Frogboy:

Lack of multiplay doesnt excuse you from not fixing the cheese! I know of several cheeses floating in the latest version, go n erf it. Especially the Torians for the love of god LOL

Also adjust the allocation slider after next patch to 10% new contant 90% bug fixes. THANK YOU!

In responce to moo:

Hold on a second, the only difference you state between LAN and online multiplayer is knowing the individuals your playing against. Your talking about finding players to play against, thats not really an issue (well it is borderline, because these types of games are so time consuming, so LAN games would be preferable in some cases) Its a bit more complicated than that, in any case the issue is whether adding a multiplayer would have detracted from the single player, and unless stardock have an unlimited amount of time and money to spend on making games, i dont see how it couldnt.

Secondly, (just repeating whats been said before) why spend a large proportion of resources (in the form of labour, capital etc) on an option that only the minority will utilise. Its got to be clear that most seem to think multiplayer is not needed and are thus happy. If it was 50/50 then of course it would warrant implementation, but it isnt.

Labelling someone as a 'fanboy' thats argueing for this particular cause would be ill advised, because theyre actually correct (dont 'fanboys' take absolute views, have poor reasoning, have trouble creating a half decent arguement, and usually argue for the sake of arguing becuase they are one of many who bought the product and are trying to reassure themselves that it was a good purchase (ie PC vs Console owners, and thus aiming to recruit others to their point of view)). So dont label us all as 14 year olds,ok.

I also think that adding multiplayer wouldnt force stardock to irradicate more bugs/issues before release. Because 1) Multiplayer will introduce a whole new set of challenges and bugs, different to those encountered in single player 2) Theyve got deadlines to keep to, the deadlines arent going to change (you know how publishers are) but becuase there are more bugs to fix, stardock will devote patches to patching multiplayer balance issues etc rather than adding content (so you may never get a fleet manager etc). 3) Patching has become increasingly accpetable option if things cant get resolved by release, so your going to see bugs and issues on release no matter what happens, multiplayer or not. Apparently this is more of an issue with developers based in the US rather than elsewhere due to on part by publishers forcing games out the door.

hi.

at first: time to bugfix ?

we want a lan game or play with friend over inet. i dont want channs for anonymous gaming or so.. so we dont need anticheat fixes...

is ther a poll or someone who makes a poll to collect names and mails from that people whos want to pay for a mp expansion ? i have played teh game a couple of time and now its boring, iam not the man who wants to beat an ai in different levels, fi i haved owned the ai 3-5 x its boring after that,,,

bye

Not to belittle Stardock at all but just pointing out their Indie nature and dev team size was way smaller than any big name developer. Which I think is so cool.

Anyways, Brad/Frogboy did say more than once (that's why people say who resurrected this argument and beating the dead horse (AGAIN!)) that if enough support is warranted it may become possible in a future expansion. Translation: enough people will buy that MP expansion at said price to justify Stardock spending the resources to make it. Previously, a poll was conducted a while back and lo and behold there wasn't. However GC2 is very popular now, more popular than devs hoped for it looks like. I will also say there's a Large, maybe not Large but Huge number of people who like the single player and probably wouldn't touch MP at all. As it is now, MP is not likely. But who knows?
The one ray of hope is that the devs aren't opposed if a large group of people wanting MP and willing to buy said MP expansion is found.

If you really want it - I'd say visit various fan sites and garner support, have them sign an petitiion (basically so you can count heads) Then point/show Stardock the numbers of people.

There are many old threads on MP if you dig them up. There's also the one that's stickied. Hope this helps.

Anyways, Brad/Frogboy did say more than once (that's why people say who resurrected this argument and beating the dead horse (AGAIN!)) that if enough support is warranted it may become possible in a future expansion.

That is exactly what these peopel don't sem to get. And I get acussed of Fanboism everytiem I get pissed off cause anotehr one of these senseless threads pops-up. I argued more so than anyone here for multiplayer during BETA. And that is when Frogboy said there might be one in the expension if there is enough of an interest. I foudn it a very reasonable compromised and the issue became non-existant at that point to me.

Besides that I also got out of Beta that this game would be difficult as a multiplayer game unless a lot is changed. You cant have 40 speed ships runnign around in a multiplayer game beacuse you would have to have a very big change as to the order of execution of moves. Simultaneous movement ala civ4 woudl just not work. The system would end up being uneven to one side, and it would all just blow up with people crying foul. More dtrouble than it's worth.

Yes you can say LAN this and LAN that, but as a multiplayer opponent I would say I don't give a rat's arse about LAN play. I want fully integrated internet play. I don't want to play with my cronnies IRL, because none of them like htese types of games. And I don't want to use that outdated KALI crap which is buggy as hell.

And the point of your post is?

... and the stupidest post of the day goes to *drum rolls*
Astax.

Perhaps instead of wasting time telling people how people should enjoy this game and how much they suck because they find defence to be comparitively useless, you could actually go play the game so you're not stuck at the pathetic "Normal" level still! - its quite sad really that there is generally an inverse correlation between brain and mouth size

Hold on a second, the only difference you state between LAN and online multiplayer is knowing the individuals your playing against.

Yes, when GalCiv LAN will be compatible with kali or hamachi. Shouldnt be a big issue. So you can still play your buddies without LAN. And some non-xenophobic people can even try to play against strangers.

I also think that adding multiplayer wouldnt force stardock to irradicate more bugs/issues before release.

And I do think so since I know that several bugs are just disclosed when some player controls the performance of another player. I can give a dozen Moo2-bug examples which can be used in SP but most SP are still unaware of them. (They are fixed in fanpatch 1.4.)

Rest of your post is about justification why Stardock hasn’t released with MP. I don’t really care about your points since I talked about an extension which will cost about 10$ (according to Stardock). It would not have taken much of their resources to present a MP-sign up on their page and a forum part where just those registered people can discuss about the MP-extension. Stardock prefers to wait several weeks or months before they include such a sign-up on their page. I have no doubts that MP interested guys play different games like Sword of the Stars then. I even think they should include such a sign up during beta phase. I hope they will do so when they consider GalCiv3.

And now move on and demand some AI fixes in patch 1.1 and prolly 1.2. How much will you pay for them? I hope you take not to much resources.

And I don't want to use that outdated KALI crap which is buggy as hell.

Noone forces you to do so. And now some kali bug examples or troll on, Astax.

Well im hapy that i bought these single game for sure.
That out of the way, yes i would pay 10 more for a multiplayer expansion too but as an extra not changing the original.

An expansion pack woudl cost more than $10.  Just so that we're clear.  The minimum for any expansion pack would be $20.  You have to sell it at $20 at retail in order to get $10 out of it (actually you'd get less than $10) and not enough people buy on-line yet to do something that expensive digitally-only.

It's one thing to go from $50 to $40 if EVERYONE is subsidizing a given feature.  But the opposite isn't true.  Typically only 20% of people buy an expansion pack.

Anyway, point being, we will probably at some point do an expansion pack. It won't happen this year though (2006).  Hotseat might happen this year - maybe.

We have some ideas on how it would be done.  I just don't want to do some half-hearted attempt. If we're doing to do a serious multiplayer expansion it would need to be done right. 

Lack of multiplay doesnt excuse you from not fixing the cheese! I know of several cheeses floating in the latest version, go n erf it. Especially the Torians for the love of god LOL

Astax: #1 You are complaining about a play balancing issue introduced in a beta version? Come on.

#2 There will ALWAYS be cheese tactics. You need to recognize that.  Every game will always have some loophole that people will find.  Long after GalCiv II has seen its last update, someone will find something.