The Galactic Civilizations II Battle Plan

What are we doing with v1.1?

They say that no game can be all things to all people. But that doesn't mean one can't try.  When people see our change logs for the upcoming v1.1 they notice they're huge but what a change log can't tell is the overall goal of a particular version.  Taken on their own, a change log can look arbitrary, even casual in what's being changed. Why are we doing this? Is there a unified vision of what's being changed?

So the first question is, why are we doing these updates?  The answer to that has everything to do with word of mouth. Why is an little indie game like Galactic Civilizations amongst the top selling titles at the major retailers? Surely, it must be the awesome, intimidating Stardock marketing juggernaut. Maybe not. Maybe it has something to do with you -- strategy gamers. Strategy gamers who recommended the game to their friends and coworkers for a variety of reasons.  It's a win-win situation.  We do everything we can to make sure you're satisfied with your purchase and we benefit from good word of mouth because of the free user-input updates.

Typically, a person buys a game, plays it for a month, maybe two, and then it's gone.  If they like the game, they may recommend it to their friends. Our updates are about extending the game's lifespan.  The longer we can keep the game interesting to you, the player, the more value you received from your purchase and the better off we are since it extends the time that you're playing the game.  We also see it as our responsibility. It's a single player game. Therefore, we have a duty to keep enhancing it to make it fresh, this is particularly true of the computer AI.

We've been making Galactic Civilizations in one form or other for 12 years now (the original OS/2 version was released in 1994).  And yet it continues to evolve.  We're happy that the game has gotten such good reviews.  And we're very happy most people seem to like it.  But the favorable reception of the game was important for another reason: Doing updates after release, especially ones that add new features naturally beg the question: Didn't they finish the game?  Had the initial reaction to the game been negative, then that would be a very legitimate question. It's one of the reasons we self-published Galactic Civilizations II. We could wait until we were happy with the game to release it. And that way we could do updates without fear of people saying "Well look at all these updates, it must not have been done".

And that brings us back to v1.1. What are we trying to do with it?  There are 5 main goals for v1.1:

  1. Better Computer Players. Nearly every review has focused on how good the computer AI is. We're very jazzed about that. But like all strategy games, there are a certain % of people who find it too hard and a certain % of people who find it too easy.  The goal of 1.1 is to make the game play easier at lower difficulty levels so that players can be gradually introduced to the game while making the AI much more challenging at higher levels by being smarter, more sophisticated.  For example, a lot of work has been put onto tech trading, handling of transports, ship tactics, planet improvement handling, etc. We read forums, not just here but all over the net. We lurk. We hear what strategies people employ.  If it's an exploit, we plug it. If it's just a really clever strategy, we extend the computer AI to deal with it.  The goal of 1.1 is to have computer AIs that blatantly play smarter.
  2. Cleaner Game Mechanics. The economic system of GalCiv II is essentailly a hold-over from GalCiv I which was a hold over from the OS/2 version.  The goal with 1.1 is to make it clear where the numbers come from, make sure they're intuitive, and make balance tweaks based on player feedback.  We're adding in more tool tips so that players can see where things come from, how they're derived. We're tweaking costs, bonuses, etc.  There is no such thing as a perfect balance.  A good balance to a strategy game is derived by how people play that game. We listen to how people actually play the game and then adjust it based on that.  Nothing particularly dramatic (though social production no longer being wasted is a pretty big change but it's something we've had months to think about), mostly things that just make the game feel...better.
  3. Better User Interface.  When you read how people in the real world are playing your game, it makes sense to try to cater to those playing styles. For example, the ship designer has become incredibly popular. We had no idea it would be such a big deal to design your own ships in a free form way.  So we've put in time to make it better. Other players wanted better ways of managing units, selecting units, keeping track of where units were going, so we have been working on that as well. More hot keys have been added, more buttons added, and so forth.  The overall goal is to improve the game so that you're focusing on having fun (it's a game after all) and the user interface stays out of the way.
  4. Modding.  The long-term viability of many games is modding.  We see it as our job to make sure that modding isn't just something techies can do but rather something anyone can do to the game.  We have some experience in this given that we do run the world's largest Windows modding community. When the modding is done, players will be able to download a mod and then from the game point to that mod and make use of all its changes without having to mess around with editors and images.  To help in mod creation, 1.1 will include a pretty significant set of mods in itself to use as examples.
  5. More Gameplay options. This is something that will be an on-going thing.  We don't want to have a crazy # of options, but we do want people to be able to have the game play the way they want. For instance, some people don't like tech trading. So we put in an option to eliminate it.  Other people didn't like that you could see where the other empires were from the first turn, so we put an option to not be able to see controlled territories until those areas were explored. Some people don't like minor races, so we put an option to not have them.

