So basically turn this game from a strictly TBS game to one similar to the games that made Total War series. I would love that but it would mean that kind of a change. We will see if the devs thinks this is a good idea.

Think of it this way: Making all games look alike would mean that when you got bored with one game, no game would appeal to you. This gives new meaning to the value of IDIC (from Spock of Star Trek: "Infinite Diversity in Infinite Combinations" -- or something very close to that).

Edit: Believe it or not, I found it. http://en.memory-alpha.org/wiki/IDIC   It comes from Vulcan philosophy and goes back quite a ways in the back story.

Can it be added? Yes.

Will it be added? No. RTS is not a direction they've given any indication they want to move the franchise in. I don't doubt that Total War: Space could be a really good game, but it's a different game than what GalCiv 3 is going to be.

I don't believe that they'll add real-time combat in GC3, but even if they did it wouldn't resemble total war or they'd have to devote a serious portion of the game towards it.  The comparison of Total War to strategy games isn't a reasonable one, because Total War is made first and foremost for the tactical combat; the strategy element is made to support that, rather than the other way around (otherwise who would play a game with spear militia or hobilars?).

The reason I don't think they would add that is because making a good interface is difficult.  From my perspective, although Empire at War was fun for a while, it suffered badly from having no particular focus (not to mention the real-time galactic map was painful to use).  They had to divide their attention into making the galactic conquest, ground combat, and space combat interesting in order to make it work.  What they ended up with was virtually no ship variety at all in space, and the ground combat was typically mediocre (although that's just my two cents).  Another important thing to note, is for real-time combat to work they'd need to make an AI specifically for those tactical battles.

Here is what he had to say about combat in a recent interview:

"We don’t want to turn it into something like Masters of Orion, where you have like fleets of thousands of ships and you have to command every ship in the fleet and tell them what to do every turn because that would be... I know there are plenty of gamers who want that, but at some point that’s what your game becomes about. When it comes to games like this it’s always about what percentage of your time are you spending on what? In Galactic Civilizations, it is about your civilization. You are building fleets, designing ships, running planets, you are not telling which ship to fire at. That’s not what the game’s about."

Every option takes time and money to implement. Time and money the devs could use to implement something everybody will use.

Ok it's not sounding like a popular idea with the community but don't exaggerate.

Gaunathor, really, THOUSANDS of ships, nobody could manage all that. And if something insane as that was in MOO then I am glad I never played it. Logistics would limit the amount of ships as normal.

Tridus, There is nothing that interesting about the old tactical viewer. When you see your custom ships moving around and blasting enemy vessels that's all the idea basically is, that's what I am trying to convey to you. It already exists I know a litle about programming and it would not be a monumental task to tweak it so we could move them in a plane. A feature like that which at the start of combat would ask you. do you want to do it the way original way ( and I actually like playing with it to. If you remember I started off saying "I love galciv") or do you want to start the battle personally would be a huge money maker. And would put it in two gameing categories when people searched for games. (that's how I found galciv and hearing great reviews about it.)

But if you want to say there would be problems with it find real ones like. Making the AI to make use of the feature. Or makeing weapons turn to fire on the enemies direction.

Let's be constructive with our comments we're a community we shouldn't hate but communicate. Lets start over and talk about making this possible.

Now I'll know if that last bit worked if my friend gaunathor doesn't correct me on something I said...

Galciv 1 and 2 were both turn based strategy games and many StarDock employees have stated on several of these threads that that will continue to be the case. 1 & 2 were not multiplayer, but they have announced that GC3 will have multiplayer capability:

<quoted from the FAQ file>

Q: Is there multiplayer?

A: Yes, there is online multiplayer. Stay tuned for details, but we can at least confirm that some form of asynchronous play will be included so you don't have to get your friends to commit to playing for several hours in one sitting to complete a game.

</quote>

To find the FAQ file, go to the top of this page and click the "GAME" tab. Then click on the "FAQ" picture. Or use this link.

I guess you already answered my question. My question was are there any good real time stradeqy games out there. You said no only Galactic civilizations could do it. Instead of messing with a good turn based stradegy game you need to go out there and get them to fix the real time strategy.

They did turn Galactic civilizations into a real time strategy game in the Dark avatar days its called Sins of a solar empire, instead of turning a good turn based strategy game into real time strategy or real time combat why not take a previous game and fix it.

I noticed that both Distant worlds and endless space are limited games. Eventually it takes 20 minutes to do one turn. I really would like to cut that time down instead of making it a lot longer without limiting the game.

I might would like to see turn based tactics. Personally I would like to see the combat screen like Endless space without the cards.

I wouldn't want to buy Galactic civilizations 3 and then realize it is none thing like the game.

