I think there's plenty of money in expansions. If blizzard has taught us anything it's that players are VERY willing to pay to play new content for old games. Not just in WoW, but look at the success they enjoyed with Brood Wars. They could easily have made another sequel to starcraft and people would have paid full price for it.

I say take it all the way until work can begin on galciv3 ... assuming it's profitable for you guys. I guess you really have to base your judgement on whether or not Twilight of the Arnor is profitable. I'd say keep making expansions until they end up in the red.

i for two (or whatever reply i'll be when this is done) would probably go for several more exapsions. i'm not a prolific gamer; i tend to pick a few games and play them a lot (or rather, the time i spend on gaming is divided among a very few games).

i still played Civ3 (yes, 3) after its release, even after Civ4 came out.

also, spending $40 isn't a big deal to me. i'm a full time professional and a bachelor. i for one will probably buy further expansions the same month they come out, if i don't pre-order them. i know that i don't represent your entire consumer demographic, but i think if you make more expansions, and you make sure each one is a worthwhile purchase, your fans will purchase them over time.

perhaps one way to model a business plan for GC2 expansions would be to avoid making further ones linear: that is, release expansion packs that allow players to pick and chose the additional features they want. i for one wouldn't buy a multiplayer expansion unless it was required for other features i did want. in that case i'd slightly resent having to buy it, but only on principle (again, $40 ain't that much). on the other hand, i'd be willing to pay good money for a prolific expansion to ship jewelry, but i know that's not necessarily what every player wants.

just my thoughts on the subject. i really like this game, and frankly i could see myself playing it for quite some time if you continue adding to it.

I'd pay $20 for a well-done economic revamp alone.
In fact, several people that I tried to get into the game stated that the economic system seemed pretty weird to them. And to a certain extent, it really is.

I'd be very cautious with changes and additions to the combat system though. There's the danger to overload it: It can be fun for a while, but when conquering dozens of planets and fighting even more battles you stop wanting to care about too many details. Combat - both the general strategy and individual tactics - has to stay somewhat manageable even on the biggest map sizes.

Considering how long I played MOO2 and wanted minor upgrades I would go for continuous upgrades. One expansion a year seams reasonable.

There are still a lot of ideas in the game that I want to see mature and expanded upon and graphically keep maturing as well.

It encourages me to see a continuous development of ideas from a game company rather then a set release with no chance to improve. That shows a vested interest and passion for gaming that holds value to me. It helps a lot that its one of my favorite kinds of games too. That it’s a game niche which has been starved for anything of quality for years might also have something to do with it.

I think this is a great idea. I haven't messed with the mods at all, but rolling some of the best of breed into an expansion and flaging them meta compatible certified/uncertified, certainly plays to my laziness...

I do also like the idea of independent add-ons and options for roll up packages for the new buyers.

Frankly, you have to look at some combination of potential profit and desire. I just don't know if your hardcore set of players is large enough to keep justifying it financially. I suspect TA will give you a pretty good feel for how many people are willing to buy expansion packs indefinitely and what the bottom line will look like.

The desire portion is pretty important as well. Your team, at some point in time, is going to want to just do something new and different. Their feelings on this matter.

I've purchased many of the StarDock games (GC I, GC II & expansions, Corporate Machine, Political Machine) and I feel they have been regularly improving in their quality and ability to hold my interest. I am reasonably confident that I will like whatever new games come down the pike and, consequently, you've got my money because of your track record, whether it's an expansion or a new game. If continuing to do expansions significantly delays the possibility of the next great MOM like game, I would prefer the new game. If you can do both, well, I obviously want both.

I would rather see 2 or 3 more expansion packs for GC2 until GC3 is done, a 3 (or more!) year wait between Twilight of the Arnor and GC3 would be waaaayyyy too long, I'm getting old...who knows how much time I have left!

I think the reason you can continue expansion packs is that you have a real masterpiece on your hands. It would have been meaningless to have an expansion pack for MoOIII. But your product is really special. It has issues, but as long as they are addressed in the expansions, I'm a buyer. Certainly the economic/production engine would need a relook. Espionage has been mentioned already and diplomacy changes would also add a new freshness to the game.

I personally feel that ground invasions only need a graphical update. I feel that too much micromanagement in conquering many planets is not an enhancement, but the look and feel of the combat right now just isn't as first class as the rest.

Combat, quite simply just needs a few things....more like MoOII i guess, targeted attacks against enemy fleets instead of the current automatic pick of the target.
Tweaks to balance out the defense/attack.