Our schedule right now is to have another beta this week which should introduce the modding.  We will continue to iron out bugs in the beta, tweak balance, and then after that we'll release it as a non-beta. Originally we wanted to get 1.1 "done" by the end of March. But we wanted to have some extra time to tweak and balance things, which in turn add bugs, which in turn have to be fixed.  But we're getting pretty close now. Hopefully users of v1.1 beta 2 like what they see. And soon it'll be done.

And then what? Then we'll start in v1.2 with features we haven't even thought of yet. ;)

Update: The Modding UI may got into 1.2. Mod docs will go out with 1.1.

52,240 views 85 replies
Reply #1 Top
It's great for you guys to be so open about what you are trying to achieve, so far everything looks good. One thing i would like to see though (maybe I just don't know how to do it) is upgrading of stacked ships, which clearly falls until point #3 of your objectives.

Great work guys.
Reply #2 Top
Sorael: Agreed!
Reply #3 Top
Yeah it sucks needing to seperate ships to upgrade them, dangerous too sometimes.
Reply #4 Top
An easy way to share ship designs coming in 1.1 or later or ever? Because right now it's pretty awkward, gotta copy the right files, then load up the ship then save the game, I'm guessing it's too difficult for most users.

Sounds good to me, can't wait. Always funny how Frogboy posts at like 2am on a saturday. Oh and btw, don't forget to set your clocks an hour forward (for people in the U.S. only)
Reply #5 Top
Unsurpassed


A button activated retrofit list from the ship designer (or other place for that matter) would be cool. Showing each ship of the selected design and the location of that ship. With right click centering the main map on the ship, and left click opens the upgrade box. Shift left click to select multiple ships. You don't always want to upgrade EVERY ship of a desgin, but often you do want to upgrade more than one.
(one of those free user ideas mentioned. not sure how viable it is tho, lol)
Reply #6 Top
I must say that I am supremely suppressed by the level of commitment and caring that Stardock has shown to their player base. I have never experience such a thing from any other game developer, with the exception of Valve Software, and even then they do not shine as much as you do in your standards for communication with the players.

Truely a job well done, and I can't wait for this patch!
Reply #7 Top
Sorry to break your confidence...but the AI has not improved in the 1.1 quite to the contrary. It has gotten a lot worse...

Just play a game in the following style and look what will happen...

Build a military starbase with lot of ship support (especially all defense support modules and some offense modules, just everything you get from the first three or four starbase techs), build one fleet with small ships (which have at least one offense and one defense point to get the full benefit of the star base) and now look how the ai will soon declare war against you, as you are military too weak to compete with them...and than waste fleet after fleet against your ships witout doing them any harm....

A completely other point (others have also mentioned) is that Ai doesn't research many different weapons trees anymore...normally they concentrate on just one (in my game now, nearly everyone beside me uses only mass drivers, in that before every one has used only beam weapons) and don't even research the defenses against other weapons...I'am a long way in the game and have not seen a single ship with defense against my beam weaopns...

And one last point as the Ai got more sensible to miniaturization the ai is pushing each other to just research this tree and leaving lot of other techs unresearched...Now normally the minituriaztion techs are much earlier researched than even new hulls...I think you must find here a better trade off....
Reply #8 Top
I think this is NOT the place for such bug reports! I suggest posting it in the regular forums where all bug reports go.

