Why are you putting GalCiv aside?

[peterfharris]

This question is addressed to those of you who have either already stopped playing GalCiv or are heavily modding it.

I have been modding my GalCiv very heavily because it is a game with great potential but with the maintenance cost of improvements so overpriced there is very little worth building on most planets with the consequence that the game became "boring". It came down to: build a few basic improvements, build wonders and trade goods, build the fleet you can afford to support, then build starbases (full up with trade modules) and spam space with them. Keep the people happy by loading them into transports (yes, really people prefer to be crowded into transports rather than sunning themselves on a lovely planet!)

There were no "what should I build now?" choices. About the only building choice that came up was "should I build soil enrichment or a bank first?".

Oh, and destabilisation is my pet hate. I never use it because it is too overpowered and I hate it when it is used against me.

Your thoughts?

[Harry Seldon]

I do think that research is kind of a lock. There are very few deviations I ever take. It'd be nice if there were some competition between techs.

[Romanus]

I modded GalCiv mainly to increase the pace of the game. I dont want a game that I can play in an hour, but I dont want it to drag out forever either. Thats the main reason I shelved it for a while. I just didnt like the pacing of the game.

Currently, it plays the way I like it, and im enjoying my current game. I've kept the Carnoids(I think) alive for most of the game now by providing warships and money. Another race surrendered to someone else to spite my takeover attempts....that is classic gaming I must say.

I think my off and on again with GalCiv has been due to playing MOO3 and RFTS at the same time. All fun but very different.

[vee4473]

I have put it aside now and then not because I don't like it, but for the same reason all other games see down time.

There is just too much that I want to do as well as too many games to play, so some of them have to take the hit.

[vee4473]

Also, if I may say so, I think that Galciv plays so much like civ (in terms of research and "you have to build this in order to get that") that I find criticism of Gal civ's gameplay by civ lovers to be ....well, a bit hypocritical.

I do however, believe that Galciv can leave a less than appealing taste in a civ lovers mouth after a while only because Galciv seems to have a sort of "flatness" about it...

Even though Civ had the same type of repetitive research/build gameplay going on, it had a more alluring quality to it...

I'm wondering if the lack of "tile management" has anything to do with it.

I mean, in civ, you could found a city on partially poor terrain, but then improve 20 individual squares to suit your own play goals.

In Galciv, you found a planet of class X, and that's it really... it ends there for the most part...

Unless I am missing something.

I'm starting to think that maybe this is the missing link in galciv.

[DarkCloud]

vee- galciv and civ do have a lot in common. but civ has more things going for it;

1. tile management, like you said. the planets can't really harvest things outside of their initial square or be improved past their originality.

2. civ had history; we know about these nations and we know how they shoudl be played and we know these unitws- therefore it is interesting and ifnormative to play civ!

3. civ had a lighter color scheme. atmosphere adds to a game...

4. civ actually had more options; because there were roads and improvements for transport; you cuold move troops across and play out each game in a different way.

5. civ II had a scenario editor

6. civ II had a map editor

7. civ II's random maps actually vary much mroe than galcivs random maps. the maps are much more interesting in that they have different terrain about them.

8. the tech tree, though it was quite linear- actually played much better because of the distances between civs- because of terrain and moement, civs wouldn't get into conflict as fast and people could upgrade their civs more on the BUILD side than the CONQUEST/TRADE side (that is necessary for galciv's early games) *especially in small maps*

8. and some other stuff that I forgot to mention including UNIT EDITORS! But at least galciv has event editors

[Draginol]

This is really good feedback, btw.

[peterfharris]

Originally posted by Draginol
This is really good feedback, btw.

Please do not take this thread the wrong way. It is intended to be constructive. BTW I think I got very good value for money when I bought your game (I don't want to admit how much time I have spent playing it).

There are just a few things that become increasingly offputting in an otherwise first rate game.

