Would be more sensible if they had Tactical Combat AND Combat Viewer(This is where auto-resolve comes in, just that players can view the "battle" that took place in auto-resolve).

Honestly, in this era of gaming, having Tactical Combat is a must have, young gamers nowadays demand a lot of action and get frustrated or bored with games that are purely strategic turn based games. Having both will appease both the ol' timers and the young gamers. Also these young gamers will be the majority feeding Stardock to release more, better games for us....

No president decides how to develop the new colony either (where to put your buildings etc.) or where exactly to send ships to (which quadrant).

Playing president would restrict you to set the tax rate, maybe decide whether to colonize a planet (but not how) or not and to declare war.

Even nowadays, the president of the USA IS the chief commander of all forces. Of course, he would let his generals/admirals fight the battles, but he would decide what goal to achieve - to completly destroy the enemy, to just give a warning, enforce embargos etc.

Like I said, ultimately I don't care, but I believe the single player game will suffer. Multiplayer wouldn't but tactical combat doesn't serve single player TBS games that well.

Ok. Look. You can continue to keep bitching about the reason I openly admitted was stupid all you like. I can pettily troll with the best of them and do this all day.  However, that still doesn't change the fact that tactical combat only serves multiplayer. AI tends to have problems understanding complex tactics and almost any auto-resolve solution tends to be easily exploitable, or tedious in application.

If it's done well, and if it's done right then so be it but to just add it for the sake of adding it makes no sense. There is a reason most 4x and Grand Strategy games don't use it.

Personally I would like to get it without direct ship control in combat (at most a general withdraw like during the view mode in moo3). On the other hand I would like to get grouping within fleet, default behavior for ships (similar to Lost Empire: Immortals), objectives (and disengagement rules) for fleets and groups. Default role should even be added to the design.

ALSO. I would like to get a combat simulator to test the designs against known enemy designs (with the option to consider the racial abilities too).

It was funny (OK, not funny at all) in Imperium Galactica I that loosing your lead ship resulted game over (like failing the psyhic test).

If tactical combat were implemented I think that would be the best way to do. The only part that makes me nervous is the human element.

Tactical combat only serves multiplayer? Really? What are you basing that on?

You know how much multiplayer sucks when you're playing with someone who wants to play out every single combat against the AI in tactical mode? It exponentially increases the length of the game, quickly reaching unplayable levels of waiting.

For a strategy game, an option to disable tactical combat (particularly if one of the participants is AI) is one of the core requirements. The game doesn't need it at all for MP - if it's in, it does need the ability to turn it off for MP.

Hallelujah.

I'm glad to hear that Brad and the team are staying true to GC.

Did it really work well though?

Simple and easy to pick up for sure.

But fun? Personally, I found the simple rock paper scissors to have detracted substantially from the game. That, the Starbases, and Terror Stars were more or less worthless simply because they couldn't defend themselves and could only move 1 per turn.

The issue I have with combat is that it completely lacked depth. I could not identify with the ships that I had built - it was just, watch the battle viewer, which, combined with the simplistic rock paper scissors system, which felt, well, boring.

Notice he didn't mention MOO3...

OK, I think I am up to speed. It took my 3 hours to find out how stubborn you people are, think outside the box people.... Why not be open minds a bit, go beyond the fact that there is tactical combat, there is a method you can include that will be SATISFACTORY

Imagine a game that is Tactical, but you still maintain a nice short cinematic that will auto resolve.

Q: HOW IS THIS POSSIBLE?

Well duh, the tactics are all in the ship designer and what modules you fit on the ship that will be tactical.

Q: Does this mean I get a shitty rock paper scissors system?

**** NO! You guys are so thick headed that you don't realize that all weapons are going to have strengths and weaknesses, including fire rate, damage, and even other factors like ship sizes (fighters) or another similar idea.

Q: Does this mean that rock paper scissors is gone?

Well, I cannot answer that yet, but it is a special part of the series and I believe that it should stay in the game where it belongs. This is what separates Galactic Civilizations with MoO (really funny name BTW, I thought Master of Orion was a game based on cows or something (no offense intended, This is what happens when your competitor lives and your favorite series dies)) Besides, you don't want to alienate your fan base do you?

Q: Well what if I am still too stubborn to accept what this game has to offer?

Well, if you are really mad about the decision they made, then go play something you would like, if you are a founder... I am sorry for your loss, but reality is that there are hundreds of fans with different taste, and I assure you that some people will appreciate what Stardock will give to us. Pat yourself on the back and go somewhere else for helping a group of people get what they want.

Q: But what if I don't want a cinematic?

disable it in the options, like in civilization V on multiplayer most of the community likes animations OFF. I can guarantee that the cinematic experience no matter how much eye candy you throw at a player it WILL lose their appeal because they may get repetitive.

Q: How would somebody win and own everybody in the game?

Well, to be honest every civilization will go for different technologies and there will be strengths and weaknesses for all of them. Find these weaknesses and wipe them out selectively, galactic wide rampages could result in disaster if everybody has a different technologies and ships. keep in mind that the more you use a specific weapon type, the opposing side will always be updating their weapon and defense to defeat you, so you need to do the same.

Q: What other factors would make the combat "interesting"?

Well I requested on a separate page of what I wanted to combat system to be like, and apparently while you were all arguing I was able to get "hints" on what the real combat system will be like. Basically all weapons will have ups and downs.  Idk exactly what is in store for us, but lets assume that there will be

A) Rock paper scissors weapons

Weapon cool downs

C) Weapon Power

D) Weapon speed

E) Weapon effectiveness against sizes

F) Fighters/bomber modules with fighter assistance bonuses(weapons+???)

D) Rock paper scissors defense systems

E) Many more I don't have time to think about

Q: Why are they making the system this way?

Have you been paying attention to latest GCIII news? Apparently ship design will be HUGE considering it is top on the priority list, we got big surprises in store. so calm yourselves down and move on to new topics, explore the forums and please suggest things that would help the developers, not confuse them.

*** EDIT< FLAW IN QUESTIONS< MINOR SPELLING ERROR AND MISSING WORD***