It is beta still so any comments are not an insult toward the progress on the patch.
Reply #9 Top
thx for all the great info! really appreciate all the work & keeping us updated so we are not just hanging in the wind wondering when the patch is coming.
looking forward to 1.2;)
Reply #11 Top
Alliances require both researching them AND a close relationship with the civ in question. Trade a lot with one, give them valuable presents, wage war against their enemies and be very diplomatic, and you'll get such a relationship.
Reply #12 Top
A completely other point (others have also mentioned) is that Ai doesn't research many different weapons trees anymore...normally they concentrate on just one (in my game now, nearly everyone beside me uses only mass drivers, in that before every one has used only beam weapons) and don't even research the defenses against other weapons...I'am a long way in the game and have not seen a single ship with defense against my beam weaopns...


Do you have the "no trading tech" option turned on ? It is meant a bit to be like this, you (and the AI) research a particular weapon branch. After you some time it (should) become to expensive to research other weapens. If tech trading is allowed the AI just buys/trades with all others.

If tech trading is on, sorry, no idea
Reply #13 Top
Sorry to break your confidence...but the AI has not improved in the 1.1 quite to the contrary. It has gotten a lot worse...


I suppose the impact on the AI depends on the individual playing style as well as the difficulty level. I know, I have had to drop down to 'masochistic' after updating to 1.1 beta 2. I'm a very much impressed with the tweaks of the AI (and a little bit annoyed ), it does seem to anticipate a lot of my strategies.

Reply #14 Top
Do you have the "no trading tech" option turned on ?


No I don't have turned that one on.

I suppose the impact on the AI depends on the individual playing style as well as the difficulty level.


I'am playing on tough. And as I don't like to build a strong military just from the beginning. I need at least one military starbase to fend off the offerly aggressive ais, which nearly every time declare war on anybody, who looks not string enough.

I think this is NOT the place for such bug reports!

I think this as good a place as any other. I've send lots of bugreports directly to the developers. And I think is time for them to get back to the ground and stop clapping themself on their backs for the missing copy protection and the new features, while there are lots of Bugs, which need fixing...like missing letters on most screens through the whole game, which I've reported and documented with screenshots now at least three times and gotten no answer...
Like wrong display of ship stats in orbit around a planet, when they benefit from a military base (also reported)...And that are just the bugs I can think of now...

At least they have fixed the upgrade button in the ship designer....By the way the tool tips for inserted components are missing, when i upgrade ships...

Reply #15 Top
I'am playing on tough. And as I don't like to build a strong military just from the beginning. I need at least one military starbase to fend off the offerly aggressive ais, which nearly every time declare war on anybody, who looks not string enough.



Well, there are other ways of dealing with the ruffians in the beginning... Also 'tough' isn't that difficult, if you want to see the true AI unfold play on a harder difficulty level. I promise it will surprise you a great deal.
Reply #16 Top
Hi all,

Can we have an option of changing the sex of the aliens we're dealing with ?

Thanks
Reply #17 Top
It sounds like you're taking the game in the right direction. However, don't you think it would be in the best interest of your paying customers to get the beta in its current state out to production before you start with another major enhancement (re: modding)? It sounds like you're at a perfect milestone to push out code and I'd really like to see the current enhancements and bug fixes in release.

Features I'd like to see:

1> Un-obsolete a ship design.

2> Sandbox Mode in Ship Designer (hull and jewelry only on saves)

3> Game serial number stored in registry so I don't have to type in that god-awful, huge number every time I patch.
Reply #18 Top
Do you have the "no trading tech" option turned on ? It is meant a bit to be like this, you (and the AI) research a particular weapon branch. After you some time it (should) become to expensive to research other weapens. If tech trading is allowed the AI just buys/trades with all others.

If tech trading is on, sorry, no idea

No, it's a bug that makes every race focus on the same weapon and defence at all times. So instead of one race adapting to an enemy, all races will switch to the same new weapon and defence, making it fairly pointless.

