@STARDOCK - wish list for GC2
from 
Stardock Forums
Stardock Forums
GalCiv is a great game and I love it very much. But it is still possible to improve it 
My favorite wish for GC2 is that planets don’t waist all of the money when they don’t build anything.
I know that this was discussed several times before and that there is currently another thread about this topic: http://www.galciv.com/forum.asp?BID=GF&id=132094#132470
But we all have got more experience in the meantime and the logistics from AP changed the situation. I think it's really worth to argue one more time. Please ...
I’m a programmer by myself and can imagine that it would be a lot of work for the AI. Thus I ask Stardock to bring it on the feature list of GC2. I promise that I will buy GC2 when this comes. (In fact I already bought GC2 but this is some years ago and I don’t mind buying it again
)
I don’t like any of the possibilities we currently have
- don’t build anything on planets you got in the later game and leave them in the Stone Age
- buy the improvements on new planets and spend a lot for leases
- waste all the resources by building nothing on your best planets because they already build everything
The situation gets even worse with AP when you have no need for endless lines of constructors any more due to the logistics feature.
It would be much better not to waist the money when you don’t build any social or military project on a planet. Or maybe that you loose only half of the money since you still have the costs to upkeep the manufacturing potential …
There is no additional micro management whatsoever when a planet does not waist money when the queue is empty. The current game play would not change or be damaged in any aspect.
The current design works very well on midsize maps. But epic empire building games on large / huge / gigantic maps would be much more fun.
I already like GalCiv very much. It is a great game and a lot of fun. But for me this detail is definitely broken and reduces the possibilities and the fun I have.
The only argument I can agree so far it the programming effort. Thus I suggest it for GC2.
My favorite wish for GC2 is that planets don’t waist all of the money when they don’t build anything.
I know that this was discussed several times before and that there is currently another thread about this topic: http://www.galciv.com/forum.asp?BID=GF&id=132094#132470
But we all have got more experience in the meantime and the logistics from AP changed the situation. I think it's really worth to argue one more time. Please ...
I’m a programmer by myself and can imagine that it would be a lot of work for the AI. Thus I ask Stardock to bring it on the feature list of GC2. I promise that I will buy GC2 when this comes. (In fact I already bought GC2 but this is some years ago and I don’t mind buying it again
)I don’t like any of the possibilities we currently have
- don’t build anything on planets you got in the later game and leave them in the Stone Age
- buy the improvements on new planets and spend a lot for leases
- waste all the resources by building nothing on your best planets because they already build everything
The situation gets even worse with AP when you have no need for endless lines of constructors any more due to the logistics feature.
It would be much better not to waist the money when you don’t build any social or military project on a planet. Or maybe that you loose only half of the money since you still have the costs to upkeep the manufacturing potential …
There is no additional micro management whatsoever when a planet does not waist money when the queue is empty. The current game play would not change or be damaged in any aspect.
The current design works very well on midsize maps. But epic empire building games on large / huge / gigantic maps would be much more fun.
I already like GalCiv very much. It is a great game and a lot of fun. But for me this detail is definitely broken and reduces the possibilities and the fun I have.
The only argument I can agree so far it the programming effort. Thus I suggest it for GC2.
