Please dont flame...but...

I'm pretty sure I've overheard talk about limited ship designing in GalCiv 2.

Me too - can't wait

Why should you get flamed for suggesting things that you would like to see in a game?

There were many, many, many suggestions that were picked right out of these forums and inserted right into the game!

Bill

~SDC~

Well, because im used to people saying "Hey this isnt Masters of Orion..bla bla.." Purists.. This game blows MOO away in the empire aspect, but the ship building/combat in MOO2 was 200% better. I have said to many people that GCiv is what MOO3 "should" have been. However, it is still missing those aspects that I love.

Anything that is suggested by the people of this community is taken by Stardock to help improve the game, I have noticed, if the proposal is consider feasible. There have been many comments that have been made by members of this community, and I believe that Stardock appreciates the feedback. Just remember, all the world can be a stage, and we are merely players.

Have you guys ever tried out Space Empires 4? That game has complete ship customization, but it's complicated as heck. I tried the demo out and it's like 200 times more complicated then gal civ, but if you like the complex 4x like MOO3 then you probablily like it.

Space Empires 4 is awesome. It is a bit more complicated, but once I got used to it I had a blast. I had a ship design for practically every mission profile you can think of.

What kind of game is that?

It is the same kind of game as GalCiv, MOO, Stars!, etc. (A 4X space domination game.)

Here's a couple of reviews:
http://www.gamerankings.com/itemrankings/launchreview.asp?reviewid=102567
http://www.gamerankings.com/itemrankings/launchreview.asp?reviewid=45297



~SDC~

Thks Matthew,
I'm a bit out of touch: after sid meier's alpha centaury, I only played shogun & medieval total war. Then I tried imperium galactica, which I didn't really liked. Anf after that it was GalCiv. Except for the total war series, it is the first time I play a game for such a long time!
[Message Edited]

I'd never heard of Star Empires myself until today, though I've played all the games you mention. Imperium Galactica was interesting but flawed. The others were all good.

~SDC~

I agree



I'm expecting Rome Total war now... that's the only thing that will make me get away from galciv for a while. Or at least make me share my playing time.

SE4! Too many options though. I drown in cutomization because I can't control my micromanaging ...ess ...er ...ment ...ion :notsure:

Excuse my ignorance, but I keep hearing the term, and don't know what it means. What is a 4x game?

The genre of games where the mission is eXplore, eXpand, eXploit, and eXterminate.


[Message Edited]

If you think Space Empire 4 is hard try dominions2 acenstion wars, 2 minutes in and I was swamped

Thanks, I would never have guessed that.
[Message Edited]

would there be a way so that you could mod new ship techs a certain way to give them different stats but make the value of the techs 0 so they won't trade them? give them ALL to the human then he gifts them to the civs and then doesn't use the new techs himself.

so you can make a "drengin corvette tech" that has more of everything but slower than a terran corvette? you don't need a new ship model just use the current one.

Space Empires 4 just doesnt look very good. There is a point where too many options is bad. I love Galactic Civ. I think it has the perfect blend of Micro and Macro management. If they only could improve it in those few areas it would be perfect all around. Combat and ship design are the only lacking areas.

I find that the fact you don't have to
muck about with ship design very enjoyable,
allows me to concentrate more on the other aspects
of building a empire...

MoO2 had great combat/ship design? You obviously never played MoO1.

MoO1 had a GREAT balance between big and small ships. Made making small ships worthwhile, as they had legitimate roles and legitimate combat worth. MoO2 on the other hand, threw out that balance. You always wanted to build the biggest ship possible... and you might as well scrap your smaller ships so you could build more bigger ones.

And it's actual combat model wasn't worth bothering with. While you COULD build a customized task force to go out and CAPTURE your enemy ships, the optimal strategies was just not bother. A well rounded design always beat out specialist designs, and were easy to use (and let the computer run for you). That meant all your ships were always the same, just packing the best available at the time you built/refitted.

MoO1 was also much better balanced at the Galactic level... with each new settling tech opening up a new set of worlds you could colonize. Gave the game a better flow.

MoO1 is a master piece. MoO2 is just a pale adaption of Civ to the SF model. Much to much worrying over what flavor of factory, library, and marketplace each world should be building and how many laborers/scientist/farmers you need, when you should be spending your time crushing those aliens!

Oh, I see, someone else who thinks that Moo1 with better AI and some bugfixes would be the best 4x game ever!

I'm not even sure it needs that. I don't recall any major bugs (from the most recent patch anyway), and the AI was actually pretty good for its time (much better than, ohh say... either of the sequels).

It does 'cheat' with significant bonuses on the harder levels, but it also does some fairly clever things... like change its ship designs to counter the designs that the human player is currently using, etc.

MOO1 was definitely the best in the series, and still rates as one of the best of all time, at least. Of course, GalCiv has many of the same strengths and few weaknesses, but it's not over a decade old (at least this version isn't).

The biggest problem I saw with individual ship design (i.e. moo2) was that, at some point, tech made it obsolete. For me, it was enveloping plasma cannons - as soon as I got those, the ships became unbeatable; so why design ships with anything else? This means that, while you CAN design other ships, you never do - and all the ships end up the same again...

I would think it'd be very difficult to design a well-rounded and balanced system where there wasn't one "ultimate answer" that eventually reduced the design-your-own system to identical ships on all sides. (Of course, I'd LOVE to see some attempts!! Don't misunderstand - personally, I'd really like the ability to design ships; just not sure how feasable it is without separate tech trees or random research or other major changes, which I believe might do more harm than good.)

Bard of Prey... you are mistaken. MoO1 never designed its ships to counter the User's design. It merely scrapped out old designs when it had achieved significant tech advances.

In MoO1, there was an "ultimate" ship design. Use it, and you could have one ship stand off max # of stacked AI ships, WHILE defending your homeworld from Bio Elimination.

When you allow ships to have "special" abilities due to having certain components (whether it's teleportation, repulsion, etc), you do indeed get designs whose abilities effectively become "ultimate" designs. The way to avoid that is to simply not have special abilities. That lives simple numbers, which most people find boring. But it prevents Players from exploiting any combinations and/or AI failings. And as players, you wouldn't want the AI to use such exploits, as it would force you to use the same exploits to "level the field".