[Feedback] Beta ver 0.72

Beta ver 0.72.2.0


1) U.P.

**

Much more propositions are needed, it quickly becomes always the same to vote for.

**

Add a proposition for to not vote a law at all, to postpone the vote without a new law.

**

Separate the chairman law proposal and the vote for the proposed law by a few weeks (ex: 4 or 5 weeks); the players are informed about the future law, and so they have some time to try to influence the others civilizations vote, to "trade" for the future vote of the law.

**

Add the possibility for a civilization to be able to not respect a law, by including a penalty (clearly marked), for every law, if the civilization does not respect the passed law.

Ex:

Planets Protection Act: no colonization of planets for 100 turns.
Law penalties: 100 BC per turn and per planet colonized for 100 turns, -1 to Diplomacy (relations) with every civilization in U.P. for 50 turns per planet colonized.

And a supplementary penalty for breach of an U.P. law:
-1 to Diplomacy (relations) with every civilization in U.P. for 150 turns for the first time the civilization breach a law.
-2 to Diplomacy (relations) with every civilization in U.P. for 200 turns for the second time the civilization breach a law.
etc.


**********
**********


2) Ideology.

**

The ideology branches are too small, they need more levels per branch (Ex: Outreach, levels 1 to 5 becomes Outreach, levels 1 to 10).

**

Also the traits are always the same, this will quickly become repetitive after a few games.

I suggest to add more traits for each level (ex: at least 5 or 6 traits for each level), so there is 6 traits for Outreach level 1, 6 traits for Outreach level 2, etc.
Make each trait for every levels random (same name but with different bonuses) for each game and for each civilization (every civilization gets different traits from the others civilizations).

This will remove the monotony of the actual choices and allow more diversified strategies in different games.

**

Idea:

Some ideology traits can also unlock mini branches of special techs in the technology trees, they can/must be different for each races.

**

All traits must give their bonuses at any time.

Ex:

For "Cautious" (Vigilant level 4), "All planets receive 3 free defending ships".

The bonus is a "one time bonus", the player loses the bonus after the choice, it no longer acts in time, unlike the majority of other bonuses.

It should act on all current planets AND all the future planets to be colonized, invaded, traded, etc., provided only that a planet can receive the bonus only once.

Also, it's certainly better to ask the player where he want to put the ships, near the planet, or in orbit (for reduction of micromanagement purpose).


**********
**********


3) Tech Tree.

**

The Technology Age system must definitively be a game option.
Sometimes I just need to research one tech located in the next age, and it forces me to research a dozen of other techs first, before I can pursue my research strategy, it's frustrating and breaks the game flow.

In addition to the game option to remove the ages, also, change the way it work for more flexibility.
Instead to completely prohibit to research a tech (no other choice for the player), allow the player to research the tech but at a higher cost.
For example, if the player (in the first tech age) want to research a tech located in the second age and don't have access to it (not enough techs researched), he must pay 2 times the base cost of the tech.
If the player (in the first tech age) want to research a tech located in the third age, he must pay 4 times the base cost of the tech.
Now, the player can make a choice.

So, the player can play the game without ages and without penalty (ages game option set to off), and, with the ages but with some flexibility and with penalty (ages game option set to on).


***** Added 03/14/2015. Start.*****

It seems a third possibility is needed: "Strict" Tech Ages (default, current Ages), "Open" Tech Ages with penalties, and No Tech Ages, to satisfy all player types.

***** Added 03/14/2015. End.*****


**

Always expand all the "3 in 1 rounded boxes" (ex: specialization techs).
It's really tedious to open/close them for checking, and it brings nothing to the game apart hassle.

*

And replace all the green "+" icons (ex: Shield Specialization "+" Shield Cost -10%, Point Defense Specialization "+" Point Defense Cost -10%, Armor Specialization "+" Armor Cost -10%).
It's tedious to move the mouse cursor over each "+" to know the bonuses, replace them by something more specific so the player immediately know what type of bonuses he can get just looking at the tech.

**

When the player goes to the tech screens, it would be nice the program remembers the last screen displayed instead to reset to the default screen (ex: if the last screen the player went was the Warfare Tech Tree, next time the player goes to the technology screen, the Warfare Tech Tree is directly displayed).


**********
**********


4) Improvement.

**

Allow to build over an already built improvement instead to first destroy the already built improvement.
The new improvement uses the construction points from the precedent improvement to speed up the construction, and the precedent improvement is still active during construction (it worked well and this way in GalCiv2, why change it).

**

Add a global "Auto upgrade Improvements on/off" game setting, the "Auto upgrade Improvements on/off" on planet has priority on it.


**********
**********


5) Homeworld.

**

Idea:

Add specific race bonuses for the different homeworlds.


**********
**********


6) Ship/Fleet.

**

Auto Survey/Explore modes should have a setting mode to avoid other civilization ZOC when there is no Open Border Treaty between the civilizations. A setting mode to order the same for ship/fleet path.

**

Upgrading a ship should be more a "convenience" that a "punishment" for the player.

Add a game setting to adjust the ship upgrade penalty cost (percentage added to the difference between the actual ship cost and the new ship cost).
Ex: Default, 0%, 5%, 10%, 15%, ..., 200%.

Add also a game setting to adjust the ship decommission "credits back" (percentage based on the actual ship value (construction cost)).
Ex: Default, 0%, 5%, 10%, 15%, ..., 100%.

***** Added 03/14/2015. Start.*****

A clarification point.
"Punishment": it means that it's better to destroy a ship and build a new one, instead of upgrading an old ship to a new ship, because the upgrade cost is too high.

***** Added 03/14/2015. End.*****

 


**********
**********


7) Nebula.

**

Add a game setting to play with bigger areas for Nebula, Dust Cloud, etc.
Ex: Standard, Big (4 times bigger), Very Big (16 times bigger).
This will allow to play with different strategic impacts from nebulas.

**

Ideas:

Other areas types could also give damage to the crossing ships.

Specific planets located in the nebulas with harsh conditions, with specific techs (colonization, farming, manufacturing, etc.), different malus (Wealth, Manufacturing, etc.), but also great special bonuses.

**

Change the way the sensor penalty works. Currently, the penalty (-50% sensor) is activated only when the ship is inside the nebula. Make it that each nebula hexagon cost 2 (instead of 1 currently), so, even if the ship is outside the nebula the penalty is activated for its sensors.

Ex:

A ship near a nebular (but outside) has a sensor range of 8 hexagons. The ship is located at west near the nebula. The nebula is 3 hexagons wide. The ship sensor range to the east should be only 5 hexagons ((cost 3 hexes x 2 (nebula penalty) = 6 sensor range) + (cost 2 hexes x 1 (standard cost) = 2 sensor range)) (6 + 2 = 8).

The nebula should "block" (reduce) the sensor range to the east even if the ship is outside the nebula.


**********
**********


8) Starbase.

**

Add a module (only for military starbases?) to reduce the ship sensor range of other civs . Works the same way as nebula hexes cost (hexagon cost 2 instead of 1 for sensors, see above (Nebula)).

