Galactic Civilizations IV Beta 1 Community Q&A

It's time to leave the dockyards!

We are preparing to launch Galactic Civilizations IV into beta, and we can't wait to talk with you about everything that's shiny and new. When we launched the alpha several months ago, we knew you'd have questions - just like you probably do now. Which means it's time for another LIVE Q&A session with members of our development team!

We'll answer questions like:

What have we been working on? How are things going to be different between the alpha and the beta? Who's driving this thing, anyway?

Excited to hear more? Here are the details!

What: Live Q&A session with the Galactic Civilizations IV team

When: October 22nd at 1:45 PM (1345) ET

Where: https://discord.gg/galciv

Who:

  • Derek Paxton – Lead Designer
  • Chad LaForce – Producer
  • Henry Pailing – Community Manager

If you have a microphone that wasn't sold at an inflated price on the galactic market, then you can join in on our community discord and ask your question during the live Q&A. Alternatively, you can post your query ahead of time here on the forums or via one of our other social channels. Our goal is to collect and answer as many questions from the community as possible. 

If you can't make the 2:00pm live session, don't worry! The Q&A will be recorded and uploaded to our YouTube channel

Don't want to miss a thing? Follow us on Twitter and Facebook.

See you online!

62,150 views 17 replies
Reply #1 Top

If you want good comments, suggestions, and questions, I recommend that you post what you are going to present on 10/22 a day ahead of time.  This will give us time to digest what you are going to tell us and prepare for the Q&A session.

I have played many sessions until the game crashed or stopped responding (I have not been able to play a game all the way to defeating all opponents due to the current state of the software). I have also taken the time to create many posts here on this forum describing the bugs I have encountered complete with screen snapshots without hearing anything back acknowledging that the bug has been replicated and is being fixed.  Given that we are helping you debug and improve your product for free, it would be nice if you would at least respond to acknowledge the information we provide to you.

Reply #2 Top

Quoting PaulLach, reply 1

If you want good comments, suggestions, and questions, I recommend that you post what you are going to present on 10/22 a day ahead of time.  This will give us time to digest what you are going to tell us and prepare for the Q&A session.

I have played many sessions until the game crashed or stopped responding (I have not been able to play a game all the way to defeating all opponents due to the current state of the software). I have also taken the time to create many posts here on this forum describing the bugs I have encountered complete with screen snapshots without hearing anything back acknowledging that the bug has been replicated and is being fixed.  Given that we are helping you debug and improve your product for free, it would be nice if you would at least respond to acknowledge the information we provide to you.

Hi Paul, we appreciate all of the feedback we get. Due to the quantity of it we do not always get around to personally responding to every instance though. None of this should discourage people from posting however, as often if people are encountering multiple examples of the same issue it can help track what is causing it and the severity of things.

However, this thread is not about bugs, though people are free to ask about them. As we get closer to the Q&A session more information about the beta will be revealed. Even before that though we already expect people to have lots of questions about specific aspects of the game, including features and factions that have been added to date and what is yet to arrive.

Reply #3 Top

My answer didn't get answered in the last Q&A, so I'll repeat it here.

As someone who enjoys and still plays GalCiv 2, what about GalCiv 4 will appeal to me? If you must know, resources, adjacency bonuses, and citizens didn't appeal to me.

Reply #4 Top

A question I would direct towards Chad LaForce.

Even though this is early in the game's development and release stage, is there a plan in the sales and marketing for a "Founder's Edition" of Galactic Civilization IV like there was with Galactic Civ III? (Galactic Civilizations III: Founder's Elite Edition)

If there is, will those of us who have purchased early be able to upgrade easily TO this "Founder's Edition"? Or will we be forced to endure like some of the 'other' retailers make us and simply purchase the DLCs separately without being able to have them bundled together at the lower cost like previously? 

FalconGrey#5941 (Discord)

Reply #5 Top

I like the idea of prestige victory. How satisfied are you with the current design and are you planning any changes? My own suggestion would be to take a more relative approach: the more prestige your opponents get, the more prestige you need to win.

