. It'll be a new game basically.
The AI's capacity for expansion is orders of magnitude better in 1.9. The map sizes are irrelevant to it.
This is great to hear, thank you for the response. In the past you have mentioned how AI improvement in games is very often a thankless task, but I very much do appreciate improvements.
The broad list of updates you wrote down for the Crusade in this diary as well has me very excited. The new economic model and faction customisation especially.
That's a cool list, lotsa changes I am desperately waiting for (esp. customization, and more sophisticated invasion system)
I'm curious though what "living galaxy" will be about ...
I am looking forward to that!
But before that, how about the first step: the admin system? Are we gonna get it sooner, as a part of 1.9X or something like that?
I am looking forward to that!But before that, how about the first step: the admin system? Are we gonna get it sooner, as a part of 1.9X or something like that?
Re Admin system: IF I can do it myself, then yes.
It's the UI that's the problem. I have no idea how to modify the screens and we're a little short-handed right now (Christmas and illnesses).
Thanks for the continued updates. Looking forward to Crusade, perhaps a sneak in the Founder's Vault would be a nice Christmas gift.
Simply restoring Insane won't solve the problem as that map was the least affected. Other map sizes are half of what they were before. Perhaps it would have been better to create new map sizes rather than shrinking them.
This is what interests me the most. Will specific civilization techs be at last tradable?
Okay, fair enough. Thanks for the hard work, hopefully your staff gets better soon!
I would help myself but as a finance guy, I guess could only supply tea and coffee for those sick
There are many great features available to you once you register, including:
Sign in or Create Account