1. I would love to be able to disable destabilisation.
2. The tech research path is something of a lock as Harry Seldon mentioned
3. You get a planet class X and that is about it as vee4473 mentions. The planets you are lucky enough to start near are so very important because there is not much you do to develop them and too often you are better off not developing them because of the high maintenance cost of improvements! I would like a game in which I could eventually turn some useless world into something very good (as in Master of Orion 2 I could turn a large, barren, ultrapoor world into something that really contributes to the empire)
4. The regular appearance of minors with all of my tech militates against a tech strategy because I know the other majors are going to immediately extort "my tech" the very turn that minor appears. They will continue extorting until I can get a transport over to that minor. Result is that there is not much point trying to get a significant tech lead.
5. The diplomacy emphasises military strength too much, excessive reliance on extortion and bullying.
6. Due to limited number of planetary improvements and high maintenance costs I find my planets usually can't even pay their own way! I need huge trade revenues to subsidise my planets!

Despite all of the above I still recommend this game.
(Oh, and I too would pay for a map editor, hint, hint).

[DarkCloud]

Originally posted by Draginol
This is really good feedback, btw.

Thanks.

and thanks for reading it. that makes all the difference- it's good to know that i'm not just typing away randomly- even if 1/2 the stuff I write is probably idiotic as you would know better than anyone...

[Harry Seldon]

5. The diplomacy emphasises military strength too much, excessive reliance on extortion and bullying.

I don't like this either. I've never been able to win with Pacifism. You have to be able to crush other civs for them to leave you alone or form treaties with you.

6. Due to limited number of planetary improvements and high maintenance costs I find my planets usually can't even pay their own way! I need huge trade revenues to subsidise my planets!

The only way around this I've found is to not build ninety percent of planetary improvements. I only build money makers at first, then wonders, then antimatter power. If I get far enough ahead I'll go back and build the fusion plant (way too expensive early for too little benefit). I find that positive cash flow means better morale and can be a better boost than most any of the social improvements.

[tetleytea]

I put down Galciv to play Rise of Nations. I really need to be done with a game in an hour. I'd like to get into Galciv and really beat it on Maso every time, but real life calls.

Plus, the expansion pack is nice (and free), but it's not really up to par with typical expansion packs. More like a good patch. Usually expansion packs have a new race, new ships, new buildings, etc..

[Draginol]

Originally posted by tetleytea
Plus, the expansion pack is nice (and free), but it's not really up to par with typical expansion packs. More like a good patch. Usually expansion packs have a new race, new ships, new buildings, etc..

What expansion pack have you played lately? Looking at the packs for HOMM IV, Warcraft III: Frozen Throne, Age of Mythology: Titans, etc. None of these add new races. Just a few new units typically and some scenarios.

The GalCiv epxansion pack is in BETA. That means not all the new stuff is in it yet. Adding ships and buildings is trivial compared to adding things like waypoints, hyperlinking, etc. We can add new sips and buildings without loading up the compiler.

The final GalCiv expansion pack will add more planetary improvements, ships, wonders, events, techs, etc. But those are a lot easier to do than the stuff we've done so far.

I can't think of any free patches in any game I've played that have added as much as we've added post-release let alone what's in the expansion pack beta already.

[Romanus]

Draginol is absolutely correct. I cant wait for the expansion pack.
Interestingly enough, this very thread caused me to start playing GalCiv again, and now im really enjoying it. In fact...I think GalCiv is a game that really needs to be played a lot to appreciate. I kept going thru these stages where I played MOO3 for a while, then GalCiv, then I got RFTS....I finally put them all aside and focused on GalCiv.

I think that in the future, the ability to play other races and maybe some variety in ship designs, or a little more control over them, would be awesome. But for now, it really is a fantastic game. I think what sold me more than anything else, this time around, was when I started paying attention to the politics.....there really is a lot going on. I find that the diplomacy is easily as good and enjoyable as Civ....better than MOO3.

