Things you dont like in GCII

From a previous thread i replied to: -

The only thing that is nagging me right now is the huge range the initial ships have? Hopefully this will be sorted by the release.

I kind of thought that in the begining (seen as you only have basic tech knowledge) maybe a range of 1 square radius from the starting planet (say earth dead centre and surrounding areas only) and then increments of this as you gain more tech knowledge. But instead the 'Hero' ship can pretty much tour the entire screen even on huge setting. The above would have made it easier to understand how far a new engine could propell you rather than the current situation.
Please dont get me wrong as i really love the game already but a mans gotta have something that dont seem quite right eh

The main thing being that it doesnt come out in Australia untill mid-March.

From what I've seen so far it seems that many random events are taken over 1:1 from GalCiv I, so they won't be very surprising. Other than that: zip!

Sorry the above post was me. I was logged in wrong....

Not exactly a dislike, because I adjust to the circumstance, but a frustration all the same: I don't know about the Gold version, but neither GalCiv 1 nor Beta GalCiv 2 allow for trading and/or buying constructors from other races. Every other ship, flagship included, could be exchanged (for a price), but constructors never show up on the list. If someone could please explain why?

Second, about ships, (also in both GC1 and Beta GC2. When negotiating a peace treaty, we can demand and/or offer even planets, but ships and starbases are not allowed. In real life, the victor often carries off the weapons and resources of the defeated. Why not allow ships and starbases as part of the peace treaty?

Then again, if your kicking someone's proverbial tail why would you want their ships... and unlike the game freightors are not my first targers, starbases are...

W/R
Suralle

Most if not all of what I did not like in the beta seems to have been addressed or has been taken into consideration someplace else (done or not going to be done).

Actually its hard to say, everything from what I have read is either improved or much different in gold than beta.

I will get back to you on this one.

W/R
Suralle

Well, I personnaly think that this thread should have been opened AFTER the release of the game. That way, everybody would have the same version of GC II.

My most annoying part is that the space battles are incontrollable... the attack the nearest ship and done is done.... instead of you clicking on 2 ship to attack one thus inceasing your chanse for winning

My most annoying part is that the space battles are incontrollable... the attack the nearest ship and done is done.... instead of you clicking on 2 ship to attack one thus inceasing your chanse for winning

That is not at all how it works. Each ship will target the enemy that is the strongest yet most vulnerable (i.e., whichever one they can reduce the enemy's power most efficiently by killing first). Your ships will all fire on that one until it is destroyed, then begin to attack the next one (so if it gets destroyed and some of your ships have not yet fired, they'll attack the next highest proirity target decided by the same method). Since all that matters is attack, defense, and hp, not maneuvering, this is the most effective means of winning anyway.

My most annoying part is that the space battles are incontrollable... the attack the nearest ship and done is done.... instead of you clicking on 2 ship to attack one thus inceasing your chanse for winning

Are you speaking in the battle combat viewer or when attacking a stack of ship on the map?

I may be oldfashioned, but I wait until I played the game (release version, that is) until deciding what I like and what not.

Agreed.

Yes, so many things may be changed in the release version.

I am annoyed not to have the ability to spy on minors while being told that I should. This may be corrected in the release version.

Only problem I have is that once battle is entered, a fleet cannot disengage. I don't really like the "2 man enter, 1 man leave" approach to the combat. However, I see how it might be difficult from an AI standpoint, but I know if i had a weaker but faster fleet, i'd get the hell out once I saw the tide of battle turning and live for another day.

The one thing I don't like at all is that the game isn't out yet!

Okay you asked for it:

Brad's list of gripes for Galactic Civilizations II:

1) I would like larger ranges. I know someone else wishes rangers were smaller, I'm the opposite.

2) I want more difficulty levels.

3) I want a greater differentiation on the speed that technologies are researched

4) I want to be able to easily make canned scenarios (sceanrio that also has a map -- basically 1 mission campaigns)

5) I want to be able to have a screen for setting various AI options. i.e. a power user screen for little stuff. IF not a screen then a data file that i can tweak. 

