[quote] Tactical considerations work just as well on a flat map done properly - a simple projection map gives you everything you need in terms of spacial positioning, distance, etc. [/quote] Well, considering that on a round map one would be able to wrap around the planet, I don't think that a flat map would be able to take into account this real-life consideration.
[quote who="trims2u" reply="18" id="3463585"] And none of this addresses the issue that a flat surface map is superior in information presentation/density to a globe. Basically, a 3D globe gets you a whole lot of eye-candy, no features that can't be much more simply implemented on a flat surface, and a whole bunch of deficiencies the flat map doesn't have. I'm not against bling/eye-candy - heck, the whole "watch the ships circle the planet" view in GC2 when
@JoeBall23: Looking at the rest of the planet would be as simple as rotating the map. 3D models are certainly an issue, although I think that they would be a small one compared to the wholesale 3D update that Stardock has brought to the rest of the game. Further 3D models would have to be made for a whole line of Planetary Invasion techs, such as tanks, personnel carriers, ships, you name it. I don't gather what you mean by "direct interference in space battles". Space battles are
[quote who="econundrum1" reply="5" id="3463226"] I would like to see ground battles played out stratigicly over multiple turns on the hex based planet maps e.g. troop movements, zone capture that sort of thing. [/quote] Perhaps the 3D map idea suggested previously could form a part of this. It is unrealistic in terms of tactical planning to ignore the fact that planets are indeed spherical. Furthermore, the 3D map would allow for
Cool! I would love to see more tactical battle planning, so long as economic micromanagement can be reduced significantly. As far as that is concerned I would like to see more macroeconomic policy tools and fewer "build this factory on this tile" tools.
Well, so long as it is done cleanly to minimize micromanagement while adding new avenues for gameplay, I am okay with it. For this reason, having a race should give access to certain techs that are race-specific, having a culture should give access to culture-specific techs, and having foreign citizens should spread your influence to foreign lands but do not give techs. Other effects could of course be added, but as far as techs and racial abilities are concerned this should be the basis.
I like this idea a lot. Perhaps for more realism and to eliminate pentagons, we could make all tiles on planets triangles. These tessellate perfectly to form a geodesic dome. Furthermore, I hope that over time, the planetary map becomes larger in area and acquires a greater significance, especially with regard to planetary invasion. Planetary invasion shouldn't be a pure numbers game, it should be an interactive process that involves control over specific strategic areas on a planet and t
@DLWildcat: I would like to modify your idea slightly. There should be three sliders present for race, culture, and citizenship. Race would of course define how one would have to feed the population or what racial abilities one would have access to, while culture would be determined by the influence mix on a planet as modified by trade, conquests, etc. Citizenship would be more rigid than culture but would gradually tend to it; citizenship would determine how many residents would serve in the
[quote who="ParagonRenegade" reply="5" id="3461372"] Quoting Wer900, reply 4 It doesn't have to become over-complicated. Just create a race percentage counter and a distinct Civ-style cultural/citizenship counter. If these two percentages did not interact with each other in any way and/or it was assumed that citizenship by empire is uniformly distributed between races present as changed by some minor species-affinity modifiers, then a lot of problems will be resolved.<br
[quote who="ParagonRenegade" reply="3" id="3461351"] We've discussed this before, and it's generally accepted that this would get overly-complicated on the bigger maps with dozens of players and races. That being said, I would like this in some fashion.[/quote] It doesn't have to become over-complicated. Just create a race percentage counter and a distinct Civ-style cultural/citizenship counter. If these two percentages did not interact with each other in any way and
GalCiv3 Forums
Please delete this post, mods, I accidentally self-quoted from the previous one
GalCiv3 Forums
[quote who="ElanaAhova" reply="1" id="3461352"] There are some very interesting ideas here. Many deserve a close look, further development, and followup. One comment about your description of 'influence.' I never understood the area of influence to be an area of control. I saw it, rather, as the range the planet/starbase was able to effectively project its 'power/etc. The entire area (volume of space) is not filled with that planet/starbase '
It's a good idea to put citizen races. It would give more of an impression that we are living in a galactic community rather than merely playing a game.
A brief disclaimer first: I do not own the alpha of GCIII, having bought GCII Twilight of the Arnor mere days before the announcement of GCIII. However, I have seen videos of the GCIII alpha being played and believe that the following suggestions are still applicable. However, I believe that these suggestions would allow Stardock to make GCIII the best strategy game that has yet been devised. So far, GCIII looks excellent and has great potential. Not all of these ideas are entirely mi