You can always hit the tab key or use the Find button.....

Not if it has automove left. Tab won't find it. And if there is a way to execute the automoves without clicking "Turn" please please please tell me.

And i'm not saying it's bad, just that it isn't 9/10 good.

There's a reason that's not possible: because managing a 50 planet empire is not what the game is about. Sure, you can play one, but that's not what the game is optimized to handle best. Civilization, even in its 4th (5th if you include Alpha Centauri) incarnation, doesn't give you the ability to manage production in such a fashion. In short, if you need to efficiently manage 50 planets, you've got too many planets in the galaxy.

With all respect, that's a justification, not a reason. 30 planets doesn't make it any better, I still don't want to have to manually update 15 planets. And if you play on a gigantic map, you can easily have 50, and you better have 30 if you're trying to win.

And just because Civ 4 didn't have it, doesn't mean Galciv2 shouldn't.

@redshift

If you check the option not to waste auto moves, after you hit turn then when a ship with automoves that has movement points left will stop the autoturn priocess and you will again see the turn button. At this point, if you hit Tab it will center on the ship with moves remaining. You can also go to other ships, that have not auto moved yet - or do anything you want. It kicks you back into regular turn mode again, until you press the turn button again.

This is in the Beta 1.1 versions - not sure if it is in 1.0x

The AI needs to be taught how to build on bonus squares, and in general not gimp its planets by not building a factory (I've taken over planets with very few improvements late in the game)

Wrong on two points. One, the AI does use bonus squares, except for food (which a lot of players don't use). Two, if it thinks it will lose a planet, it will deliberately wreck it.

There needs to be a way to give build orders to multiple planets (not governers... what if I have 50 planets building constructors and I want 25 to start building warships).

Ok, you come up with the idea and send it in. A lot of people complain or troll without offering alternatives (I'm not saying you're trolling, and since I love gigantic I understand where you're coming from)
So, how about changing the planets screen so that you can see what each one is building and change it?

And also:

P.S. I'm in the UK, an avid gamer, and can honestly say I've never even looked inside a copy of PC Zone - I think they're geared up to appeal more to the FPS or TOCA / GTA type fraternity, rather than the in depth strategy / RPG gamer.

I agree. Although I have read it a few times, possibly one of the best ways I find to describe it is "Used Toilet Paper". The only one I go near is PCGamer, who (incidentally) are running a demo version of galciv2 on their disc. So, finally, my mates are deciding to buy it, woo.

l know these threads are supposed to be fanboy only affairs

Oh please. Us "Fanboys" acknowledge the game isn't perfect. It has some bugs, including some early ones that were game breakers for some (until they got fixed, which was quickly). We (that's the majority of posters in the forum) know that it despises new players, and crushes their egos to bloody little pulps. We know the UI can be confusing (I remember first time I played galciv1, I just sat there staring). However, people get extremely annoyed when some stuck-up FPS-loving prat starts to badmouth the game on graphical terms, when he barely played it, and didn't bother to learn any mechanics of it whatsoever.

Honestly, I never read paper game magazines for good reason. They're all ads. The overhyped games always get terrific ratings despite how crappy they may be (see Driv3r), and the largest multi-page reviews. Indy titles or more underrated games are often overlooked entirely, or given little consideration.

I agree with Redshift8... 5 of out 5 for this game is VERY generous... Its a great game but has some major flaws mostly with the UI... however i can see what the reviewer is saying because when i first bought this game i probably would have given it a similar rating; and i LOVE TBS ... in fact after 5 hours of play i shelved it VERY disapointed... lucky i picked it up again... its a great game but probably has one of the worst UI's ive seen in a tbs game (i didnt play gal civ 1 so who knows? ).. i mean after 5 or so hours of playing most games i can easily make my way around without consulting forums ect ... whereas even now winning on challanging difficulty easily, got econ/ most game mechanics downpat, i still dont know how to set rally points, or upgrade my ships on mass, automatate production EFFECTIVELY on planets or manage many individual fleets (without loosing them or carefully scruitinizing for them)... the game shifts back to my flagship every fkn turn regardless of whether he is on guard or not... and a whole other host of smaller issues; its taken the enjoyment out for me playing huge/giant maps ... now i understand there is a very loyal fan base here who will probably flame the hell out of me for being so stupid ie knowing such basic things but thats the point, an intuitive interface is quick, easy to learn, and obvious.. whereas galciv 2 is not that... lucky i installed the beta patch and the social/military micromanagement nightmare was fixed lol...

on the other hand im still playing it and most games have a very short lifespan with me and i am very critical about games... it was great to see a game at only $60 AUS (unheard of for a new release/non expansion title) and also good to see a producer/developer who actually cares enough about his work to keep working on it and actively participate in the community the game creates.. (entreprenuer was another great stardock game, loved that game

There needs to be a way to give build orders to multiple planets (not governers... what if I have 50 planets building constructors and I want 25 to start building warships).

