A minor suggestion about the tech tree and the Govern UI.

from GalCiv3 Forums

Greetings folks! 

One of the things I like is to have End game last a wee bit longer. One suggestion is to add 2 more techs between say Phasors (or any 2nd to last tier weapon or defense) and Doom rays. The jump from 16 dmg to 24 is really noticeable but it would last longer and be a smoother transition if we had a tech or two on the end of each of the Age of Ascension trees. This would of course prolong the game and some here may not want that. 

Another suggestion would be to have a separate tab/page in the Govern menu dedicated only to Starbase management. From there I would go and assign what shipyards I can designate as 'sponsors' and ones I do not want to 'sponsor' at all. You list ship yards on one side and there would be two breaks, Yes sponsor or NO Sponsor. From there on the other half you can designate what bases are sponsored by what shipyards. 

I am sure this is no small act and the work involved is extensive. It would go a long way to being more intuitive to how to manage your Empire and Starbases which is what Gal Civ is all about.  I was thinking as an alternative is a button in the Shipyard screen that is simple and says Sponsor starbases, either check box it or not. 

I say because I was talking to my friend who was complaining about how his primary military production shipyard was clogged with constructors. I explained to him that  you can simply cancel them and put your ships in but he had none that. He simply didn't want his main production yard involved. The process of NOT having constructors from that yard is kinda tedious. You have to go to each starbase and tell it not to pull from that yard. The idea is good and I love the sponsor system we have but a main govern page to manage how and what yards in our Govern screen would help new players. My friend is a long long time Gal Civ Player and for him to complain kinda surprised me. 


Anyway, thanks for a Great update Stardock!

8,781 views 8 replies
Reply #1 from GalCiv3 Forums Top

i agree with the starbase thing 1-2 SB is alright but I tend to have hundreds and it gets annoying

Reply #2 from GalCiv3 Forums Top

Yeah, the sponsor/no-sponsor flag, or something similar, would be great for shipyards. I like to have Shipyards that are dedicated to only building module upgrades, but it's very tedious to manage, especially on larger maps. 

 

This is definitely in my top 5 of things I'd like to see in an update. 

Elemental: Reforged
Reply #4 from GalCiv3 Forums Top

Yes, it would be a good thing to add a checkbox "Do not sponsor starbases" in shipyard interface, it could be placed on the right of "Do not notify when queue is empty".

Reply #5 from GalCiv3 Forums Top

I'll second this for the dozenth time or whatever since I kept banging on about this when the starbase upgrade came out and there was no joy! Hopefully now a few of you guys are clamouring for it too we'll see that 'no constructors' flag finally implemented so we can reduce that tedious late game micro of going through manually listing shipyards for every starbase when we add a few new ones, only one of which we don't want to make constructors from...

Reply #6 from GalCiv3 Forums Top

The current system would work if you were required to pick which shipyard to sponser starbases allowing one shipyard to sponcer multiple starbases or multiple shipyards to sponcer one starbases. Or allowing starbases to have no sponcers. Maybe doing this automatically was a bad idea since noone wants this. A list of planet sponcers for a shipyard and shipyard sponcers for starbases with control over this would help.

Reply #7 from GalCiv3 Forums Top

Quoting admiralWillyWilber, reply 6

Maybe doing this automatically was a bad idea since noone wants this. 

I use the automatic selection process 100% and it works for me quite well.  On my high production shipyards, I queue up a few of the latest big military ships and the automatic shipyard selectors go somewhere else without my thinking about it.  My overall shipyard production is more distributed than some, but so far the automated process is working out fine for me.  I am not saying that the ideas here are not good ones, I just have to point out that there are people who actually like it as it is so far.  It is not some bad idea.

Reply #8 from GalCiv3 Forums Top

I thought it was a good idea the first few times I came up with it. My reason for automatically doing this is to prevent forgetting.