GalCiv Dead?

Vince278 · June 26, 2003, 00:47

Correct me if I'm wrong but looking at the number of posts a day it seems to me that interest in GalCiv has died out faster than interest in MOO3. (Just an observation. Not trying to start something.

)

anofalye · June 26, 2003, 02:22

Hiya!

Well, for me it remain my top game for 1 week only, but MOO3 never been on top, no idea for others, yet...I will play this game for a LONG time, but here and there, not in a rush.

Are the chatty players representative of the many? Maybe the Metaverse can be of help to you, althought, I will never play there as long as I don`t find Masochist level just home to easy...there is no point in my crowding the place and lagging it and not shining, if I show up in metaverse, I will try to shine as much as possible!

Finarfin · June 26, 2003, 09:59

I played GalCiv exclusively for about a month but then interest in it just kind of faded for me. I can't put my finger on what it was, but it just seemed to lack some quality that kept bringing me back. In fact, I stopped playing it and started playing Civ 3 again, a game I never thought I'd be playing again. In fact, I'm even considering getting the expansions.

Romanus · June 26, 2003, 10:16

I bought GalCiv and MOO3 around the same time. While GalCiv was easier to get into and fun for a while, I always came back to MOO3. Once the patch was released, I have to say MOO3 is a more enjoyable experience for me. Still far from perfect, but a load of fun. A mod here and there, its fun. My main issue with GalCiv has been that it doesnt beg me to play it. Civ3 and MOO3 are addictive, GalCiv just isnt.

Romanus · June 26, 2003, 10:22

I will say this in defense of GalCiv.....most people are probably playing as opposed to posting about it. It didnt give users a fraction of the reasons to post that MOO3 or even early Civ3 did.....GalCiv was a much better product on release than the other two.0

Harry Seldon · June 26, 2003, 14:28

I like it. Too busy playing to post too much. I'm still around if someone has questions, though.

bonscott · June 26, 2003, 16:16

It's summer time. Between family outings and yard duties the time to play for me is far and few between. I still love the game though.

I've been itching to play Civ 3 again though. Been about 6 months since I touched it which has been a good layoff for me. I'll probably get it's expansion.

Kuciwalker · June 26, 2003, 19:41

I don't have any suggestions for stuff to add, because it's already perfect

(well... almost)

Kuciwalker · June 26, 2003, 19:45

WAIT! I found one!

When you are Close with another civ, and you give them a gift, the first word of what they say is "You", but the 'o' is capitalized

As in one game I kept having to give back this city that kept flipping to me that I didn't want, I noticed this a lot

Actually, that is an important suggestion: let you "rebuff" the rebels when a system flips, like you can in civ3. This way trade routes don't get destroyed.

ravagon · June 27, 2003, 01:03

Quote:

Originally posted by skywalker

When you are Close with another civ, and you give them a gift, the first word of what they say is "You", but the 'o' is capitalized

Bah! Critics ....

I'd like to see your first attemt at translating Drengin.

Vince278 · June 27, 2003, 02:22

Quote:

Originally posted by Romanus
I bought GalCiv and MOO3 around the same time. While GalCiv was easier to get into and fun for a while, I always came back to MOO3. Once the patch was released, I have to say MOO3 is a more enjoyable experience for me. Still far from perfect, but a load of fun. A mod here and there, its fun. My main issue with GalCiv has been that it doesnt beg me to play it. Civ3 and MOO3 are addictive, GalCiv just isnt.

Thats about how I feel. I'm still playing MOO3 and will probably go back to Civ3 afterwards if something else doesn't comes along. The next game I expect to buy will probably be UFO Aftermath (currently due out Dec 2003).

bonscott · June 27, 2003, 09:48

I usually check all my regular message boards at least once a day. I have noticed in the past week or so a marked decline in messages on the galciv.com forum. Used to be at least 2 pages of posts within the past day. Now there isn't even half a page.

I'll bet it's just summer and many of the kids and colleage students that played a lot are outside doing stuff (imagine that) and thos "older" players have families.

Or maybe the game is indeed getting old for some people. Who knows. I'm sure the expansion pack will breath more life into it later this summer.

Harry Seldon · June 27, 2003, 10:10

Look at the other Poly forums, too. The only forum groups with any activity are OT and RON.

LDiCesare · June 27, 2003, 17:45

What made Galciv have a lot of posts was, I believe, the constant tuning and ai improvements made by Stardock. Now, we have to wait for the Xpack. If you look at galciv.com, you'll see many posts were about the scoring system, some bugs/behaviours which have been fixed or are better known, so there are less people posting about that kind of topic.