I hereby retract any previously negative comments I may have made and recommend GalCiv to all.

Plus, the support for the game is over the top....best ive seen in a while.

[LDiCesare]

There is little replay value in the sense you always face opponents who force you into the same military rush strategies at the highest difficulty levels. Most techs are useless because you have to find frigates and have little time to spend somewhere else, so you'll either use these techs as trade fodder or conquer them, but they will never give you much of an advantage as everyone else will have them too. If you focus on non military techs, you'll probably get bashed.
That and the Yor are quite useless.
I'd actually fully mod the game if I could be sure I can replace tech effects for diplomacy/yellow star detection/alliance etc. and if I didn't know the ai would collapse because they research a tech tree based on predefined tech numbers (so I'd have to start my techs at a weird number). The lack of a map editor doesn't help.

[Chronus]

Vee and DarkCloud bring up a good point about tile management. For me, this aspect of the Civ series has always been a fun addition to the game. Of course, if you are the warmonger, you may see it as a form of unnecessary micromanagement.

Tile management is simply another non-military task that us "Peace-builders" can enjoy. Think of it, how many non-military units do we have in TBS games? We have Settler/Worker/Colony units, Trader/Caravan units (sadly, the caravan unit is gone in Civ 3), and Transports (which have a primarily militeristic role). Civ 1 and 2 had Diplomat/Spy units. Out of all of these non-military units, only the Settler/Worker has multiple economic tasks . . . sheer heaven for the peace-builder .

Anyway, I still enjoy GalCiv a lot, in spite of my realization that tile management will not make it into the game.

[Draginol]

Chronus, the star bases allow you to do a lot of the same kind of thing.

[Master Marcus]

Well, I intend to stay on board as long as I can and I'm still in. Can't wait for the final release of the expansion, and it's good to hear that the ''nicer and most wanted'' stuff - though not fully implemented yet in the beta - is the easiest to code later on.

Though I'm still enjoying GalCiv, I have one gripe: the AI does not declare war on the player too often - and never in my games when I'm dominating. When I'm ranked number one, military and all, the AI opponents let me undisturbed and the later stages of a typical game can be quite boring - like any other TBS except CivIII. Yes, in CivIII the AI cheats but at least it can be quite of a military challenge even on normal diff levels like Regent. I win regularly at GalCiv's Painful without being challenged. But I'm doomed at Crippling, since I'm always behind the AI. So my ideal wish is that the AI can declare war on the player - either dominating or behind - by some forged alliances if needed, and also adjusted gaps between the diff levels.

[vee4473]

Since Brad is checking in on this thread kinda frequently, i'll ask a question that I have asked in the past.

Are there any plans to add a zoom function to the main play map?

Now, THAT, would be appreciated.

[Chronus]

Chronus, the star bases allow you to do a lot of the same kind of thing.

Agreed. But it's not the end result I'm looking at here. It's the how I get there.

I'm very tempted to classify Constructors and Traders as "buildings" as opposed to "units" because once they're built, you really don't derive any benefit from them until after they "perish" (i.e. they are integrated into a starbase or turned into a trade route). And of course, once they "perish" they are no longer a "unit" that you control. It's almost as if they are a mobile type of "building". This seems true with most TBS equivalents such as Caravans.

However, the Worker units in Civ 3 (Settlers in Civ 1 & 2) are the only true, economy-oriented units that I know of in any TBS game (granted, that ain't much ). They have multiple tasks to perform (build mine or roads, clear forest or pollution) and they do not perish (except when attacked or disbanded . . . consequently, they need to be protected). I suspect that for many "peace-builders", who feel flooded with a bajillion units used for military purposes, workers/settlers are a dream come true. Alas, a common and vitally important NON-MILITARY unit to move around and do things with .

Silly? I suppose . . .

Anyway, I'm looking forward to the expansion pack.

Are there any plans to add a zoom function to the main play map?

