gal civ: not enuf micro policy

What can be done is that you can count your blessings that this game does NOT play like Civ or MoO2, MOO3.

Civ3 is infamously bad at crediting player with victory when the real victory point has been reached. There is often a whole lot of mopping up to get to the end. GalCiv has the rare quality I've previously seen ONLY in Master of Orion, of offering quick outs when player has reached a bona fide winning position. There are all kinds of spit and polish on the design of GC that just aren't there at all in Civ3: no make-work, no micromanagement madness, actual depth to the diplomatics, AI's with a killer instinct, no prejudice toward oscillating war, no artificial limits on effective civ size. I'm STILL playing with autoturn active. Turns go zip-zip-zip. There's a quick out for each victory condition: cultural goes quickly if you can gain control of the influence resources. Alliance goes quickly if one side gains military superiority. Conquest goes quickly if you opt for terror stars. Finish it, then on to the next game.

It does take a certain skill to manage your empire as a whole, rather than micromanaging. For instance, there is benefit to delaying massive infrastructure investment until you've completed your land grab. If all your planets "grow up together", you won't have any left behind, lacking important structures. You are better off building wonders in packs, with 100% social spending, but a good idea to have enough tech to let your weaker planets be catching up on other social items while your best planets are going for the big tickets. Economic strategy varies to map size, ratio of taxes to trade income (fertility), and more.

The thing you are complaining about, I find to be the MOST advantageous thing about GalCiv: the design limits me to micromanaging only a limited number of game elements per turn. So instead of endless tedious "move a worker here", "double check all my planets to see if I can squeeze an iota of efficiency out of them", "spend most of my gaming time on insignificant minutiae", I get in there, manage the most important things for that turn, then I'm done. Click next turn. Manage a few things, move a few ships, or conduct my war or diplomacy, next turn. The turns go quickly, and they are meaty, not filled with meaningless micromanagement.

If you cannot conceive of finding blessings in that, then GalCiv may not be the game for you.


- Sirian

Sirian:
Well said. Thats the first thing ive ever read from you that i can read without getting my dictionary out

Dictionaries! Gotta love that.

By the way, my dictionary is parked within arm's reach, and I refer to it a couple of times a week on a slow week. Bless you for using yours, and for being interested enough in my views to make the effort.


- Sirian

To me, the "lack of micromanagement" is one of the major advantages of GalCiv. I stopped playing Civ3 as I could not stand the micromanagement any more ...

- Physicist

Yes, I concur. The less micromanagement as possible, please.

I agree too.

what jordan kwan says about the waste of resources was discussed in the forum very early after release. And the justification was somthing like you have a planet with 100 people in it 33 doinf social, 33 military, 33 research (euh... and 1 nontax payer, that doesn't count). Even if you say all expenses to research, you can't expect some factory workers who put the frigates together to become astro-physicists searching the beyond human tech...
And for those who likes control, there is a lot of information, available every turn. But it's not so micromanagement as it is strategic informations, which is much better. In the end, you have to mcromanage your strategy, which in my opinion in much better.

~SDC~

I hate micro management but I would like a VR plug in so I can lauch myself across the negotiating table at chickin head when he demands a tribute!

LOL

Amen to that. Preach it, sister.

If somebody put out a dartboard with his image on it, the thing would become a bestseller.


- Sirian

[Message Edited]