derekroth derekroth

Poll about game mechanics

▼

Poll about game mechanics

from GalCiv2 Forums
After reading and participating in numerous threads about tactical combat, I really have to wonder what most people want. Please don't discuss anything here, just simply state your oppinion. Should GCII continue to be CIV in space? Or, should it be modified to become similar to RTW where you have the option to personally control every battle. Again, no discussion because I doubt it really has any effect on what the game will become. And just post once.

My vote is to keep it the way it is, NO TACTICAL!!
52,677 views 58 replies
Reply #51 from GalCiv2 Forums Top
No tactical.

Maybe add a 3rd Dimension for moving units "up" and "down" though.


That'd be cool, but you'd have to keep the third dimension small, or trying to see all the galaxy would become a nightmare.

Then again, galaxies are disk-like and not sphere-like, so that's doable. Wasn't Moo 3 in three dimension, except the third dimension just meant a longer travel for two systems who otherwised looked close to each other?
Reply #52 from Stardock Forums Top
Featauril - Dont post if you arent going to vote. If you want to discuss this go to the threads for discussing. You have already posted twice with garbage and no vote.
Already voted.
ObjectDock - Access shortcuts and frequently used applications from an animated dock.
Reply #53 from Stardock Forums Top
No tactical. Eats too much time and doesn't add to the strategy element signifigantly. Besides, generals don't fight the small battles, the individual troops do. Generals tell where and when, the coherant strategy. You have to rely on your ships/troops/etc to carry out your orders. From a strategy point of view, adding tactical control doesn't add alot to the game, but eats ALOT of time.

Off topic, not all galaxies are disk-like. In fact, many of the largest are ellipitical galaxies which can be nearly spherical in distribution. Plus, near the center of a spiral galaxy, there is typically a spherical bulge, meaning that the region of densest star distribution is often very "thick" along the galactic plane when compared to its spiral arms.
Reply #54 from GalCiv2 Forums Top
When I want Tactical, Ill get a game devoted to doing that as well as GC2 is devoted to big picture strategy.

That being said, a "poll" on whether a game thats going to be on store shelves in 4 days, should or shouldnt "continue" to be what it already IS , seems more than a little silly( so of course, I had to post in it )
Reply #55 from Stardock Forums Top
No tactical combat unless it can be done well.


Couldn't have said it better myself, Apoc.

No tactical.
Reply #56 from Stardock Forums Top
No tactical.

I feel pity for the guys n gals who wish tactical
Reply #57 from GalCiv2 Forums Top
Personally I WANT tactical.

If I would dislike it I could always tourn it off. But I always like to choose what to do by myself. The sense of option exist is to be an option, so everybody can choose personally.

Yes Tactical.
Reply #58 from GalCiv2 Forums Top
No tactical battles!

But maybe some strategic possibilities with affect on battle-tactics before entering a battle (e.g. surprise-attacks out of asteroid belts resulting in an initiative attack-bonus, or waiting for ships to enter nebulas and then attack them, while some systems suffer from the nebula resulting in a bonus or malus on certain points, as some fellow poster(s) already suggested elsewhere) and in-combat-options (like selecting a ship to focus fire on, as BlizzardGR and others suggested - maybe there could be tactical guidelines for each ship/fleet to set... "attack small ships first" or something like that) would be nice.