You weren't around for the outspoken minority demanding Multiplayer and Carrier's were you mate? Tactical combat has always been a relatively minor complaint by the outspoken minority compared to those two.

It is my opinion that people that want GC3 to be a MOO3 sequel should start a social media campaign against the rights holders of MOO until they inevitably make a kick starter for MOO4 and in the mean time leave GC3 to be GC3.

Fate,

In a game like GC i don’t like long extended tactical combat. Infect i find it boring to get forced to fight every battle.. That’s a reason i hate Horizon right now, it’s fun at the start but quite boring when you play 4h and more.... Back in the day when i played MoO2 i always clicked auto resolve combat..

What i want from this game is great diplomacy and a good feeling of the races.

What i would like to see in expansion is some sort of "hero’s".

example:

If you go monarchy you can build a dynasty and get traits like in crusader kings II to boost your empire.

If you go something like democracy you can influence the race traits with your leader.

I like lower tier of characters that can make own decisions.

example:

If you give your fleet commander an attack order and he has a trait like "shepherd" he refuses to fight if his chance to win the battle or to flee when it goes down.

All in all i like it more to be a micro cosmos that I can evolve in. Having little story’s with in the game is more fun for me.

Ahh... I see it happens here, too... 

There's no discernible need, in my opinion, for tactical combat to be meshed with GC3. I liked Star Wars Empire at War- but acknowledge it is a much different game than GalCiv. However, there are a few things that could use some minor attention. For one, how many times have you looked at an enemy fleet and said, "I want that battleship dead," but been unable to order you ships to prioritize fire? A 'key target" tag would be useful. It shouldn't be difficult to code in, just have the ship's targeting get switched to an over-ride. Damn, that would help. An option to try to save whichever ships you can from a hopeless fight would also be nice, but be slightly harder to code.

I think a little more control would be nice, and non-detrimental. I also believe that complete personal control of ships is more X's purview, though they're rightly F-ing it up right now. I do hope we can make general orders to assist in fleet control, and be able set vaguely "aggressive" and "defensive" stances to augment how they work. I always lamented that you couldn't try to force enemies away from combat or execute a running retreat in dire times. Could we maybe get a withdraw button in the combat viewer?

In short, only a few conveniences are needed to simulate an Admiral's role a little more fully. I hope to see the dev's focus revolve around the ships and other functional parts of the game until at least beta. Of course, Stardock are rather legendary at tactical combat games and I strongly advise anyone seeking that more immediate thrill sample Sins of a Solar Empire, as it rocks out hard.

Keep up the exceptional work, devs! You guys are awesome!

The problem with the terribly dull combat in GC2 was not just the lack of any interaction but weapons tech is just a boring numbers game.The difference between laser1 and phaser was nothing but a number.No range,no rate of fire,no shield penetration or anti armor bonus.Games like Dominions4 and gratuitous space battles show that you do not need full control to make it interesting.

Perhaps we should say only that there are some changes in this area of the game. Shouldn't we wait to see what is delivered before us fans claim it is fixed?

battle are made of both strategies and tactics and many of us want to play this game also want to make ship and troops and fight we don't just click and things die that pointless we don't need some over the top thing like Xcom (great game) but more feel like we matter since war is big part of the game we should a level for all gamers to get involved  with some us don't fight others of us to the helm and commander their space army and see their power. or lest be able to till ship what to like all small ship attack the big fight or set their fighting style like stay away or get close or fall back doing that each round the best I can see it is short rounds for battle and longer the battle the more rounds their will be. because a good chunk or the games is you ships fight and invading of planets the needs have  options more pre during and post battle.

cosmicdrew - ever heard of punctuation ?  I cannot make any sense of your post.

In "Twilight" it always puzzled me that when there was a fleet combat the viewer would show that my lower weaponized, speed-fleet-enhanced ships would attack the opposition rather than my armed-to-the-hilt capital battleships.  So space-battle visuals seemed somewhat eccentric but as long as I won the battle I didn't really care much about having some control.