I am more than willing to pay to have features added to the game to enhance the replayability of it. Like many others have mentioned, I play just a few games at a time and those that keep my interest I play for years and years. This was my replacement fix for Master of Orion 2. I had bought several CD's so that I could keep playing it when the CD's wore out. I can trash those now....

Please continue with expansions as long as you can and in those expansions, address the issues that are brought up over and over in these forums. The very active user base here should give you a real roadmap to what changes are wanted. But the changes should be adding options where possible instead of wholesale changes that may not fit everyone. (Multi-player is a perfect example).

And last and not least, thanks for asking....can't remember the last time a developer/publisher asked.....

for my two cents' worth, if you revamp combat it think the bottom line should be that you won't lose anything if you don't micromanage. what that should mean is no ordering units in real time: you can plan tactics before battle or pre-program them into each fleet or type of fleet or type of ship or individual ship, but once two sides enter battle the outcome should be established purely but automated equations.

that way players who don't want to micromanage dozens of battles don't have to, but we still end up with a feeling that we have a lot of choices at our disposal. same goal should apply to invasions.

Well with all the ideas that have been put forth, I'd hate to have to wait 3 more years for an updated game. I too, like the sound of the UP idea, i once suggested that civs be able to see the subject before the vote comes out and they can use the trade screen to try to get allys (only allys) to vote their way. And an elected president choses which subject gets voted on.

But, To answer your question I thimk the continues release of expansions is ok. I like to tyhink the svaings are passed onto us and i like that i feel like im still playing the same game i love. A new game is, well, a new game. i guess its all psycological though. As long as the expansions keep the game growing and getting better id be willing to buy them. I think a GalCiv3 is something for when the entire game will be changed.
Like maybe a real 3-d galaxy, spherical and all or voices in the game "our shilds are down, we're taking damage!!" stuff like that.

Well personally I think the addition of the Terror Stars is a big leap.....now we only need carriers!  

I just wish there was a lot more depth to the game, and by depth I mean the fun kind of depth. Not the kind of depth that makes the game confusing. Like having unique techs per race. I like the Drengin Slave Pitts a lot.

The Good/Netral/Evilthing needs to be fixed, as said by many here on the forum. Being good shouldn't always be a kick in the pants. Like the underwater cities, if the you let them live they will contribute to the game in some other way. They could give you a boost in extreme planet colonization research for example. If you just killed them all you get nowhere, so evil should get the boot there.

The ancient city ruins: If good didn't bulldoze it down, it could give a boost to the influence of the planet but it would slow pop growth. If you did bulldoze it you would get a boost in pop growth, but loss of influence.

There just seems to be no thought here with the planetary events. Evil always gets the bonuses. Does benevolence have no reward?!  

Speaking of the underwater cities, I think they should be able to live along side your race as a minor nation. Probably not the best idea, but I think when you land on a planet you should have a chance of finding a race that has todays level of technology. It would just be so much cooler to claim the planet and use them as your little guinea pigs. If the planet had different nations on it, the nations would battle eachother for dominance.
Once one side gains control they would be upgraded to a "minor race".

Minor races: They shouldn't be minor. Do you know how hard it would be to unite an entire world? Try uniting Earth. You have SO many cultures that fight eachother and you would have to get them all to be peacful and not want kill to eachother. Not gonna happen in our lifetimes. So uniting an entire planet under one solitary rule is a magnificent feat for ANY civilization.

Politics just needs to be done all over again. Diplomacy is SO boring. The UP bills thing is good though.

Speaking of which, it would be cool to guide your race from primitive society into the space age of Galciv2. Yea, I'm asking a lot that will probably never happen. Combine Sid Meirs's Civilizations, little of the Age of Empires series, Master of Orion, and Galactic Civilizations to get the ULTIMATE GAME! Yea, i'm asking to much aren't I?  

I think you kinda missed the point of morale choices. Evil choices always reap the benefits, but on the downside youll be more prone towards a evil alignment which will hurt your diplomatic relationships (especially with Good aligned factions).

Its easy being evil, thats how its always worked be it in a game or reality. But soon or later someone is gonna come knocking down your door and make you stop your villainous behavior. Thats something that is a lot less likely if youve gone on the morally good path in your choices. Thats also the real benefit of making a Good choice.

You cant have your cake and eat it... unless your evil and steal someone elses cake that is.

More expansions would be great!
I can't wait for 1.7. When TA comes out, it's "Katy bar the door"!