Should ships have special abilities or perks like in Elemental? How I think this would work is that you would attach "modules" onto ships like GC2. These would take up room or cost money. Alternatively building ships at a certain place could assign "perks" like the Nav Station for Arceans did in GC2.
A bit OT, but does that look like the green admiral's uniform from Star Wars for the Empire?
Interesting debate here. I think that given the size and scale of GC3, we're talking about a medium-sized project here. It's not Blizzard WoW-sized, but it isn't quite Indie studio sized either. Stardrive is an example of a 1-2 person show. This is a team of people. In general, I support the concept of "Valve time". That is - release quality software when its ready to be released, not in a rush. Software forecasting is hard and i
[quote who="Frogboy" reply="30" id="3435323"] The *plan* is for trade to be a bit more sophisticated than GalCiv II. One of the reasons is that we finally hired a full-time professional writer PLUS we have Adam Biessener (formerly of GameInformer) to provide us with a lot more, unique per race, dialog which will allow for conversation trees (i.e. different races will potentially be able to give you different, unique things depending on the circumstances and your dialog choic
Shogun 2 kind of solved this one with a phenomenon called Realm Divide where once you reached a certain point, all AI players would gang up on you.
[quote who="Alstein" reply="9" id="3445903"]High-quality small ships could work if the logistics were low enough, or as defenders, or if larger hulls had a high enough cost.[/quote] It really depends on if there's a need for such units towards the end of the game.
[quote who="EvilMaxWar" reply="4" id="3445900"]I agree with op that race/alignent specific government models could be a very interesting addition. It is in the same order of ideas as the race specific tech trees that I like so much in ToA[/quote] Each government in that case would have a unique set of advantages and drawbacks modified for each culture.
[quote who="The_Biz" reply="3" id="3445944"] in terms of the actual 4X genre and its original target audience, it has been downhill for quite a while, mainly because of there being negative progress since civ4/galciv2[/quote] This is my great fear. Civ V I think was a huge step backwards for the genre as a whole.
So does everyone here think that no changes are needed?
[quote who="RonLugge" reply="1" id="3445878"]Agreed. While it's likely that democratic societies are electing some planetary leadership once they get that ability, this still works if the central authority simply appoints someone (like a General) and that person leads the planetary government however he sees fit.[/quote] Yes, but take for example the Drengin. I don't think they'd have anything close to a "republic" or a "democracy". Mo
[quote who="EvilMaxWar" reply="5" id="3445856"] Quoting Tridus, reply 3 At which point we'll instead have people complaining about how small ships are useless once larger ones are researched. Isnt it already the case? In galciv 2, larger hulls always give you more bang for your buck. And obsolete ships do 0 damage to a properly defended ship, making it totally useless, Beside for military ranking in diplomacy. In my last game
[quote who="Gaunathor" reply="1" id="3445829"]In all seriousness, I really hope Frogboy's plan will fix this. It got really annoying sometime.[/quote] I think it'd be easy to cut down on ship spam. Just make the game so that it rewards larger more powerful ships and have the AI favor larger more powerful ships, decommissioning or upgrading the ones that get rendered obsolete by technology.
I was thinking, do you think that 4X games are still a potential growth opportunity in the future? It probably will never reach the point of say, WoW, or LoL, but seeing that GC2 has sustained some pretty impressive sales figures right into 2013 (and maybe 2014), do you think that the market for 4X games is growing rapidly these days?
[quote who="atlatea" reply="13" id="3445657"]I rarely spam henchmen, mostly by the time you can get all of them to useful level, the game is already decided. Although 2 or 3 commander henchmen with exp buff traits is insane to level either champion or units to insanely high level due to henchmen doesn't drain exp, they count as units to other normal champion. Unfortunately altar racial traits doesn't synergy with level, unlike Pariden or Magnar traits (they have single target spell th
In GC2 , we had a system where we started with Imperium, then upgraded to greater degrees of local freedom up to Star Federation in exchange for economic bonuses. For the "good" and maybe the neutral factions (some of them), it may make sense. But for others? - All of the good factions are probably democratic - Human may very well be democratic - Arcean? Sounds more like the Klingons from Star Trek; probably not demo
[quote who="Lucky Jack" reply="9" id="3445758"]So you are taking about the game, not what the real future may bring?[/quote] I think that if we look at the game descriptions of Terran, Altarian, and a few other of the "good" societies, a democratic society is very probable. By contrast, the Drengin are probably an autocracy or a military junta. Edit: I've opened up a thread on it: https://forums.galciv3.com/45222
Ah I see, so that makes sense. Thanks. Is there any way to convert the ship parts over?
[quote who="Lucky Jack" reply="4" id="3445627"] Quoting ElanaAhova, reply 3One might envision their sovereign as more of a lineage / ruling family. This is the first time I have seen anyone attempt to apply abstraction to any characteristic of the GC series. GC has many characteristics which must have abstraction applied to it before one can really get into the game. The idea that a single image on a map represents a single item is a huge stumbling block, as can be seen
Would GC3 benefit from a sovereign-like leader? You would pick your race, then you would design your leader, giving them traits. Then you would assign them onto a ship and that ship would get bonuses for housing your sovereign. As your empire expands and you build better ships, you could assign them onto more potent ships. They could also garrison planets for other bonuses.
[quote who="admiralWillyWilber" reply="1" id="3445361"] Well here what I would like to see changed in this area. I think that ships should gain abilities when they level up.[/quote] So are you suggesting "paths" or some other method? [quote who="WIllythemailboy" reply="2" id="3445388"] Quoting admiralWillyWilber, reply 1 Well here what I would like to see changed in this area. I think that ships should gain abilities when t
How much is the capability of ships going to scale in GC3? Will it still be a percentage? Or will it be something else? And how big are the gaps between tiny to huge (or the equal in GC3) going to be? What will the impact of miniaturization (if it exists still in GC3) be on those ship sizes? And finally how do you think GC2's ship design system should change? Personally, I'm not a fan of the pe
[quote who="anc40" reply="635" id="3445101"] One odd thing is although it doesn't allow you to have a Kingdom Quendar faction in the sovereign creator, it allows you to have an Undead Kingdom faction (which would seem rather contradictory). Strange, eh?[/quote] I think they're all interchangeable in the sovereign creator.
I think we need a dev to confirm or deny this.
Ah ... thanks. I understand now - so they do exist. Also, one issue I see is that it will depend on the resolution of the person's screen. I for example game at 2560 x 1440, so I could fit 13 such skills with no problem.
I'd have to agree with Joeball - perhaps that can be some how programmed into the AI? The point is, the AI can do something about it ... were it programmed to respond effectively.