I'm just curious . . . how does that greatly enhance your enjoyment of the game?

[peterfharris]

I agree with the above comments on workers and tile management and would like a another closely related point.

On of the things that gave the Civ series that "just one more turn" quality is that there were always choices to make and one often could not be sure that one had made the best choice.

By way of illustration: At the beginning of a Civ game one must not only choice which tiles to work first but also what improvements should be made to each tile and the sequence of those improvements whilst being careful not to waste any turns needlessly moving ones worker. On top of that there was also the question of whether or not one should build a granary first so one can pump out more settlers later. Also the problems of whether or not to build military units first, if so, how many and should I keep some on city defence or send the lot out exploring. Choices, choices. Even the best players have debates about these things.

OTH At the beginning of a GalCiv game there is but one choice. Ramp up military spending to between 70% to 100%, put the balance to research, ramp up spend rate to 100% and spam space with colony ships. There appear to be no debates about this strategy, the only differences of opinion are about the percentage to go to military.

A bit later in a Civ game one has choices about building sequences. Some cities should build a barracks ASAP and others never need a barracks. Should I build a market first or a temple or a barracks or perhaps a wonder or something else.

In a GalCiv game the decisions are easier. For most planets you build soil enrichment, banks, habitat, economic exchange and perhaps entertainment network unless you load the unhappy people on transports. That is about it until rather late in the game when things like stadium become available. A few big planets build a lot of improvements. Why, because most things are not worth building in most places.

[peterfharris]

DIPLOMACY.

Extortion pays off too handsomely in GalCiv. Astonishing what a few early starfighters can get.

The extortion is so "extortionate" and so repitive that I automatically refuse to pay no matter what because I know there will be further outrageous demands in the very near future.

The AI seems to declare war without considering the strength of the allies of its intended victim. My current game is a typical case. The Arceans are repeatedly attacking my very weak ally, the Arvinidians. I am stronger than the Arceans, so are each of my other allies the Carinoids, the Alexians and the Scotlingas. We are locked in a cycle, Arceans attack, allies rapidly destroy Arcean fleet, make peace, Arceans attack.

Also it is pointless to pay (or bully) someone to stop fighting someone else. They start fighting again the very next turn. It is clear that each AI reviews the galactic situation each turn to see who is weak enough to push around, no consideration is given to recent events.

It seems counterproductive to ally with more than one major (or to ally with a major and a minor) as, sooner or later, they are quite likely to fight each other. I suggest an EU2 type of alliance system in which anyone who joins an alliance must also ally with ALL members of the alliance. This would make it much harder to get more than one ally, perhaps exorbitant payments to get them to ally could be made. At the moment, allying with other majors is the sort of thing one would only do on the very last turn to get a diplomatic victory.

New minors are treated as nothing more than punching bags. They start with all of my technology and only survive until they have given it all away as extortion. This may have been put in as a "game balancer" however it militates against a tech lead strategy. You work hard to get a big tech lead, a minor appears, every AI civ Civ instantly says gimme, the minor dishes out your hard earned tech lead. Sure, you can invade the minor but that takes some time to get your transport to his system, extortion starts the turn the minor appears.

I would like new minors to have a lower tech level to avoid this problem and I would like them to have some capacity to defend themselves.

BTW I do think GalCiv is, overall, a most excellent game despite all of my comments. (I play it too much).

[peterfharris]

More ranting about extortion and alliances.

I note that if one is at war against an alliance then one enemy may pay you for peace then, next turn, declare war because you at war with their ally. A few turns later they offer to pay you some more for peace. This peace/war cycles then continues. One may finish up receiving ludicrous benefits from such a war.

This cuts both ways. If I have a weak ally it will go into this cycle with my opponent.

This could be fixed by having the entire alliance make peace all together. Any tributes received could either be dished out by the alliance leader or by an AI routine. (Europa Universalis 2 has an excellent alliance model for making peace). Any AI considering an attack on an alliance member should consider the strength of the entire alliance.