Well, it's pretty easy and quick to do from the F2 planet list - I can't think of any easier way to implement it, how are you suggesting it is done?

The AI needs to be taught how to build on bonus squares, and in general not gimp its planets by not building a factory (I've taken over planets with very few improvements late in the game).

The AI does appear to use scorched earth tactics. Also, the planet could well have changed hands between AIs a few times - and they love to use invasion tactics that destroy improvements. Unless you've captured an extremely badly developed planet from an AI that has never been involved in a war, and you took it on a first turn surprise attack, then this isn't a valid observation.

I know one of PCZones freelance reviewers (Michael Filby) - He endorses the review by jolt, who he also reviews for; Who, ironically, gave the game 90%.

GalCiv2 is the best looking, most advanced game in its genre (4x Space Games) and easily the only TBS pushing Civ4 for the crown of best turn based strategy. What on earth were PCZones reviewers on?

i still dont know how to set rally points

It's the tiny little button above the visible research/morale/cash display in the bottom left.

or upgrade my ships on mass

There's a little checkbox saying "Upgrade all ships of this class". This is the only other option aside from ship by ship updates.

automatate production EFFECTIVELY

Err... what? I don't think you can automatate at all. You say what ship, it builds. You have to do the infrastructure yourself. If you mean shifting focus, just click on the icon next to the output on the planet screen.

manage many individual fleets (without loosing them or carefully scruitinizing for them)...

If there is nothing for them to do, send them home. Otherwise you'll just get bored of doing nothing. If you're preparing for an invasion, set the up strategically, ready for the attack.

the game shifts back to my flagship every fkn turn regardless of whether he is on guard or no

Flick him on sentry, he'll only shift if he sees something that shouldn't be there. Or press W for auto explore, he'll go look for unexplored space and not ever bother you again (I mean that)

People expect us to believe they can beat the game on challenging, but don't know how to upgrade a class? Maybe the giant window that automatically opens and says 'upgrade' might have something to do with that?

Clearly the 1.1 patch is primarily focussed on addressing the way the AI plays the game and fixing some more obvious exploits. I don't really have a problem with the UI: I'm not confused by it, and I don't think it's difficult to do anything. There is just too much clicking to find information that should be in one place.

Oh, and I want to say the auto-focus switch is incredibly annoying. If Stardock is in love with it, at least put a 'don't ever change focus unless the player says so' option. It's tres frustrating, and I really don't see what help it's supposed to be.

No 6 out of 5 would have been very generous. This cracks me up. Opinion people. Everyone has one myself included.

Could things be better? Well define better. I always find it amusing when in my own job I design an interface for something that I think is spot on and then someone comes along and tells me its *too confusing*. And by that they mean to say *hey how come this button isn't here?*. Guess what. Not every one thinks the same or perceives things in the same way. There are a few of us that apparently have zero issues with the interface because it made sense from day one. Guess I'm just special that way

Often makes me wonder what a game like Pong would have gotten if there had been reviews and forums back then. Talk about a confusing interface... You want me to spin this knob to make that block move up and down the screen?!?? wait that makes no sense... it should be slide a control up and down to make the block move up and down. This is awful. Who designed it a blind monkey?!?? At least Space Invaders interface made sense cause you push the joystick left the ship goes left and same for right.

I wish at times people would complain about game content rather then personal preference. You know why the interface works the way it does? Because the devs like it that way.

Marcathonas
Sending ships home when a base can only support a limited number of docked ships?

Pnakotus
If you could read properly i said upgrade on mass.. why should i have to disband my fleets and upgrade each ship individually? if there is a prompt that comes up automatically when i upgrade my ships in the ship designer its only come up periodically (i do recall seeing something like that but only got it by chance). I dont care what you or anyone else believes in fact there is no way in knowing whether what i or anyone else says here is truthful or not so whats the point of disputing truth?

cyberj914
sure everyone has an opinion but some things are obvious flaws which is what i was pointing out.. for instance im sure the devs are aware and probably arent happy with alot of the problems which is why they are patching .... the difference between 1.0x and beta 1.1 is fairly dramatic so that implies the devs dont simply choose things because they "like it that way"

Sending ships home when a base can only support a limited number of docked ships?

