Actually, the thickness of the Milky-Way is only about 1,000 light years. Hardly enough room for "millions" of stars.



Nonsense. A complete overhaul of how the economy and tech tree works in the game could be of great value.



Actually, I think ground combat should be removed entirely. You should have to use ships to take a world. After all, if you bring along a huge battlecruiser and park it in orbit, threatening to start making cities disappear, the populace is likely to do what you say.

Now, that being said, I think planets should be able to fight back. They should be able to have orbital bombardment defenses (which don't take up space on the planet, so that they're not competing with other things for precious space) which can weaken or completely negate an attempt to take over. They should also have offensive systems that aid battles taking place in orbit around the planet, so that they don't get into that situation to begin with.

And in order to actually orbitally bombard a planet, the ship will have to carry orbital bombardment weapons, which do take up room on the ship that could be used for other things. That prevents you from taking over undefended worlds in the very early game with your most basic warships.

Absolutely enough room for *billions* of stars, as noted on the Wikipedia page you cite.

But this is a game, not a formal research model, so I'm more concerned about how these notions might affect the play flow and the UI. I guess I'm a "hybrid" when it comes to the 3D for GC3 debate. I'd like to be able to look at my map in simplified 2D terms, but I'd also like the underlying math and the deep zoom-in (full graphics) level to reflect the fact that stars share a 3D space.

Perhaps GC3 needs an analog to the Master of Magic "two planes" map. It could have 3, or perhaps 5, layers: the core and the smaller planar sections on either side--basically a mirror pair of pyramidal pancake stacks. Put that together with something sort of like the "zones of thought" in Vernor Vinge's A Fire Upon the Deep and you could have a pretty cool game.

Unless the 3D position of planets and stars has an actual gameplay effect, there's no point in rendering it.

You could attack from above and below.

A 3D map works fine for a real time game with no grid like Homeworld, but not for a turn based game using a grid like Galactic Civilizations.



Totally agreed - we should focus on fun, not accuracy. Playing in a realistic representation of our universe would be boring.

The *billions* of stars cited refer to the entire Milky Way, not the just the depth. Which means that the Milky Way is about 51 stars deep at the edges, given a density of .0509 stars per cubic light year (if you erroneously assume that the depth doesn't change).

A 3D map would be cool and worthy for a sequel. It's already been done in The Sword of the Stars. The biggest difficulty is with the interface to make effortless manipulation of the map in 3D with just the mouse; It can stress the fine motor coordination and strain the eyes.

More influence in battles would be cool, without going to directly controlling them. Adding ship's captains, crew training, tactical doctrine, more weapons and defenses (more types, more options rather than blanket fleet modifiers). More detail to battle along the lines of sensor contacts and stealth. Stealth should conflict vs. sensor levels to determine if a ship even sees another one in a round of battle, before it even shoots. E.g. Some ships might hang back and lob from a distance, while others try to dogfight for a tactical advantage against weakpoints in the armor (defense modules have facings, anyone?). Some ships might stealth, while others might emphasize sensor sweeping and command and control to get ships to focus on a single target. Basically more detail and realism that hooks into the tech tree. The risk is of course too much bloat.

Space battles should also look better. I'd look towards emulating the coolness of The Sword of the Stars battles without actually doing tactical battles. Maybe the makers, Lighthouse, could be contracted even. Better looking ship vectoring, better weapons effects (probably individual weapon tracking), coherent squad movement and volleys.

Planetary invasions need to be something more meaningful, like maybe a strategic mini-game. I'd still keep the tactics option. A multi-stage aspect to the invasion (invasions could be in multiple stages--atmospheric defence / troop shuttles, initial landing, and then the true campaign) with more details that portrayed a trade-off in casulties, planet damage, force ratios, force composition, etc.. would make land war more interesting. At the very least a random selection of 3D videos in the style of the original land war animation.

