[video][/video]1. I don’t like the tech random tech option can there be an option with a tree like 3. 
2. I don’t like this core world thing can there be an option to have it like three.

3. If we are going to have a core world option. There are to many low class planets. 
4. if we are still having a core option then can we at least have a auto build. The governor system n three could be a nice way. It’s not that hard to transfer code from three. 
a. You could pick just one governor to auto build from three.

b. You could carry over all the governors and randomize which one to auto build.

c. You could let us pick a governor when we colonize a planet.

d. You let us globally change our governors. 
at least build something on the planets. The easiest way is transfer code from three. If it’s easier rename the governors. Auto build don’t leave the planets empty. 
5. getting unhappy Torians when I’m building what they want makes no sense. 
6. pods why is there no scientific bonus for bonding. 
7. shouldn’t we have an option for each ideology. 
8. shouldn’t we only be in one ideology at a time not two. 
9. shouldn’t we have at least 25, not 15 choices for each ideology. 
10. please tell us the difference between types of planets when we highlight them. 
the Oynx traded everything, but Oynx prime. 
11. how does ministry of foreign affairs leads to fusion power plants what. 
12. I would like to see specialized hubs like they used to have in three. 
13. I would like to see a fixed jagged knife this time around. 
14. please tell me what planets I need to scan, so I can in case I need to snap them. 
15. I miss the slyne how did they get wiped out. Are we going to see the return of the ones that didn’t get wiped out. 
edit 16. Please give us the planet list more like 3.

17. scorpions look to much like the hyper gate core; maybe, it’s time to find a new picture. 
19. capital mainframe dido player achievement maybe a +2 to raw research. 
20. Can we have our adjancencies back on our artifacts +2 made sense since the weren’t improvements but more serious. 
21. I like how the terrain affects how it affects my improvements. 
22. I would like to see more race types it four. 
23. I would like to see race types more evenly represented. 
24. It doesn’t make sense for a capital planet to have planet fall resource. 
Improvements adjancencies are +1, colony capitals should be +2, and the cililizatiin capital should be +3. 
25. hubs should have an adjancency of +2 a player achievement like the industrial center should have a +3. 

26. The shipyard is missing a lot of options. 
27. my ship upgrades aren’t showing up in the shipyards. It has something to do with firing speed. I’m sorry I forgot the name. You give no history of my events. Disappeared on my notifications. It was called a ship upgrade anyway. 
28. it’s a shame the space elevator isn’t a hub, but a galactic achievement, but as a galactic achievement it should give a +3 to base manufacturing instead of 20%. 
29. You know I think 5% is to low there were a lot of complaints about 5% adjancencies now we have 1% please make the manufacturing adjancencies at least 10% this could be total manufacturing it doesn’t have to be base. 

30. Ok this manufacturing problem started with adjancencies in three. I’m using six factories and a power plant. In two that would be 26 points. With antimatter it wound be 30. With a quantum plant it would be 36 points. I forgot what the adjancencies were but it didn’t threw everything off. The other complaint were to reverse it where factories were a percent. Let’s say a fusion plant was 2 and all six factories were 10%. That would be 3.2?without adjancencies. I would accept 5% for adjancencies. It being a hub +2. Not receiving from the factories, but giving it. Factories give a +1. They also receive adjancies. The adjancencies add a 120% that’s 7 The antimatter would be +3 on adjancencies six factories at 25% is assuming 3 points for antimatter that’s 7.5 points add 150% adjancencies that wold be 19 With quantum 4 points with a +4 on adjancencies with six factories at 50% 10 points with adjancencies at 180% 28 points. An advanced capital could add to two factories +4 so that +8. Changing the adjancies to 32 points still 4 less than two with most planets not likely to do this well. 
especially with most planets can’t be built on this is desirable. 
31. I’m not saying this is not the alpha, but I’m here is an option to automatically do the battle viewer. It’s currently not working. 
32. huh I lost a colony ship, and the game didn’t tell me why it was exploring.

33. when loading a game from the menu it says destroying a galaxy when it should say building a galaxy. 
34. I ended up with a class two world with four colonists I need colony ships to hold at least three colonists.

37. Are there going to be a market or governments. If not governments, how about political parties like we had in two. 
38. contacting private citizens is way to expensive for our research. Maybe a percentage of our treasury instead. 
39. ice bridge sunken ship. I chose to leave the ship to get two tiles. Didn’t get my two tiles. 
40. I got two citizens from a random event. It would have been ok if they would have went to earth. The random event put them in the colony Artemis(the theoretical ninth planet) I wasn’t going to waste a leader on a class two planet. This is to close anyway. I naturally built a colony ship. I’m used to galactic civilizations three here I can put three people on a colony ship. In galactic civilizations four I can’t load three citizens, but only one. The transport only have one. I need to be able to move my citizens. If your not going to allow this. Then don’t allow the game to overload colony planets. 
41. I honestly believe that the output should be the same in four as in three and that you need to adjust this accordingly. Under the new system both production and improvements need to be adjusted. This should be based on the average planet in three and four. I would assume people would probably colonize as many if four as in three.