**

Add a "quick list" for the next modules to be built in the starbase screen (it can be located below the available modules list). This allow the player to rapidly select some future modules to be built for the starbase, they are automatically built when a constructor is available (a sort of Manufacturing Queue for starbases).

**

Idea:

New types of modules:

Add bonuses for Planetary Defense.
Add bonuses for Soldiering.
Add bonuses for Growth.
Add bonuses for Food.
Terraforming (add free tile(s) to the planet(s)).
Increases the "Culture Flipping" time (ex: from 10 turns to 30 turns).

**

The bonuses provided by a starbase are too small compared to an improvement built on the planet.

First, the player has to build a starbase, then construct and send some constructors to get the bonuses.
At this time, the bonus provided is much less than one improvement built on the planet.

Then, the player must construct and send some more constructors to defend the starbase (modules), and eventually construct and send some ships to further defend the starbase.

All of this just to have a bonus less significant than a lone tile (improvement) on the planet.

It's really not worth the effort.

The bonuses provided by a starbase should be much more important, at least the value of 3 or 4 tiles (improvements) on a planet.

***** Added 03/13/2015. Start.*****

It seems that this is not clear enough.
The comparison is for the "% bonuses" (starbase modules and improvements), without taking into account the production bonus (Economic Ring, as the production bonus works for all the "% bonuses").

***** Added 03/13/2015. End.*****


**

Construction limitation of starbases.

I find that the current limitation system based on a minimum distance between starbases is not very convenient. The player need to count the hexes, and this, even with the starbases of the opponents.

And it can be easily abused to prevent the AI to build a starbase near one of your planet or near one of his planets. As the starbases of the opponents are taken into account for the limitation, the player can build "empty" starbases to "block" the AI and protect his planets, and even block the construction of starbases near the planets of the opponents.


I suggest to change the way the limitation is applied.

The limitation should be based on the number of overlapping effect areas of starbases (the number of layers), anywhere on the map.

(The effect areas of starbases increased by starbase modules are taken into account before the modules are researched, so, always based on the max effect areas of starbase available (change in game, modding).)

Ex:

It cannot have more than 6 effect areas of starbases overlapping for the player, and 6 effect areas of starbases overlapping for all the opponents, near one player's planet.

So, basically, in the example, 6 starbases max per planet for a player's planet, and 6 starbases max for all the opponents for the same planet.
A total of 12 starbases max per planet.

The player can have more than 6 starbases per planet only if he "trade" for a starbase of an opponent, or if the starbase "flip", (or eventually by boarding it, in the future of the game), but the limit is always 12 starbases max.

Much more user friendly; the player wants 1, 2, 3 starbases, he just has to build them on the map without the need to "count the hexes", and the AI cannot be "blocked".

Another solution would be to bring back the "system of areas" used in GalCiv2 (or a similar system), the "sectors system" (1 sector = 15 X 15 tiles) and to set a number of starbase per sector for the player and the opponents (player: 6 starbases max, all the opponents: 6 starbases max).
Don't know if it's easily feasible in GalCiv3.

A "sectors system" is also really needed in GalCiv3 to help the player to evaluate the distances on the map.


***** Added 03/14/2015. Start.*****

Also, a system based on "effect areas of starbases overlapping" (layers) is much more flexible for modding (ex: make more "powerful" starbases and limit them to 1 or 2 starbases per planet).

***** Added 03/14/2015. End.*****


**

The starbase modules are, in reality, built the next turn instead of "instant" building in the current turn. It's destabilizing.
And sometimes, this prevents to build all the modules in the same turn, example, when building first a module who extends the effect area of starbase, and so it forces to wait next turn to build a mining module, it just adds more micromanagement.

Make the building of starbase modules "instant" (current turn).


**********
**********


9) Shipyard.

**

When a shipyard is in "Shut down" mode (inactive), a double click on a ship in the list should automatically cancel the "Shut down" mode, instead of being forced to cancel the "Shut down" mode and then add a ship.

**

Double click in a ship task in the shipyard manufacturing queue should remove the task from the list.

**

Some techs to upgrade shipyard defense are needed, should be automatic, please no more constructors.


**********
**********


10) Planet.

**

Double click in an improvement construction task in the planet manufacturing queue should remove the task from the list.

**

The player should know at which shipyard the planet is linked, and what ships construction tasks are in the shipyard manufacturing queue.
When the player adjusts the planet production in the Govern Planet window, it should be possible to see the repercussion to the shipyard manufacturing queue linked to the planet.


**********
**********


11) U.I.

**

Add a game option to display a visual info (ex: inverse/change the colors for background and text on the turn button) when the player can hit the turn button (no more orders to give), for players who play without sound activated.

**

Display the planet tooltip when the mouse cursor is over the planet sprite in the planets list.

**

When zoomed out ("strategic view"), display the icons around the planets (the same icons when zoomed in). They were always displayed in GalCiv2.

**

Add a "Quick Save" button and a corresponding keyboard shortcut.
Allow the player to set the number of quick save files he want (ex: 1, 2, ...4 different quick save files)(the quick save files are replaced sequentially and automatically, the fifth save replace the first save).

**

The player must be notified when a planet has reached its maximum population capacity.


***** Added 03/14/2015. Start.*****

Allow the player to set the population limit for the notification (ex: notification when the population reaches 20B Pop).

***** Added 03/14/2015. End.*****


**

The planet tooltip must inform the player when a civilization has chosen an ideology trait that implies the planet can no more be flipped.

**

The player must be notified when there is a free tile on a planet after a terraforming (if the planet has only an infinite project in progress in the manufacturing queue).

**

Make bigger areas to click on, in the planet screen (small arrows to cycle through the planets), instead of just the tiny graphic areas of the arrows, or make bigger buttons (graphic). The same for others screens.

**

In the colonization event screen (ideology choice), make the whole area clickable for each choice (all text area), instead of just the small check box.

**

Load ship window.

It would be nice if the Pop/Max Pop, Growth per turn, and Approval infos would be displayed when loading a ship. Approval is updated real time.

The program automatically remembers the player's last settings, for the population and the selected planets, next time a ship is launched from this shipyard.



**

Designer.

Can we have a way to display the quantity of the same component for each component type (in the example, "23" under the component, top), instead of displaying 23 times the same component (23 times the same graphic, bottom).

With a bouton to fold/unfold (top in example/bottom in example) the display of components list.

The components can be removed (double clicks) even if the components list is folded.




**********
**********


12) Trade.

**

Why separate the access to the trade window in 2 steps.

First, access the "home screen", then access the "real trade window" by clicking on the "Let's see if we can come to a trade agreement." button.

In GalCiv2, the player can go through all the civilizations with the two arrows on top of the screen, simple and efficient.

In GalCiv3, each time the player goes to the next civilization, he is redirected to the civilization "home screen", and then he must click on the "Let's see if we can come to a trade agreement." button.
This brings absolutely nothing to the game apart annoyance. Even worse, the player can declare war to the civilization if he miss click (without confirmation).

