How about more differentiated Civilizations--Game Creators?

from GalCiv2 Forums
I have been playing this game since the day it came out and one thing stands out to me. With the ability to modify any civilization's abilities, there seems to be very little intirinsic difference between sides. Outside of graphics and one ability (such as +6 logistics for Humans) and starting technologies, of which some races simply have more, rather than having advantages in certain areas of the tech tree, there is basically no difference between different civs. I would kind of like for civilizations to be more unique, each with its own identity, so that there is more than cosmetic difference in playing different sides and in interacting with them. Since there is already an ability to create your own civilization, there seems little need to make each of the other civilizations almost completely customizable.

Basides the difference in the experience in playing each individual race, there is also a difference in interaction with each race inside the game. I do not want to draw parallels with other games, but I would like to use the example of Alpha Centauri to illustrate my point. There each faction had its own agenda and identity. The experience of starting next to the Spartans was completely different from starting next to the Peacekeepers. Each faction leader determined his or her attitude towards the player based on numerous factors, such as social choices, past history, etc. Interaction between races in Galactic Civilizations 2 seems shallow in comparison, as the only thing that seems to matter is proximity of borders. This seems especially apparent in light of how perfect the game is in all of its other aspects. There is a lot of background history between civilizations, but it does not seem to be reflected in the game. Torians are just as happy to talk and trade with the Drendin Empire as they are with everyone else, despite having been formaerly enslaved and vowing revenge at the beginning of the game.

Basically, I would like each side to be, by default, unique in abilities and starting technologies as well as in-game personality, values, and attitudes. Experience of playing different civilizations should be different in more ways than just cosmetic, as should be interation with different sides. The ability to create a custom civilzation will keep people who want that specific ability configuration happy, while providing a richer game experience for everyone. At least that is my opinion. I believe this should at least be made one of the option--to have unique civilizations in abilities, ideology, and attitudes.

One last note. One thing that I do think should remain customizable is the political party--it makes perfect sense that different political parties can lead different civilizations. And it will allow each player to customiza the abilities a bit.

Anyway, what do you guys think of my idea? Let me know. I would also love to hear the developers' viewpoint on this issue. Thanks to everyone for responding.
13,507 views 27 replies
Reply #1 from GalCiv2 Forums Top
I think that the main arguement that you will get against your idea is that you can start with a select relation to each other races. You could play the Torian, and choose to start at a very hostile level with the Dregs if you wanted to.

And as far as when you play against these two races, it is more likly that the Torian will war with the Dregnin, but I think that its more associated with thier ethical allighnment.

I agree that the races can feel very similar, but I appreciate the abbility to play each race as I choose... most of the time I just choose to play the same way, regardless of what race I choose. But doesnt that kinda make it my fault?
Reply #2 from GalCiv2 Forums Top
It seems strange that all these different races.. be they mechanical, insectoid, or human, all have the exact same requirements for planet quality.

For instance, a planet that is, in the yor opinion, quite habitable, to a human could be a desert wasteland. Different races, different needs.

It's part of the reason I find the planet race in the early game so irritating, is that it doesn't have to be that way. Different races, after different planets = goodness.
Sins of a Solar Empire II
Reply #3 from GalCiv2 Forums Top
I have to agree with Kirill, and I've been playing GC (1&2) since the early days. It seems as though in the beginning of a game there is a difference between races, however, as the game progresses everything seems to get homogonized until little distiction remains. There needs to be specific racial abilities exclusive to an individual race. Not just the generic "+10 econ" which any race can get with research or discovering an anomoly, etc. I also hate comparing games (apples&oranges) but to illustrate my point I'd like to talk how MOO did it. For instance, the Silicoid had the ability to colonize any planet in the galaxy from the beggining of the game, something NO other race could do, no matter what. To offset this huge advantage the Silicoid could not engage in diplomatic relations. This made the Silicoid a unique race, not just in the beggining of a game but the entire game. I know that some people like to play a race, but want that race to conform to their play style. I understand this, but it begs the question; What is the point of having different races if they are all fudamentally the same. It's ethnocentric and arrogant to assume that all sentient life in the galaxy would be so similar, just because of our understanding of how life started on THIS planet. I just want what all people on the forums want, to make this game (as well as future vesions) as close to perfect as possible.
Reply #4 from GalCiv2 Forums Top
I will be quick and to the point... I love Barahir's idea. Problem is, since the planets are not differentiated by atmosphere, etc, and only graded numerically in terms of quality, I do not see how the races could tell the difference unless the numeric values of each planet varied for each race. My 15 planet may be a 4 for the Yor, etc.
Reply #5 from GalCiv2 Forums Top
The differences are mainly in how they act. Each race has it's own Artificial Intellegence, so each acts differently from the others.
Reply #6 from GalCiv2 Forums Top
yes but they all value everything the same. They may arrive at different methods or have certain predispositions but they all value planets, etc exactly the same. This is necessary for the game to move forward and have conflict but it would be nice if these differing values could play a bit more in how each race strategically calculates it's route to victory (other than I am evil, you are good so now I will attack you).
Reply #7 from GalCiv2 Forums Top
The differences are mainly in how they act. Each race has it's own Artificial Intellegence, so each acts differently from the others


