I appreciate Stardock's work at not only making a great game better, but also working at constant improvement.

The vast majority of software companies respond to game problems with a series of lame workaround "solutions." They assume that the problem has to be with either your hardware or third-party software.

Stardock, on the other hand, seeks out constructive criticism and tries to not only fix their product, but increase the coolness quotient.

I'm saddened with decision that tech inflation should be put out of the game. Don't get me wrong I didn't like the effect of the same ingame, but the problem I (and I believe most of others who complained about it) encountered wasn't the inflation itself, since it represented only few percent increase after each new tech researched. The main problem was that after XX tech researched the cost of all techs would double ! That steep increase in cost is what was "gamebreaking" since it led to the situation that after only 1/2 of tech tree researched the costs for all techs would be 6 (or even more !) times the base price. I've read that tech inflation was WAD, but only with small inflation percentage; there was no mentioning of doubling of prices that IMHO was the original problem.
If there is some possibility, could you kind people at Stardock look into it one more time and just check for some random poster's sake that tech inflation works as it should Personally I like the idea of tech cost increase very much, and I think that with minor tweaking it could work quite fine.
Ofc. maybe the sudden increase is indeed WAD in every aspect. If thats really the case, oh well, won't be first time I've got something wrong.

What troll, I don't see a troll...( is he gone yet? )

Slight increases in cost over time wouldn't have annoyed people, but needed some sort of realism. Sudden doublings looked a lot like a bug though, and acted like a bug- not to mention crippling of the AI.

Also, it made creativity the most powerful trait in the game.

Gotta agree with this statement. The idea wasn't bad, but the implementation was funky. Say I'm researching Tech A and Tech B, Tech A taking 5 turns, and Tech B taking 6 turns. I do Tech A first, and once finished, I notice Tech B now takes 15 turns!! Sure looks like a bug. Now that I know it's not though, it's still a hassle 'cause you can't really predict it (at least not without doing calculations). It would probably be fine if you could keep tabs on the inflation; that way you can plan for it and get your most important techs while they're still cheap.

Arstal's comment was along the lines I was thinking of, after reading again through the posts, and the 'doubling up of tech point's' comments throughout. It's almost as if the Z factor starts at 2, then jumps to 4, 8, 16, etc.

Is there a possibility it would work more effectively (and almost practically unnoticeable until the end stages of massive map games), if the z factor started off as a fraction, then worked up on a gradual curved scale? IE: starts off at 0.01 and works up exponentially to 1, or whatever figures balance out the gameplay? This might then shove the larger tech increase amounts to the larger maps at the end, and leave the smaller maps playable on the same exponential logarithm, without having to adjust all the current base tech points?

Or have the team already considered this and gone, 'great idea in theory, but just doesn't work / absolutely nukes a hundred other things in the balance'? :p


Also, include an option to turn the tech increases off/on on the game start. Allows those who just want to play with base tech points, do so.

I've missed all this ...... for so long, but... :
1) Even assuming Stardock forgot us for 5 weeks, they still would rank n°1 :CONGRAT:
2) Please be moderate in your passions; Stardock people don't deserve it based on their history
3) I want to express my full support and understanding; I'm sorry some of us just keep asking and wanting like small babies
4) I've finished some games at large size and had minor problem; like Brad said, it's a design issue
5) Brad, please next time you all are out of office (meaning working too hard to take care of else...) for so long... post a sign on the home page so I can see it.

Regardless of the merits of this research model, this illustrates my long term pet peeve with GalCiv--the game is just not as transparent as a grand strategy game should be. Because of a combination of a poor and incomplete manual, vague or absent rollovers and other ingame descriptions, an unwieldy UI, and the lack of a (IMO almost mandatory) Civilopedia-like feature, I often only know generally, but not precisely, what the results of my actions will be. How much additional revenue/morale/influence will a particular improvement generate? How many turns will a new/upgraded factory or lab save me in production or research? In too many instances, I don't know exactly because the game just does not provide such information. I do know precisely the anwsers to these kinds of questions in Civ or EUIII (though Paradox's UIs are only middling themselves). This is one of the reasons I love Civ but only like GalCiv.