**

When the player make a proposal with "Offer Credits", the value is automatically adjusted.

The same (value automatically adjusted) should be done for "Make Weekly Payments", and also for "Strategic Resources".

**

Allow the possibility to make payment for a specific number of turns, instead of an "eternal" payment.
The same for the strategic resources.

Ex:

20 credits for 50 turns.

**

Add a "Remove" button in the "Credits Per Turn" setting window, so 3 buttons, "Remove" to remove the item from the trade list, "Cancel" no change, "Offer" to validate the offer and the change. It's not very user friendly currently.
The same for the strategic resources.

**

Add some filters in the different categories (planets, techs, ships, etc.) in the different trade lists.

**

Add a "Remove All" button at the bottom of the screen to remove completely all the items in one click (clear the lists of offers).


**********
**********


13) Bugs.

**

When I adjusts the planet production in the Govern Planet window, the improvement costs in the manufacturing queue list are not updated (Basic Factory, Research Laboratory, etc.).

**

Sometimes it's impossible to build the "Soil Enhancement" improvement and others terraforming improvements on a planet.
This must never happens. It should always have enough tiles to build all the terraforming improvements on each planet.

**

3) The mouse wheel works when the mouse cursor is over the planets sprites zone and the window scroll bar zone (green rectangles) but don't works over the central zone (red rectangle).

This occurs when a construction bar (improvement) is located under the mouse cursor during the list progression.

Link: http://img607.imageshack.us/img607/8261/6u2t.png




**********
**********


14) Suggestions.

**

When a player colony ship was heading towards a free planet, and the planet is colonized by another colony ship (own or opponent), the player colony ship must stop and ask for new instructions to the player ("Idle Ship" button).

During its movement, when a ship/fleet finds (in its sensor range) a planet, an opponent starbase, an opponent ship, etc., the ship/fleet must stop and ask for new instructions to the player ("Idle Ship" button).

Ex:

A colony ship, with 10 moves, discovers a planet (in its sensor range) during its move while he has moved 3 moves out of 10 moves, he must then stop and ask for new instructions.

***** Added 03/13/2015. Start.*****

A precision point.
The ship/fleet must stop and ask for new instructions to the player ("Idle Ship" button), only the first time the planet, starbase, etc. is revealed.

***** Added 03/13/2015. End.*****


**

Remove the "+" for the improvements manufacturing cost (ex: "Basic Factory, Manufacturing Cost +26" --> "Basic Factory, Manufacturing Cost 26").

**

Move, Ship Range and Sensor Range systems.

Move, Ship Range and Sensor Range systems are all based on hexagons.

"Move 1" = 1 hexagon displacement.

"Ship Range 20" = 20 hexagons max range displacement.

"Sensor Range 4" = 4 hexagons range visibility.

So why use percentage for the bonuses?
(ex: Moves +10%, Ship Range +10%, Sensor Range +10%, etc.).

This way, with percentage, these systems will always be flawed and wobbly.

The player researches specialization techs for nothing, 10% for 1 move will be 1.1 rounded down to 1, etc.

All the bonuses (techs, traits, improvements, etc.) for Move, Ship Range and Sensor Range should be flat number bonuses.
(ex: Move +1, +2, +3, etc., Ship Range +2, +4, +6, etc., Sensor Range +1, +2, +3, etc.).
End of quote

If percentage continues to be used for these systems, I further suggests to give a double bonus (ex: +1 move and +10% move), so even the ships with small move get a bonus.

**

I would to be able to add "labels" and "text" (description/memo for player) to the planets, shipyards, starbases, rally points, ships/fleets, etc.
Each planet (etc.) can have several labels (ex: Factory World, Military 112, Ship Abg, what i want).
Labels are used for search function (in the planets list, etc.) and for assignments ("Commands" in "Govern Civilization" window (ex: all shipyards with this label must do this)).

The labels and text are displayed in the tooltips (planets, etc.).

**

When in war phase with an opponent, it becomes rapidly tedious to have to destroy the enemy shipyards almost every turn.
The AI should be smart enough to not rebuild the shipyards when this arrives.

An "Auto Attack" ship/fleet command would also be nice for all sorts of circumstances in the game.

***** Added 03/14/2015. Start.*****

"Auto Attack" Command with rally point.

Set the ship to Auto Attack.
Set a radius (ex: 10 tiles).
Set the ship to a rally point.

The ship will auto attack all the enemy ships entering the area, determined by the rally point and the tile radius, and all starbases and shipyards located in the area.

Can be extended to an "Auto Colonize" command, all colony ships send to the rally point will auto colonize the planets located in the area.
With possibility of directives --> nearest planet first, furthest planet first, better quality planet first, etc.

Can be extended to "Explore" (and "Survey") command, all ships send to the rally point will only auto explore the determined area.

***** Added 03/14/2015. End.*****

**

I added a suggestion for rally point (point "6") to reduce micromanagement in this topic:

https://forums.galciv3.com/462140

**

***** Added 03/13/2015. Start.*****

Add a game setting to adjust the rush buy cost penalty for ships and improvements.

Ex: Default, 2, ..., 25 times the base cost.

More flexibility for different types of players.

***** Added 03/13/2015. End.*****

 

**


***** Added 03/14/2015. Start.*****

Allow the player to rush buy more than one task (improvements, ships), there is only one improvement/ship built per turn, and the others are only planning for the next turns.

***** Added 03/14/2015. End.*****

 


**********
**********


***** Added 03/13/2015. Start.*****


**********
**********


15) Production overflow.

**

Currently, the production overflow is wasted (construction of improvements and ships).

I suggest to send all these "production points" to a "global bank", so the player can use them to "rush buy" improvements and ships, and to upgrade his ships (it's complementary to rush buy/pay with credits and don't replaces the credits, the player can use both at the same time); the player can also sell/buy them to/from other civilizations.

Or, transform the production overflow directly into credits?

Is that a game option is necessary?


**********
**********


16) Shipyard.

**

There is no way to set the launch direction to a specific hexagon for a newly built ship. And it will be a supplementary micromanagement to do it.

So, I suggest that the six hexes around the shipyard are free of move cost for the first ship movement (thus, only for the newly built ship), and this, as long as the ship is located on the adjacent hexagons (if the ship leaves the area and then returns to the area during his first movement, in this case, it costs full move cost).

Perhaps the same for ships around planets and starbases, when utilising the eject button.


**********
**********


17) Research.

**

During a game (with approximately 60 planets), I was able to research a tech every turn.
This was a quite tedious to set a tech each turn, and it rapidly became uninteresting to do it.
I know it's still in beta, but just to say it.

In GalCiv2, it is possible to research multiple techs per turn as long as you have enough research points to do it.

Just like with the production overflow for manufacturing, the production overflow for research could be transformed into credits.

So, the player do not need to micromanage all his planets (for manufacturing and research overflows), to get finally the same result.

Is that a game option is necessary?


**********
**********


***** Added 03/13/2015. End.*****


**********
**********


***** Added 03/15/2015. Start.*****


**********
**********


18) U.I.