That's not the point of the topic, the point is how it feels when I play as the different races, and I feel that they are all to similar. It is not a large enough distinction just to have each race act a little different from each other diplomatically. Eventually during a game "act differently" becomes very similar. Someone said it on the forums before that ALL the Ai players are aggressors in waiting. That's not that "different."
Reply #8 from GalCiv2 Forums Top
I agree with the sameness of the races - this is leading to a sameness to the game experience and IMO the most limiting factor to the games replayability

If there is anything I could change about this game it would be to make the races so they behave very differently in a game, and yes being able to exploit different worlds would be nice, and what techs they develop and how they expand and interact with each other

then when you customise to have a detailed list of characteristic so players can create a number of distinct races that will behave uniquely when downloaded and added to a game would be cool
Reply #9 from GalCiv2 Forums Top
well, while we aren't comparing games, Moo3 describes planets with:

Size, Gravity, Temperature, Pressure, Fertility, Biodiversity, and Mineral Richness.

each race has different Gravity, Temperature, and Pressure preferences.

the number of regions where things can be built on the planet is set by Size.

resources produced by Mines and Farms depends on Mineral Richness and Fertility & Biodiversity, respectively, as well as the terrain of the region.

this makes the decision about what planets to settle highly depend on your race. the methane-breathing Ethereans like the gas giants, for example, while their mortal enemies of the Cybernetik races prefer small, low gravity planets, so they aren't competing for worlds.

and since i brought up "mortal enemies" and the lack of blatant Torian vs Drengin grudge in GC2 is mentioned above, i should say that Moo3 has a table that sets up the initial relation of the races. some are naturally friendly, some are natural enemies, and some are indifferent towards each other.

the designers were of course sure to design the table so that if any two races are likely to be your friends, they are also likely to hate each other... except for the Humanoids, who occupy a central role in the diplomatic structure, and have a unique minefield of relationships to negotiate.

general conclusion by non-fanatics: "agh!! too complex! "

but it does have the effects described in the above posts as desired: every race plays differently (in the hands of players that know what they are doing, and can adapt their style to what works best for the race) and the other players will treat you differently, depending on who you are.
Reply #10 from GalCiv2 Forums Top
Personally I do find the different AI's acting differently. Some of the characterictics don't play well on different size maps - the Drath wil pay off other races to go to war - but if their are only a few races you may not notice this.

The Torians will expand like rabbits on viagra on a scatterd, large map with lots of planets. They are very aggresive and snotty when they do this - you really have to work hard at getting diplo techs if you want to be able to trade or buy them off.

The Drengin will stomp you militarily if they get some good resource planets to buld an industrial base.

The Altarians will weasel their way into Galactic dominance, they seem to thrive in medium sized environemntswith not a lot of planets.

IMO The sameness comes into play in techs, planet build, and reactions to a human player snowball effect - but reading the most recent journal by Frogboy, he is aware of this stuff and is working to make them even better.

I think that once full modding support, and AI behavior support, is made avaiable lin a future patch, then we will start to see true Custom races with identity. Right now my perception is the stuff programmed into each AI to make it different is not moddable, only characteristics.
Reply #11 from GalCiv2 Forums Top
All you people's suggestions require a hell of a job in balancing the game. I find it fine the way it is.
Reply #12 from GalCiv2 Forums Top
My point is that different races do not seem to have an identity of their own. Playing as torians is no different than playing as terrans as long as u pick the same bonuses. Yes you get to pick them, but what's the point of having 10 different races when they play the same, except the starships are different color.

If there are hidden bonuses that are not shown on the interface, I think they should be made apparent, because then it would make more sense.

I am going to take a sheet out of Real Time Strategy history here. When the first games, such as Command and Conquer and War craft appeared in the RTS genre, sides were pretty much the same, excepting the graphics. StarCraft was a huge innovation because it offered 3 completely distinct and balanced races, each with its own identity. The experience of playing different races was nothig alike.

Now I am not saying rework GalCiv 2 and make all of the races COMPLETELY different, but I do not think it is too much to ask to give each its own identity. And make their differences more apparent. For example, when u start next to Drendin, it would be shit im next to them, they are militaristic and they will attack and I better try to use my technological advantage as torians to counter their brute force. Whereas the way it stands right now, I do not FEEL that the races act all the different. It maybe true that there is completely seperate coding for each AI, but it should be obvious to the players as well as the developers.

Basically I am talking, not only about gameplay, but also about atmosphere here. That is the game's only weakness as far as I can tell.
Reply #13 from GalCiv2 Forums Top
@Kirill Choulga

I respectfully disagree with your premise.

Why pick the same bonuses if you are playing as a different race? What's the point in that??? That is not a game issue....

Again, I do find each race has it's own identity and way of doing things. Difficulty level, map size, and star/planet combos have a lot to do with how they act. Try diffent things. Each has it's optimal situation where you will really see the differences - some combos just don't play to their strengths.

When modding is fully implemented. I really beleive that some of the things you wish for will happen. Frogboy is constantly working on improving the Ai - see the most recent Journal entry.

