Of course it wont fix it. Beyond that this game needed another 6 months of development and even the Master of Stardock admited as such when he encouraged us to come back and play it in 6 months. No thanks.

You have a beta to flush out these serious flaws but the AI wasn't even in the game back then? Now we have tepid AI that can't compete even with weak players and a really dull game of micromanagement with no strategic rewards because there is no game just a few layers of poorly implemented systems.

I dont even know how play throughs with the game to the end escaped the developers but GC3 sucks.

There is so much potential here but like loads of projects that require major code re-writes after launch and feature changes, SIMCITY anybody, this is just another disc for Video Game Nerd to rack on the shelf.  

Okay, I guess I read too much into a few comments then. In that case, I'd like to speak as someone who disagrees that managing planet-by-planet is off-putting and that it doesn't work. I really like having the per-planet control. Whatever form the new economy management takes, please make sure we retain some measure of planet-by-planet differentiation on the spending level. I happen to think the global wheel is pretty useless, as there is no global setting that makes sense for all or even the majority of your planets. Economy and Research might make some sense on a global level because they effect you globally, but manufacturing's effect is purely on planetary level and needs vary wildly from planet to planet.

Also, for me planetary management is the strong point of this game. Obviously you see it as a weakness. If you want to take player focus away from planetary management, what kind of tasks do you want players to focus on? On the Macro level, what do you see as GCIII's strengths?

Hi guys,

It's not that we are against the idea of being able to customize your planets.  The problem is that this current implementation is basically not very fun. It's work. It's a necessary thing and adds no flavor, no sense of immersion and feels absolutely required to optimally manage the game.

What we want to do is set the game on track where most players feel comfortable running vast interstellar civilizations.  And right now, the UI is just not conducive to that. 

In GalCiv II, you could go to the details of any planet and get all kinds of information about it. Stats, a little history, man on the street, etc.  What we want to do with GalCiv III in the long-term is move it more so that players can make each planet feel unique and interesting but also do it in a way that doesn't require a lot of work on their part.

I am fully in support of the idea of specialization of worlds.  I don't want to see GC3 move to a zillion generic planets.  But the current per planet implementation is as bad as what tactical battles would be. You HAVE to micro each planet in order to optimize your strategy just like in tactical battles you would HAVE to micro every unit if the game allowed it to get the optimal result.

By micro, I don't mean that we don't expect that plaeyrs will be able to just ignore planets. We don't want that.  What we do want, however, is for players to eventually setup a vast federalized government that allows them to run their civilization very well but doesn't require them to set the actual local spending for a particular world.

You are the leader of a vast, galactic civilization. Not the mayor of AlienVille.

You are thinking along the lines of what we're thinking.  

But more specifically, what we want to do is set up a system where the player is creating an intergalactic government complete with governors, senators, etc.  This is long going to happen in 1.4 but this is the direction we want to see the game go.

Our view is that the governor still responds to your desires. Thus, I have no problem giving players the option to have the AI build up their planets, but players should absolutely have the ability to set up a template that certain governors use.

If we're having that, the spending should be included in the template. Which brings s straight back to the wheel. 

Now, I've actually no objections to the concept of the 'governor wheel' - a template where you can set what Governor A does, and then another for Governor B etc. And then we just shunt planets between them for different wheel settings. But I don't see it as cutting down on micro. It's more busywork through a different filter.

That sounds an awful lot like an outright admission that from 1.4 onward, we'll be using governors to run planets. 

I'm willing to put 'dealing with the Dept for Work and Pensions' on my list of things that will go into the suspension of disbelief category, personally As someone else mentioned, if we want real immersion, just show us the inside of an office somewhere and have everything conducted using papers. The interface is a conceit, but it's a necessary one, and we accept that. Adding extra layers into it, like having to deal with Senators to set the sector policy, and then further down dealing with Governors too to ensure each planet knows what the hell it's supposed to do... these aren't fun. These are creating the PITA of normal bureaucracy in-game; it's forcing the player to fill in form 82b when he wants something done. We deal with that in real life. We don't want it in our escapism.

See, if I want to go to mars but have to pay to run a colony, I can't just eliminate all social programs in GC3 already. I'll go bankrupt (at least, I would if we didn't start with so much money that I can run the empire for 100 turns at a deficit). But if I laready have Mars, and it's producing a ton of surplus cash, I can stop making Earth pay for it's own social programs - that's how having an Empire works. I use the surplus from the oppression of India to run London at a loss. An d I can do that by taxing the indians til the pips squeak. 