**

In Diplomacy window, reverse the "diplomacy state bar" of opponents ("At War" is at right side, and "Ally" is at left side currently), it is the other way in GalCiv2 ("At War" is at left side, and "Ally" is at right side); currently, it doesn't match the reading direction standard; like a growth curve for diplomacy, small value to the left ("At War"), high value to the right ("Ally").

Also, the "Yes" and "No" buttons are also inversed in the windows (they are the right way in GalCiv2); it doesn't match the Windows convention standard ("Yes" button at left, "No" button at right).

**

A way to expand the "lists of offers" (bottom of the screen) in the Trade window, look at all this unused space on the screen and how these lists are cramped, not user friendly.

**

When a new shipyard is built, the "Assign Shipyard Sponsors" window is displayed, add a way to go directly to this shipyard once a sponsor is attributed (ex: "Go To" button).

**

Add a way to see the future bonuses (% Production, % Morale, % Tourism) for extreme planets (Aquatic, Barren, etc.) when the player has not yet researched the necessary techs (planet tooltip, bonuses in planet screen window).

**

Add a way for the player to know how many planets he possess for each type of extreme planets (ex: 8 Aquatic planets, 15 Barren planets, etc.).

**

Display the future planet potential (current planet class, max planet class (ex: 10/26) in all the corresponding tooltips (Planet Surface screen, Planet tooltip, etc.), when all the terraforming techs (in game, modding) will be researched.

**

Add a way to see the ships in defense in the planet screen.

**

Display different icons corresponding to the ship types for the ships in defense for planets, starbases, shipyards, etc. (same icons as the "strategic view" (map zoomed out)).

**

Add a game option for ship movement on the map.

Currently, select a ship, right click on the map, the ship moves to the destination.

Add an optional mode to an alternate functioning, select a ship, right click on the map, it only displays the ship path on the map, another right click on the same hex, the ship moves to the destination (if the second right click is on another hex, it displays a new ship path on the map).

**

Make sure that the tooltips are displayed outside of the display area of lists (planets list, improvements list, lists in trade screen, etc.), same for the tooltips over the minimap.

This is becoming more and more annoying the more I play the game.

And, if I display a tooltip, per example, over a tech in the trade screen, and I scroll the list with the mouse wheel (without moving the mouse cursor), the tooltip is not updated for the tech under the mouse cursor, also annoying.

**

Planet screen, there is enough space above and below the current improvements list and manufacturing queue list, to make the area of the lists bigger; just use this space for a more user friendly interface.

**

Display the "Influence Growth" and the "Current Influence" at the same time in all the Influence tooltips.

**

The current display system for hexes on the planet surface (overlapping of the edge of the hexes, top in example), can sometimes be confusing. An unbuildable hex can appear as buildable, when it is surrounded by buildable hexes, but it is not.

The display system (separated hexes, bottom in example) used in alpha version of the game is better suited. It would also be more suited to directly display the different qualities of the tiles (color coded system tiles for terraforming).




**********
**********


***** Added 03/15/2015. End.*****


**********
**********


***** Added 03/18/2015. Start.*****


**********
**********


19) % bonuses from planet traits, colonization events and race traits.

**

The % bonuses provided by the planet traits and the colonization events are too small compared to the % bonuses provided by improvements built on the planet.

They are a bit interesting at start game, but they become gradually less and less significant as soon as more improvements are built on the planet.

The bonuses provided by a planet traits should be more important, at least the % bonuses value corresponding to 1 or 2 tiles of the top level improvements built on a planet; perhaps "flat" bonuses (always useful) instead of % bonuses.

They should keep a certain importance throughout the whole game duration.

*

I find that some of the race traits bonuses are also too small, they also are a bit interesting at start game, but they become gradually less and less significant; initial bonuses are diluted in the mass of % bonuses, and the civilizations all end up looking alike.

The race traits bonuses should provide at least the equivalent value of 1 or 2 fully harvested Relic resource, to provide sufficiently differentiated gains, for all civilizations, all game long; perhaps "flat" bonuses (always useful) instead of % bonuses.


**********
**********


20) Planet.

**

In the planet screen, replace the base icons used in the improvements list by the icons of the current level of the improvements available.

Ex:

Basic Factory (+25% manufacturing) replaced by Manufacturing Center (+55% manufacturing) when available.
It's will be more user friendly, and easier to directly apprehend the correct value of the constructed improvement.


**********
**********


21) Ship component.

**

It would be nice to have several various Hit Points modules, just like in GalCiv2.

And unique techs, unlocked by traits in the Ideology trees, with specific Weapons and Defenses for ships.


**********
**********


***** Added 03/18/2015. End.*****


**********
**********


***** Added 03/19/2015. Start.*****


**********
**********


22) U.I.

**

Add tooltips for the improvements in the manufacturing queue (tasks), in the planet screen.

**

Add tooltips for the ships in the manufacturing queue (tasks), in the shipyard screen.

**

Display the current rally point destination in the shipyard tooltip, in the shipyard info bar (bottom left of the screen when selected), and in the shipyard screen.

**

Display the current rally point destination in the ship tooltip, in the ship info bar (bottom left of the screen when selected), and in the ship screen.

**

Add the ships in fleet list in the fleet tooltip on the general map.

**

Allow to set a duration for the "infinite projects" (ex: Research Project).

By default the duration is infinite, the player can set a duration, per example, 20 turns; and at the end of the 20 turns, the project is "suspended" and the player is prompted ("Idle Colony" button).

**

When the shipyard is in shut down mode, the "Quick Build" button is not accessible (in the shipyard info bar (bottom left of the screen when selected)), it should be; perhaps change the button label to "Resume" in this case (resume the shipyard, and add a new task).

**

Display the current rally point in the "Set Shipyard Destination" window.

**

In the planet screen, memorize the selected improvement, when the player change the current planet.

Ex:

The player selects the "Basic Factory" in the improvements list, when the player change the current planet, the "Basic Factory" is already selected in the improvements list.

**

In the Diplomacy screen (Relations tab) display the "Power" of the civilizations (same number as "Power" tab in the general screen).

**

In the starbase screen, add a way to display all the starbase modules available in the game (from all the civilizations tech trees, and even not yet researched), ex: a toggle button "See all available current modules / See all available modules in game".

**

Display the "home planet" name in the freighter tooltip, and the ship screen.

**

Display the icons of the "Defending Fleet" ships in the tooltips for planets, shipyards and starbases.

**

Allow to create a rally point located in an area not yet explored on the map.

**

When moving a shipyard ("Unanchor" button), and when the shipyard has reached its destination and is again anchored ("Anchor" button), open automatically the "Assign Shipyard Sponsors" window if a "free" planet is available to sponsorize the shipyard (if the planet do not already sponsorize another shipyard).

This can be eventually a game setting.

**

Sometimes, the player is "prisoner" of the game screens.
Per example, in the "Colonization Event" screen, or the "United Planets" meeting screen, etc., it's imperative the player act before he can leave the screen.

