Stalker0

I think my biggest problem with the sensor system as is if I only interact with it a few times a game. I build a few sonar ships, park them....and down. I never think about sensors again, I never touch them. Personally if we go that route, I would rather all ships and starbases get default sensor ranges based on your sensor tech, and then remove sensor components entirely. I might actually pick the higher sensor techs then:)

[quote who="Illauna" reply="41" id="3542157"] I'm sure Stardock would want feedback if their are any specializations that should not be. They should make you think. They should not have 1 must have and 2 no way in hell choices. [/quote] For anyone who wants to debate weak or strong tech specializations, here is the thread: https://forums.galciv3.com/463742/page/1/#3542017

I liked the old system, but I've made my piece. We do need to work on rebalancing the specializations though, as is there really isn't a choice for many of them to me.

Just wanted to give you a big kudos! Finding little typos is a thankless job.

[quote who="Illauna" reply="9" id="3542116"] Because they are much harder to destroy. [/quote] Nope, just stick your sonar ship inside the starbase. Now its as hard to get to as the starbase itself.

Correct me if I'm wrong, but is there any real difference between increasing max food and max pop? I would rather it be food then as that tracks better. Seeing pop higher than food just is unintuitive to me.

I know that kinetics fire faster than missiles....but overall yeah I think the missile prototype is awesome in comparison.

I reported this in my full comments thread, but I thought this one deserved special mention since I hadn't seen anyone else reporting. The AI's so far to me are pushovers in this version. They don't declare war, don't aggressively build mining bases, they are extremely passive in the last 2 games I've played, and that was on a tough galaxy. Anyone else notice this?

I will echo this bug, same problem.

General 1) Anomaly provides a +25% bonus to fleet range...seems like a big bonus! 2) Earthquakes event: Pragmatic and Malevolent Options seem too harsh (-25/50% growth is a pretty big penalty) 3) If a building or unit has 1 turn remaining to build, and a rush buy another thing, the 1 turn remains. I feel like it should build both things. 4) I think the new starbases might be just a tad too strong. I would rather see them grow a bit with each modu

So doing a quick check on the terran tech tree, as far as I can tell the specializations are EXACTLY the same as before. So I feel this thread still has value, so I'm bumping it.

I got a new one. Bring back the ability to click on a star and see how many planets (and inhabitable ones) are around the star. I so miss that from GalCiv 2!

[quote who="Nathan E" reply="41" id="3541090"] The game could be changed so that declaring war isn't needed for destroying starbases. It would cause a small diplomatic hit only. I think another 4x game uses this mechanic. [/quote] Endless Space used a "cold war" mechanic. Inside your borders, vessels in cold war with you could be shot with no penalty. Only with formal peace were the borders locked down.

[quote who="Frogboy" reply="26" id="3541074"] er, what core feature do you think 1.0 GalCiv III is going to be missing? The AI will certainly be feature complete. It'll be feature complete in beta 6. As for in game help system, I am afraid I don't know what you're looking for. There will be an in game tutorial. [/quote] I think we are all just getting ansy as all we have to go on is 5.3. Just get us 6.0 soon and w

AI settling planets smack dap in the middle of my territory = free planets for me through culture flip. Some additional ways to get ideology other than colonization. Way too many default ship templates every time I get a new tech. Making sure if the AI declares war of me early on they have fleets to back it up. I will get war declaration early in the game, and simply not care even against godlike AIs...as they don't yet have fleets that can kill my minimum starbase

[quote who="ForesterSOF" reply="11" id="3540944"] Listening to Paul they have a month of work to do in 3 weeks. I expect a very very tired Paul by launch. [/quote] Hehe, when I saw him on the Friday Dev Stream I went "how does that man have time for this, give him a nap!"

[quote who="Frogboy" reply="27" id="3540675"] Reminder: your areas of influence are NOT political boundaries Even though aliens and humans act like it is. Between human players and AI players complaining about trespassing I am glad we made it a United Plantes proposal (what you want is one of the UP proposals in game). [/quote] While True, I would argue that the region right around planets should be considered "sovereign territory". If the AI's starbases a

I don't have issue with the AI securing resources around the map, its just a difference resources strategy. I do agree with the idea that a colonized planet should exert some kind of "get off my lawn border" for starbases, as then those enemy bases don't just take resources, they prevent economic/cultural bases of my own.

I really like number 3, helps them scale up a bit better to stronger threats

Its also good for another balance pass. They won't change mechanics, but can change balance numbers.

The Hyperion Shrinker gives ships built using the planet a bonus to capacity. A few questions: 1) How does that work with multiple planets. If the planet provides just 1 mineral to the ship, and another planet provides the rest, do you still get the bonus? 2) How does the extra capacity help me? I get more mass, but how do I get the mass onto the ship?

I'll echo some concern, but also know that companies got to make the money and get the game out at some point, so....GOOD LUCK STARDOCK!!!! Go Gal Civ 3!!!

As the game is theoretically leaving beta soon, its probably the last chance to address any core issues with the game (its maybe past time but no time like the present) When I say core, I don't mean bugs, and I don't mean balance issues. For example, I think influence is too strong on small maps right now. That's a balance issue, easily addressed with some number tweaks. Core issues to me are areas where the game is "going in the wrong direction". The gameplay itse

[quote who="Surge72" reply="1" id="3539454"] Isn't this exercise a little pointless considering Paul said he is redoing them all for Beta 6? [/quote] Its a way of letting the devs know where we think the imbalances are at.

So in Beta 6, specializations have become exclusive, meaning that once you pick one, you can't go back and pick up the others. My biggest concern with this is tech balancing, in order for the system to be useful the choices must be very close in power. Else, people will choose the same ones over and over again. So I'm going to go through and rank the specializations as I see them currently. People are then welcome to chime in or completely disagree!