I think there is, however, a decrease in the attraction galciv has upon us players. To me, the reason is twofold: Replayability and Difficulty.
Despite all the hype, Galciv has a rather average replayability. You can choose tiny, average or big maps (with variations), more or less clusters and starting abilities, but this only gives a dozen different map types, with the corresponding strats.
About difficulty: the maso level is too hard even for the best players (maybe not to be won, but to be enjoyed) while crippling is piece of cake for the same.

The library, which adds 'mods', actually only new scattered events or techs doesn't help much because you can't do real mods like what's been done in CtP2 (some hard coded stuff, the research path of the ai and a few abilities like getting diplomacy...) nor scenarios like in civ2.

I still play the game, but not as much as I used to, but am eager for the expansion pack to get out.

vee4473 · June 27, 2003, 20:11

I was going to say that one drawback to galciv's customization is that it lacks what a land based game like civ has...the ability to choose islands/continents ect...

But then I thhought that galciv's options for custers and stars tries to compare.

Meaning that maps with few stars could be compared to an island map in civ.

anyway, after thinking about that, I realized that the graphics and combat are what I have a problem with.

I like the game and I really think it looks good, but as I have said before in other posts, I seem to have a gene in my body that tells me "space games must have luscious graphics and tactical combat!"

I understand that many will read this post and say "blasphemy!, gameplay rules over graphics everytime!"

My last word for now is that I am starting to think that even though this type of combat works in civ, for me, I just love the tactical combat in a space game.

It's a sticking point.

Kuciwalker · June 29, 2003, 11:48

What could really boost replayability is terrain. Nebulas, giant asteroid fields, etc. covering 10-20 tiles or more. Also, "jump routes" or something that are faster to travel on. And permanent wormholes would be cool.

asleepathewheel · July 1, 2003, 09:01

GalCiv had some good ideas, but I find it to be quite boring. Perhaps the latest patch would help me, as I think it has increased the stars. I find the lack of space combat to take away from the game as well.

DarkCloud · July 2, 2003, 20:57

Just wondering... if GalCiv has an expansion pack- will it include a map editor?

Hydro · July 3, 2003, 13:45

I've gone back to Moo3, which I find to be richer and more interesting now that some of the critical bugs have been fixed.

Hydro

Vince278 · July 4, 2003, 23:48

Quote:

Originally posted by Hydro
I've gone back to Moo3, which I find to be richer and more interesting now that some of the critical bugs have been fixed.
Hydro

Agreed.

peterfharris · July 8, 2003, 01:53

Although I enjoy GalCiv I see it as having some shortcomings.

1. There are too many improvements that should not be built so there is not that much scope to improve your planets (if you build much you drive yourself into the ground). It seems silly having such useless improvements in the game, it spoils it for the new players who can't understand why they are getting into so much trouble when they have done such a good job of improving their holdings.

2. The AI place too much emphasis on the military strength graph. The Drengin and the Altarians are so utterly predictable if the have any military advantage, they instantly try to bully no matter what. Diplomacy has far too much emphasis on constant bullying and extortion.

3. The destabilisation is so utterly overpowered it comes very close to ruining this game. Just spend a few bucks a turn and wait while your victim gradually builds itself into a deep financial hole and falls behind in tech, might as well just cheat. Conversely it really hurts when the AI uses destabilisation.

4. It is pointless trying to get a significant tech lead when minors pop up all over the place with all of your tech so every AI can instantly extort that tech. It is rarely possible to eliminate that minor the very same turn and the extortion starts instantly.

5. Trade is far too important and can be inflated excessively by starbase spamming. I tried a game without trading and it was a gruelling poverty stricken game in which my planets could barely pay their own way whereas with starbase enhanced trade I always have loads of cash.

This game has some very significant strengths but I predict it will fade into oblivion for the above reasons. I have found that I need to mod my game heavily and I have only had the game a short time.

anofalye · July 8, 2003, 06:15

Yup yup, you are right.

I would add there is to much "random", 1 game you are so overpowering from your start, the next you are so hopeless, all is pure random, so usually if you get a "decent" game, you might have 2 others empire to watch, never 4.

tetleytea · July 11, 2003, 17:07

As a fan of Heroes of Might & Magic series, I agree about there not being enough terrain. Give me tons and tons of it.

What I'd like to see are resources on sub-class-14 planets; not just starbase resources. I should have to colonize a class-1 planet to get that military bonus. Give them rare "trade goods" that make me want to plan my trade routes through their sector so I'll make more money. Let's put asteroids inside of star systems that have stuff. Give all the aliens different unique ships that do weird stuff--not just have attack/defense/hp/speed stats.

I disagree, though, about there being too many improvements you shouldn't build. If that's a problem, don't build it! So what if a Propaganda Center is worth building 2% of the time. That's better than 0%.