I suggest to add a "Wait" button (delay the choice), so the player can "check" other things before he makes his choice in these screens; the "waiting screens" are added to the list that the player must do before ending the turn, "Idle Colony", "Research", "Idle Ship", "Idle Colonization Event", "Idle U.P. Meeting", etc.

**

Add a way to set all the "Idle Ship" to the "Guard" command, with only one action.
Example, in the "Govern Civilization", "Commands" tab: All "Idle Ships" should be set to "Guard".


**********
**********


23) Starbase.

**

An idea for starbase, perhaps in a DLC.

A specific starbase, the "Terraforming Star", allow to terraform all the dead planets (Class 0 (Dead)) located in a solar system, just one use (destroyed after use), then the player can colonize them.

Available with special tech(s), and need some starbase module(s).


**********
**********


***** Added 03/19/2015. End.*****


**********
**********


***** Added 03/20/2015. Start.*****


**********
**********


24) U.I.

**

Display the manufacturing cost and maintenance cost of components in the tooltips, in the components lists (in the ship designer).

**

Add Ship Range, Sensor Range, Maintenance Cost and Manufacturing Cost in the ship tooltip in the general screen, etc.

**

Add a "Wait for Colonization" command for the colony ship located near a free planet (adjacent hex) and waiting for a specific colonization tech to be researched (Extreme Colonization, Atmospheric Cleansing); the colony ship is automatically activated as soon as the tech is available. If the planet is colonized by an opponent before the tech is available, the ship request new orders ("Idle Ship").

**

Add a way to know how many ideology points are generated by the improvements per turn.

**

Add an icon over the planet sprite to show the extreme planet type (Toxic, Barren, etc.) in the planet list and in the planet info bar (bottom left of the screen when selected).

**

Add a smart fonction in the program to auto upgrade the improvements from other civilizations (due to Influence "flipping", Invasion, Trade, etc. of the planet), if the player's improvement provides greater bonuses (ex: player's current research improvement bonus 50%, opponent's research improvement bonus 25% only).

This can be a game option.

**

Organize the way the bonuses are displayed in tooltips, in the planet screen, to make them clearer.

Ex:

Civilization Bonuses
Productive (+1)                      +15%

Global Events Bonuses
xxxx                                     +xx%

Colonization Event Bonuses
xxxx                                     +xx%

Planet Bonuses
xxxx                                     +xx%

Improvements Bonuses
xxxx                                     +xx%
xxxx                                     +xx%
xxxx                                     +xx%

Starbases Bonuses
xxxx                                     +xx%
xxxx                                     +xx%

Etc.


*********
*********


25) Bug.

**

The Growth tooltip (Growth: x Per Turn) displays false info (general screen, top right in the screen).

**

The effects of "Toxic World Mastery" and "Radioactive World Mastery" techs are inversed, the "Toxic World Mastery" tech acts on Radioactive world, and inversely.


**********
**********


***** Added 03/20/2015. End.*****


**********
**********

17,097 views 22 replies
Reply #1 Top

Wow, you put a lot of work into that and you have some great suggestions.

Reply #2 Top

i like some i dont like others lets break some down

1) up resolutions etc
i agree

2) ideology tree
more options is better i like these ideas

3) technology tree
ok here i disagree

there needs to be something to hold the player back in many cases ( some of the civ games) this appears as a web of interconnected techs this is used to represent certain prerequisite techs the tech age system acts the same way but allows you to use any techs of the current age to represent the prereq's required 

for example (Civ IV) you cant develop education without code of laws, guilds and feudalism.

code of laws ultimately originates with the techs fishing and agriculture

feudalism ultimately comes from mysticism 

and guilds ultimately comes from mining

so this mid game tech requires 4/6 starting techs and all the direct techs inbetween

the tech age system acts as a similar barrier to the interconnected barrier in Civ IV if the tech age system were to be removed then another system would have to be implemented something like the interconnected system is impractical due to galciv's much larger tech tree

 

4) improvement

im not sure about this one i dont see you turning a factory into a shopping mall very easily if they were the same type of buildings maybe like population buildings or research buildings etc but some i dont think make sense.

 

5) homeworld
i like having the homeworld play some kind of important role so i like this

6)

auto survey avoiding ZOC this makes sense.

 

fleet upgrade/punishment im not sure exactly what you mean. it should cost something to upgrade a ship that just makes sense having the option to upgrade ships for free just seems gamebreaking, heck one tactic i was contemplating recently was building empty ships for low cost and low maintenance, if someone WARDEC's me upgrade them all to warships and earn a massive army in a short number of turns the upgrade cost would be the only real limiting factor in this tactic.

7) nebulas

adjustable size this makes sense ( on a semi related topic adjustable sizes for tight/loose clusters on star generation)

damaging ships i think is being added already

planets in nebulas could be interesting

sensor range personally i would like to see each hex of nebula reduce the remaining sight distance by half so that its not just harder to see through a nebula its harder to see anything on the other side of one

8) starbases

sensor range reduction- sure

quick list - sure

new modules - nope
the only ones i could see in this list are the planet def and culture flipping one and right now theres not enough reason for me to build military/ culture buildings on my worlds putting them on starbases means i will probobly never build these buildings.

 

bonus's too small

i have to strongly disagree here

each economic starbase adds 10% to production. that right there is enough to make it overpowered you have 10 of these and you've doubled the base production of your world without any actual modules and you can have up to 12 going at the same time. this is then multiplied with any tile upgrades. on top of this you can add manufacturing, research, economy, and morale bonus's (i have yet to build a morale bonus building on planet) keep in mind right now you can funnel your manufacturing through your econ/research making it multiple times more effective that bonus production just skyrockets those econ/research values.

 

construction limitation of starbases

i disagree here as well this limit makes much more sense then it did in gc2 where you could place multiple starbases directly adjacent to each other as long as they were crossing arbitrary lines drawn on the map.

as for 'abusing' it to limit the ai from building starbases next to my planets well if the ai builds a starbase next to my planet thats an act of war IMO and it will get destroyed if i have to come up with a dozen other 'abuses' to prevent the ai from doing something that it shouldent do in the first place then i will. i will park empty ships on any tile within range of my planets, i will buy constroctors that come into my space, i will build walls of ships so the ai cannot pass.

 

9) shipyards i agree with all points here

10 ) planet i agree with all points here

11) UI these make sense as well.

12) trade i agree here)

 

13) bugs the only issue i have here is the one about soil enhancement 

currently (AFAIK) the game generates continents randomly and places them on the planet. each tile depending on how the continent is placed is given a useable land mass value

at colonization all tiles with 100% ULM are available.

soil enhancement allows 1 tile of =>90% ULM to be made usable (im not sure if its actually 90%)

and each additional terraforming tech lowers that requirement by 10% or so 

this means that yes there will be some planets that a certain terraforming tech will not work on this is not a bug IMO an annoyance at time but it adds to the flavour of the game.

