WIllythemailboy

Reply to What ever happened to reaction moves? in Galactic Civilizations III GalCiv3 Forums

The biggest problem I can think of is that turns are sequential (at least they are in GC2). The Altarians take their turn, the Drengin take their turn, the Terrans take their turn, the Yor take their turn, the player goes last. At the end of the player turn all the move counters get reset and the cycle starts again. I think it's safe to assume something very similar will happen in GC3. You should immediately see the problem. At the time I take my turn, everyone else's movement

Reply to No ultimate technologies (infinite technology trees) idea in Galactic Civilizations III GalCiv3 Forums

[quote who="ParagonRenegade" reply="2" id="3426818"] So like Master of Orion then? I like the idea. Keep in mind exponential growth in cost with a 5% interest rate would quickly become ridiculously expensive and basically impossible to maintain.[/quote] Yes, but that seems to be the point. It would be ruinously expensive if this was the ONLY way to improve your weapons, but as the infinite option at the end of a tech tree it's a way to keep research spending

Reply to Wishlist in GalCiv III Founders GalCiv3 Forums

[quote quoting="post"] I am looking forward to your comments. [/quote] 1. The constructor spam is going to be reduced, with the module system being changed to a linked-to-a-planet's-production system. We don't have much more information about that, and even that much isn't carved in stone yet. 2. Sounds really interesting. 3. In the previous games, the energy costs were included in the weapon/shield/engine modules. So your laser module had a sepa

Reply to Thinking of cancelling my pre-order in GalCiv III Founders GalCiv3 Forums

[quote who="screamingpalm" reply="45" id="3425956"]Now, having our entire library of games being centralized, controlled and overseen by Dear Leader Gabe and too-big-to-fail Steam is another issue entirely, and perhaps something to think about.[/quote] TBH, I'm not sure which worries me more: overcentralization on a single vendor, or the same game being sold on 4-5 different platforms with exclusive content on each platform. It's usually a console issue, but it's not hard

Reply to DLC control for GalCiv3 with Steam in Galactic Civilizations III GalCiv3 Forums

That's a pretty good idea. Nothing is worse than a dlc pack that you don't really like but can't get rid of. And distributing mods like dlc might lead the high profile modders to get something for it (does steam allow free dlc with a donate option?)

Reply to Ask the team your questions! in Galactic Civilizations III GalCiv3 Forums

Are influence mechanics going to be similar to GC2? How much calculus will be involved in solving the influence system this time around?

Reply to IGN claims that GalCivIII is under development in PC Gaming GalCiv3 Forums

[quote who="heft" reply="11" id="3425705"] Quoting Chibiabos, reply 10 Not just 4X games, but PC gaming is completely dead ... and for that matter, the PC itself is dead! Oh, man... Again? I still never got over the last few times it died. I had to drown my sorrows in new PC games on a new PC. [/quote] PC gaming has died even more often than WoW has been killed.

Reply to AI coding, I can’t even begin to express how excited I am in GalCiv III Dev Journals GalCiv3 Forums

[quote who="Gaunathor" reply="31" id="3425623"]Those are extremely rare in TotA, along with PQ 2 worlds. I'm not sure, if they are even supposed to appear in TotA anymore. In DA, on the other hand, they are much more common.[/quote] In DA they were pretty common, but I've never seen anything under 4 in TA. The best part of the PQ1 planets (and why they were cut) is that the AI would not colonize them until every other available planet had been claimed. They frequently terrafor

Reply to War of Magic, should it be brought back? in Elemental Dev Journals GalCiv3 Forums

[quote who="mqpiffle" reply="48" id="3425185"] Can't say I would be particularly excited to see a WoM remake, even with new bells and whistles. I'd much rather see E:FE:LH: etc. continue to evolve on its own trajectory.[/quote] Starting a pool: How many expansions will it take to fit the entire alphabet into the acronym?

Reply to Large empire management in Galactic Civilizations III GalCiv3 Forums

[quote who="ParagonRenegade" reply="4" id="3424887"] How would we deal with building planetary improvements on planets? We know that planets in Galactic Civilizations 3 have the "class" mechanic, so you can't just que up buildings on a sector-by-sector basis, you would still need to do it planet for planet. If there's a very simple solution to this, then I can't see it.[/quote] It sounds like it would be more of an "delegate control to the AI" system. You still might

Reply to Tactical combat. in Galactic Civilizations III GalCiv3 Forums

[quote who="joeball123" reply="376" id="3424812"]Also, you call my argument self-centric. Yes, it is. So is yours, and so is the argument of anyone who has ever made any kind of argument whatsoever, because the bottom line is that people only argue for the things in which they believe, or to improve their ability to argue for the things in which they believe, or to impress other people. Your argument for autoresolve and manual control being mutually exclusive is at least as self-centric as my

Reply to Tactical combat. in Galactic Civilizations III GalCiv3 Forums

[quote who="Bioecologist" reply="371" id="3424780"] I agree with what you just said except for one major point: Quoting WIllythemailboy, reply 3705. A shoot-em-up, by common usage, is a game where you directly control what units are shooting at what. It's going back pretty far, but both PTO and PTO II were completely turn based shoot-em-up games. Maneuvering individual ships (and in PTO, air wings) and choosing what they shot at and when was the defining characteristic of