6) I want to be able to rename the computer players from the UI (you can do it from the text files).

7) I'd like there to be a ship component that causes ships to miss (i.e. a jammer) and I'd like a correponding targeting computer with both of these having various levels.

8) I'd like to see population have a more significant impact on production.

9) I would like to see planetary bonuses that affect production be visually apparent (i.e. if I have a 30% research ability, I get 30% more research taht I'm not charged for, I'd like to see the little beakers color coded so I know which ones I'm getting for free).

10) I'd like a high approval rating to give you production bonuses (that you can again see visually on the planet screen)

11) I'd like to see even more AI dialog (more different ones).

12) I'd like to have higher resolution textures NOW.

13) I would like a 24 inch Dell monitor (okay, that's not the game but I wanna it)

14) I would like to zoom in on planets and based on population have various orbital activity.

15) I would like to have a planetary improvement that makes ships start out at a certain level (i.e. barracks equivalent)

16) I would like to see a super project that doubles the money you get from tourism

17) I'd like to see a galactic achievement that doubles money from tourism again.

18) I'd like to have an orbital defense platform that's built like a very expensive ship but has no movement (I know you can customize your own but i'd like to see the game have this)

19) I'd like to find a way to incorporate some of the concepts from Oasis (one of my favorite games) into the ground combat.

20) I'd like to be able to set the base # of moves all units get at the beginning of the game.

21) I'd like to have certain planets visibly marked that they have some special resource and if you own that planet you automatically get that resource as a trade good.

22) I'd like to see the bonuses from ringed planets and planets with moons clearly displayed in the planet screen.

23) I'd like an option to disable ranges.

24) I'd like to work on the AI for another month straight uninterupted.

25) I want the AI to be able to beat me at intelligent.

26) I want more random events.

27) I want to make a new list after these things have been added.

I think people are really going to like the game.  But I think they should also know how Stardock operates -- we release games and you shouldn't ever have to update it if you don't want.  But we will continue to enhance the game after release because we always have new ideas.

woah theres a few things

Thanks Frogboy glad you can see why the gripe section was launched early.. for exactly the above reason

BTW #22

I hope you get half of these in and the game will be as good as two real good games!

what i would really, really like is for the diplomacy AI to be moved from passive to active, with the AI given the same diplomatic opportunities as the player - thus a siutation where, say, a militarily weak AI player will come to you for an alliance. as a player you turn it down because it might draw you into a war that you're not ready for, but your senate votes for the alliance because you alignment is good. an active diplomacy AI will mitigate the need for random events because the AI will generate diplomatic ones. to me the magic in GC1 was the diplomacy - an AI player coming to you and saying "let's keep an eye on x". i'd love to see it tweaked up to the same level as the combat AI.

Second, about ships, (also in both GC1 and Beta GC2. When negotiating a peace treaty, we can demand and/or offer even planets, but ships and starbases are not allowed. In real life, the victor often carries off the weapons and resources of the defeated. Why not allow ships and starbases as part of the peace treaty?

Actually you can trade ships and starbases in GC1 I believe. I don't know about GC2 since I didn't get the beta, but I would assume that it will stay the same.

Not to belabor my point -- #5 -- though it will appear that's what I'm doing -- no flaming, please!

1) I do accept Suralle's comment (#6) that if I can beat an enemy's ships, why would I want them as part of a peace negotiation?! However, they do make good canon fodder to protect planets from invasion, etc. Or, even if I have better ships, maybe they would still be better than other enemy races.

2) While we can trade ships outside of war, as Gunner 243 notes (#22), once at war, thus when negotiating peace, ships do not list on the diplomatic screen. I would just like to know why.

3) While getting that answer, I'm still curious about why constructors are never listed on the diplomacy screen.

Thanks for any and all insights -- truly!

*achem*..... naaaa - I"m not going to touch this one........

While getting that answer, I'm still curious about why constructors are never listed on the diplomacy screen.

Perharps because the AI fears that it will be used against them for building influence starbases. Or in other words, it can too easily be abused