 

14 ) suggestions

colony ships asking for new orders - yes

fleet encountering a new enemy ship/planet/starbase/etc this could go both ways it could be helpful it could also get really old really fast. yes theres a ship there youre chasing him remember he was there last turn and moved out of your LOS now quit stopping and catch up to him , enemy ship moves out of LOS, order ship to move 5 tiles ahead moves 2 (!) hey boss theres an enemy ship here what should i do? (faceplam)

percentages make sense to me yes it means that some ships wont benefit but thats a choice i have to make do i upgrade this ship to the more expensive engine that wont actually do anything for it or not? or do i upgrade this ship that has 50 moves already with an engine that gives it an extra 10%?

 

the AI rebuilding starports that can be destroyed in 1 shot

if rebuilding the shipyard is the only thing i can do then i will especially if it ties up your fleet destroying it every turn all i need to do is keep them coming while i build up a fleet at another planet (if i can)

Reply #3 Top

Regarding the ages thing on research, one of the results of this is the demise of the, (what was it?) 10 move, 20, move victory that was a fad with GCII.

If this was even a consideration, I am sure it is not the only reason. I am sure SD is not that bothered by by the foibles of GC players. :) 

Reply #4 Top

Quoting Franco, reply 3

Regarding the ages thing on research, one of the results of this is the demise of the, (what was it?) 10 move, 20, move victory that was a fad with GCII.

If this was even a consideration, I am sure it is not the only reason. I am sure SD is not that bothered by by the foibles of GC players. :)  
End of Franco's quote
 

i believe they also said in a dev stream that the ages allow them to change goals for the ai do this in age 1 do that in age 2 etc

Reply #5 Top

@Franco fx

Wow, you put a lot of work into that and you have some great suggestions.
End of quote

Thanks. It was just like a full time job. ;-)

@androshalforc

3) technology tree
ok here i disagree

there needs to be something to hold the player back in many cases ( some of the civ games) this appears as a web of interconnected techs this is used to represent certain prerequisite techs the tech age system acts the same way but allows you to use any techs of the current age to represent the prereq's required
End of quote

With a techtree without an "Age system" (like in GalCiv2), the player is free to pursue the strategy he want. Doing this, the player takes a risk neglecting some others research to follow its strategy; it's his choice.

With a tech Age system, there is no strategic choice here, just an arbitrary "wall" who says "you cannot go further".

As a player, I play a game to have fun, not to have frustrations.
The Technology Age system is too arbitrary for me.

So, a third possibility seems needed: "Strict" Tech Ages (default, current Ages), "Open" Tech Ages with penalties, and No Tech Ages, to satisfy all player types.

4) improvement

im not sure about this one i dont see you turning a factory into a shopping mall very easily if they were the same type of buildings maybe like population buildings or research buildings etc but some i dont think make sense.
End of quote

It's more about the game design level, rather than about a "real life" comparison.

6)...

...fleet upgrade/punishment im not sure exactly what you mean. it should cost something to upgrade a ship that just makes sense having the option to upgrade ships for free just seems gamebreaking, heck one tactic i was contemplating recently was building empty ships for low cost and low maintenance, if someone WARDEC's me upgrade them all to warships and earn a massive army in a short number of turns the upgrade cost would be the only real limiting factor in this tactic.
End of quote

"Punishment", in this case it means, it's better to destroy a ship and build a new one, instead of upgrading an old ship to a new ship.

Also people are different, they want to play the game their way, and try different things.

7) nebulas...

...sensor range personally i would like to see each hex of nebula reduce the remaining sight distance by half so that its not just harder to see through a nebula its harder to see anything on the other side of one
End of quote

I based my suggestion on the already in game penalty (-50% sensor), if they can go further, I would say yes, I am also for a more effective penalty for sensor inside/near a nebula.

8) starbases...

...new modules - nope
the only ones i could see in this list are the planet def and culture flipping one and right now theres not enough reason for me to build military/ culture buildings on my worlds putting them on starbases means i will probobly never build these buildings.
End of quote

This would bring more options to the player to pursue his "strategy of planet development".

8) starbases...

...bonus's too small

i have to strongly disagree here

each economic starbase adds 10% to production. that right there is enough to make it overpowered you have 10 of these and you've doubled the base production of your world without any actual modules and you can have up to 12 going at the same time. this is then multiplied with any tile upgrades. on top of this you can add manufacturing, research, economy, and morale bonus's (i have yet to build a morale bonus building on planet) keep in mind right now you can funnel your manufacturing through your econ/research making it multiple times more effective that bonus production just skyrockets those econ/research values.
End of quote

I thought it was clear enough, as my comparison was with an improvement, thus, it's for the "% bonuses" (starbase modules and improvements), not for the production bonus (Economic Ring). The production bonus (Economic Ring) works for all the "% bonuses" (starbase modules and improvements); now compare the "% bonuses" given by the starbase modules with the "% bonuses" given by an improvement; "It's really not worth the effort".

As you have said, it's better to just build Economic Rings.

For the "overpowered manufacturing transformation" flaw, I hope they will rectify it rapidly.

8) starbases...

...construction limitation of starbases

i disagree here as well this limit makes much more sense then it did in gc2 where you could place multiple starbases directly adjacent to each other as long as they were crossing arbitrary lines drawn on the map.
End of quote

I think that a system based on starbases overlapping, will be less constraining and will satisfy all the players.

My proposal for the "GalCiv2 sectors system", here, is just a sort of "last try" if the "starbases overlapping system" is not retained.

I want "to play" the game, not "to count the tiles".
It is "my preference". Here also, people are different.

13) bugs the only issue i have here is the one about soil enhancement

currently (AFAIK) the game generates continents randomly and places them on the planet. each tile depending on how the continent is placed is given a useable land mass value

at colonization all tiles with 100% ULM are available.

soil enhancement allows 1 tile of =>90% ULM to be made usable (im not sure if its actually 90%)

and each additional terraforming tech lowers that requirement by 10% or so

this means that yes there will be some planets that a certain terraforming tech will not work on this is not a bug IMO an annoyance at time but it adds to the flavour of the game.
End of quote

If the player researches a tech, and the player cannot do what the tech is supposed to do, then, I consider it as a bug, and not as an addition to the flavour of the game.

The game should work as intended, and if the system design is not optimal, then it must be adjusted.

14 ) suggestions...

...fleet encountering a new enemy ship/planet/starbase/etc this could go both ways it could be helpful it could also get really old really fast. yes theres a ship there youre chasing him remember he was there last turn and moved out of your LOS now quit stopping and catch up to him , enemy ship moves out of LOS, order ship to move 5 tiles ahead moves 2 (!) hey boss theres an enemy ship here what should i do? (faceplam)
End of quote

In another suggestions topic, for this, I precised: "During its movement, when a Ship/Fleet finds a not already discovered enemy Ship (in its sensor range), the Ship/Fleet should stop and ask new instructions to the player."

Yes, it's not clear enough the way I changed it. My fault.

So, basically, it's only the first time the planet, starbase, etc. is revealed.

14 ) suggestions...

...percentages make sense to me yes it means that some ships wont benefit but thats a choice i have to make do i upgrade this ship to the more expensive engine that wont actually do anything for it or not? or do i upgrade this ship that has 50 moves already with an engine that gives it an extra 10%?
End of quote

Early in the game, if the player decides to pursue the strategy to improve the speed of its ships, the "10% to move" bonus is useless.

