GalCiv Dead?

[Kuciwalker]

What could really boost replayability is terrain. Nebulas, giant asteroid fields, etc. covering 10-20 tiles or more. Also, "jump routes" or something that are faster to travel on. And permanent wormholes would be cool.

[asleepathewheel]

GalCiv had some good ideas, but I find it to be quite boring. Perhaps the latest patch would help me, as I think it has increased the stars. I find the lack of space combat to take away from the game as well.

[DarkCloud]

Just wondering... if GalCiv has an expansion pack- will it include a map editor?

[Hydro]

I've gone back to Moo3, which I find to be richer and more interesting now that some of the critical bugs have been fixed.

Hydro

[Vince278]

Originally posted by Hydro
I've gone back to Moo3, which I find to be richer and more interesting now that some of the critical bugs have been fixed.
Hydro

Agreed.

[Egbert]

Although I enjoy GalCiv I see it as having some shortcomings.

1. There are too many improvements that should not be built so there is not that much scope to improve your planets (if you build much you drive yourself into the ground). It seems silly having such useless improvements in the game, it spoils it for the new players who can't understand why they are getting into so much trouble when they have done such a good job of improving their holdings.

2. The AI place too much emphasis on the military strength graph. The Drengin and the Altarians are so utterly predictable if the have any military advantage, they instantly try to bully no matter what. Diplomacy has far too much emphasis on constant bullying and extortion.

3. The destabilisation is so utterly overpowered it comes very close to ruining this game. Just spend a few bucks a turn and wait while your victim gradually builds itself into a deep financial hole and falls behind in tech, might as well just cheat. Conversely it really hurts when the AI uses destabilisation.

4. It is pointless trying to get a significant tech lead when minors pop up all over the place with all of your tech so every AI can instantly extort that tech. It is rarely possible to eliminate that minor the very same turn and the extortion starts instantly.

5. Trade is far too important and can be inflated excessively by starbase spamming. I tried a game without trading and it was a gruelling poverty stricken game in which my planets could barely pay their own way whereas with starbase enhanced trade I always have loads of cash.

This game has some very significant strengths but I predict it will fade into oblivion for the above reasons. I have found that I need to mod my game heavily and I have only had the game a short time.

[anofalye]

Yup yup, you are right.

I would add there is to much "random", 1 game you are so overpowering from your start, the next you are so hopeless, all is pure random, so usually if you get a "decent" game, you might have 2 others empire to watch, never 4.

[tetleytea]

As a fan of Heroes of Might & Magic series, I agree about there not being enough terrain. Give me tons and tons of it.

What I'd like to see are resources on sub-class-14 planets; not just starbase resources. I should have to colonize a class-1 planet to get that military bonus. Give them rare "trade goods" that make me want to plan my trade routes through their sector so I'll make more money. Let's put asteroids inside of star systems that have stuff. Give all the aliens different unique ships that do weird stuff--not just have attack/defense/hp/speed stats.

I disagree, though, about there being too many improvements you shouldn't build. If that's a problem, don't build it! So what if a Propaganda Center is worth building 2% of the time. That's better than 0%.