If you aren't at war, there is no reason for an army so huge it can't fit. If there is, your ships are far too weak.

If you could read properly i said upgrade on mass.. why should i have to disband my fleets and upgrade each ship individually?

If YOU could read properly, when you upgrade any ship of a certain type (in the game, not the designer), you have the option to upgrade all ships of that class. This includes auto-upgrading those in fleets, and all from 1 single ship.

sure everyone has an opinion but some things are obvious flaws which is what i was pointing out.. for instance im sure the devs are aware and probably arent happy with alot of the problems which is why they are patching ..

Not true, the main thing is better AI and user-suggested options. There are things they want to fix, but probably not as many as you think. Most things were fixing beta bugs, which are to be expected. The AI is a constant work-in-progress.

Oh yeah, and before you say "there is no way to prove" it's called the metaverse. We see the badges, victories, and defeats, to see what you can and can't do. Before you start to become more aggresive, get your facts right. Just so you don't start to look like an idiot.

Let's not fall into the falacy of someone pointing out a legitimate "flaw" as justifying a ridiculous score.

Oblivion, for example, has all the NPCs leveling up with the player which many RPG fans consider a game ender for them. But you don't see websites giving it a 60%.

GalCiv 2's UI ain't perfect but it has some really handy innovations not seen in other games like being able to zoom out to a tactical map. Any points it might lose because the stacked unit list is kludgy should be more than made up by that innovation.

Civ 4 is a great game with some nice UI parts. But it has its share of UI flaws as well. It's a real pain in the butt to manage a large empire in Civ 4 compred to GalCiv 2.

The falacy really comes down to the scoring. If I said "Civ 4 is hard to manage a large empire. 60%" people would scream just as people here are screaming about some nitpick about the UI and then handing it a 60%. The site gave STar Wars, Empire at War a 85% or something like that for crying out loud.

And i'm not saying it's bad, just that it isn't 9/10 good.

These people who think 4.5 out of 5 or 5 out of 5 is being "generous" begs the question. Okay, what's a 5 out of 5 game?

Civilization 4? Is that a 5 out of 5 game? A game that gets tedious because the computer players have to cheat like mad to be remotely challenging? A game where you have to play multiplayer to have any sort of longevity? A game that is virtually impossible to win other than space race or letting the time run out? I would give Civ 4 a 4.5 out of 5 or even a 5 out of 5 even with these flaws because games are rated compared to each other.

What about Oblivion? It's averaging 5 out of 5 ratings almost. A game where the caves are all the same? A game where the more you play the more you realize the everything was copied and pasted across the world with different names? A game that has all the NPCs leveling up along with you so that walking the road at level 20 means the bandidts are now level 20? That you could clear the enemy gates at level 2 but have a tougher time at level 30 because the guards are now level 30 instead?

We aren't comparing GalCiv to some imaginary perfect game. We're comparing it to other games that have been reviewed. Compared to say Age of Empires 3 or Oblivion or even Civilization 4 which all got their share of 4.5 or 5 out of 5 reviews then hell yea, GalCIv II is a 5 out of 5 game.

No reasonable reviewer shoudl be giving it less than 4 out of 5.

Wow. The guy who is saying it's hard to upgrade ships. Wow. There's a freaking upgrade button in the shipyard screen. How easy is that?

How do I upgrade units in mass in Civ IV? Oh yea, you can't. I guess they must have given Civ IV a 60%.. Oh wait, no, they didn't.

an idea to do this:

To change what planets you want to change the ships they are building....

highlight all of the planets from the planet screen and then change 1 planet (from the selected) and it'll automatically update all that are seleceted.

How do I upgrade units in mass in Civ IV? Oh yea, you can't. I guess they must have given Civ IV a 60%.. Oh wait, no, they didn't.

Yes you can...When you select the unit type you want to upgrade, hold down alt before pushing the unit icon of your upgrade. Voila.