The minimal speed for benefit the % bonus is 10 moves.

The player researches specialization techs for nothing, 10% for 1 move will be 1.1 rounded down to 1, 10% for 9 moves will be 9.9 rounded down to 9.

The player has no real choice, the only viable choice is to research the tech just before/after his ships have at least 10 moves.

For all the ships with less than 10 moves, there is no benefit.

In the current conditions of the game, a percentage system is not adapted to operate in all circumstances, the minimum speed of the ship should be 100 moves, so an 1% bonus could be used, but it would not be practical because the maps would be insanely immense.

As I have already said, "The game should work as intended, and if the system design is not optimal, then it must be adjusted".

And it's the same with sensor range and ship range, "This way, with percentage, these systems will always be flawed and wobbly".

14 ) suggestions...

...the AI rebuilding starports that can be destroyed in 1 shot

if rebuilding the shipyard is the only thing i can do then i will especially if it ties up your fleet destroying it every turn all i need to do is keep them coming while i build up a fleet at another planet (if i can)
End of quote

The player has the "space superiority", all the enemy ships are destroyed, he just waits for his transports to reach the enemy planets, resistance is futile, ...and he must destroy the enemy shipyards almost every turn. This becomes rapidly tedious.

Here, we see a problem brought by the starport externalization.

I'll quote myself:

"Too easy to block the AI with Starport.

Starport on planet --> the AI can build a powerful Ship.
Starport outside planet --> Starport can be destroyed as soon it appears."

i believe they also said in a dev stream that the ages allow them to change goals for the ai do this in age 1 do that in age 2 etc
End of quote

But, the player is not an AI. ;-)

Reply #6 Top

Precisions and Suggestions added.

Reply #7 Top

I put in some of my reactions using ---->

 

Quoting Unknown_Hero, reply 5

@Franco fx


Wow, you put a lot of work into that and you have some great suggestions.

----> Ditto
Thanks. It was just like a full time job. ;)

@androshalforc
/snip/

7) nebulas...

...sensor range personally i would like to see each hex of nebula reduce the remaining sight distance by half so that its not just harder to see through a nebula its harder to see anything on the other side of one


I based my suggestion on the already in game penalty (-50% sensor), if they can go further, I would say yes, I am also for a more effective penalty for sensor inside/near a nebula.

---> I would also like to see nebulas give a strongly penalty.   I wouldn't object to 1 hex sight range into a nebula from outside, 1 hex sight inside, and none thru a nebula.

Like Wrath of Khan, the Motar Nebula...the odds will be even... :D

8) starbases...

...bonus's too small
/snip/

As you have said, it's better to just build Economic Rings.

----> I agree right now there is very little incentive to build other than econ starbases.  Maybe a culture SB at a contested border, but even then the cost and duration of usefulness limits the incentive.   There needs to be some serious work here, not only to limit the power of manufacturing improvements but to give a reason to build the other starbases.

/snip/.

End of Unknown_Hero's quote

Reply #8 Top

The Mining starbases are great for trading with the AI they put a high value on the resources and you can get a lot of tech for a few units of durantium etc.

I am waiting for the post that says the relics are overpowered. They are fantastic and can boost your economy and production by 400-500% if you build the sb and research the progenitor techs. Each sb will give you a 100% boost civ wide when fully utilized.

Reply #9 Top

@Bamdorf

----> Ditto
End of quote

Thanks. I made a few hours overtime. ;-)

---> I would also like to see nebulas give a strongly penalty.   I wouldn't object to 1 hex sight range into a nebula from outside, 1 hex sight inside, and none thru a nebula.

Like Wrath of Khan, the Motar Nebula...the odds will be even... :D
End of quote

Yes, only 1 hex visibility would be nice, this would add much more strategic possibilities for Nebulas. Hoping.

----> I agree right now there is very little incentive to build other than econ starbases.  Maybe a culture SB at a contested border, but even then the cost and duration of usefulness limits the incentive.   There needs to be some serious work here, not only to limit the power of manufacturing improvements but to give a reason to build the other starbases.
End of quote

Yes, starbases need adjustments, and a serious overhaul to reduce their management, the astonishing continual streams of constructors all over the map.

This was (and is) already the case in GalCiv2. Becoming more and more annoying the more you play the game.

When I saw that GalCiv3 was in preparation, I thought:

"They cannot seriously make the same mistake with constructors (and miners)."

Well, they did, and it's even worse with all the new resources to harvest on the map, simply insane.

An "Auto Upgrade Starbases" option to let the player choose if he want or not manage the starbases construction would be very welcomed, even really necessary.

I made a proposal about this in this topic:

https://forums.galciv3.com/462140

@Franco fx

The Mining starbases are great for trading with the AI they put a high value on the resources and you can get a lot of tech for a few units of durantium etc.
End of quote

It's only temporary, the AI don't harvest them, ...and there is no real AI. ;-)

I am waiting for the post that says the relics are overpowered. They are fantastic and can boost your economy and production by 400-500% if you build the sb and research the progenitor techs. Each sb will give you a 100% boost civ wide when fully utilized.
End of quote

The relics are the only ones really valuable currently, if you play the game other than for testing.

And I think there is a bug currently, as the last module is added instead of replacing the previous module, as do the previous modules (90% (40% + 50%) instead of 50%, if I remember correctly).

Reply #10 Top

Quoting Unknown_Hero, reply 9

@Franco fx

The Mining starbases are great for trading with the AI they put a high value on the resources and you can get a lot of tech for a few units of durantium etc.

It's only temporary, the AI don't harvest them, ...and there is no real AI.

I am waiting for the post that says the relics are overpowered. They are fantastic and can boost your economy and production by 400-500% if you build the sb and research the progenitor techs. Each sb will give you a 100% boost civ wide when fully utilized.

The relics are the only ones really valuable currently, if you play the game other than for testing.

And I think there is a bug currently, as the last module is added instead of replacing the previous module, as do the previous modules (90% (40% + 50%) instead of 50%, if I remember correctly).
End of Unknown_Hero's quote

First, I (and by now most here), know that the AI is a "place holder", "undeveloped", "stupid", whatever. I understand that whatever it is now is not what it will be. The shelf life of any comments I make on game behavior is only for it's current iteration :)

The AI will harvest mining resources in the late game, so it is in their code but with a low priority. In a game near turn 500 I saw the Yor frantically mining resources with dozens of constructors puttering around the galaxy

Reply #11 Top

@Franco fx

First, I (and by now most here), know that the AI is a "place holder", "undeveloped", "stupid", whatever. I understand that whatever it is now is not what it will be. The shelf life of any comments I make on game behavior is only for it's current iteration :)
End of quote

Yes, it was a "joke", enjoy the "stupid AI" for now... ;-)

The AI will harvest mining resources in the late game, so it is in their code but with a low priority. In a game near turn 500 I saw the Yor frantically mining resources with dozens of constructors puttering around the galaxy
End of quote

I understand why now; so far, I only tested gigantic maps at most (less than 500 turns), thanks for the precision.

