Tony2488

Thanks for updating this

Nice. Will be adding this. Slowing tech progression would be a plus for me.

@stellioPaultos You're right. Buying a complete game these days is a tough challenge. One of the main differences here though, is, this is the same developer. Paul has made this his life's work, clearly. There is ownership, unlike other titles. This in my mind means there is a lot higher chance of this game being made into an actual good game....not just fun bits here and there, as it is now. This is similar to the situation with Starcitizen's Chris Roberts; whereas Chris

@mottikhan Whilst that may be true, please remember that we went through a long Beta, when many things were pointed out to the Devs. Paul did show us a play through a year ago and promised a large map play through later. This wasn't done to my knowledge. Many of these issues are fairly obvious when playing on larger maps for any length of time. Frustrations set in, as the OP points out. We can agree they are valid points.

[quote who="RobTzu" reply="10" id="3513710"] Compared to civ 5 the tech tree seems bland. But we make our own units in this game. [/quote] +1

Yes, I was wondering the same thing....there was nothing mentioned in the last dev stream which I thought strange. Keeping fingers crossed that it is in.

+1 for me too

+1 starting off with basics, then limiting when I could expand further with a certain pop level but at least allowing me to greater develope a planet over time, sounds a good compromise to me. Discussed on previous threads. Again, it's the let me expand a planet as I want, but make it restrictable over time/ tech, plot. So I need to focus on an increased population, to unlock further hexes after the required Tech is gained, including sea hexes for some improvements. But, I r

Yes, above 2 posts highlight my feelings - as explained previously in this thread. Some may go on to point out "this is GalCiv". But does it have to be?? A new game and all!!! Hopefully Dev's will read this thread. The same common gameplay issues keep emerging.

Paul said he will do a play-through of this BETA. I'm waiting to see if he too comes to agree with some of the same comments made during this thread.

Thanks. I understand that certain planets don't make it easy to terraform. On these huge maps though, an option to be able to terraform would be great....even if it means through the whole play-through of massive universes, just a handful can be done due to the time constraints and resources needed. It would add to the decisions and strategy for placement.

Yes, I play pretty rare inhabitable planets. But......what about all the uninhabitable ones? They are just there to be pretty? Surely if we are space travelers, we can plonk down pre-fab structures (ie class 1 planet) that can have a military installation (listening outpost, anti pirate base etc.) allowing for ships in orbit to defend/ refuel/ resupply . Or Terraform an uninhabitabl

[quote who="BimmyJimmy" reply="4" id="3502585"] Well written summary of what bothers me currently with Gal Civ 3, kestlstw. I do agree that it ist too early to judge combat but my biggest fear is, that it will be the same old "rock, paper, scissors" system without any real choices, other than defense and weapon type. I hope I will be proven wrong in december. Another thing i couldn't quite put my finger on were the tech trees and the "choices" they offered or rather did no

I agree with the comments here. As I posted a few days ago, the Techs just seem too easy, too frequent and could easily be changed to blocks of 5 % gains as described above. Not my choice, I'd rather see civ's getting way less total techs during a play through and having to specialise, being forced to make balances. As for the planets, yes not enough space for any of the unique buildings. Build a few farms, factories and science and that's it. Build up population. Ri

Techs seem to be too cheap - maybe just so we can test them in Beta. After about 100 turns in, Techs come along every few turns - I can send a newly built ship to an outpost say 6 moves away, and before it gets there I have new engines etc researched! I would prefer it if we chose a path through the Techs, but actually only got maybe 30 techs total in any one long play game so the choices are more carefully needed to be thought out. It doesn't seem t

[quote who="The_Gear" reply="11" id="3500253"] On the topic of Steam and your games. That's why you have them registered with us and that's why we've had registration in the games. When you've registered it with us, should Steam ever fail, we will still be here and will be able to get you your games. [/quote] There you go......no problems. I would be much more concerned that if in the future Stardock fails, and we don't get a GalCiv 4....5.....6!!!!!

Yeah, certainly should be considered IMHO. My only thoughts are for the excessive sized maps where zooming right out, you may not be able to pick what you were looking for......... 100,000's of hexes! But yes cleaner, and maybe save some horsepower under the hood - every little will help with the big maps!

No. Let's see what today's goodies bring to the table.

[e digicons]:pizza:[/e] You have way too much time on your hands!

^^ this please [e digicons]:thumbsup:[/e]