Simplicity123

This can't be fixed by an AI evaluating it's own tech against the player's unless the player's tech ranking is brought into play. But frankly, that's a terrible, self-defeating mechanic that is nothing better than something for the tech morons of the game to catch up. I don't mind if tech trading is a part of the game, I like a certain amount of it. But there's a good hundred techs. Even if you've only got five players, that's a lot

Of course for the conference thing, there would need to be a time period between them. Maybe it can only be called by the UP or something.

It seems to me that not only is tech trading a crazily time consuming fiddly part of this game so far, it's an absolutely necessary one. I shouldn't be able to contact everyone around me and suddenly triple my research. I realize that I can disable tech trading, but it sure seems out of whack. It makes research speed almost proportional to the number of players in the game. Isn't this game going to support 100 players? You guys are going to ascend on

Takes kind of forever to even start interacting with other races and then when I do, le crash. Sad panda bear. Beta 4 is clearly a step up from Beta 2, but I think I'm going to have to wait some more for this thing to get more stable.

[quote who="Gilmoy" reply="5" id="3519794"] I support the OP's terminology! Wormholes as first-class values! Then I can write a lambda function that returns a wormhole, remote-run it on your PC, and your entire call stack falls into the wormhole! ... but some programmers argue that this has already happened in the past. From the outside, it's a Big Crash. From the inside, it looks like a Big Bang ... [/quote] So wha

[quote who="5myosin" reply="1" id="3519613"] There are "interstellar rifts" that have yet to be fully implemented in game. As far as I understand them, they satisfy 1,2, and 5. [/quote] If this is the case, then the wormhole "artifact" should just be thrown out. I can think of few situations where I want to send my (likely single) survey ship on a Lost in Space adventure.

The UI has a few major problems with it that I see. Too many important details are hidden from the user or are not easy viewable. The most glaring example is when the button becomes "Turn". Not "Next Turn", just "Turn". This button is small, subtle, way in the corner. And "Turn" is the same color as any other state. I spend half the game clicking on this one button. Going next, next, next (not just turns but to do my next action). Why is this

The way wormholes are implemented as an artifact that throws you Voyager-style into the middle of nowhere and then disappears is really lame. Wormholes are the sort of thing that could really spice up the map. They should be fully realized as a feature if only to provide texture to the landscape. They should: (1) persist, (2) be two-way, (3) allow influence to flow through, (4) be named by the discoverer (5) Be labeled at both ends on the map&

I haven't played since Beta 2, and I've just now started Beta 4. And I'm just noticing the tons of beautiful art that has been added to the game. Very nice stuff. It's one thing to be told that there's a ship stuck in the ice. It's another to get a screen-wide, GORGEOUS picture of it. Who ever you got to do these things is adding some great flavor to the game. So kudos, unknown artist.

[quote who="Starus" reply="11" id="3519501"] Indeed. Not only the lasers look too large and bright, they are also too abundant in battle. It doesn't take long until the battle is filled with lasers firing all the time, non stop. I'll also propose a comparison: This is from GalCiv II . The battles look much better. And this is GalCiv III <br

Oh yeah and they'd never miss.

[quote who="Turkwise" reply="1" id="3518994"] The on/off is a realistic (and welcome) depiction of laser physics. Slow-moving lasers are, in my view, an antiquated relic of early TV/Hollywood sci-fi that just won't die. But yes, they are a bit...overwhelming. They're very large and tend to make a mess of the battle view. If they had a more focused appearance (rather than the wide beams we have now) I think it would be much more aesthetically pleasing.

Looking at the video and the screenshots, it seems like the lasers are way too prominent in the Battleviewer. The instant on straight line extending off infinitely winds up filling the screen with laser light and makes it hard to see the combat itself, I think. Especially when the fleets are on approach and then it's just huge swaths of only laser. Does anyone else feel this way? It seems like the lasers definitely shouldn't extend off infinitum. &nbsp

[quote who="perigrine23" reply="11" id="3487456"] Quoting Simplicity123, reply 9 So simple that you described it incorrectly... By your calculations, starting earth with a population of 10, research division of 33%, and capital bonus of 20% should have research of 4 (10 * .33 * 1.2). It actually has a rese

[quote who="androshalforc" reply="12" id="3487543"] Falcon punch [/quote] Agreed.

[quote who="Gaunathor" reply="7" id="3487320"] Quoting Simplicity123, reply 6 That might make sense if Planetary Invasion were in the Age of War... But it's not (at least for the Drengin)... It is in the Age of War for the Drengin. It's the first tech right after the yellow/golden

[quote who="perigrine23" reply="8" id="3487336"] The formula for the economy is very simple: Your raw production is your population + production modifiers. So if you have an economy starbase and no other production modifiers, your production will be your population +10%. Your raw production in is then multiplied by the percentage you allocate using the production wheel. As Gaunathor noted, you can see your raw production devoted to research or wealth by checki

That might make sense if Planetary Invasion were in the Age of War... But it's not (at least for the Drengin)...

After getting War Machine as Drengin, I am unable to get Planetary Invasion. Disabled for the Beta?

Tooltip for planetary production/research/wealth are so close and yet so far. They say something like: +20% ruins +10% work camp ----------------------- Total Production 3.5 Those percentages are useless if you don't explain how you compute the base here. I've been playing the game for years and I always forget the formula.

Also, do economic starbases actually work? I don't see any sort of production modifier on my planets from them...

One basic design problem that has always existed with GalCiv, I feel is the hardedged map. Without wrapping borders it can be a significant disadvantage for an expansionist player to be on the edge (or heaven forbid) a corner of the map. On the other hand, this can be a defensive advantage, as you only have to worry about enemies on one or two sides of you... But that advantage really doesn't make up for the loss of explorable space, I think. So how do we fix it

Started trying the game out after a long break since the first alpha. Here's my early impressions on the latest build. A lot of work has been done to increase the content of the game since the alpha. I LOVE the black holes in that they provide a real sort of terrain to the space. I wouldn't mind more such things (Come on interstellar rifts...) On my first playthrough, I had a crash on clicking Earth's manage button. First thing I did.

If terrain isn't important, then random maps are pointless. Who cares where the tiny slow you down nebula is. It doesn't affect play.

It might, though I think you'd either need a lot of black holes, or they'd have to have quite a radius on them to serve as a real terrain feature. When water is 70% of the planet, where it is matters. A dot that you can go near in a vast space... isn't even a speed bump.