[quote who="Lucky Jack" reply="4" id="3429891"] (And thus, begins another bunch of flames and bitter bickering about whether GC3 should have tactical battles under full control of the user. -- well, maybe not. I sure hope not.)[/quote] I really hope the other fourteen threads are sufficient. :P It's really pointless now, they've already decided on what they are building.
[quote who="Stormer9742" reply="2" id="3429889"] I just got here! Was it decided the battle system would always have you have a hand in it, or that it would always auto-resolve (like in GCII)? [/quote] They haven't said exactly what it is. They have said that it's not MOO2 style "control individual ships" combat. This is what has been said is in: " Tridus : Given all the threads on it and the endless speculation... is there going to be
1. Already ruled out, and then discussed to death. It's not happening. 2. Given that 1 is not happening, neither is this. Ship design actually has a simple mode where you don't even have to design, you just pick what stuff you want. This would be really incompatible with that, and not worthwhile without tactical combat. 3. Seems possible. Fighters and carriers are already mentioned as a thing. And combat has more parameters than before, so ship size could b
[quote who="Wetballs" reply="17" id="3429585"] And while I'm at it, what's with this "production dial" thing anyway? What was wrong with the sliders? I think the sliders were much simpler to look at, personally.[/quote] Multiple sliders to control something are sucky. If it was a single slider than it'd be fine, but it wasn't. Now it's a single control to do the same thing, and it can tell you how far in the direction of wealth you have to go
[quote who="Lucky Jack" reply="9" id="3429439"] Tridus, My point is that I want confirmation from StarDock that they are dropping what has 'till now been a very major philosophical point, separate build queues for buildings and ships.[/quote] The screenshot showing one queue was in the PC Gamer article, and the last time this came up Stardock didn't say anything to refute it. So that seems fairly concrete to me, unless they change their minds.
GalCiv3 Forums
Take it somewhere else, folks. No good can possibly come from having that discussion on a game forum.
[quote who="Lucky Jack" reply="5" id="3429413"] I am bothered by the idea that seems to be building here that there won't be separate colony queues for building improvements and ship construction. IIRC, didn't GC1 (or was it GC1 for OS2) introduce this as a basic tenant? It is one of the things I really liked about the entire GC string of games.[/quote] There's been screenshots put out that show a single queue per planet for both buildings and ships, yeah.
Seems sensible. Novice players will never use it, and an empire wide setting is great for them. (Also like the new UI for it, incidentally.) As you get more advanced and specialize planets, you probably don't want your awesome research planet shifting to a production focus even if you're going to a war footing and mass producing ships. So being able to override that for the individual planet is a handy thing to have. If it is implemented, it would be nice to have some
Yes, you'll get a Steam code when the game is available for you to download. That's the only place to download it. :)
Email [email protected] and explain the situation to them. They can help you out. They're not open for the holidays right now so it may take a couple days.
GalCiv3 Forums
[quote quoting="post"] Other than the Alpha build, you get lifetime expansions. Traditionally, this brakes down to 1-2 expansions with the base game. So, we're paying about $20 for the alpha access and the ability to name a star? (figuring $40 for the pre-order and 2x expansions for $20 each.) Are you planning on anything more that we should be looking forward to? I'm NOT saying that this game won't kick serious
GalCiv3 Forums
Merry Christmas to you and the team. Hope everyone has a good one. :)
[quote who="satoru1" reply="11" id="3429063"] To me mines are as in "Star Trek" parlance "thinking in 2 dimensions".[/quote] Star Trek had the occasional case where mines could work. The wormhole at DS9 for example was mined at one point, and given that it's a single, fixed point that couldn't be accessed any other way, that was effective. It only actually offered any defense against one side (the ones coming through the wormhole were coming blind into the mines), and ev
[quote who="Quinntheeskimo777" reply="6" id="3429025"] The point is, putting the full weight of an empire's research capabilities towards one technology isn't how a galactic empire would work. You'd have planetology scientists, weapons scientists, political scientists, etc. It would be ridiculous to think that the political scientists would be able to help out researching Doom Ray, for instance. In MOO I, you could set sliders to allocate how much of your total research effo
[quote who="Hamshank" reply="4" id="3428913"]Continue the discussion, I wrote this post pretty late after some pre-Christmas beers so don't look for a perfect argument, extrapolate. Thanks gentlemen. I've followed the industry for a very long time, but if business practices have changed and these types of deals are routine then you could say Stardock have evolved depending on your viewpoint. So have Blizzard-Activision, but I'm not sure most fans would agree t
[quote who="admiralWillyWilber" reply="23" id="3428865"] I also have two understandings of that definition. One I wouldn't want is real time stradegy where there is no turns where everything is timed instead. There may be a variation of this. The other I think is a good idea at least in multiplayer is where it is turn based where you end your turn when you are done except everyone takes their turn at the same time, and then the computer or server computes the values at the end of th
[e digicons]:beer:[/e] Merry Christmas!
I'm guessing someone hasn't seen Steam's "early access" section, which is pretty much nothing BUT buying a game and getting access to the alpha/beta. [quote] I'll have already made ~8 payments on my credit card towards this game?[/quote] If you do anything with your credit card other than pay the full balance immediately, you're doing it very, very wrong. Leaving a balance on a credit card is just setting money on fire.
[quote who="WIllythemailboy" reply="17" id="3428777"] I think we're using different definitions of asynchronous and talking past each other. If you want simultaneous play such as Mottikhan is talking about, use that term. If you want time-delay tolerant gameplay, we'll have to come up with a term that fits that type of play. Sequential-turn, maybe[/quote] it already has a name. Asynchronous multiplayer is not a thing Stsrdock just invented. It's in lots of games alrea
Hotseat is not asynchronous. We have to be playing at basically the same time, in the same location. We can't play hotseat if you're not at my house, and we can't realistically play it if I take my turn at 8am and you take your turn at 4:30pm. Plus people are asking for it specifically to pay when their friends are over, all playing at the same time (taking turns). That's the opposite of asynchronous play.
[quote who="Aygis" reply="6" id="3428746"] I would rather like automated homing missiles - small self-destruct spaceshipe that I deploy onto one hex and that subsequently attacks fleets that don't have the right transponder-code. A further range-upgrade could allow attacks into neigboring hexes. Point-defense systems or AI-core-hacking would counter this space-defense systems. This would also be some kind of wall because it must not be invisible, just a small automatet ship with a n
[quote who="Rhonin_the_wizard" reply="11" id="3428756"] Hotseat is a local form of multiplayer, where each player takes their turn playing the game on the same device. I don't know what StarDock means by asynchronous so I can't answer that.[/quote] I don't know what Stardock has in mind specifically, but asynchronous multiplayer is any method where players don't have to be playing at the same time. Play By E-Mail (PBEM, mentioned earlier in the thread) is pr
[quote who="magnuskn" reply="5" id="3428699"] Hotseat is a sure sale for me and a very probable sale for at least three of my friends, who would otherwise pass on this title on general principle. Call us old fogeys, but we like to get together, sit at the same computer and shoot the shit about stuff while people take their turns. It's not even that we get to do that as often as we'd like, but it's having the option that counts.[/quote] Since the entire point of hotse
Did we really need another thread for this? There's already two of them.
I really don't care about hotseat, as it's a mode I would never use. Only being able to continue the game when someone can come over and trading places with the way turns tend to work in Galciv? Pass. PBEM or some other type of async play would get a lot more use from me.