What I want from this game in a selfish sort of fassion.

from GalCiv2 Forums

I've got this game down.  I love it.  but...

There is always a point when the tide turns in every game.  a point from which its obvious i will win.

I dont win every game, but when I do, it obvious that I will, years prior.

I want, being a long time fan, and first time poster to this board, a check box that says for example "hit me when im up".

i dont want the game to throw a curveball like "the galactic economy is booming" when im leading in that department.  I want the game to say "your in the lead, and a band of raging pirates plans to raid every trade ship you produce".  Or,  a collective group of races has decided that the only way to handle your kind is to send every spy they have avaliable to all of your planets".

It needs to feel like "im in the lead, and everyone, iran, russia, japan and mr. chavez included, are working behing the scenes to off me as the leader.  I want everyone to beg and pleed for their survival.  Cough up some gosh darn techs for peace, and maybe I wont wipe you off the map.  Why dont you ugly mugs try to climb up my ladder of succes and knock me off!!!

 

Thats it.

I want to say that this will be my only post.  but from my previouse attempts on other boards, i have to admit that it never seems to work out that way.

 

thanks

3,965 views 7 replies
Reply #1 from GalCiv2 Forums Top

Turn on Mega Events.

Don't thank me yet.

Also, consider increasing your difficulty level.

Reply #2 from GalCiv2 Forums Top

ive got the mega events all the way up, and usually do.

its not so much about the difficulty,  it just that point where you think you've won, and unless one of those events happen to happen,...

im asking to much... the game is great!

put that idea in your next one

thanks

 

Offworld Trading Company
Reply #3 from GalCiv2 Forums Top

The weakness Matthew pointed out is common to most (maybe all) strategy games: Before actually winning the game, there is a phase in which you surpassed the AI opponents in most or all areas, so your victory is basically assured and the act of achieving it is just kind of a formality. Since this is a weakness of the genre in general rather than GalCiv in particular, it´s nothing that "needs" to be fixed, but it would, of course, improve upon the gaming experience.

At first glanze, I see two ways to deal with it:

  1. Behind-the-scenes adjustments: Modern racing games often employ a kind of rubber-band system, that slows down AI opponents which are far ahead, and speeds up those who are far behind. Basically, the same could be done in GalCiv: opponents which are far superior to the player receive a malus to their economy, research, production etc. to allow the player to catch up, while those who are much weaker than the player receive a bonus. This way, the balance of power among player and AI races could be improved, and the game would be challenging throughout the entire match.
  2. Visible adjustments: Aside from giving the AI opponent hidden bonuses, the AI opponents themselves could be improved by implementing scripts that allow them to recognize the players superiority and find ways to undermine it. There are already some minor scripts of that kind in GalCivII, for example the AI refuses to trade weapon techs to players that have a strong militia. More radical scripts could, for example, have the AI form big alliances of 3 or more races all allied to each other to defend against the threat presented by the players superiority. Or they could have weak races who don´t stand a chance on their own surrender to stronger allies, to create a force that can oppose the powerful player. There are a lot of minor and major scripts that could be used here.

The advantage of the first approach is, it should be rather easy to implement and I think it would be quite effective. The AI would be kind of cheating, though. The advantage of the second approach is, that it´s visible to the player, making the game more interesting, and giving the late game a unique feel. It´s more difficult and time-consuming to implement, though, and might not be as effective.

 

One final note: something you must never do is "hurt" the player in response to his success (like in Matthews band of raging pirates idea). In a game, the player must always be rewarded for doing something well, not punished. Otherwise you risk hurting the players enjoyable gaming experience and motivation. Of course, if the player won´t realize the connection between his success and the bad things that happen to him it´s fine. So things like the pirates idea can still work, but you have to use them carefully and economically.

Anyway, the focus must always be on strengthening the AI opponents, not on weakening the player.

Reply #4 from GalCiv2 Forums Top

While its true that every game has a point where you know you'll win. Sometimes its as early as when you get the (broken) MCC built. But I don't know if anything can be done to make it harder at the end of the game. I guess one problem is that the game does not cheat. So what happens in the game when the AI is way ahead; before the player has caught up and overcome? Do the other AI players team up? Does the human player get some bonuses to catch up?

What I think is the biggest question: At what point will the game decide that the human player is going to win and the AI players need this boost? If its late and you have alreday taken a lot of AI planets it won't matter what kind of bonuses they get, they need planets to produce ships and troops. If its early then it just wouldn't be fair. WHat we're talking about is a point where you KNOW you will win, by definition there should be nothing the AI can do to stop you. And even if these things were implemented, there would still be a point where you know you will win, it would just be later in the game.

Now its not just this genre that has this happen. Think of the end of WW2, there was the point where the allies knew that victory was inevitable, but without a surrender they had to fight it out. The difference being of course that in WW2 there were real deaths associated with it and it wasn't considered boring I bet. The bombing of Japanese cities with little or no resistance is like having a fleet of ships next to every AI planet waiting to kill off and ship as its built. In Germany the resisitance was reduced to young boys and old men. There could have been no question that the allies were going to win.

Reply #5 from GalCiv2 Forums Top

In WWI, the German people were convinced by the media that they were winning the war, right up till the day before Armistice.   Interesting trivia fact.

Reply #6 from GalCiv2 Forums Top

The biggest problem with GC2 in this respect, is that attrition simply doesn't exist anymore once you get too powerfull.

IE, build a ship with 2-3x the defense of the opponents attack, hit auto attack, and that ship can single handedly destroy thier entire navy. 

There should be some limiting factor to make this not work.  A logistics limit, the unit is tired, the attacker gets lucky, whatever.   You shouldn't be able to ever go on a careless rampage.  Even kids with sticks and stones can kill trained soldiers if they get careless.

Another issue, is that there are few early game trade offs when it comes to colonization.  The game in a lot of ways comes down to who can grab the most planets.  There really is little reason to stop short and build up.  I think the main weakness here, is that it is far too easy to populate the planets quickly.   There just isn't enough balance in the game between chosing one strategy over another, because 1 works 100% better than the other.

 

 

Reply #7 from GalCiv2 Forums Top

The only real option is to prolong the inevitable, whether it be a win or a loss. The end result is always going to be the same, it's getting there that's the problem.

Do you create more in the way of micro management to prolong the news? Having to be more involved, make more choices would allow for greater flexability in the outcome...

Do you create a tactical combat module to allow for more than the gun for gun and your done for battles? Maybe that one ship doesn't survive just because it's got more guns or shields. Maybe evry enemy ship targets the shields in one massive concerted burst and overloads the shield generator or the power generator leaving the ship defenseless. Allowing for tactical genius is what makes chess the game it is, and it's far less complex than GC2. As it is, battles are really more like checkers...

Do you create a penalty for growing too large or too advanced? Opulant and exotic have their price... The latest incarnation has the first glimpse of that in the huge cost increase of higher weapons techs. The same should be done for all buildings, ships and starbases. Maintenance should increase as your empire grows, as well as money lost to corruption and waste. Maybe there's a point at which you really need to stop building ala CIV4.

Do you create more varied weapons and defenses, making some not accessable to all races? Do you make minimal defenses available for some of them? Is it possible to do so without severly unbalancing the game?

Me personally, Tactical combat would be the most welcome addition even in a simplified form. So long as you have the ability to outsmart and outmaneuver an opponent, to use cunning instead of force, especially if your a tad inferior tech wise. That would make things a little more interesting. Throw in a corruption/maintenence scheme and it may be you simply can't take over the whole galaxy...

T