But I don't see this game as not having atmoshpere - it has a helluva lot more than a lot of other mainstream TBS games IMO.
Reply #14 from GalCiv2 Forums Top
Kirill, I agree with you 100%. The races being alike is a key weakness in the game. Also, it makes some races overpowered - just look at how many abilities the Drath start with.

See my post on the same topic: Link
Reply #15 from GalCiv2 Forums Top
To Oldstatesman. My point is not that you should pick the same bonuses. You can pick whatever you want. My point is that if you do pick the same bonues, to you as a player evey single race will play the same, with a few exceptions. Bonuses are what defines strengths and weaknesses between races, and since you CAN pick same bonuses for every race, to the player those races feel the same.

And while we are on the topic, I remember a post on these forums where people discussed their preferences regarding different abilities. It sure seemed like a siginificant portion of folks were picking the same ones every game.

Finally, regarding game balance as it is right now, some races have all the advantages and none of the weaknesses. For example, some start with a lot of technologies. Just randomly. Torians have what 5 or 6 starting techs, while humans have 3.

As I was saying, the game is great in all other aspects, just in this it seems unfinished.
Reply #16 from GalCiv2 Forums Top
To Oldstatesman. My point is not that you should pick the same bonuses. You can pick whatever you want. My point is that if you do pick the same bonues, to you as a player evey single race will play the same, with a few exceptions. Bonuses are what defines strengths and weaknesses between races, and since you CAN pick same bonuses for every race, to the player those races feel the same.

Yes, that was quite obvious.
Have you ever tried actually playing different races in different ways.

If you only take the picture and the name from a default race, use the same abilities over and over and always plays in the exact same way, of course you you will feel that all the races play the same.
You seem to want the game to force you to play a certain way if you choose a race.
So my tip is to go with default races and actually try to play to their strengths. That's what they are there for.
Reply #17 from GalCiv2 Forums Top
Oh no. Everygame I pick the same and best bonuses and the same alignement and it plays the same for me. The devs should fix this bug!


Hello, Yor to Terran Homeplanet, need for a causality upgrade?

You have the ability to alter your gameplay. If you just pick the same bonuses every game you have absolutly no right to complain.

When I'm playing as the Drengin, I usually take lots of military and warfaring bonuses, as the humans I go for everything that gives me an edge in diplomacy, as the Iconian I'm outteching everyone because I selected my bonuses for this.

And for playing against them, every race feels and complains differently when I'm crunching them under my Yor'ian metal boots.

Seriously, the devs gave us the ability to alter the races and the gameplay and now you compain about it when you're unable to use it?

DISCLAIMER: (At the end of course, when it's too late )

My post is only to be aplied to the arguments of using bonuses to make every game the same and it doesn't hold against other things like different planet quality likability (which woudln't work anyway with the current system).
Reply #18 from GalCiv2 Forums Top
My point is that with 10 races there is a lot more potential to implement an involved backstory of the interaction between them and make each race unique than the developers have done. That you can make each race whatever you want is precicely what ruins I think. And yes, I do think that if this game forced you have the races a certain way, it would create much more of an individual race identity than actually exists.
Reply #19 from GalCiv2 Forums Top
Basically my complaint is that because the game does not have forced attributes for each side, and you CAN make each side whatever you want, the sides have less personality and uniqueness. There is a backstory, but the preset rules of the game do no follow it.
Reply #20 from GalCiv2 Forums Top
Sorry Kirill, you are making no sense.

If you leave the races alone and play them as the game gives them to you, they are different.

If you mod them to be all the same, that is your, the player's choice. The game designers give you the freedom to do that. Or not.

Where's your beef?
Reply #21 from GalCiv2 Forums Top
Speaking of the preset race characteristics, how do you reset defaults?

Also even there I clearly remember some points still being not spent.
Reply #22 from GalCiv2 Forums Top
Both sides make a valid point, kirill you have made the point that each race is not unique in a religious/ethical way unless you make them that way, however the people that dont agree make another good point that if you perhaps took some time presetting the game you can make an intresting situation. For example you can take the civs that normally bend towards the good ethical alingment and set relations to team then take the opposite alignment and put in at war or wary for the relations with you, voila you have made a good vs. evil war with almost garuanteed outcome of the evil fighting the good while the nuetral do nothing. So my conclusion is you are both correct in your own way. (bows and takes seat)
Reply #23 from GalCiv2 Forums Top
If I were in a position to dictate my own solution to this, I would make an entirely new branch of the tech tree that is unique to any given culture. This cultural tech line would be untradeable, and would provide bonuses that exaggerate each races characteristics. I would give this tech branch as many techs as the cultural domination tech branch. This tech branch would give bonuses that make sense for the races, such as Drath specific defense techs, Dregin specific weapon and soldiering bonuses, Korx specific trade bonus modules for economy bases, race specific research bonuses for the Iconians, and perhaps trade modules that can only be constructed by a given race.

It might even be an intresting idea to have trade module like effects that give your allies bonuses only for as long as your allied with a given race.

END COMMUNICATION
Reply #24 from GalCiv2 Forums Top
So any idea how to reset the abilities of each race to default?