What a game of Galactic Civilizations is like

[Draginol]

http://draginol.stardock.com/images/example/gc_example1.html

I actually lost this game which wasn't the plan but it still gives you an example of what a complete game is like in a nutshell. Each game plays very differently.

[PriestOfDiscord]

Detailed AAR of your game, I really enjoyed it.

A few quick questions, if I may:

When a major empire splits in two, do both of them get a seat on the UP? Do both have the expanded diplomacy options available to major races?

Can minor races(including the I-League and such) expand into new systems? Build their own starships and expand culturally?

I notice a lot of people seem to like the goodies that come with being evil compared to going the path of good. What bonuses does a goody two-shoes get in the long run that make taking some of the short-term problems worth it?

Thanks in advance, you're really getting me psyched for this to come out.

[Draginol]

Answer is yes to everything except the UP. Only the major races get a seat at the United Planets. The minor races get second class treatment.

[PriestOfDiscord]

I'm guessing the original race is the one that keeps the UP spot then, right?

[Usually Insane]

how about the goodie vs. baddie options?

[Jamski]

Well, I think this looks like a "small" improvement over MoO3's ultra-passive AI. I can't wait.

-Jam

[MarkG]

server not accessible
perhaps you could upload the file here?

http://apolyton.net/upload

[mindlar]

PoD: the original race is the one that stays in the UP. The same 6 major races are the only ones that are ever in the UP.

Good races get the satisfaction of being good, easier relationships with other good empires, and different high end technologies. Good empires ally much easier with eachother than evil empires. Good empires have late game technology that give better boosts to speed, influence, and trade.

Evil empires have late game technologies that boost production and military strength. They also get additional trade, but not as much as good empires.

Neutral empires get screwed in the technology game because they can't get either the good or the evil techs.

[Chronus]

Neutral empires get screwed in the technology game because they can't get either the good or the evil techs.

Uh oh. Perhaps this part needs to be play-tested a bit more? Shouldn't there be an incentive for picking a neutral empire?

[Draginol]

Not really. Neutrals don't have to deal with the diplomatic issues of being good or evil. It's been thoroughly play tested. It's one of the game mechanics from the OS/2 version too.

[Comrade Tribune]

Originally posted by Draginol
Neutrals don't have to deal with the diplomatic issues of being good or evil.

I read you as this meaning that is an advantage, right? So staying Neutral *is* already a viable option, as it stands!?

Do I understand you correctly here?

[Draginol]

Exactly. There aren pros and cons of any alignment path. There are real diplomatic advantages to being neutral (as you can imagine).

[Eric S]

Out of curiosity, are there advantages to being just a little good instead of angelic? I'd suspect that the evil hate the angelic even more than they hate the "just a little good" races.

End of March can't come fast enough :-) And I'm up to my ears in MoO3 right now, but I'm still looking forward to this. The alignment is one of two things that I'm hesitant about, but obviously I'm willing to give it a chance.

[Comrade Tribune]

Originally posted by Draginol
There are real diplomatic advantages to being neutral (as you can imagine).

Yep.