And luckily for the AI, the management of constructors is automatic in its case, and the AI has no notion of what is annoying (...nor what it means to be lucky). :cylon: :grin:

Reply #12 Top

Points "19", "20" and "21" added.

Reply #13 Top

Points "22" and "23" added.

Reply #14 Top

Points "24" and "25" added.

Reply #15 Top


19) % bonuses from planet traits, colonization events and race traits.

**

The % bonuses provided by the planet traits and the colonization events are too small compared to the % bonuses provided by improvements built on the planet.

They are a bit interesting at start game, but they become gradually less and less significant as soon as more improvements are built on the planet.

The bonuses provided by a planet traits should be more important, at least the % bonuses value corresponding to 1 or 2 tiles of the top level improvements built on a planet; perhaps "flat" bonuses (always useful) instead of % bonuses.

They should keep a certain importance throughout the whole game duration.

*

I find that some of the race traits bonuses are also too small, they also are a bit interesting at start game, but they become gradually less and less significant; initial bonuses are diluted in the mass of % bonuses, and the civilizations all end up looking alike.

The race traits bonuses should provide at least the equivalent value of 1 or 2 fully harvested Relic resource, to provide sufficiently differentiated gains, for all civilizations, all game long; perhaps "flat" bonuses (always useful) instead of % bonuses.
End of quote

 

i was thinking about this the other day and originally came to the same solution as you make the bonus's bigger but then an even better solution hit me

flat bonus vs % bonus

if your planetary improvements offer a % bonus ( research / wealth / manufacturing ) then the colonization bonus should provide a flat bonus (+5 or so ) to raw (research/wealth/manufacturing)

if the planetary bonus prvoides a flat bonus ( population , (morale?)) then the colonization bonus should provide a % bonus 

this will mean that its not overpowering on low quality / early game worlds and it scales well into the late game specialized worlds

that +5 is a nice bonus on new worlds and +50 is usefull when i have 1000% bonus to production-type

Reply #16 Top

@androshalforc

Yes, make them work in a "complementary" way ("flat" bonuses and % bonuses), so the benefits are "readjusted" all game long.

Reply #17 Top

I have a small suggestion regarding the UI. I have notice on the larger maps, it sometimes becomes difficult to see red (eg. Drengin) fleets on the map, because of the many Durantium-spots or red stars an the like. It might be a bit easier to spot the fleets, if their icons were blincking or pulsating (basically the same thing, the later only looks a bit cooler). If you put a ship with srong sensors in sentry mode and it keeps beeing stated as idle becuase it has spotted a fleet with a red icon somewhere and you can't find the darn thing, it can become a little frustrating.

On that note, it might also be a good idea to stop making sentries go idle when they spot a freighter from a neutral empire. If they spot it in your ZOC, chances are that it only wants to open a traderoute with one of your planets. Not much sense shooting down freighters if you don't happen to be at war with it's owner.

Reply #18 Top

@Hulsten

I have a small suggestion regarding the UI. I have notice on the larger maps, it sometimes becomes difficult to see red (eg. Drengin) fleets on the map, because of the many Durantium-spots or red stars an the like. It might be a bit easier to spot the fleets, if their icons were blincking or pulsating (basically the same thing, the later only looks a bit cooler). If you put a ship with srong sensors in sentry mode and it keeps beeing stated as idle becuase it has spotted a fleet with a red icon somewhere and you can't find the darn thing, it can become a little frustrating.
End of quote

In the "strategic view" mode (zoomed out, with icons), when there are many symbols, it's sometimes difficult to analyze the map.

This was (is) already the case in GalCiv2, and now even more in GalCiv3 with all the new resources types to harvest all over the map.

Perhaps a similar system, but more advanced, to the one used for the minimap, to show/hide the different icons (minimap: ships, planets, etc.), and adapted to the general map in the "strategic view" mode could do the job.

Ex:

Show/Hide combat ships (with at least 1 weapon) for the Drengin civilization (Show/Hide Drengin).
Show/Hide Durantium resources.
Show/Hide Class 0 (Dead) planets.
etc.
etc.

On that note, it might also be a good idea to stop making sentries go idle when they spot a freighter from a neutral empire. If they spot it in your ZOC, chances are that it only wants to open a traderoute with one of your planets. Not much sense shooting down freighters if you don't happen to be at war with it's owner.
End of quote

I think it does not happen often enough to necessit to implement a solution, and the sentry mode is also made for this, to warn the player. ;-)

Reply #19 Top

Quoting Unknown_Hero, reply 18

On that note, it might also be a good idea to stop making sentries go idle when they spot a freighter from a neutral empire. If they spot it in your ZOC, chances are that it only wants to open a traderoute with one of your planets. Not much sense shooting down freighters if you don't happen to be at war with it's owner.

I think it does not happen often enough to necessit to implement a solution, and the sentry mode is also made for this, to warn the player.
End of Unknown_Hero's quote

 

In case you were serious,

Sentry ships do not shoot first and ask questions later. They only wake up and become idle.

Reply #20 Top

@Franco fx

Quoting Unknown_Hero, reply 18
On that note, it might also be a good idea to stop making sentries go idle when they spot a freighter from a neutral empire. If they spot it in your ZOC, chances are that it only wants to open a traderoute with one of your planets. Not much sense shooting down freighters if you don't happen to be at war with it's owner.
I think it does not happen often enough to necessit to implement a solution, and the sentry mode is also made for this, to warn the player.
End of quote
End of quote

In case you were serious,

Sentry ships do not shoot first and ask questions later. They only wake up and become idle.
End of quote
End of quote

No one said the sentry ship automatically attack the detected ship. ;-)

"I think it does not happen often enough" ...to detect a freighter from a neutral empire...

"to necessit to implement a solution," ...like: ignore freighters from a neutral empire when a ship is set to sentry mode...

"and the sentry mode is also made for this, to warn the player." ...there is something happening here... :)

Reply #21 Top

Not you UH, I was referring to the comment, "not much sense shooting down freighters if you don't happen to be at war with them", which was probably just a joke.

Regarding the sentry setting, I think even your own ships might wake up a sentry. Maybe not, but to be honest, I don't find the setting very helpful vs guard, which is very helpful. Whenever I have used sentry they constantly wake up.

maybe it might be a good thing to use on a border with a hostile neighbor, but it doesn't seem to be a good setting around your home planets.

Reply #22 Top

@Franco fx

Sorry, your quote was rather vague. :)

Yes, "Sentry" command is better used to watch what's going on in a particular area on the map.

"Sentry": the ship wakes up when an opponent ship (when at war or not) enters the ship sensor zone.

"Guard": the ship wakes up when an enemy ship (only when at war) enters the ship sensor zone.

We need another command:

"Awaiting" or "Stationary": do nothing, just wait.

Also, it would be nice to have a visual info (specific icons) near the ship/fleet reflecting the ship current command (and also in the ship/fleet tooltip, etc.).