To prevent human abuse of alliances it may be desirable that alliances are defensive only so allies need not support me if I start a war (and I need not support an ally that picks a fight). Also, if the spoils are to be distributed by the alliance leader then it seems desirable that the alliance leader be the civ that was attacked, not necessarily the biggest civ or the human civ.

[anofalye]

*giggles*

You should be able to establish a protectorate as well over minor powers (or vanishing use to be major).

Once under a protectorate the power cede all diplomatics to you, they have no official major politic toward anyone else. They might be able to do stuff, but NOBODY should be able to declare them WAR without declaring you war as well. Maybe they should have to pay a small derisive tribute(should not be major), give you some research points and gain 1 of you old tech every many turns, so they are always backward technologically, yet, they help you a little and you give them old tech...eventually. This is not like conquering, it is in between conquering and freedom. Also someone under a protectorate should received all your "influence"(in addition to their own) to resist others empires "influence" and get also an awfull amount to resist your own empire influence and not revolt to become fully member at the first occasion, as they developp a sense of working within without been really part...

You can even complexify the thing by making mutliples step of assimilation. 1- Foreign minister 2- tech sector 3- economic 4- social(complete, it actually is part of yourself like any other place, no matter the official titles)

Anyway, just an idea...but I would love to make it possible that others understanda message like: "Those are under my direct protection, like any of my planet, so...if you wanna bring it, sure" Now, they act like grade 3 retards that can`t understand big brother will not like if you beat his little brother...Often I find myself at war with another empire just to protect a minor (yes, it is to profitable for me to abandon the minor).

And...a tech relative value should be based on how many have it...a tech that everyone but you have, is worth a LOT less in trade, as you will eventually get it, everyone have it...on the other hand, a tech only 1 person have should have a much better value.

[Master Marcus]

Originally posted by anofalye
*giggles*

You should be able to establish a protectorate as well over minor powers (or vanishing use to be major).

You can even complexify the thing by making mutliples step of assimilation. 1- Foreign minister 2- tech sector 3- economic 4- social(complete, it actually is part of yourself like any other place, no matter the official titles)
And...a tech relative value should be based on how many have it...a tech that everyone but you have, is worth a LOT less in trade, as you will eventually get it, everyone have it...on the other hand, a tech only 1 person have should have a much better value.

--I like the protectorate idea, that should be definitely considered for a second XP, but GalCiv - still a deep strategy game - has simplified tactics mechanisms so I don't think we should suggest too much of complexified details like assimilation steps - as much I would like it, overdetailed social engines for complex TBS doesn't fit for GalCiv - I'm sure Brad want to keep it affordable for the mass of gamers. For details and complexity, we can always try for a SMAC 2....

--your tech relative value, if its like in CivIII, yes, that should be it and also upon the map size/abundance of good planets.

[peterfharris]

Yippee!

Just saw an update over at the GalCiv forum about some expansion thingy. Some of the stuff is in there.
And goodies.

[Master Marcus]

yes, it's mentioned also that the final release should be SEPTEMBER.

[tetleytea]

HOMM IV Expansion pack: HOMM IV sucks, and New World laid off most of their development staff, so HOMM IV expansion isn't up to par either.

HOMM II & III expansion packs: these rule. New races, lots of new units, new campaigns. And just when you thought HOMM III was dead, here comes HOMM III:Shadow of Death. Woo woo!

Command & Conquer/C&C Red Alert Expansion packs: new nationalities, new units, units shuffled around between races. But not as well-balanced as the originals. About on par with what I look for in a paid-for expansion pack.

Civ II & III: new civs, expansion pack makes multiplayer possible. On par.

Warlords II & III: new races, new units, map editing, new artifacts. On par.

Warcraft II & III, Starcraft Brood War: no new races, but new units, new campaigns, well-balanced. So maybe below par but I'm not complaining.

