alfandtot

I agree with tesb. Unintuitiveness, micromanagement-chore if you want max. efficiency and too quick switching (e.g. from 100% focus on production to research in 1 turn) spoiled the game for me*. My suggestion (easy fix proposal): make the production-wheel a percentage-modifier like starbase-modules of buildings, which are free ... So from the start you can have like +100% for one area (like production), or +50% for science and production or ... you get the picture. May

The last two days I played a game of the opt-in to beta 1 in a large galaxy setting and want to share some observations. Bug 1: Shipyard crash In mid game, having 20-30 planets, I could not add sponsors to shipyards any more - the game would crash every single time for any shipyard I went to and clicked "add sponsor" in

Glad to hear, the step wise vs continuous bonus system of planet approval got brought up! Please make it gradual and not with those crazy big steps and thresholds in between. Also relieved, that the problem of planets' excess production at the end of a planetary improvement or ship got mentioned. After fixing it, please make that transparent to the player: The progress bars on the main screen (right side) go all the way to empty once a new build

exactly my thoughts, androshalforc . if they are unhappy, that THEIR planet is not producing wealth, but is sponsored by the empire, than by that logic pure wealth planets should also be unhappy because they don't manufacture or research anything and are thus dependent on the empire and other planets. makes no sense, to penalize (research/production) or favo

Thank you Lucky Jack - I also play in windowed mode and will try your work-around, thanks. @ androshalforc: the snaky movement is another issue, but to partly "fix" it by going far off course from the direct line of

bump

Four simple ideas for improving ship movement on the main screen: 1. Highlight the hex when a ship in that hex is selected. If my view is zoomed out and the "idle ship" prompt appears I don't readily see which ship I have selected, if there are several in the center of my screen. 2. Ship pathing creates cruxes. If for instance I want to go in "east/south-east" direction it first takes the ship straight to the east all the way and then south-east till it reaches the destina

I don't like two aspects of the current approval-system: 1.: The discontinuous effects, i.e. +50% Bonus for 100%, +40% for 95%-99% approval and so on. I would rather have the bonus be continuous, like approval-percantage minus 50%. You would get bonuses for influence and population growth between +50% to -50%. The problem with the discontinuous, step-wise system is for me, that incentivizes heavy micromanagement (adjust wealth on every other turn to be just above the thres

There were some unintuitive moments during my first game and I thought I'd give feedback now, because otherwise I'll get used to it or find work-arounds and don't notice these "issues" later on. But new players might be having the same difficulties as me, so here it comes: 1. Happiness-Wealth-System - micromanagement hassle: Don't like the constant (nearly every turn for all colonies) adjusting of the sliders on a per-planet basis to keep happiness at 100% or 50%, but

I do not understand two of the criticized points about a one-queue building approach: 1. realism: of course you wouldn't build just one thing on a planet at a time, but instead of having 1,324,980 Industrial complexes, 349,000 science labs, 2 Million farms etc. building at the same time, the GAME abstracts this into "one farm" etc. A ship is kind of a "mega-project" and it means that the focus of the planet is on that project at the time of its construction (other things get

I like all of the presented changes VERY much! Population as the basic factor for colony output, the "center of gravity" aka production wheel with population either generating production, research or money, the ability to control this setting for individual colonies if one likes, the one building queue for infrastructure and ships, getting rid of some units where necessary etc. All of this is straight forward and will make the game more intuitive for new players and less

Thank you for your for your opinions (and the kind words you put them in), I really appreciate it. As I admitted, more realism does not necessarily equate to more fun in a game. However, in GC2, the possibility to "fine tune" production/research times (adjust sliders, so that things juuuuust got finished) led to tedious micromanagement that was no fun for me. Why, you ask, do that? It was because "left over" production/research was wasted. You actually had to pay for the full producti

Thanks for the feedback so far. In response to some questions I want to elaborate the reasoning behind the mechanic and then I have a question to DARCA1213. Renney77, you are right, its about funding, not workers—but what does that money buy? It allows the allocation of larger amounts of the best materials for the projects you are funding, with the money you can re-purpose facilities and hire the smartest people. In short, you determine what

What I always found fascinating was inertia in economies. If a society has a dominant industrial sector, it can't switch to "knowledge society" overnight. It was puzzling to me, that focus in GalCiv II could be switched so quickly - it's like everybody goes to work in a factory today and tomorrow they work in a research center. It should IMHO be a smother transition and take some time, depending on the magnitude of the change. The "research-wheel" with its granul