econundrum1

On (1) I suggest since a lot of people don't like the monochrome, although I'm not one of them that instead they just lower the saturation on the areas of the planet you can't use a little to make the active part stand out but still allow you to see some color on the rest. Although personally I kind of do like the mono chrome thing. (4) good question. (6) I seem to remember that they don't intend to include espionage until one of t

[quote who="chepelink" reply="17" id="3457942"]I won't do this if I lost all my "hard work" and I would hate to rebuild all those structures that were destroyed because of that. specially in a big and ugly galaxy with a lot of planets.[/quote] But this would not happen by magic or without you direct input would it? You would be choosing to make an out of character decision for short term gain waying benefit and consequence adding more depth to the game. I do

One thing that's really going to help with getting mods more easily distributed and making them easier to find is steam workshop that was really useful for finding sorting and applying Skyrim mods and I think it will be the same here.

I fully agree that replayability should not just be a result of idologies but it will be one of the factors and I just feel they could get more out of the ideology system this way. I also think that pragmatism is actually potentially the most agressive ideology of all if portrayed properly and that it shouldn't jsut be a middle ground at all. What I'd actually like to see is the ability to switch ideology through the way you play e.g. you can only have p

True but it shouldn't be too much effort to add it for both although it will actually be much more important for the shipyard since you will probably not build ships on planets often.

I'm just not sure it is more fun either, I think making constructors built on planet more expensive than those built in shipyards would work well as opposed to haveing another specialist ship with only one purpose. That would mean in practice that most constructors would be built in ship yards anyway but you would have another way to produce one at greater cost if the situation arose where it made sense.

Well actually I'd say more in a precise and less precise way. The Icons give you an at a glance idea of the planets relative production in each category. the numbers give you precise amounts, and a graphic representation is always a nice UI element. [quote who="Nukar" reply="24" id="3457888"]1: if this layout stays does this mean a planet can have up to 2 traits max? and the homeplanet 1 besides being home planet?[/quote] Good question I hope it doesn't

Yes I don't think it is there at the moment, they may well intend to bring it back but not have the feature in yet. However just in case I'd like to say that I too would like to see that feature back in GC3.

[quote who="Nukar" reply="7" id="3457879"]Shipyard can multy spam ships so contsructer spamming is possible as long as you provide enough resources I stil say the shipyard should not be build by constructors, but with shipyard modules.[/quote] I wouldn't have a big issue with this, but logicly why would a construction ship for building one type of space base be distinct from another? I don't see a shipyard as intrinsicly that different from a star bas

By the way just had another look and there are number for production, research, etc along with icons so I don't see an issue there.

I suggest that constructors be cheaper to build in a shipyard than on planets because you can use astroid mined resources and don't have to launch all that mass out of the planets gravity well. So the first constructor you build will be expensive because it's built and launched form a planet, but from then on why you still could make them on planets it makes more sense cost wise to build and launch constructors from shipyards. You could also argue that i

Sounds like it could be, put I'd say send your save game and crash dump to Stardock so they can take a look after all that's exactly the sort of issue an open alpha like this is aimed at finding.

[quote who="chepelink" reply="8" id="3457859"]Who comes? Every single person in the world has, in less or more degree, double moral. We know that our planet is suffering from climatic problems derived from pollution and not even the radicals stop using things that pollute the environment. I don't see why is wrong to pursue two or three trees as it is right now. Altarians are "pacifist" that have big cannons . [/quote] But most of use support the ideology that we sho

[quote who="EleventhStar" reply="21" id="3457862"]i agree that the grey background is clarity at the expense of immersion. could probably get used to it, but i like immersion.[/quote] You see the reason it probably doesn't bother me is that I don't see the colony view as a direct photo of the planet from space rather as a digital display I'm looking at as the leader a sort of augmented reality display with graphics overlay (if not all the buildings on our pl

Good, Evil, Order and Chaos as to axis sounds a bit too D&D to me. Personally I would like to see more complex realistic ideologies represented but I don't think that's in keeping with the slightly tongue in cheek nature of GalCiv. So as far as I'm concerned the main thing they need to do is stop you persuing all three trees at once which really doesn't feel right to me.

Casspir On (1) just don't see why the left would be more logical than the right or indeed the other way around. On (2) I can see you're point but text and numbers would not look as good while giving as you say more accurate information I think they need to find a way to do both e.g. a visual representation that can be easily read with a degree of accuracy with numbers in a tooltip when you mouse over it. (3) and (4) are releated th

I too agree with everything you say apart from (3), 6 is very true but I'm hoping the technology view is very much a work in progress looks like there is a lot of placeholder stuff there and it needs some rethinking clearly.

I imagine that blackholes are currently fixed size objects, but how difficult would it be to add a bigger version, obviously the scanario would need to be fitted to an appropriate sized map. You could also do Galaxies with giant nebula at the centre, etc. That's the good thing about having this space terrain it opens up lots of new possibilities.

Some more thoughts on the planet screen; The hex grid is useful for adjacency bonuses and who knows me be used to govern troop movements of a planetary invasions screen [e digicons]:D[/e] . Visually though it is more distracting than a simple grid, but I think the monochrome and only drawing lines round usable hexes does reduce this acceptably. Generally the whole screen now looks clearer and less cluttered, a great improvement on the screen in the curr

I think it's looking much better and unlike ParagonRenegade I am a fan of the monochrome non-usable areas which I assume change as tech allows you to open up more of the planet.. If that makes me retarded I can live with that [e digicons];P[/e]

I like the big black hole at the centre of the galaxy idea hope they produce that scenario.

I agree that you should be able to form mining or millitary outpusts on or orbiting worlds you can't inhabit including gas giants. I don't think you should be able to inhabit for example gas giants unless that was the specific environment your race evolved for. I can see that a degree of variation in prefered planet type can work but there has to be enough overlap that races still compete over planets. For example species that evolved on a gas gian

[quote quoting="post"] The economy disc needs the ability to lock one aspect in place. This is the big disadvantage of this visualization over the 3 sliders. If I want to set my planet to be making a certain number of credits, I should be able to lock that in, then play with differing levels of research and manufacturing. [/quote] Not sure i can see why you would need to lock it just move the dot up until you get the number of credits you want then laterally to split

I do think it would be an issue for the game if each species did prefer different planet types, less competition for resources would mean less conflict to drive the game. Moo3 tried to go somewhat this way and we all know how that ended.

Does look like some sort of networking issue though from what you've posted "dhcp_proxy_script_adapter_fetcher_win.cc(265)] Error fetching PAC URL from DHCP: 2" Looks like an issue fetching a resource because of your proxy server to me. Could be wrong I work in system integration and used to work in general support but networking isn't really my specialism. But I do know what a proxy is and what a DHCP server does too. It's good