Paul said later in the stream when asked if this could be an option that it will not be an option.  Citing balance and that he will be increasing the benefits and that all specialization techs would be unique but did not specify if this will be hard coded into the game.

The only reason this is unbalancing is if the game is designed to make is so and if I can't mod the game to play the way I want to it seems I've wasted my money and GalCiv3 will get a very negative review.  I preordered early so I could get in the beta, give my feedback and hopefully avoid some of the things that have turned me off of various other games like Endless Space's version of the large empire penalty which has come to GalCiv as well.  Collapsing specializations are not the way I like to play and it seems the game is getting farther from what I like to play and incorporating features that ruin my enjoyment of 4x games. 

It shouldn't be that hard to mod it out.  Just glancing at the XMLs right now it looks like there is a bracket called "<Specialization>".  Wipe that out of your tech trees in your "home mod" and you should be fine.  The only problem would be rebuilding the tech tree so you get specializations while still moving up the tree.  But it shouldn't be that hard.  Might take a bit of planning or extra techs (say a dummy tech that let you continue to go "up" the tree while also allowing one to go off into a specialization branch that dead ends).  It wouldn't be exactly like it is in the "base" tree.  But if the goal is to be able to research all techs, it should be doable with a little bit of elbow grease. modding wise.

 Here is an example of how it could work:

SPEC TECH PLACEHOLDER =====> Rest of Tree

...............................................................===|

.........................................................................|
..........................................................................==> Spec 1 (dead end)
..........................................................................==> Spec 2 (dead end)
..........................................................................==> Spec 3 (dead end)

Might even be able to figure out a way to do this without a "placeholder" tech.  As I said, it shouldn't be that hard, given how flexible the XMLs are.

Personally I like that the Specializations are blocked out after chosing one. You do know that if its a spec you do not have you can always trade for it from an AI. 

One consequence is Extreme planet specialization where we will not be able to get 100% on all 5 types. Only one of Barren, Ocean or (cant remember 3rd type), and only one of either Toxic or Radioactive. 

This for me sucks and we should have a way to grab them. 

Since its not in yet I wouldn't rule out having to jump through some hoops to mod it out however since the tech trees are all XML files then modding them should be possible.  

I probably overreacted to the news.  While there are aspects of the game I think could be done better its overall shaping up well, there have been several things introduced in beta 5 that exactly what I hate about some of the recent 4x games and more keep popping up and when paying customers say we don't like that, the response is too bad.

I didn't see the dev stream. Did they say that if I choose beam specialization I can no longer use kinetic weapons or missiles? That would be a deal breaker for me and it truly saddens me. I hope no one tells our military planners about this.

It is one thing to block a tech like solar sails vs Ion drive, but to block an entire weapons tech is beyond stupid. I'll be waiting around for a mod and still unhappy that the bases game has left me at the alter.

Quoting Franco fx,

reply 10

I didn't see the dev stream. Did they say that if I choose beam specialization I can no longer use kinetic weapons or missiles? That would be a deal breaker for me and it truly saddens me. I hope no one tells our military planners about this.

It is one thing to block a tech like solar sails vs Ion drive, but to block an entire weapons tech is beyond stupid. I'll be waiting around for a mod and still unhappy that the bases game has left me at the alter.

joking?

you actually dont get weapons on spezialisation techs,

so... they will still be all available

mortili, you do get weapons from a specialization but you get all of them and as mentioned above the specializations now apply to all types.

Androshalforc   What I asked in the dev stream was if this could be an option because lots of people want it either way, so make both of them happy rather than choosing one and pissing off the other.  I've seen people ask for collapsing specializations before and I always spoke up against it and was never alone, nor were the people asking for it.  However much of my choice to back the game was modability, the have it your way option.  Now the devs are saying nope, we decided to go the other direction.  Likely this will be implemented in the XML so it can be modded out but Paul was specifically asked if it would be hard coded but didn't answer.  So I want to make sure they know many players don't like this decision while they are implementing it and that I at least will be vocal about it.

As for developing a new process that allows only one option for better, cheaper or smaller that tends to be how things start but over time things tend to get better, smaller and cheaper, it takes some time but generally its not a choice of one but standardized as more research is done and that is exactly why I want to be able to research all of the specializations.  

I think what Paul is trying to do is to make a more dynamic tech tree to build more replay-ability but I think this is not the way to do it, make the unique techs unique, things like actual cloaking, teleportation gates, and the ability to turn a dead planet to living one as examples.  These make sense as unique technologies, each would require lots of resources and would preclude spending lots of resources on the others, would give strategic benefits and don't expect you to give up what you expect your next phone to be, better, cheaper, and smaller.

Well for one thing the choice is always better. There are other ways to get around cheaper and smaller but better stands alone. 

Choices are exactly my point, my choice to get all three specializations is a choice.  Rather than getting say a new hull size faster I'm improving the tech I already have.  How is taking away my preferred option a better hard choice?  How is I can only have better, cheaper or smaller and move on a harder choice than should I get the next tier of weapon now or improve the one I have already?  

Those shouldn't even be considered specializations, they should be forgone conclusions.  If your going to insist on limiting my choices give me real Gods damned choices not the bland crap that is in place now.  Again the nature of technology is to get better, cheaper and smaller, why is that even a choice?  

Actually that gives me an idea.  Really most of the specialization techs should be their own lines in the tech tree, miniaturization, efficient manufacturing, efficient building and so on.  Replace them with actual specializations like, accuracy, faster rate of fire and range for weapons, and other good stuff for other things.  Even those shouldn't be collapsing, things that are worthy of collapsing specializations are chance to ignore defenses, chance of disabling a weapon or module, chance of stunning the ship for a few seconds, those I wouldn't mind giving up the other options for, not basic ****ing improvements.  Basic improvements are NOT specializations and leaving them as specializations is just lazy design.

I don't have a big problem with this based on the way they have designed it. It is not as bad as I originally thought. (I missed the dev stream), but I do favor it being a players choice if I am going to take a position at all.

Maybe instead of a toggle they could make it part of all difficulty levels above normal

I hope the collapsing specializations will be an option. If not, I really do hope they will allow us to trade for the other techs with the AI players. Sometimes it is no big deal, but in some cases I definitely want a second "specialization," especially with extreme worlds. 

Regarding which choices are better, I see that some can be gained through acquiring planetary resources, where as others (accuracy) seem to be harder to find a substitute for.

I was hoping GC3 would have lots of OPTIONS, rather than lots of forced choices.

The more I think about this, the more I dislike it.  Mostly because of the way things are grouped together in the tech tree currently.

Want to be able to create both Economic and Research treaties? Sucks to be you, you can only choose one to create.

Want to be able to fully upgrade all Extreme Worlds?  Sorry, your scientists want to take a vacation from all of this, you can only choose two to fully "fix".

Want to be able to create different kinds of alliances (military, technological, or cultural) in the game?  Huh, well for some reason we can only create one of those of alliances.  Weird.  Oh, well.

This is just a few of the ones that leap out to me as showing why this isn't a great idea to implement, especially this late in the design process.  And these aren't even getting into the ones that force one to decide between, say, faster ships or smaller drives.  Or more productive worlds or faster growing ones (PS:  ALWAYS choose +1 Production there ).

Some are less irksome than others, yes.  But others are downright teeth grinding when it comes to being "forced" to make a choice.

And, no, hoping that other AIs will research them "for me" ain't much of a hope.  Not if they all research the same things and/or I'm far ahead of them tech wise.  And that's presuming there are even enough AIs to trade with in a game.