I'e always imagined that the various stats we get to play with in GC2 are just the taxed portion of the economy. Like, we get 15%. Every market is actually adding 100% to the economic activity of the planet; we're just seeing the benefit skimmed off the top. Anyway, if the US government wanted to go to Mars and had the tech to do so, they could comfortably afford it with present spending, provided they cut military expenditure. It has nothing much to do with taxation vs social expenditure and a lot to do with buying drones.

I remember the elections from GC1 on the PC in, what, 2001? Nothing worse than being prevented from going to war at just the wrong time

The simple response to this is: We don't have that stuff yet. We're not getting that stuff in 1.4, either. You're taking away the control we do have, and replacing it with... largely promises of an enhanced bureaucracy system (yay for bureaucrats) at a later date. To be honest, I'd hope this stuff would be written in and confirmed running well for anything upto 6 months before you phase out direct control, if you ever phase it out at all. I'd rather it just became something people didn't insist on doing themselves - which means yes, using governors, but governors I can actually trust to run a dozen worlds without plowing them into the ground for me. I'll keep looking after my 7 main planets, and let the Duke of Pointlesston deal with that tiny awful class 5 planet by the two giant black holes. If he does a good job, I might let him look after a class 7 or two.

The interface is not an area that is open to being tied into unlocks from research etc, and automation is fundamentally an interface thing. We know full well that the government in 2273 probably aren't going to gather over what is basically a war map of the universe in order to discuss education policy on Zabulon B; however, we also need ot be able to see that interface. We also know that the Emperor himself doesn't actually decide that squadron 84 are going to attack the western flank of the hated Imseise invasion fleet. That's just as immersion-breaking as telling planets what to do. But it's also required for the player to be able to play the game. This is no different.

Not to mention how many habitable planets are in the galaxy.

This sounds amazing. I think my main resistance to eliminating the wheel is not that I love the wheel. I do like the wheel, but I agree it feels very game-y and so is doesn't help you feel like a galactic emperor. My concern is that there is some system in place beyond building placement to govern different planets differently. I am glad to hear that even if there isn't a substantial replacement for the wheel in 1.4 you have long term plans, or at least goals, that sound very exciting.

The strategic AI is certainly not "Terrible".  It is better then most 4X games I have seen, perhaps excluding GC2, EU4, and Civ5.  And it will only get better with time.  Stardock has specifically mentioned that this will be a focal point for 1.4.  I have high hopes for the future of this game.

Sol system ,  earth, North  America ,  United  States ,  20th century

http://www.shmoop.com/wwii-home-front/economy.html

[Quote

Revving Up a Wartime Economy

In late 1939, a full two years before the United States entered World War II, President Franklin D. Roosevelt decided it would be necessary—and perhaps wise—to invest time and money into national defense. Despite his promise to keep the nation out of the war escalating abroad, Roosevelt carefully and deliberately prepared the country for a worst-case scenario. By the spring of 1940, he convinced Congress to increase defense spending, enlarge the army, and expand the U.S. military air fleet. Through billions of dollars in federal spending—largely focused on rearmament and national security—he managed to funnel money into a peacetime draft, increase wages for military personnel, offer subsidies for defense manufacturing, and grant loans to aid Great Britain and the Soviet Union. (Not exactly invoking neutrality in his decision to assist the Allied powers, President Roosevelt noted, "Even a neutral cannot be asked to close his mind or his conscience."13) When Japanese bombers attacked Pearl Harborin December 1941 and the United States became embroiled in world war, the nation was revved for the challenges ahead.

Help Wanted!!

By the first years of American involvement in World War II, wartime manufacturing facilities had been established throughout the nation, creating a tremendous demand for labor. Within months of the U.S. declaration of war, the national unemployment rate plummeted an astounding 10% from its 1940 level. War mobilization—that is, the rapid production of military equipment, vehicles, weapons, and ammunition, along with the fortification of American borders and military bases abroad—coupled with the military draft to create a vast labor shortage. Employers were desperate to fill positions as quickly as possible to meet production demands and needed to hire workers en masse. Positions, then, had to be opened not simply to the traditional labor force, but also to women and non-whites, those who had long been excluded from many skilled and high-paying industries.

The demand for labor was so great all across the nation that proprietors had to offer high wages and other fringe benefits to lure potential laborers—young, old, married, unmarried, white, black, immigrant, and women—away from competitors. Businesses practically begged for workers, offering extraordinary incentives such as medical care, exemption from the military draft, daycare facilities, and even paid maternity leave, a perk previously unimagined! To be sure, these were surreal shifts for so many Americans affected by the Great Depression and intimately familiar with scarcity and hopelessness.

...

A Penny Saved Is a Penny Earned

Wartime mobilization contributed not merely to a temporary respite from the Great Depression, but planted the seeds for tremendous post-war economic growth. In order to maintain a military large enough and strong enough to fight on two major war fronts, the federal government required most manufacturers to halt production of consumer items. Car manufacturers, for instance, were ordered to cease normal operations and, instead, to assemble armored vehicles to be used on the battlefield.