Hmm...I could have sworn that I fixed the Ion Beams.  There are definitions in GC2Types for them.  The other two I didn't know about or I would have added definitions for those at the same time.  I'll try to look into it for the update or see if I can get someone else to do it.  I'm not sure if I'm allowed to talk about what I'm working on yet, but it's really cool. 

I'm certain that we will continue to tweak the tech costs among other things, but for now we're just setting it back to the way that it was because that's fastest.  We still have a bunch of stuff to catch up on, especially support.  If anyone here has a ticket open with Support that was assigned to a developer or you e-mailed me directly and you haven't gotten a response, I really apologize and ask that you please continue to be patient while I try to catch up. 

I can understand people's dissappointment with waiting this long for a patch. When I read the update that came out days after release it was pretty clear that it was going to be at least a month. I recall it being clearly stated that they had to finish PM. As far as PM, I could care less. I find politics a drain so a game based upon it I do not see how it could be fun. It would be like playing a game simulating a root canal.
So, yes I was bummed that it was going to be at least a month before the bug I ran into would be found (auto design ships using more components than should be possible) but I understand they have to keep the cash flowing.
I look forward to the future patches etc and prepare to enter the long winter before they do GalCiv3 (at least I hope they do a GalCiv3)

I want to chime in that in the main, we understand that Stardock is a small and striving game company. I can't believe that the vocal minority have truly played games where the QA was absymal and the support non-existent.

Compared to those companies and games, and without reservation, Brad and the rest of the Stardock team are golden.

So today it's 95 and muggy as H E double hockey sticks. I come in from having to work outside in it for a few hours, grateful for the 2 hour ride out and back in the old air conditioned van. Fire up the computer and read what is arguably the hottest topic on this forum lately...

I know this will come as a surprise to some of you. You think StarDock is just a company. A corporation... A big building with unemployed Keebler elves looking for work because some bean counter thought they could make 2 cents more a package of cookies if they automated the tree... and they all got hired so all of that programming and fixing gets done magically...

Hate to break it to you all, but after reading this thread it appears all of those people over at Stardock are just that... PEOPLE.

People with demands. People with other work to do, other deadlines and commitments. People who have to listen to ignorant purveyors of washing machines... people who get a little testy sometimes and get more than a little hot when their work ethic is questioned.

It seems some of us have forgotten that. It seems some of us think they have the short end of the stick... and they don't know what to do with it short of sitting on it. Either way it's unpleasant for them. They begin to get angry and rant and ask questions. They start to question loyalty and integrity and honor and all...

The reality is that the answer is always before them. Go through all the updates from the original GC2. Go through all the posts, all the problems, all the suggestions and all the solutions. Ask anyone who has been on this forum for any length of time. You can't help but see the care and commitment. You can't help but see the effort. You can't read them all and tell me they don't take care of things. You can't tell me they don't communicate. You'll even see that there's a few things that are still wrong. That's the way it is with people... nothing from human hands will ever be perfect.

There were times I felt things were taking a little long, when I felt there was less communication than I would have liked... But that's the nature of people. We get antsy. We succumb to the instant nature of our society. In the end I learned there was always a reason for any delays and that the things that happen to me sometimes happen to them. Just ask the bees... In the end it was always worth the wait.

It seems as companies get bigger, and their fan base grows, the number of complaints go up. It's simple Math, really. With most companies now a days you get some form letter or email or recording saying you problem is being looked into. But when Brad told our washing machine person to get his refund and go... Well, that just made my day... Yes it did. I thought that deserved something... So...

Thanks Brad for knowing when to say when. And thanks to you all for trying... and for snapping a little when you should. Thanks for letting us know there are real, live people over there. It's a comfort to know when I type something here it matters to someone, not something.