I don't understand that with all those real time stradegy games why no one is fixing those instead of trying to change a good turn based strategy game. Stardock even has one it is Sins of a solar empire. Give them what they want and make it better to not just Galactic civilizations 3.

You have to admit this is trying to compromise because you want a tactical game.

Honestly I don't know if this is better. I would think turn based tactics is better than real time strategy. As long as it doesn't take longer than what it is without taking away from the already flexibility.

My question is how come they cant change the already existing Rts games like Soase. What is it they don't have that Galactic civilizations have. To be honest the thing a bout Rts is that you have to simplify other things so it is playable, so instead of changing Galactic civilizations change Sins of a solar empire. So how about listing how Soase could be better instead.

The real problem is that Stardock already knows what they're building. Given that the alpha could come out in a month, they may have already started building it. So it really doesn't matter if its popular in the community or not. If what they're building is not RTS combat, they are extremely unlikely to throw out what they are building and replace it with RTS because of a forum thread.

Gaunathor, really, THOUSANDS of ships, nobody could manage all that. And if something insane as that was in MOO then I am glad I never played it. Logistics would limit the amount of ships as normal.

You're wrong. Creating a half decent RTS ship battle system in the game is a big deal. Sure they could just throw something simple together, but that just changes the problem from no combat control to lousy combat control (which really isn't any better).

Both of those things are only problems if there isn't time to do them right. aka: Cost. When it comes to new software development, the budget is a very real problem.

The whole point I'm trying to make is that it's far too late in the process for it to be possible. Either it's what they planned to do already and it's going to happen, or they're planning some other model and it's not happening. You will not be able to change that this far into the process.

activate meditation mode...getting calmer...calmer...logical...passionate with a cause...ready to talk.

I know it's probably not going to happen in galciv3 and as I stated in the OP. It's just possible. That's all. I bought galciv because heard it was better not SoaSE or MOO witch poeple seem to not like at newer versions. I feel this game could do it right. Given the time.

yes this is a issues that's not dieing because its wanted by players. Am truly happy stardock said there going to make combat different but I have no idea what's between Dice and RTC? This game needs the normal combat and some form of tactical. Keep in mind my life code is sovereignty and balance I don't want to turn this into RTS vs TBS I just want to see a better game. They should both exist in a later galciv title/expansion, or start making it now if they are as good as I believe.

WE ARE HUMANS and should be THINKING in strategy games. Especially on something that requires THINKING like combat. (combat is a part of strategy) witch would need to be different to keep things interesting what's the point in making custom ships if you can't really control them in a fight.(and you might as well since you rule the planets and people with a iron fist) If anyone can tell me a game that exists that's set in space, is great at all the 4Xs (like galciv) and has real time combat then let me know so I can buy it.

I know your quoting him now before I  didn't click on the link till later...s..so...sxfd.... Sorr...sorry there I said it.

I am curious gaunathor, tridus, if there was ANY form of tactical combat would you use it?

although you said it yourself that your "not people person to put it mildly" and "English isn't your first language" and your probably not it the states based on time you post your replies, and I've never met you, and have a bit to much time on your hands. We are as close as friends can be on the internet gaunathor. Were just a computer screen apart.

Actually, Gaunathor, I think you are selling the GC devs short when you say this. I believe they could indeed add tactical combat to GC without changing the game's focus. I have great faith in Brad's ability to see to it that the main focus of the game remains, regardless of what features get added.

Depends. I use it in Age of Wonders 2 all the time, but that is turn based and does an interesting job with terrain obstacles, line of sight, and things like city walls. 

If the pacing is good and there is interfering things for me to do? Yeah, I will use it. If it's tedious? Nah. 

That doesn't mean I expect to see Starcraft inside GalCiv.

we do know there is a ship role system coming, so hopefully there are some interesting thints up their sleeve. 

In the same time, I don't mind GC "spin-offs", dedicated to lower level of command, where we could don admiral's hat and command our glorious fleet from our flagship "pwner". Even lower level of command-game, natural tactical level, Nexus scale, or, I don't know, Blitzkrieg - something within captain/company level of responsibility would be nice, maximum up to colonel/regimental levels. But not in GC. That's the game of different scale - it's galactic civilizations, not borough civilizations.

That is a pretty interesting idea. A campaign from the point of view of the bottom up, rather than the top down. A strictly combat game where you start as a single ship commander and move up to fleet commands of increasing size. You might be able to design the ships you use for each mission within certain tech and money constraints. No empire building or diplomacy, just design the ship and go beat down aliens with it. Real time may not work, but "full" turn based tactical combat would be the main focus of the game. It's obviously not something to include in GC3, but as a standalone parallel game it's an interesting concept.