The federal government also asked Americans to conserve, conserve, conserve! Certain consumer products made scarce by the war, such as gasoline, steel, rubber, coffee, butter, oil, and meat, were rationed in order to prevent shortages and ensure the availability of these items to all citizens, not just to the very rich. Americans, through the use of "ration stamps," were authorized to purchase a limited quantity of each product, and families often gave up many creature comforts altogether.

While Americans had fewer products to buy, they were earning much more than ever before. As a result, families were compelled to save money throughout the war years. Once the war ended and manufacturers discontinued production for war mobilization, consumer products once again filled store shelves. A population buoyed by full employment, rising wages, growing prosperity, and renewed national confidence began to spend—and to spend enthusiastically!

"The war gave a lot of people jobs," Peggy Terry, a riveter during the war, remembers; "It led them to expect more than they had before."15 New expectations, new wages, and new options created by World War II home front mobilization sparked a postwar economic boom and the most prosperous period in the nation's history.[/quote]

Okay, it was kind of a complex situation & the postwar influx of former  Nazionale scientists  combined with  the  general  wreckage much of Europe was left dragging  it down had a lot of complicated  continuing  effects  on things... but it would  be  pretty awesome  if all  that sort of stuff could  eventually  be reflected  

A world set to 100% research is just as capable of rushing production as a world set to 100% manufacturing. Given the speeds of the ships portrayed in GCIII (particularly in the early game, at isolated colonies, or in regions where all nearby worlds are still early in their development), it's not terribly likely that I'm shipping in the required output from some other world(s). Therefore, there almost certainly exists an on-planet manufacturing sector independent of the one directly visible to the player which is more or less unaffected by the spending allocation set for the planet (or, for that matter, the population of said planet). I find the evidence for my spending allocation setting magically controlling the market and making it turn on a dime rather less than entirely convincing.

It looks much more like my planets are essentially cities, and at the city (er, sorry, "planet") of Norfolk I have the Norfolk Naval Shipyard, and over at Oak Ridge I have the Oak Ridge National Laboratory, and then my spending allocation governs how much of the capacity of Norfolk Naval Shipyard and Oak Ridge National Laboratory gets used, and whether or not the facilities are used for the intended purpose or pressed into service for some other purpose - I need tanks, so Oak Ridge National Lab gets to make rangefinders for M1 Abrams MBTs this year rather than working on that next-generation nuclear reactor project; or I need research in human-powered flight, so Norfolk Naval Shipyard uses its facilities to conduct human-powered flight experiments instead of building and maintaining ships.

There is no setting I can play with to cut spending on the equivalent of the Eisenhower Interstate Highway System or on the equivalent of a public school program; the only similar things are the entertainment centers, markets, and ongoing projects, and the first two are fixed expenses unless I build more such improvements or demolish existing ones, while the only way to adjust spending on the last is with what you describe as magic market control that makes the market turn on a dime. As far as eliminating all private manufacturing goes? I see no evidence whatsoever that there is much of a connection between my spending allocation settings for world A and the amount/existence of private manufacturing on world A. Rush-purchase costs are identical across planets, rush completion is available whether I'm at a world spending 100% on research or 100% on manufacturing or 100% on savings or doing something more balanced, (early) ships are slow enough that it's not terribly likely that I'm shipping in the manufacturing points required to complete a project (especially to remote or isolated colonies, or on colonies in a relatively undeveloped region), there's little evidence for the production points being pulled from any of the state-owned and operated facilities (which on the planet lack sufficient output to complete the project this turn or you wouldn't have bothered, and depending on the state of the game there may not be enough state manufacturing output available in the entire empire).

In GCIII, I can't get the precise tax policy I want, either, because I have no control over the tax rate. I cannot trade approval for money on Nowheresville IV (unless there's a morale improvement I can replace with an economic improvement), nor can I cut taxes on Thatplanetijustconquered III to keep them happy until they're used to being part of the empire. I have ~perfect control over government spending, though from the sounds of it you're inclined to take that away, which I feel is a mistake; managing the planets of my empire, choosing how they're to be developed, what they're to build, when, and where is the main draw that GCIII has for me, and what I'm hearing increasingly sounds like that's all going to be locked behind the upcoming governors.

I'll give the upcoming system a chance, but so far it's sounding more like hobbling the player to compensate for the computer's incompetence than any real improvement to gameplay. Very little is being said about actually adding anything worthwhile; most of what I hear boils down to taking away existing tools and replacing them with less effective tools that force the player to play more like the computer does.