Basically, bigger, stronger, better, prettier. A more complete level of detail that still maintains the strategic emphasis while including a tactical feel, without actually going to tactical mini-games.

Hey, while we're at it, why don't we just have Lighthouse make Sword of the Stars 2 and let StarDock make Galactic Civilizations III?

I understand wanting to incorporate elements from other games, but there's a big difference between incorporating a few elements and saying you want someone else to make the game just because you liked a previous game of theirs.

I think that all I would need is more controle over space battles and much more tacticle groundmaps. I could give up everything else for that.

Diplomacy needs to be finished.
A better more streamlined unit design system

For a excellent example of both, and for people who have never played it, (4xTBS game) Alpha Centauri(and its expansion Alien Crossfire), which is perhaps one of the best 4x of all time, which people still play today!


Amazing diplomatic options, decent combat, a great covert ops/spy system that is balanced, and diplomacy that actually means stuff! Not to mention super projects, many amny buildings....


bah... just remake that, but make it gal civ, (or buy the rights!)


Now im off to go play that game.... sooo good.

Anyone who wants to play a great TBS game, definitely check it out.!

@ Alfonse, thanks for raining on my parade with your mediocre conventional wisdom.


At any rate, I'd restate that the graphics level of the battles in The Sword of The Stars was definitely many notches above the video in GalCiv2, so I'd still hold that as a partial graphics goal for GalCiv3's battles.

Bottom line, to be worth another sequel and more $$.$$, it better be better than the last.

I don't think that a 3D map (in the sense of having an extra dimension to annoy you and make things generally irritating) is a good idea. New regions (galaxies) make more sense and they play to what we've seen in recent science fiction - that is, the gulf between galaxies isn't all that interesting or inhabitable, but being able to get from one galaxy to another in a reasonable amount of time is pretty cool.

I would like the stars to be like Galciv 1, with the planets tucked inside. This would add more realism to the game. When you click on the star, a window could pop up showing a system map with all your planets and ships that are in the system. You could then order your planets to build stuff like usual.

You suggested that someone who was not StarDock be commissioned to make GC3. While I don't agree with every decision they made in GC2, it's still an incredibly rude suggestion.



Yes, but the definition of "better" is up for debate. For example, I would prefer that they not have combat visualization at all; just tell me who won, who lost, and how much damage the looser took.



They took that out because it was incredibly tedious. Screw realism; I want playability.

I agree with the syars being outside the planets.

Also it is OK to incorperate parts of other games into GalCiv2. For an obscure historical referance, the mongols lost the invasion of japan twoce because they didn't adapt to the strategy. The same goes with the gameing world. As long as you incorperate it into the game properly then it should be fine.

Also lets try to be civil and not turne my post into an argument.  

Um.... The game is already 3d. The map turns into 2d when you zoom a certain distance from it so you can still see everything with symbols. (Very usefull for immense galaxies.) The strategic map is 3D. You can zoom in to a ship, a planet, anything and move around it. Routate and change the viewing angle. It is not a 2d game. I stated before the map becomes 2d when you zoom out far enough and everything is shown with symbols.

No, the game renders in 3D. 3D gameplay and 3D rendering are two entirely separate things. The Doom engine is basically 2D gameplay with 3D rendering. New Super Mario Bros is 3D rendering with 2D gameplay.

When people say they want the map to be 3D, they're usually saying that they want 3-dimensional movement.

Basically the map would look like this.

Urgh, please not 3d maps. I don't think it would enrich the game very much, and the extra UI complexity wouldn't be worth it. How would it know which "level" I'm clicking on to move my ship? Would it just be several flat maps on top of each other?

Something I suggested a while ago was the ability to design alien races in the same way we design ships. I imagined bolting body parts to hard points at the time, but nwo that I've had a go at Spore I think it could be done much better. Just design your species, set its "mood" (mean/friendly) and you're ready to go.

A feature for designing race icons/flags would be good too. Everything would then be contained within the program and new races could be designed easily. Add the ability to upload/download straight from the game to the library and you have access to more races than you can shake a stick at.

