[quote who="jball14" reply="22" id="3452664"] If PA came out on steam early access at $50, how would those Kickstarter backers feel after paying $99 for the same access? [/quote]It's a problem without a solution. Except the following one: not selling it on Steam in the first place. Wargame Red Dragon's first beta went through steam without actually being sold there.
Yeah, I think "finding ships" should be age-related. Justification: "You find a precursor ship but you have no clue how to do the first thing with it, and you inadvertently triggered its automated defense systems." The problem with the ice-cap precursor is that their worth is very much mapsize dependent. Tiny map: win the game. Huge map: almost worthless.
[quote who="jball14" reply="20" id="3452626"] With PA i thought they said the reason for the $99 price tag was because that was how much the kickstarter backers had to pay for access to beta. Which is kind of what is happening here. No big deal. We knew what we were getting into. The non-believers will break like waves upon the shoreline. [/quote]Yes, but kickstarter and steam early access are two different things (one is a generous pledge, the other a preor
I've played the beta for a few hours, took a lot of screenshots and made a large number of mental notes that I would like to share. Most of them are UI-related, because I'm not sure there's a lot I can give constructive feedback about system-wise at this stage of development. Let's start: Lots of cool bonuses, but the "+1/+2" aren't very clear
[quote who="EvilMaxWar" reply="16" id="3452596"] This was predictible, idiots going batshit in the community hub. The good news is that for 100$ they will not buy it hence they will be denied leaving a "This game is garbage" in the Steam user review section. [/quote] I think the "this is awesome" comments are usually just as stupid at this stage. Usually, they're based on GalCiv2's reputation. And yes, GalCiv2 deserves that reputation, but the reviews for GalCiv3 s
[quote who="Frogboy" reply="12" id="3452585"] The important thing to remember is that it's not a very big thing. That is, even Planetary Annihilation, which had a $99 price and didn't give extra goodies, had a backlash at first. The people who complain loudly about these kinds of things are a very very tiny minority and they do it on multiple games.[/quote]The backlash against PA was a thousand times more justified than it is for GalCiv3. PA offered almost nothing mo
It's alive! ALIVE!
SE Michigan, Stardock-town, EST. Available many hours while recovering from the end of grad' school.
6-8: Southeastern Michigan :p. Terraforming is required to fix the potholes on I-96.
[quote who="Lucky Jack" reply="25" id="3449345"] The devs have announced that the alignment feature (Good/Neutral/Evil) was being replaced. I can't find it now, but it may have been in one of the interviews they did with one of the game review sites (access to those interviews vanishes after a short time). I think they said it was being replaced with something called "Ideologies", but I can't be sure without the link to where the announcement was made.[/quote] I am aware
[quote who="Rhonin_the_wizard" reply="20" id="3449259"] Isn't the point of being good doing something because it is the right thing and not for some reward? [/quote]Yes, when there's actual people involved. When it's just C++ object instances, "doing the right thing" and "not doing the right thing" do not involve actual morality, no one dies from the consequences of your choice. Which means it becomes a fake choice, one being clearly better than the other to obtain the o
[quote]I didn't say they were the same. I said they aren't too different, i.e. they are similar. 'Showing no mercy/pity' is similar to wishing evil toward a person, but they aren't the same. But that really wasn't my point. My point is, neither of these terms expresses an ideology. An ideology is the underlying idea that drives a person (or society). As you said, few rulers are evil for evil's sake (the ideology isn't ruthlessness or evilness--these are t
[quote]"Ruthless" and "merciless," however, aren't too different from "malevolent." Neither of these words really describe an ideology. A pragmatic society can certainly be ruthless and merciless if it is most practical (and often, that is the case). And even an altruistic society can, for the safety and welfare of others, make decisions that would be considered ruthless and merciless.[/quote] Is disagree with that statement. Ruthless/Merciless isn't the same as
