One common complaint I have seen through the forums has to do with things like "sensor Stacking" and "engine stacking".
I have even seen a MP game advertised as "no cargo sensor ships"; I dont think anyone believes this type of thing is actually good for the game.
This seems to me to be a relatively straightforward problem to patch. I think it should be possible to just have diminishing returns on sensor boats; each sensor after the first drops dramatically in value (like maybe by half, but always atleast 1), and/or simply declare some maximum sensor range. If its moddable then that should lessen complaints of people who actually like to build one sensor ship for the whole game....
The game feels a lot less realistic to me when I have one little cargo ship with a sensor range of like half the galaxy, and all my fleets running around "blind".
This seems easy enough to do technically...I have to wonder what the reason is for not doing it.
You mean this?
I'm pretty sure, that he mentioned it in other threads too, but this is only one I knew from the top of my head.
Thank You. Much better.
Like the already-existing Starbase modules that do exactly this..? No-one uses them, because they require a military ring and I don't think anyone has ever built one in the entire history of Gal Civ 3, but it's quite possible to build a starbase network that triples your ship speeds.This fact alone basically demolishes about half the arguments in favour of massive engine stacking, tbh. No-one actually needs engine stacking. If you need to get from one end of your space to the other quickly, then the game provides tool to do that outside of giving every ship 20 stellar folders. If you need to be in enemy space, well, you need to be operating at a speed where the enemy can react to you. You're no longer just asking to be able to get from the one end of the galaxy to the other, you're asking to be able to attack multiple targets in one turn from way outside the AI's awareness, and that's the thing about engine stacking which is so imbalanced right now.
I think any change that makes military bases worth building is a good change. I did actually try these guys but I was never able to figure out how they work, enemy ships never seemed to be impacted by them and my own ships never moved noticeably faster near them. So I gave up trying.
I think bringing back the stargates from the lore that were how the early wars were fought before humans strapped fusion power plants to hyperdrive and gave the tech to everyone might be worthwhile to investigate. Being able to teleport a fleet from point a to either point b or point c at a cost of 1 move as long as b or c is adjacent to a military ring would be a nifty solution.
But however these existing techs are supposed to work.... I can't figure out how to use them.
As a total aside, I still do have a use for military bases, I build them in irrelevant locations, like the outer wall of the galaxy at the back of my empire, then offer them in trade. Here, have this worthless but mega valuable thing for your best tech and all your money.
I'd point out to whoever said that Frogboy was in favor of diminishing returns that this is not a diminishing returns system but rather a system where the component cost is scaled to the hull size.
Please, would a developer comment? I've been hoping the 1.7 update would finally be the time to get back into GC3, and would have thought surely by then the stacking/range issues would be addressed. Before I consider spending money on Mercenaries or Precursor Worlds, I'd like to know Stardock's intentions... If you aren't going to do something about it, I'll stop wasting my time/money.
long dead.... Frogboy basically answers the question here:
https://forums.galciv3.com/474109/page/5/#3613309He wants to do something but given the negative reply of angry min/maxers when they removed the production wheel they are probably not implementing any major changes until they can do the standalone.
Thanks, Taslios.
Frogboy wrote:
"So on the one hand, making engines and sensors consume consume a % of hull space will make the game objectively better. But on the other hand, if we do it, we’ll upset some people who like having ships that can move 73 moves and some of them will give us negative Steam reviews which will in turn cost us a lot of future sales."
The philosophy behind that comment is pretty disheartening and I sincerely hope it isn't the final word. I remember the upheaval over the wheel and am skeptical that there would be a similar backlash related to the type of changes that have been proposed. What we have here seems far more straightforward and I can hardly see an army of min/maxers rising up and flooding Steam with negative reviews on account of not being able to go halfway across the universe and defeat all their enemies in a single turn. As someone already commented, it's unbalancing to the point that it feels more like a wide-open cheat mode than an intended game mechanic.
There are many great features available to you once you register, including:
Sign in or Create Account