Just my 2 cents... 1/2 cent after taxes.

T

"not-mom" will come b4 galciv3.

I double checked them myself. Currently I have 2 files sitting side by side: "GC2Types.xml" and "GC2Types.xml.tmp". The second file is slightly larger, and if opened with notepad it will show Ion beams.

I know I asked someone to double check because I knew I had a few pairs of these files lying around, but I don't think they got back to me.

Anyways, looks like I'm dealing with an update problem...

I don't find the delays for patch that long or bad. For one, the research cost feature tweak is not really a bug. Also, some people whom complaint are forgetting that this is pc/video gaming industry we are talking about. There are not that much other options for TBS game floating around in the market, so it is not a big that a deal if SD delays releasing a patch for justifiable reasons. And they have given lots and lots of notice ahead of time. Also, as CariElf and Brad have said many times, this upcoming tweak/patch is separated from support issue. A company can be blasted for delaying giving technical support or give useless technical support, but it can not be faulted for when it delays releasing upgrades while at the same time keeping its customers base updated on a continual basis.

Some softwares might released at most two patches between iteration cycles, or more or none, while SD has stated that they will continually update the game and support it post development for one year. This is a GUARANTEE they made to their customer base. I don't see that they need to be given a hard time over 5 weeks delays.

I would suggest that research inflation, in a slightly adjusted form, be added as an option, perhaps as part of the research speed option. So after slow, you have inflationary.

Since we have people here who like it both ways, why not let them choose which way to go?

Quick questions regarding your development/business/PM strategies (if you don't mind me asking)...
1) Are you utilizing industry Agile dev principles such as TDD, CI in accordance with automated testing?
2) Working late hours to get out a game tells me that your weekly development velocity is not being evaluated properly potentially, your scope is erratic or a number of other issues...

I'm actually a BA/PM consultant in agile-blend techniques, just curious. Thanks.

I'm no Brad, but I think part of the "working late hours" thing is voluntary. They could crap out a game that was mediocre and worth it in their timeframe, they just keep finding things they want to add, if SD works the way it seems to.

On the bright side, my girlfriend is probably the one person happy the patch isn't out - I'm spending time with her now, which will cease the moment the patch goes onto SDC.

LoL!

They're in game development. Nobody in game development does that. You get a piece of code, you hammer it into the shape that your designer requires, and you move on to the next game. Doing those "agile development" things would slow this process down.

Sure, it might also lead to some positive effects like fewer bugs, less debugging, and so forth. But game design is ultimately an art. It must be flexible, which means that the coders building that game must also be flexible. They can't be locked into a rigid structure built because of a TDD that was written a year ago when the game's design was different.

Stay agile - there's probably some ducking and weaving coming up :LOL:

Regards
Zy

antracer: Completely and totally agreed.



Actually, agile development is generally a lot more flexible than other methods of development, and can adapt well to changing requirements. It needs not be TDD: Other forms of agile development, such as Scrum, can be used.

In the end, it's up to the development team what works for them. It should be noted that the size of the development team (9 people) is actually the recommended maximum size for a Scrum team. Any bigger, and they'd probably have to break it up into two or more teams to maintain their agility.

fjihjfvyujr6yujtujm

4 pages of arguing about a troll and the tech inflation.

I have TA but am still playing DA due to a problem with the tech tree keeping me away from TA... and it's not the inflation. It's because of the new unique techs not properly functioning as prerequisites. Again:

https://forums.galciv2.com/311560

Inflation does the same thing to everyone.

These prereq related bugs totally screw up the race balance.

Worry about the REAL problem, guys.

Forget my above post. Turns out a developer did in fact respond in detail to that topic and I just missed it.

Really wish there were a way for me to delete it.

EDIT: Wait, there's an edit button on this post but not the last one

Yeah it never fails the post you want to edit you can`t,.. but the post you can is not the one needing to be edited :NOTSURE:




Nasty