Frogboy, "Merciless" feels much, much better than Malevolent. In fact, I think "benevolent" is out of place and should be replaced by "altruistic" or something like that. A lots of the evil choices in GalCiv 2 could be described as realpolitik. Mercilessness is a good approximation, while evil (while technically true in most value frameworks) sounds like the choice is made just for the fun of having people suffer, while it's closer to "the ends -the glory of the empire- just
[quote who="Fate" reply="36" id="3446707"]Of course strategy should be at the forefront of the thinking, but in a space environment a fleet of purely small hulls at the same tech level and logistics size as a fleet of purely larger hulls should never win an engagement. [/quote]Again, I don't see why since we observe the exact opposite today (at similar "logistic size", a fleet of corvettes and frigates would win against a battlecruiser fleet; 80 years ago it was the opposite). Not on
[quote who="Fate" reply="33" id="3446642"] Those are two completely different types of combatants that operate in different mediums haha [/quote]The invention of the aircraft carrier pretty much killed large ships overnight (although it took a couple years for people to understand this fact). So I rest my case: air power dominates the naval battlefield, and even though they're different in nature, it's still a case of a handful of small crafts t
[quote who="Fate" reply="4" id="3445853"] Quoting Tridus, reply 3At which point we'll instead have people complaining about how small ships are useless once larger ones are researched. Really when you think about it, they should be. X-wing's only beat Death Stars in movies! Fate,[/quote]The battleships, battlecruisers and cruiser class ships are almost extinct nowadays (only Russia has battlecruisers), while planes
GalCiv3 Forums
I might be the only person in the world who sometimes prefers "laser 1/2/3". As an IRL particle physicist, particle-technobabble often makes my eyes bleed :p.
[quote who="Rozier" reply="37" id="3443780"]Stating "Party's" without the rest of the context does not mean Party's was grammatically incorrect. The scenario may have been that the party had ownership of the subject in the sentence which would make it perfectly correct.[/quote]Yes, I was of course referring to the plural (I thought my mention of the greengrocers' apostrophe provided enough context) - mistakes like this one are common in Fallen Enchantress/Legendary Heroes. </
By the way, it would be really nice if this time a bit more attention was given to grammar. Not only does this help giving the product a more "professional" feeling (Fallen Enchantress had amateurish grammar. "Party's", really? Leave those to greengrocers :p.), but this game is played in its original language by people abroad, and it's better to show them (/teach them) good habits. Playing games in their original language is a great way to improve language skills, provided those games
[quote] Would you like to eat some mutton or fish for dinner? It doesn't matter[/quote]Yes. Yes it does, it has a strong mechanical effect: food diversity affects health. And various types of meat have other advantages (sheep producing wool, not just mutton, cows producing leather when slaughtered, etc.) [quote]The only difference between hour one and hour five is that now I have 50 bots instead of 16.[/quote]
[quote who="Frogboy" reply="8" id="3443233"] Regarding fluff numbers. I would rather that the fluff be in a tooltip while keeping the numbers on the screen just numbers. For example, I would LOVE to have a system where we are free to have the population of a planet be given the number 9 and have that correspond to say 12.3 billion as "fluff". THEN we could have our own sci-fi scale on things like that (for instance, 1 could be 25,000, 2 could be 1 million, 3 could be 40
I almost live downstairs from Stardock (Plymouth Twp, MI), so that would be possible.
One small thing about difficulty: while the "starting resources" settings are labeled "easy/medium/hard", don't let that fool you: this isn't the true difficulty settings. Difficulty comes from the weather settings and map type. "Harsh/Mountain" is extremely challenging. Even "Fair/Valley" is difficult, although more manageable after a dozen hour or two; even in that mode, some mistakes will cost you your town. Small suggestion: when you start expanding beyond your "downtown"
Hell yeah. Watch snow coming early in Autumn and destroy your crops before they're harvested, then see your population halved from starvation. It's not like Cities XL, but you still can't make self-sufficient blocks and repeat them over and over again.