Anyway, as a new player, I will say I definitly found the review to harsh, on the other hand I will say this has been one of the hardest games to jump into for me. A better tutorial would be enough for me, it's all I ask. Right now I am waiting for community based guides to come out. I "seem" to be doing fine, having moved up to normal difficulty, but I don't know why and that bothers me. In beginner I literally tripped over my two influence victories, and the AI did nothing at all the whole game, so I don't feel like I learned anything from those experiences, because they just happened. On normal, much the same, though the A.I. does keep up on me a bit better, my actions just don't have enough "reactions" to visibly send me the signals needed to know if I what I am doing is "right" or just me bullying/tripping over a easy set A.I. Maybe that's a signal to step up the difficulty level again, but I don't feel anymore knowledgeable to do so.

sure everyone has an opinion but some things are obvious flaws which is what i was pointing out.. for instance im sure the devs are aware and probably arent happy with alot of the problems which is why they are patching .... the difference between 1.0x and beta 1.1 is fairly dramatic so that implies the devs dont simply choose things because they "like it that way"

No arguement there. But not everything you pointed out are flaws either. I'll grant you that this game has one of the steepest learning curves of anything released in recent memory. And I did mean to put a smilie face at the end of that last line about them liking it that way. There comes a point in development where you have to decide *yeah it's not perfect but we need to stamp it done so we can move on*. Luckily for us Stardock is going back and tweaking the things that were a bit off like the shipyard.

I guess its just amusing to me and probably only me when people complain about something as being *unituitive* since that means different things to a lot of different people. Personally I had a harder time getting my head around the economy then I did the interface. Once I found the Colony tab in the Civ Manager screen I was all set. Didn't read the manual nor did I go through the tutorials. I just kept clicking things until I found what I needed. But as I said I'm funny that way I guess .

Magnumaniac:

Well, it's pretty easy and quick to do from the F2 planet list - I can't think of any easier way to implement it, how are you suggesting it is done?

Shift click a bunch of planets from the manager screen and update them all at once.

@Oldstatesman: Thanks for the tip. I'll try that when the patch comes out.

cyberj914:

There comes a point in development where you have to decide *yeah it's not perfect but we need to stamp it done so we can move on*. Luckily for us Stardock is going back and tweaking the things that were a bit off like the shipyard.

100% agree. On the other hand, I think it has enough flaws to not deserve 5/5.

cyberj914:

There are a few of us that apparently have zero issues with the interface because it made sense from day one.

I never said anything vague like "too confusing." I gave very specific issues. I'll agree that the ability to change the production of multiple planets at once is an enhancement request, but some of the others I can only consider flaws. They aren't game-breaking, but (in my opinion) they are still flaws.

cyberj914:

Once I found the Colony tab in the Civ Manager screen I was all set. Didn't read the manual nor did I go through the tutorials. I just kept clicking things until I found what I needed. But as I said I'm funny that way I guess .

I work the same way, and have never complained about the learning curve. But when I move a stack of 5 ships, and then select another ship, and in the box at the bottem of the screen it ONLY shows that 1 ship... well, I expect it to only move that ship. Not 4 others on the other side of the map that I have moved before in a stack. I don't think that that's "intended" or "as the developers like it." I think it's a flaw. It doesn't break the game for me, but it's irritating. Every time I move a stack of ships I have to click on a planet to make sure my selection is cleared.

Pnakotus:

Oh, and I want to say the auto-focus switch is incredibly annoying. If Stardock is in love with it, at least put a 'don't ever change focus unless the player says so' option. It's tres frustrating, and I really don't see what help it's supposed to be.

I would LOVE that option. That drives me crazy too.

John Hemp

These people who think 4.5 out of 5 or 5 out of 5 is being "generous" begs the question. Okay, what's a 5 out of 5 game?

I concede the point. Well reasoned. I believe that when the AI is strengthened, and the UI is refined some more, that it will be a 95%+ game. It has tremendous strengths.

Marcathonas:

Us "Fanboys" acknowledge the game isn't perfect.

I regret having put that sentence in my original post. It served no purpose but to provoke. I didn't think it though, just typed on the fly, and I apologize.

The feeling behind it was the frustration I get when I see people rave about the AI and attack anyone that says the game has serious problems. I think the game DOES have problems, and some of them are rather irritating. In addition, I have seen many people respond to criticism of the AI with "Turn up the difficulty, it is amazing." I don't agree. I'll admit I'm pretty good at TBS games, but I expect to be frustrated by the highest difficulty for a while.

I never intended to argue that the 60% was a fair rating. Perhaps this was the wrong thread to express myself in. I do feel that the game has flaws that, in my mind, could not allow it a 5/5 rating. I think very very few PC games have deserved a rating of 5/5 at release time. I hope and believe those flaws will be addressed (I know some of them will be in the next patch).