Amen! Any changes to the combat system (tactical battles, tactical ground ivnasions, etc.) need to come with a toggle in the menu so we can disable it. Gameplay > realism.

My current ideas for it are the following:

1. Make planetary invasions different. This kind of goes along with the OP, but my idea is to make it so that planets must be conquered one improvement at a time. This would obviously make it so that planetary invasions would be more realistic time-wise, make it so that more than one faction could control a planet. Perhaps in the event of joint ownership, influence could play a role, allowing you to slowly have enemy controlled improvements defect to your side. Also, control of the starport would be crucial as well, since whoever owned it could effectively defend the planet against reinforcements. The only problem is, what exactly happens when the improvement you conquer is one that would be destroyed? Maybe instead of being destroyed, it is upgraded to an equivalent building for your own race?

2. Stealth technologies. Make it so that ships can be cloaked, and only very good sensors can detect them. Then, change the ship battles so that they aren't necessarily to the death. If a cloaked ship remains unseen by the enemy (bad sensors/no sensors on fleets) and it has at least 2 moves, it can do a hit-and-run attack and escape unscathed. I'm thinking of something like an extension of the Arcean super ability, only the battle ends after the first round, and the cloaked ship gets away clean. I think that would be pretty neat.

That sounds incredibly tedious, and not a particularly useful thing. It may be more realistic, but nobody cares about that. Do you really want to conquer a race that has 100 worlds one planetary improvement at a time?

Just a few of my own ideas... for GalCiv3

Alpha Centauri had a lot of good features and keyboard short cuts that GC2-3 would benefit from, particularly the "go to" destination.

There are few improvements i`d like to see in the interface and the game play, but i doubt we will see them in the TA update. Would be nice to see some of the non - agressive game play options beefed up, as it can get a little too Invade & conquer oriented.

1. Would be nice to see which "tech & remaining weeks to discovery" you are currently researching when in the "Colony Management" view screen for each planet... this way you can cycle through your planets whilst altering the "military, social and research" spending and get instant feedback on how this will effect the "discovery" speed of thecurrent tech. Also include the "current tech" being researched in the "Civilisation Manager - Colonies" screen... so that you get quick feed back on how your "spending" decisions, effect the research time to the next "discovery".

2. Ship Experience: Would be nice to see this included with the other ship information when you click on a ship(appears on the right in the main galaxy window). Otherwise you have to double click on each ship to get a separate "pop-up" window to fins the info.

3. Espionage: All though this has been improved under DA, there is still plenty of scope for improved game play options as in Alpha Centauri. Some of these options would only appear if you have "researched" further up a spy-espionage tree. Thus, when you place your spy on an enemy planet, you would have a choice of options, dependant on your "spy tech level".
Options could include:
Sabotage - Military / Social / Research / Economic (with an option to destroy, delay, disrupt, assasinate scientists etc.

Steal: Techs, Money, Research Points, Influence points

Blame another "race": set up another race for your deeds.

Reduce Morale or take over planet: Have to be big credit cost, low % chance of success, require highest "spy tech level" to attempt. Option of an Espionage Module for "Influence SS", would improve % chance of Espionage if fitted and enemy planet was within sphere of influence.

The more damaging choices would have a lower % of success or higher chance of capture etc. The higher your "spy tech" level the higher the chance of you succeeding. You could add a financial cost fee against some of the options and / or pay a fee to recover your spy after "an operation". If you choose not to, you loose your spy if you are successful or not. Should be an option to make a clean getaway (for a fee) or try to blame another race (% chance of being caught doing this etc.. for which there should be serious consequences for the "Spies race" ie: Fines, Loss of influence, loss of treaties, Diplomatic loss, WAR.

Not sure how the AI would play the "Spy options", but it would make fun gameplay for the human player. The "Spy - sub tree" levels would have to be quite expencive to research, so both AI & human player would have to consider how much they want to expend on gaining espionage options.

