Is GalCiv 3 good now?

I played this game a little bit during early access and after release, but I wasn't that hugely impressed. I tried to enjoy it as the game it was, not as the sequel that I hopped it to be. It didn't work out. Many factors made it difficult for me to enjoy.

That was some time ago and Stardock has a rep for improving their games. I'm wondering if things has been improved since then?

49,662 views 15 replies
Reply #1 Top

It truly depends on what you thought was wrong. If the game had too many bugs or had poor performance, it's much better now. If you thought managing planet economies too cumbersome, that has been improved because the whole economy system has been simplified. If you thought diplomacy was too exploitable but lacked character, not much has changed there. If you like to play the largest of map sizes but found the UI too cumbersome for large scale empire management, not much has changed there either. Do you have specific things that you wanted to see improved?

Reply #2 Top

So... the game was awesome in Alpha.


Its much better now!


:D

Reply #3 Top


I'm wondering if things has been improved since then?

I complain too much so, don't read any of my forum posts.  Really I just knit pick because I want this game to be the best that it can be.  With that being said I continue to play the game and enjoy it.  If there is something that you are looking to have improved or "fixed" I suggest you make those issues known so Stardock can be aware of where areas of improvement can be made.

Overall I agree with Larsenex..

Quoting Larsenex, reply 2

the game was awesome in Alpha.

Its much better now!

P.S.  Stardock the quotes seem to be broken in the forms not displaying correctly with the auto quote links...  Thanks.

+1 Loading…
Reply #4 Top

Well, I didn't like doing all the micromanagement that you had to do. You couldn't leave ships idle, your planets had to be producing something or have 0 social production, where you placed your planet improvements mattered because of adjacency bonuses, terraforming was a pain because you could screw it up badly, etc. It made it hard to speed run through maps. I could finish even large GalCiv 2 maps in a few hours, but I find it difficult to do the same in this game. That is more or less what I liked to in GalCiv 2, play through a map as though it were a quick game of chess.

Reply #5 Top

Quoting DivineWrath, reply 4

Well, I didn't like doing all the micromanagement that you had to do.

There is still a lot of micro management, however, it's getting better, especially with patch 1.7 and the new constructor/star base improvements.

Quoting DivineWrath, reply 4

ou couldn't leave ships idle

Just place the ship in guard mode and move on.  It will stay that way until you move it, (although sometimes in the current build if you add a ship to it's fleet you have to put it back into guard mode but, Stardock has said this is a bug and would look into).

Quoting DivineWrath, reply 4

your planets had to be producing something or have 0 social production

This is true, however, just put it in special project mode and let it go, forget about it unless you need it to do something.

Quoting DivineWrath, reply 4

where you placed your planet improvements mattered because of adjacency bonuses

Adjacency bonus's can be a pain and, even though it does add something to the game it almost forces the player to specialize planets.  Although I find that most planets have two clumps of tiles next to each other which then allows you to prioritize in two areas.  I personally am not a big fan of overall adjacency bonus's, especially in general research, production, economy, ect..., however, I like the bonus production that hives give adjacent things ect...

Quoting DivineWrath, reply 4

terraforming was a pain because you could screw it up badly, etc.

Terra-forming has improved, mainly because they've reduced the unlock any tile terra-forming options.  This now allows a player to unlock tiles as they become available versus just having one of these unlock all terra-formers and want to wait to see what the other smaller terra-forming tiles unlock first.  I don't see this as a problem anymore, however, you must keep in mind to unlock tiles near other tiles or place it in a place that will allow a single tile to be connected to the larger group so one can get adjacency bonus's.

Quoting DivineWrath, reply 4

I could finish even large GalCiv 2 maps in a few hours

You're awesome, always played epic games in the largest Galactic Civilizations II maps and even more epic games in Galactic Civilizations III, never finished the largest map games in a few hours. :)

Quoting DivineWrath, reply 4

That is more or less what I liked to in GalCiv 2, play through a map as though it were a quick game of chess.

The smaller maps still allow this, I've played smaller Galactic Civilizations III maps in an evening.  Although I've only did that once or twice mainly to test certain things and even that I don't know if I actually completed it, I may have stopped short because of old bugs that have since been fixed.

 

Overall, give it a good try.  Look at the benefits of the adjacency bonus, instead of the down side.  This game does still have a lot of the feeling of Galactic Civilizations II and I feel it will get even better and, will eventually surpass Galactic Civilizations II as great games.  It has a ways to go, including squishing a lot of bugs that is still on a long list somewhere and will eventually be gotten to but, for now enjoy.

 

Reply #6 Top

Quoting DivineWrath, reply 4

Well, I didn't like doing all the micromanagement that you had to do. You couldn't leave ships idle, your planets had to be producing something or have 0 social production, where you placed your planet improvements mattered because of adjacency bonuses, terraforming was a pain because you could screw it up badly, etc. It made it hard to speed run through maps. I could finish even large GalCiv 2 maps in a few hours, but I find it difficult to do the same in this game. That is more or less what I liked to in GalCiv 2, play through a map as though it were a quick game of chess.

All of the things you specifically mentioned are still there and no changes have been made that reduces micro for them. Some of them will always be there because that is just how the game operates.