The game IS really good, and I think that with some more work (UI and AI) it can be one of the few truly great games.

Any site that would give Age of Empires 3 a good score, which they did, has no business complaining about GalCiv's UI.

Age 3's UI was so bad that it made the game incredibly difficult to play. It wasn't unintuitive, it was just a huge obstacle to actually getting to the game stuff.

Under "drive by reviews" they should link to this review.

I had never played a 4X game before and so my first impressions were not much different from some of those echoed in the review. However through these forums, and reading many reviews and other peoples opinions, I decided to work my way through those and found they changed, totally.
Whilst I think there are some real shortcomings to the game I akin it to a rough diamond, in need of a polish.

What some seasoned veterans of this series need to consider is that the first time player / buyer will see the game differently, and not be as forgiving of any shortcomings. They will not understand the dedication, support and enthusiasm that goes to make Stardock one of the better game developers and supporters of their software.

I had similar opinion when I first played Civ 3, then I became a Civ addict. Civ 4 is different - eye candy galore but there is substance underneath.

Now I'm just a Galciv adddict


I have a thought that if this type of game is going to appeal to those who wouldn't normally be attracted to this genre then it would need to do something similar to what Civ 4 has done over Civ 3.

I've bought that magazine, it's crap. PC Format is much better IMO. Just another mediocre reviewer trying to stand out by being controversial. Any serious gamer gets more than one opinion anyway.

I guess I'm a little more forgiving of what I term *sequence* flaws then most. Yes I've run into the click a ship and it moves two ships bug but for the most part once I figured out what was going on I simply stopped doing the sequence of clicks that cause it. Therefore I don't see it as a major problem because I no longer have it.

Oh and I do have things that the game does that annoy me. For instance I play the game almost exclusively in strategic view orientated in such a way that if I scroll the map *up* the view moves *up* on the mini map. Now every time I load a game or start a new one I've got to adjust the map. But do I complain about it and say the game is flawed? No of course not. I simply put it on my list of suggestions when they ask for them and if it gets changed then bonus for me. If not then I'll just keep putting it the way I want and go about my business.

As for the AI not building on its planets well this is something they are addressing in v1.1 and from the looks of things it's a lot better. Is it perfect? Well no of course not it is an AI after all. But it is better then any other AI in any other game of this type. Period. You don't have to build a factory on every planet. This is one of those instances where the logic *because I do it means it must be right* does not apply. Maybe it is a border world and the AI doesn't want to risk giving you a fully developed world. Maybe it decided to use the planet for population for transports it will purchase. Also on higher difficulties it will actually remove buildings from a world it thinks is in danger of capture. It does take advantage of bonus tiles if need be. Again these things are all in 1.1. Should these changes been in release? Well hard to say since I'm willing to bet that the majority of this update is simply because the devs and all of us have had a month to play the game.

Honestly quibbling over a 4.5 or 5 is mostly personal preference and pointless. The 60% the mag gave it is just ludicrous and proved the reviewer did not give the game time. Sure on a gloss over of two or three hours things look terrible. But after several days you begin to see where the strength of the game lies. Brad had a post about reviewer types a little while ago. The type that *reads the marketing materials and decides what to give the game* seems to be what this particular review falls into .

I find it amusing that they complain about the Gal Civ II interface when, for me, their website is completely chopped off about half way across the screen, making it completely impossible to access some of the content

Still, there ARE flaws in the Gal Civ interface. I love the game, but there are just so many little niggles here and there that have my tearing my hair out.

- Ship production: When you change the build order, clicking on 'Back to Planet' changes it back to whatever it was before you did anything.
- Fleets: Sometimes they just won't form. You can't access individual ships which are in a fleet either, without disbanding those ships.
- Stacked units: You can't access an individual unit for upgrading/fleet for dibanding/etc without moving them to a separate square. With stacked units, you have to double click several times to open up the screen you want, because it will instead open up the screen for the OTHER ship on that square. Then there's the old favorite of having part of the stack still selected when you click on another fleet somewhere else on the map... This has lost me one of the campaign missions by kindly moving my transports right next to a dreadlord ship.
- Upgrading ships: They loose all the weapons and stuff, so I have to fill them up all over again (I know this can be turned off in 1.1, but I'm still playing 1.0X as, I assume, was the reviewer)
- Clicks not registering: Sometimes I click on a fleet and it just does NOT want to be selected.