Reply to Tactical combat. in Galactic Civilizations III GalCiv3 Forums

1. While tactical combat isn't a defining characteristic, it does affect games substantially. If for no other reason, development assets are spent making it that could have been used on other aspects of the game. 2. No argument. See tactical combat definition below. 3. As I have stated previously, you are 100% completely wrong here. Your particular play style may make tactical control truly optional, but others do not play the game the same way you do

Reply to How Complete Will the Alpha be? in Galactic Civilizations III GalCiv3 Forums

[quote who="adrencrow" reply="6" id="3424702"] Quoting Seilore, reply 4 Quoting Frogboy, reply 2Alpha will be going out this Winter to those with Founder's Elite. So by that we can assume December 21st??? or more like March 19th Okay I know this is a gift and we'll be happy with whatever it is. Just poking a little think nothing of it I know you people at star dock have been saying this winter co

Reply to Worried after Podcast in Galactic Civilizations III GalCiv3 Forums

[quote who="michaelwhittaker" reply="22" id="3424695"] Oh yeah this was miner, but I noticed things like when I made something like a research facility I didn't get the research or manufacturing points it promised. I assumed that this was called becaise the civilization screen worked of divying up whatever. Maybe I'm not clearly explaining this. All I'm saying is how come I never got all the points for stuff I built when I built it. This was minorly irritating that I could n

Reply to Worried after Podcast in Galactic Civilizations III GalCiv3 Forums

[quote who="mormegil" reply="18" id="3424618"]I will say that the Focus on the sliders in the Interview was primarily a result of the Interviewers bringing it up repeatedly, I do think there is room for improvement in the economy is handled. (More of that later) But our goal, main and Brads, is the make sure that the game is true to GC2, we know that interactions like you describe with other races, trade routes, trading techs and ship, etc. Make for some great moments, If anything we will be

Reply to PC Gamer's First Preview of Galactic Civilizations III in GalCiv III News GalCiv3 Forums

[quote who="Hawawaa" reply="76" id="3421288"]OH I got a new galaxy name size... "Mines Bigger Than Yours"[/quote] "Even the Hubble Can't See the Edge of This Map"

Reply to Will the balance between swarms and capital ships be fixed? in Galactic Civilizations III GalCiv3 Forums

Especially with higher logistics numbers, tiny hulls could take down a bigger ship pretty easy. The main reason no one did that was that the tiny hulls couldn't have engines if they were going to have any significant amount of weapons.

Reply to Tactical combat. in Galactic Civilizations III GalCiv3 Forums

[quote who="Azurak" reply="362" id="3424430"]Ah, well, that's a bummer. At least tell me it's not going to be real time...[/quote] You can take that as a given. One feature we do have confirmation on is that there will be some sort of completely asynchronous multiplayer - meaning it will be playable by more than one person without them ever being online at the same time. I do my turn this morning, you do yours over lunch, I do mine again when I get home after work, etc. Real t

Reply to Things wrong in GC2 that I hope don't return. in Galactic Civilizations III GalCiv3 Forums

[quote who="michaelwhittaker" reply="36" id="3424316"] Quoting qrtxian, reply 34 I don't really have a problem with AI surrender behavior, but I don't think it's ever a good thing to have "turn it off" as the only solution to a problem. If you have a better solution to what you don't think is a problem then I would like to hear it. The reason I think it is the best solution is because someone likes planet trading and surrenders, or it would not be on the

Reply to GalCiv III Founder's Vault! in GalCiv III Founders GalCiv3 Forums

[quote who="Frogboy" reply="79" id="3424126"]For instance, the way star bases are being handled (we don't like the constructor spam so we're tying the star bases to their planets).[/quote] Can't say I'm happy to hear that. I'll wait to see how it is implemented, but I can't see how any tied system can match the speed and flexibility of the constructor system. It's going to feel like bases have been nerfed pretty hard.

Reply to Question about Fleet Battles in Galactic Civilizations III GalCiv3 Forums

[quote]But in this new scenario where ships receive evasion bonuses and each ship fires at ships in their weapon ranges, Fleet B could send their Tiny ships in to surround Fleet A's dreadnoughts and draw fire, while the two Medium and Large ships strike from a distance. [/quote] This scenario assumes either 1. the mediums and large outrange the huge ships and can keep out of their range or 2. the huge ships would be stupid enough to waste time firing on the tiny hulls at the

Reply to Things wrong in GC2 that I hope don't return. in Galactic Civilizations III GalCiv3 Forums

[quote who="mormegil" reply="5" id="3423342"]planetary governess [/quote] Only if you officially refer to it as the "planet nanny".

Reply to Minor races in Galactic Civilizations III GalCiv3 Forums

[quote who="androshalforc" reply="4" id="3421844"] Quoting DivineWrath, reply 2My thought is, what happens when the minor civ is uplifted mid game? Do they suddenly get a bunch of planets to so they can compete with the established civilizations? If a minor civilization is uplifted without proper resources, it would be easy prey for the other civilizations. If a minor civ is uplifted mid game, but it has no means to do anything, did anything change? i would think t

Reply to What would you like to see in GC3 (your perfect 4x star game) in Galactic Civilizations III GalCiv3 Forums

[quote who="John Falkenberg" reply="61" id="3423229"] In Galciv the war 'penalty' is far too cheap. War, rather than being a great strain and drain of both lives and resources, is pretty much a cheap, risk-free way to expand your empire. Now the devs understood some of this, and implemented the logistics cost which was a good first step, but like many things in Galciv2, the concept was there, but the implementation left a lot to be desired. They put in the war-penalty, but I woul