Empire Earth: Original: good. Expansion: sucks.

Real War: They call this a game?

Diablo II XP: Expansion pack absolutely rules, and it has new character classes (the equivalent of a new race).

Ultima Online: expansion packs open up new maps and add more stuff, and they FINALLY introduced non-PK shards. So on par, but UO sucks to begin with. Stick with Everquest.



When I mentioned I thought the Galciv expansion wasn't on par with other expansion packs, that was strictly based on the feature set I saw listed for the beta, and disregarding the price. If Galciv were a paid XP, I'd probably expect a new alien race, new race bonuses, new ships, and particularly for Galciv new difficulty levels. Like maybe split up "Crippling" into "Paraplegic" and "Quadraplegic". Also I'd probably expect some new terrain feature, like you have stars, anomalies, starbase resources, and....?

[Draginol]

The problem I think we have here is that you seem to view new races and ships as somehow being a big deal. I can only assume you haven't played the GalCiv:XU beta.

Throwing in a new race, for instance, takes less than a minute. A major racew ould take slightly more work due to artwork. New units? Trivial. A text file with some graphics.

On the other hand, adding in way points, a tech tree navigator, and hyperlinkging info all over the place required significant new programming.

Put another way, creating more of the same (more units or aliens) is a copy and paste type effort. Putting in an integrated way point system required real effort.

Same for Scenarios. Stardock developed one of the Starcraft add-ons - Starcraft Retribution and doing new campaigns and scenarios was astonishingly easy. They are basically saved games.

Strategy First is interested in us doing a GalCiv Gold at some point which will have new stuff beyond the expansion pack IF we do it (not sure yet). So at that point we can revisit things and see what sorts of things beyond GalCiv: Expanded universe people want.

[LDiCesare]

Brad, I agree with you that the features added in the XP are more than things that could be modded in. Plus you add new ships, if I remember well (I don't have the beta). But in order to mod it correctly, there are a few things that Galciv needs: A map editor would be nice for scenario design, and some tweaks in the tech tree so that a modder could design new techs which are handled correctly by the ai:
Right now, new tecsh won't be researched by all alien races because the tech ID is not on the ai's list (f.e. Arceans if I got it right). Removing all techs so that the list starts finished, adn putting all the new techs afterwards screws the game because there are some techs which have a special effect which doesn't appear in the tech files (seeing yellow stars, ability to diplomacy, alliance, change government).
Plus I'd like a feature for the ai that I'll post on the galciv board too to be sure it gets read: Allow different ai's tech researches from one game to another. Allow the player to add their own tech path for a given ai and select it.

[peterfharris]

LDiceasare

You can already do a mod get the AI to research the techs you want it to research and, subject to some limitations, influence when they will research your custom tech.

BUT
Each AI seems to consistently follow the same tech path for about the first twenty techs up to Corvette technology (the drengin have their own path, the Arcaens are fixed and I find tha all other AI's consistently follow the same third path up to Corvettes). After that you can induce the AI to research your custom techs by assigning an "AI value" to each of your custom techs. You will, as you mentioned, always have a problem with the Arceans but they can eventually get your custom tech by swapping or by extorting from a minor. Once you bear that in mind I don't see any problem modding the techs.

I agree that there appears to be nothing a modder can do about those special effects that do not appear in the tech files. (I agree it would be nice if Stardock eventually did something about that but it seems not very important. Something for a future expansion pack or maybe GalCiv2 perhaps?)

Aside from the above much can be done to mod the tech tree, particularly if you are prepared to let the Arceans be disadvantaged.

If you want some more info on the research posts please see my other thread, in the "GalCiv Creation and files thingy in this forum, and if you ask I could post those early research paths. I got frustrated trying to mod the tech tree so I spent a day of boredom doing some tests and experiments. Now that I have done that research it is quite easy to mod the techs and easy to get the AI (umh apart from the Arceans) to research stuff when I want them to.