Where I do think combat sucked, was in the planetary invasion screen but I won't repeat my comments in an earlier thread here, other than to repeat it needed more than a little improvement, especially distinguishing between a civilian population and a military population to remove the Genocide feature.

So the Game does have Tactics when they are appropriate but they definitely need upgrading in my not-so humble opinion.

No it won't. There are several games that havfe good tactical battles while having good stratagy gameplay.

TC would enhance the gamplay of GC3.  If done right (See AOW3 for an excample of good TC)

Support ships to set up a battle options?  What kind of crud is that?  Do I need a Fleet Tender to pull a ship out and retreat?  Do I need a special "Co-ordination Cruiser" to have my Light Battlecruiser focus fire on the Mega-Space Carrier?  Why?

And like Magic the Gathering?  What is that all about?

With Tactical Combat, as they've had it in other games, no one is ever forced to do anything.  If they don't like fighting the battles, do what you do now, which is Cinematic Auto-Resolve. 

Adding a Tactical Battle Layer adds depth and choice.  It's a win-win. 

My suggestion is to go play the Un-Modded version of Masters of Orion III, with the first patch, and see how fleets work there and how stupifying combat is when you set the stage and have no control over what happens.  It's terribly unsatisfying and down right frustrating.

Captain Tolan T. Grimm, Grand High Poohbah

Ol Grognard

Glorigoth

Grimmian Union

Ading tactical combat would dramatically change GalCiv, and IMO not for the better. Let me describe how GalCiv is:

You design ships, you arrange fleets, you send your fleets to attack other fleets, then the best part, watching the battle unfold (which could be done in a more dramatic fashion, and I hope this is addressed in GC3).

This is what GC is, and I love it this way. Adding TC, would destroy the battle viewer, and turn GC fleet battles into little more than 'advance wars' for the game boy. This IMO would destroy the joy of watching your fleets do battle with the enemy. That's not to say that tactical combat games aren't great and don't have their place, they do. But it's not what GalCiv is all about.

Perhaps we all need to take a breath and read Brad's wise words in the link below, they're as true today as ever.

"...But Galactic Civilizations has always been a strategic game. It's never been a game about tactics. It's literally a class of civilizations."

http://draginol.joeuser.com/article/88762/Galactic_Civilizations_is_not_Master_of_Orion

Very interesting.  I wish I had read that article before.  Frogboy is philosophically dead set against Tactical Combat.  I had hoped in the 10+ years since that was written that he had evolved his thinking on this, but it's clear he hasn't.  He enjoys playing spreadsheets.  As do some of you.

Perhaps I should have given my $99.00 to the developers of Lords of the Black Sun.  Or buy a copy of Distant Worlds Universe for a friend.

I will shut up about Tactical Combat now. 

I'm against Tactical Combat, for one simple reason:   it's the slippery slope to making GC a RTS with 4x stuff bolted on as an afterthought.

If we decide that turn based tactical combat is essential to our GC experience, then the next step becomes a TBTC system where you control your ships' abilities, not merely move them around. Turret placement becomes important. Fields of fire make an appearance. Etc. 

Naturally, once this comes in, there'll be the push to make Tactical combat Real-time. It'll only be a little more work, and heck, it'll be wonderful and sell to all those Starcraft folks! Will be the cry.

And then, we're back into making GC a MOO2 clone; or, worse, Homeworld with some extra planet stuff hanging around for no good reason anymore. The 4x elements fall by the wayside, and we've got a game solely based around warfare. And GC has become lost.

I'm OK with the proposals to make the weapons/armor characteristics more varied (range, rof, etc.) as earlier talked about. But once you introduce the human-controlled aspect of combat resolution into the picture, there's no stopping the slide to being a RTS.  And that kills GC.

I love RTS games. But that's not what I'm here for - this is Empire building. And the God-Emperor of my domain doesn't waste his time telling the captain of Ship 20435 to turn right to bare the 3rd phaser bank because bank 1 just got destroyed by fire from Enemy Ship 4032789.

For all you TC fans, your princess is in another castle. Please leave ours alone.