4. Survey: Currently, anomalies and space junk provide the human player a big boost in the game. Would be nice to tone the "bonuses" down a little or make the bonuses better but harder to gain IE: Introduce a "Survey" subtree off the Sensor Tech tree, which you have to research to unlock / discover some of the Anomalies/SpaceJunk in the game. Prior to research the anomalies/space junk carnt be surveyed/unlocked or may be even seen on the screen? But once researched (improved/advanced survey module fitted) they can be surveyed/unlocked with a bigger/better bonus/tech discovery etc.
This could also apply to "pre-cursor" tiles on planets. (A bit like the "terraforming" tiles options).
If you research to the highest level in the "survey sub tree" you could have access to a "Planetary/Galaxy tech building" that once built, unlocks/discovers/provides bonus "pre-cursor" tile/s and/or technology or space ship etc or major pre-cursor "Galactic Achievement" that could reshape the game if you or your enemy discover it on their planet.
As with the espionage, the "survey tech tree" would be expencive to research, but might prove a worthwhile option, depending on your game play. It stops the game becoming mainly an invade / conquer strategy.
I wouldnt think this would be too hard to code into the game

5. Planetary Resources: This is an option i would like added to the game.
At the moment, we colonise or conquer new planets, improve their PQ, terraform, build up populations and construct ships, buildings, research techs. Apart from planetary moral, there is no impact on the planet.
I would like to see the planets resources dwindle, or polution or production decrease over time unless you research a sub tree of "Planetary Improvements". This would have a big impact on the game, as you would be left with the choice of "stripping" a planet bare of its resources as quickly as possible, before it decreases in PQ or "resources" or you choose to reduce "production- research" to increase the longevity of the planet etc. By introducing planetary resources into the game, players could use various options of play ( this could involve Race Modifiers, as some races are less industrial, militaristic or destructive). You would be left with the option of husbanding your planets existing resources or researching "ECO-techs" to increase/improve/recycle or extend your planets PQ/resources or conquering more planets in order to maintain your Races expansion.
Each planet could have a variable amount of resources (choice in game options)which the player may or may not know about (might have to research tech to have an accurate idea of PR (planetary resources)). The PR would then decline dependant on some of the variables i have outlined above. Eventually, without any action on the players part, the planet would exhaust its PR or become too polluted or toxic to produce any thing as well as support/feed/water the population etc.
So it could come as a shock that your PQ 18 Planet that you have built up suddenly starts turning into a toxic dustbin! (And looks like it from space etc).
Alternatively, the "Survey" tech tree outined in Para 4 "Survey" might unlock or discover "pre-cursor" technology or a pre-cursor building tile that can reverse/halt or improve your planet's "PR" state. So if your spies find out that another race has discovered or has built/building a "PR" project/tech/building you may wish to intervene, invade, steal, sabotage etc..

Like i said above, all the ideas included from para 1 through 5 are ideas for improving
and extending gameplay. Some might not be practical or achievable, but I would like to think that there is scope for some of the ideas to be considered or improved upon. For those that havent played Alpha Centauri, take a look, its still a very good game and a lot of the game play in GC2 can be traced back to it. I particularly like the "cut video scenes" when you "invent-discover-build" a planetary improvement... this would add a lot to the "bells & whistles" overall sense of achievement in GalCiv. It wouldnt take too much to introduce these.

Well maybe not. I guess I'm thinking in terms of small galaxies, since those are the ones I usually play on.

How about making it so that each planet can do research on a different technology?

I was thinking like IQofSpam in that the more detailed invasions are good for smaller galaxys. One cool ting is to have there be an override, so the invasions are handled automatically (and well) but you can go in and command.

Annother cool thing would to be to have more plain old events. thgey wouldn't havce specific ethical choices, but they would just be cool. More non essenital informaion is just plain old fun.

(And good for writing AARs.)