Lager_74

My thoughts. A new larger DLC should be focused on Diplomacy, Cultural and Trade. And in order to make these influences more valid War have to change. Each war have to fill a purpose, these ever going wars between civilisations that can´t reach each others has to go. Is the war to curb the Drengin perhaps the reason for war is to decrease their military strength with 25 %. Perhaps a reason for war is to eliminate one cultural space station, when it is gone

I like the demo but I think it is wrong for Galciv3. GC3 is about strategy for a whole civilization and as such there aren´t room for a more hands-on develoment when it comes to battles/invasions. This is as I understand it why SD left it out in space battles and why they probably will leave it out for invasions. On the other hand I think there are lots of other things they should add to the game both in the invasion and the space battles. 1. Aggresiveness setti

How about a larger turn around? Is the resource money/credits still important or could the game be improved by removing it instead? I would argue that the concept of what Money ($) is, is already built into the game as part of social construction (SC), military construction (MC) and influence (I). By removing $ from the game and making it possible make deals using SC/MC/I, the trade deals would be more interesting. Are you going to go for a deal that improves your tradepartners MC and

I really like this Changes and Think it will be a very interesting development. But I can´t help feeling that; Why didn´t you go all the way and kill off the building on planets? In this new direction it would have been plausible to accept that the Construction on planets are run by the administrators. As the prime leader you decide the focus of the planet rather than where the factories are to be placed.

If I understand the preview of 2.0 we will get a new resource called administrators and you need one for your starbase. So one way administrators might work is to force you making a choice between expansion or strong worlds, if you need administrators to colonize a world. Also they seem to have changed the distance between spacestations again making it possible to spam stations around worlds even more. But this is my speculation based on the previ

One thing I wonder about when it comes to less expansion is how to mine Durantium et cetera at a larger scale. I usually have quite a lot of mining resources and use them heavily in ships. A large AI civilization will be able to do this against me if I choose to play as a small empire. Also you have to consider all research-, production-, ascension resources et cetera. How are a small empire going to compete against large empires on these, if they can´t reach them?

I like your ideas. I don´t agree to A since I usually have tons of mines and I like the system of buying them. I like to pretend that I open up a new area and private mining companies move in. On the other side I totally agree with your B and C suggestions. But I would also suggest that the Logistics- and mass cost of the Tanker ship will be very high to make sure they are military weak making them fragile and high priority target.

I agree that in its current form alliances are useless. They are more or less another non-aggression pact. My suggestions to fix it would be the following: When the computer are considering war against a civilization they also consider the military strength of the allied. This way it will be possible for military weak civilizations to pursue influence and culture rather than military. But the computer also consider the military strength of its own allies because

As stated in the title I love to play GC3 but I have no interest what so ever to actually win the game. I play to enjoy building a galactic civilization and to interact with the other large- and small civilizations. In order to achieve this I have foregone all standard civilizations and made my own where expansion and military power are their bottom priority. In order to enhance my kind of gaming these are my suggestions. I am totally aware of that many of the suggestions probably are very ha

I want a Zone of Control for fleets. It might feel wrong since the space is so big that a fleet shouldn´t be able to block movement in a tile where they aren´t. But this is how argue for it. The turn based game is a way of bringing some kind of structure to movement that happens in real time. But in real time the movement of fleets would have to react or at least consider enemy fleets movements. Therefore you could consider in a turned based

zuPloed: Yes, but the change you suggest wouldn´t it only mean that the AI will still fill up its fleet with one size ship, not just the largest. The way I see it it just Changes the problem. And also, I guess if mixed fleets are used it would have to be incorporated so the players also are inhibited by it. In one way that could actually be a quite interesting extra problem for some players. Trying to find ways to put together the "best" fleet and having to mix sizes in it. Woul

That was a lot of text, but since I learned a lot from it, thank you. But as I read it I conclude that my topic is still valid but my fact where wrong. "When I see the fleets attacking me and all the ships in the fleet are battleships the game looses a sense of credibility." As you showned me a fleet made for battle can be all battleships, but as you implied in your text. Not all fleets would be fleets made for battle. There would be smaller fleets for s

Hello all. First of all, English is not my language so parts of this might be hard to understand. I´m a long time player of GalCiv and similar games and I must say that I enjoy GalCiv 3 and think it's a really good game. But there is room for improvement and one of them would be in fleet disposition. When I see the fleets attacking me and all the ships in the fleet are battleships the game looses a sense of credibility. I really would like the fleets to hav