Will we be able to manually assign colonies to core worlds (of the same sector ofc) or downgrade core worlds to colonies?

Would you remove nested tooltips if you couldn't find a way that is more gain than pain? ;-)

Will tourism be "the same" as in GalCiv3 (controled hex-fields * multipliers)?

I like trading. It would be easier to handle a lot of trade routes if we could sort by origin and by destination.

In my opinion adjacency bonuses work better in GalCiv3. I can grasp two main reasons:
1. Population and food share one adjacency group at #3. By splitting those you have a harder time creating synergies.
2. No continents. I like to be able to specialize continents in #3. In #4 it often feels like this: Okay, I have my manufacturing stuff here and if I build something else next to it I will lose those possible man. synergies.
I would like to know your thoughts on adjacencies #3 vs. #4.

+1 Loading…
Reply #6 Top

ON the Question of the "battle" interface, I say "Yes, we need it if, it makes a difference!" I would like it to cut to a "mini game" whereby your input can effect the behaviour of the ships during the battle.

A "window" to watch the ships fire at each other without any input from the player is boring. If thats what you mean, forget it.

 

Thanks, 

 

Saladman

Reply #7 Top

Here's maybe a more "overall" question about 4X:

Have continual improvements in sounds and graphics made your jobs harder in terms of sometimes forcing you into a choice of "Do we spend time and money making the game more intellectually appealing (ie having a challanging, intelligent AI) or making it more graphically appealing (ie having a ship designer and a battle viewer)?"?

To put my position up front: Asking as a player who wouldn't miss either the ship designer or battle viewer. Designing a fancy ship is fun and everything, but it's not what I play 4X for. It's too nit-picky and too much of a time sink and "small decision for little overall Civilization difference" stuff...

 

Reply #8 Top

We're collecting the questions so far and will be preparing for this Friday.

Reply #10 Top

Just to respond to a few comments ...

I like the new adjacency schema.  It rewards "patches" of inherently synergetic zones, without creating a terrible malus on having something else next door.  The "upgrade all of this type" planetary project is extremely intuitive, and keeps micromanagement down.

What some don't realize... if (for example) entertainment districts are built, and upgraded to a level +2, all new entertainment districts are automatically at at level +2.  The order is NOT important.  This makes planetary upgrades SO easy.

Reply #11 Top

Not sure if this is a bug, or intended... but if I build a manufacturing zone, upgrade it to level 3, destroy it and put Elon's Lift on that land (assuming some other culture hasn't built it first) it is at a level +3 (+7.5%) just for the planetary upgrades (not including tile boni, or adjacencies).  This is powerful.

 

Reply #12 Top

Quoting AdamMG, reply 11

Not sure if this is a bug, or intended... but if I build a manufacturing zone, upgrade it to level 3, destroy it and put Elon's Lift on that land (assuming some other culture hasn't built it first) it is at a level +3 (+7.5%) just for the planetary upgrades (not including tile boni, or adjacencies).  This is powerful.

 

This thread is for gathering questions ahead of the Beta Q&A.

Reply #13 Top

Will leaders gain experience and level up?

Reply #14 Top

There are a lot of Techs that are either empty or do not seem to do anything.

When will we see more of them get filled in and/or implemented?

In particular, all of the Drone Techs after the 1st Drone Production Tech (that produces Drones, which can be used to unlock certain high level Techs, this Tech works), seem NOT to work: increases in Asteroid Mining Production and ways to send Production from one Core World to another World via some form of a Drone, etc.

Also a lot of mid level (and probably higher, but I have not tried all of them yet) military Techs seem to be empty (or do nothing),
as well as one or more Techs that seem to have been added to the game with/for the Yor Race are empty.

We also need some buildings/Districts/Wonders/Achievements/Citizen Specialties that will add more mineral production to a Core World, before the Factories/Industries/etc. start processing it into the production that is used to build things. There should be at least one or two buildings that you could build on every Core World, to increase mining production, with the usual tiles benefits depending the terrain of the tile they are built on and normal tile adjancency affects. (see next sentence).