Reply #7 Top

Quoting DivineWrath, reply 4

Well, I didn't like doing all the micromanagement that you had to do. You couldn't leave ships idle, your planets had to be producing something or have 0 social production, where you placed your planet improvements mattered because of adjacency bonuses, terraforming was a pain because you could screw it up badly, etc. It made it hard to speed run through maps. I could finish even large GalCiv 2 maps in a few hours, but I find it difficult to do the same in this game. That is more or less what I liked to in GalCiv 2, play through a map as though it were a quick game of chess.
First if I remember it right you mean Dark Avatar since you never bought Twilight of the Arnor. Galactic civilizations have always been micro intensive. Civilization tried to fix that, and more, or less ruined the game. Matter of fact that does seem to be the biggest complaints of games is removing the game from the game another words micromanagement. It is true you have to be producing something, but now they have ongoing projects that give you something every turn like civilization. I like adjacency bonuses. They bring a nice flair to the game. You could just ignore them if you don't like them. I'm also torn of terraforming. In two you could terraform more tiles especially on small planets. You could turn a class 1-4 into a 16. You can't do that anymore. They now penalize you for picking up small planets. Civilization 4, or call to power had better city management than Galactic civilizations. They could have came close by letting you terraform every tile, but that never happened. Plus the Ai were never good at it anyways. Irony the computer actually have no problem at comparing, assigning values, or decision making, so I will never understand this. Citizen management something Civilization 5 removed would be a nice addition to the game. I'm talkine citizens managing tiles, and soecializing, but one thing Galciv always did better was let you build multiples of buildings. Something civilization wouldn't. So terraforming really needs to be redone.

 

Reply #8 Top

Quoting Seilore, reply 5


Quoting DivineWrath,

ou couldn't leave ships idle



Just place the ship in guard mode and move on.  It will stay that way until you move it, (although sometimes in the current build if you add a ship to it's fleet you have to put it back into guard mode but, Stardock has said this is a bug and would look into).

See your point here would like to be able to shut off ships until I need them. This is a very inefficient way to save up ships for a rainy day, or strategically locate them.

Now as far as guard, and sentry mode that needs redone. Didn't do it right in two either. It would either let enemies invade so guarding planets are useless, or it wouldn't stop, and take you where you need to go. Watching auto moves is pointless because you would have to remember hundreds of moves, and locations.



Quoting DivineWrath,

where you placed your planet improvements mattered because of adjacency bonuses

[/quote]Or you could ignore adjacency bonuses either way. I like them it makes you think.

Quoting DivineWrath,
 

I could finish even large GalCiv 2 maps in a few hours
 
[/quote]Ok you must play on a high setting of tech research, not the slowest like me. You could also speed up gameplay. The maps which is a good thing is bigger though, so you will have to play smaller. Not big on big maps huh. My moddo is bigger the better.

Quoting DivineWrath,

That is more or less what I liked to in GalCiv 2, play through a map as though it were a quick game of chess.
 
[/quote]Never seen a strategy game as quick as chess. You could fix that by turn limit games. Others will play a game for six months, or longer.
Reply #9 Top

Quoting admiralWillyWilber, reply 7

Civilization tried to fix that, and more, or less ruined the game.

Quick question, how do you feel Civilization is ruined?  I agree, there are a few things I miss, but I've got to say now that Civ 5 is better than ever.

Reply #10 Top

Quoting mafutnyoas, reply 9


Quoting admiralWillyWilber,

Civilization tried to fix that, and more, or less ruined the game.



Quick question, how do you feel Civilization is ruined?  I agree, there are a few things I miss, but I've got to say now that Civ 5 is better than ever.

 

Civ5... gee, i havn't played that since the 2 x unit tile limit nearly drove me round the bend,,, have they fixed that yet?

 

I should add... i like the way the tile limit affects strategy in combat,,,, but when it comes to just moving units around the map, that's where it falls apart and has me wishing to tear all my hear out in frustration.... i don't want to have to plan a huge logistical strategy that requires so much effort and forethought just for nothing really.

Reply #11 Top

No, they haven't changed it back.  As for fix .. not sure it's broken.  It's not what people are used to, and that included me also.  It makes for more like a chess game than a stack war, which in my opinion ends up leading to a better battle and a more thought-out approach is needed.

Reply #12 Top

Quoting mafutnyoas, reply 11

No, they haven't changed it back.  As for fix .. not sure it's broken.  It's not what people are used to, and that included me also.  It makes for more like a chess than a stack war, which in my opinion ends up leading to a better battle.

Well if you want to know why someone might think civ5 is broken, you have my reason. Its not everyone's reason but it sure as hell is mine!!!

Reply #13 Top

Fair enough.  I guess I kind of feel that way about GalCiv 3, which is why I came to this thread.  I just can't seem to find good cohesion in this game yet.  I try, and I want to, but just doesnt happen.  Some of my most memorable single games were of GalCiv 2, and win or lose, I just cant get that feeling like everything is clicking, like I did with GalCiv 2.

Reply #14 Top

Quoting mafutnyoas, reply 13

Fair enough.  I guess I kind of feel that way about GalCiv 3, which is why I came to this thread.  I just can't seem to find good cohesion in this game yet.  I try, and I want to, but just doesnt happen.  Some of my most memorable single games were of GalCiv 2, and win or lose, I just cant get that feeling like everything is clicking, like I did with GalCiv 2.

 

Well yea, that's right, when mundane management becomes to big a part of the game it starts to suck the pleasure out of it,,, even if the game is otherwise very brilliant!

Reply #15 Top

I'm of a similar opinion although I already tried to come back (left 1.04 ish) during 1.5 - 1.6 era and left again.  I suspect 1.8 (UI update) is we're waiting for.