Another big AI problem is when they only build defence on a defender. I havo no problem with the early component-less defenders, they serve a purpose even though I never transport-rush myself. The problem is when a M2-5-design (second year, fifth month) only has one shield. When the AI has an Orbital Fleet Manager, it doesn't matter whether he has one or five of these designs, it takes another player only one movement to wipe them out anyway. This is specially bad when the AI:s first year-designs had ~4 in attack or something and he instead begins building these 0-attack strength ships.

Otherwise I'm very pleased with this beta, the AI (and everything else) is much better now.

I have also found an exploit in the beta, not sure if it was possible before. If you doubleclick on a ship, fleet or starbase in the fog of war that you see sometimes, you will get to see the ship design, the fleet data or the starbase components (if you have the espionage).
Reply #19 Top
I disagree with Sparhawk that the AI has not improved with 1.1. I'm not using military starbases, so maybe there's a problem regarding the AI dealing with them (or perceiving them as dangerous?), but I've seen a couple of aspects where the AI acted significantly better in my opinion: Namely building faster ships, developping its own starbases better and research in general. The most important AI problem regarding my playstyle right now is that it likes to trade resource bases away for a few thousand bucks - it shouldn't do that unless in dire circumstances. Being able to get all resources for money makes the rest of the game a breeze.

By the way, I LOVE the new population growth mechanics, social production now carrying over to military production and the new options. I play without tech trading (in order not to tempt me ), with blind exploration (more realistic) and without minors (too exploitable and I don't like the "new minor" random events) - thanks for making it possible. If I may suggest other options for galaxy setup to think about: Randomized alignments (that was a lot of fun in GC1 and you want that people actually see all your nice texts, right? ), a slider for setting the frequency of occurence of the resources (maybe even going down to zero) and making logistics and miniaturization available as racial abilities (for the right prize, of course).
Reply #20 Top
Are the savegames to older versions compatible? Is it now possible to upgrade coredesigns in the shipdesigner? And Why is it not possible to make a real upgrade of a shipdesign in the shipdesigner aka why forget the shipdisgner always how the older design was equipped?

Darklor
Reply #21 Top
Aaah, truly a grand thing I see unfolding before me.

Keep up the good work, Stardock Dudes. It's really refreshing to see an indie developer that's not only successful, but utterly honest and open. The whole idea of 'If we provide more content, they will come' is a great business model that I hope works, because in addition to making Stardock stronger and more able to bring cool games in the future, it might even clue up the bigger, less indie developers out there.
Reply #22 Top
I'll preface this by saying I'm not playing the beta version, so if this has been addressed feel free to ignore it. My one serious gripe with the UI is the placement of the end turn button in relation to the minimap. I can't count the times I've tried to move my view to look at something in the bottom right corner, or tried to send a ship that way using the map, and wound up ending the turn instead. Put a bit of dead space in between them at least. My second greatest annoyance with the UI was mentioned above, the inability to upgrade stacked ships.

These are minor issues that don't cause enough agony to destroy my enjoyment of the game, but it would be nice to see them dealt with.
Reply #23 Top
It IS a beta , right? Gripe about the finished patch, this is still a work-in-progress.
Reply #24 Top
It IS a beta , right? Gripe about the finished patch, this is still a work-in-progress.

I have no idea who you are referring to but you don't seem to understand the point of a beta.
Reply #25 Top
Wow, it just keeps getting better and better! I especially like #2 s we see easier where/how the economics work. More tool-tips are most needed.

Like many people have mentioned, I'd love to see a difficulty level that has fully enabled AI, but the slight restrictions on its building/economics etc. I think for a lot of us the Tough level is slightly too tough... and we want a unique AI.

Modding - I think modding will be slightly crippled if people can't use modded games for high scores and score tracking. As everyone else does, I want every game to "count" - so probably alocal Metaverse or local score tracking as full as the Metaverse logs will be neccessary to get more than visual mods pumped out in volume.

I'm hvaing a blast with the game (though I still am stuck on Campaign Mission 4!) Help, the Dread lords keep creaming me!!!