Could you add some Mining Districts as well as a Miner Citizen specialty or profession that adds more mineral production.

Then make the Citizen Stats more useful, by making them add to the production in their specialty area. I mean add to the Raw Points in that area, not just % gains.
As an example of what I mean, a Scientist type citizen with a 5 Intelligence might add 0.5 Research Points, a Worker with a 6 Diligence might add 0.6 production, a Trader with a 4 might add 0.4 income, etc. Take their relevant skill Stat and divide it by some number such as 10, and that is how much they produce of that item per turn. These additions to productions would come before the various % gains get applied to get the final produced value. A Higher level version of the same profession would give a better yield that they produce.

When you reduced the Cargo Hull from 6 slots to 3 Slots you should have reduced it's Logistics Points needed by it, from 8 to (probably) 4.

Can we get back a bigger version of the Cargo Hull, as an additional Hull type, perhaps as a higher Tech required to get it, i.e. I want more than one type of Cargo Hull in the same game, i.e. I want the old Cargo Hull back as a 2nd Hull Type.

Also when you changed the sizes in slots that they have available for different size hulls, you did NOT change the various Prototype Ships, such as the Retribution, Raptor, Praxis, etc, so they could use the additional slots (now available) for equipment that they carried.

Carrier and Fighter Modes  and combat need to be expanded and reworked considerably, Give Carriers (or other ships that carry drones/Interceptors/Assault Fighters/etc.) a Carrier Mode rather than Support Mode, that controls how they function in combat and get targeted by the other side in the battle. This should include how you want you Interceptors and Assault fighters to act in combat, i.e. Combat Air Patrol (defensive) or various offensive missions. It should be possible for a major warship to be an Escort or Capital Ship/Mode that also carries Fighters that you want to give orders/assign missions to their Fighters, while they are still functioning as an Escort or Capital Ship.

So you might want to add a fighter mission mode in addition to combat role mission (such as Escort or Capital) to all ships (that have fighters).

You might also split Support Mode into Fleet Support Mode (ships that support warships somehow), and Noncombatant Mode, e.g. Troop Invasion ships, that can not fight at all (they might some defenses), as well as pure exploration/survey type ships.

I would really like to be able to change what Modes various ships are assigned to in a Fleet, which would stay that way until I changed them again. So I can change what they do, as controlled by their Mode, before I send them into a Combat, or before I think that an enemy Ship/Fleet is about to attack. I would not be able to change these Modes in the middle of a battle, only before the battle, or during a normal turn.

This would allow me to change how a particular ship gets used as I get better and bigger ships available, or by the other ships that I have available in a particular Fleet, by changing what Mode it is assigned to.
Particularly, since we are adding upgrade modules discovered during surveying, to ships, such as surveyors, as well as warships, as they gain experience, we might want/(will need) to change what Modes they are assigned to use in combat, as they acquire more and more upgrades, e.g. an unarmed surveyor that acquires some drone bays, and defensive modules, you might want to handle differently, i.e. what combat Mode it is using.

Also try adding ways, perhaps by buildings or specialist citizens (they might be called tax collectors/agents or something similar), to change the tax rate (up or down) of a world from the Empire Rate.

Introduce a ZERO Tax rate to the choices for Tax Rates.

Additionally, perhaps have Sector wide rates/policies/etc. rather than just Empire/Race wide rates/policies. That way a newly colonized or frontier Sector could be treated differently than an old well developed Sector, or because one Sector is in a active War Zone, while another Sector is well removed from any fighting. (I think I saw someone else suggest something similar to this).

I also wonder about game settings to control how many anomalies get added to a Sector, when a Race in that Sector researches (or acquires) Anomaly Detection. We can do this with the starting anomalies, we also need a way to control this for anomalies that get added.

On the Discord or on Steam I use the game nickname of Dray Prescot. (I do not try to keep it secret, my real name is in my public player profile on Steam).

Reply #15 Top

Is there any plan to add battle strategies to conflicts? Plans of attack or defense that would be more or less effective depending on the enemy formation and battle tactics?

Reply #17 Top

Is the test version basically the beta? That was unclear