the illusion of gameplay dynamics and creative strategy in galciv 3

In Galciv3 we have three resources types being research, economy, and production divided into colonial infrastructure and military production

Secondly, we have the structured components of the research tree which is directly related to the research resource and the ideology branches which are indirectly linked to production, through the colonization procedure and the building of ideological buildings in being that produce points on turn base (Economics can also be linked to ideology by purchasing these structures rather than manufacturing them but it may be argued this is less cost effective).

 

First, it must not even be argued because it is so core to the design elements of this game that all resources follow simplistic models of exponential growth, at the planetary level and governing system. To dedicate to a resource and diversity in a secondary resource is a losing procedure . There is no logic in aggressive balancing as it is impossible to keep up with exponential models. Therefore the most consequential step is to holdout until it is necessary to switch from massed and potentiated resource points in say research and switch to military at the last possible moment. The player is held subsidiary to the opponent AI which is not developed at all yet, in relation to its own timeframe for attacking and skirmishing. Galactic wars are long, whether based on a Russian roulette impulse or aggressive planning and tactics. Therefore, there is not a system for skirmishing and minor conflicts, testing how far a player can go and forcing that player to interchange in and out of the exponential model into a war economy.

Governing is a marginalized feature as the player is forced to apply it to the exponential model or lose out on significant advantages.

 

Basically, as the map is infertile, lacks 3-dimensionality, and sticks to the previous iterations of the series, every game acts out in similar fashions. Further, everything from surveys to galactic events to colonization tries to create new dynamism in the gameplay but always sticks to 2-dimensional designer over player control, and plays into the exponential models which are the core of the game. But, as stated above the exponential models are inherently self-limiting.

 

There are no choke points, no idiosyncrasies, no nothing. Even in star trek the original series there is the Romulan demilitarized zone.

 

Lastly, the United Planets is a totally worthless feature as the player is just a vote on a board. The players control amounts to the same as pushing the bar on a slot machine.

 

Galactic civilizations. 3 needs to build something outside of the simple planetary management system which is enough to be a side feature or mini game within a larger space opera. It isn't about building new races that have slight variance in traits or research trees because this stick to the overstated fundamentals that do not reward player decision. What this game needs is something radical outside of what we have now to create a truly flourishing space opera.

 

Otherwise sell it for 35 dollars.  Maybe less.

 

Background: I have played 4x space strategy games since masters of orions and owned all gal civ titles.

 

The game now is addictive and fun, but lacking. So is smoking.

 

 

27,169 views 8 replies
Reply #1 Top

OK and I forgot to state productions importance is negligible as it tries to offer a balance to the two core resource types economy or research. It is much more effective to mass at the last moment possible which is easy enough and with real technology

Reply #2 Top

Since its only Beta 4 and we have a Beta 5 do go through along polish for release, you are correct, 35 now and 49.99 upon release. 

 

 

Reply #3 Top

Well, trying to parse your tortured grammar and overwrought word choices is is quite the chore. It seems that you think the game is too simplistic and should therefore have its price lowered or some complex governmental/economic model added. Unless you have some specific examples I have to say I strongly disagree.

You complain that the optimal strategy seems to be specialization of planets, which is certainly true, but there are many factors you didn't consider such as the way population interacts with research, wealth, and manufacturing (which by the way is different from production) and morale. Additionally there is influence, tourism, trade and planetary defense to consider, all which make planning and managing planets much less simplistic than your post would have people believe.

You claim that this game is simple enough to be a mini-game within a real game, and that is crap. If you have substantial recommendations to improve the game I'd love to hear them, but to pretend that this is anything less than a fully realized, strategically complex game is just hot air.

Reply #4 Top

Calling Galactic Civ 3 simplistic seems highly inaccurate to me. However, the assertion that players who game the economy to the maximum will be able to do exponential growth and always outclass the AI is probably true, however that can be said about almost any 4X strategy game.

I would like to see two features in Galciv 3 to limit the player's ability to work the mechanics to the maximum: For one, it should be made harder for any faction to amass a significant tech lead, and for that I would suggest the following feature: Only technology that noone else has discovered yet should have to be reached exclusively by research. Tech that is already know to other civs slowly spreads itself through trade, tourism and basically any way civilizations interact in a cooperative manner. Only civilizations that completely isolate themselves or follow the war path should be able to largely prevent their technology from spreading to others. Such a mechanism would be based completely on how it actually works on Earth right now: The developed countries have a significant tech lead, but far less than they would have if every country only had what their own scientists discovered.

The other mechanism that I would consider useful is a corruption/efficiency score. Planets far from the seat of power should be increasingly hard to make economically productive, by losing some of their income, production and research into dark channels, being more susceptible to espionage and less content. That would make small, compact space nations better able to compete with larger, sprawling empires.

Basically, I think some equalizing mechanics would be a good thing to make a 4X strategy game more balanced and prevent it from getting boring too early when the player reaches a critical advantage.

Reply #5 Top

Quoting torfbolt, reply 4

I would like to see two features in Galciv 3 to limit the player's ability to work the mechanics to the maximum: For one, it should be made harder for any faction to amass a significant tech lead, and for that I would suggest the following feature: Only technology that noone else has discovered yet should have to be reached exclusively by research. Tech that is already know to other civs slowly spreads itself through trade, tourism and basically any way civilizations interact in a cooperative manner. Only civilizations that completely isolate themselves or follow the war path should be able to largely prevent their technology from spreading to others. Such a mechanism would be based completely on how it actually works on Earth right now: The developed countries have a significant tech lead, but far less than they would have if every country only had what their own scientists discovered.

The other mechanism that I would consider useful is a corruption/efficiency score. Planets far from the seat of power should be increasingly hard to make economically productive, by losing some of their income, production and research into dark channels, being more susceptible to espionage and less content. That would make small, compact space nations better able to compete with larger, sprawling empires.

Basically, I think some equalizing mechanics would be a good thing to make a 4X strategy game more balanced and prevent it from getting boring too early when the player reaches a critical advantage.
End of torfbolt's quote

 

Interesting ideas.  I like the idea about techs spreading to other polities, I think a bonus to research for each non-hostile neighbor that has the tech would work fairly well and better simulate how people interact with technology and the spread of ideas in the real world.

I agree some type of corruption/efficiency rating would be interesting but I think it would be different for each race and governmental system with possibly mitigating options as well.  Also I'm not sure it would actually be an improvement to the game.

Reply #6 Top




Otherwise sell it for 35 dollars.  Maybe less.

 

Background: I have played 4x space strategy games since masters of orions and owned all gal civ titles.

 

The game now is addictive and fun, but lacking. So is smoking.

 
 
End of quote

 

How would you price other games, Distant Worlds for instance?

 

You are wrong to set a price at this point.

Reply #7 Top

Okay, a discourse in price is not necessary I apologize but the devs seem firm on their release date.

I think the game is shaping up well but some of the fundamental concepts still confuse me as to whether they are really the best system possible and if it is possible to vary these experiences.

Reply #8 Top

Quoting catonGreentea, reply 7

Okay, a discourse in price is not necessary I apologize but the devs seem firm on their release date.

I think the game is shaping up well but some of the fundamental concepts still confuse me as to whether they are really the best system possible and if it is possible to vary these experiences.
End of catonGreentea's quote

IIRC, the release date has already been moved from April to May.  I am not going to be at all surprised if  it slides a bit further.  And I will repeat what I posted when it was first announced:  This is a good thing.   The quality is more important than the time of release.   And if the offering of Founders and the presence of Early Access has removed some of the pressure to meet their original predicition  of release, that's a good thing about those methods.  IMO.