Weeks?

Yes, it's vexed a number of folks over the years.

Eventually, can't remember exactly when/what-version, the devs added a UI toggle so you can click the (confusing to me) calendar date at the top of the main game window and it changes to displaying turns. Unfortunately, the setting is not sticky, so you have to do it for every game session you start.

The timescale thing for Civ-type games has never been ideal. No one's managed to come up with a good 'temporal transmission' mechanic that lets you both manage the rise and fall of a civilization while also managing specific battles and construction projects. 

Well, actually yes someone has.

It's Paradox and their "Europa Universalis" games, but they're not turn-based so they can afford to go fast-forward during peace - where you build - and slow down for war - when things are frantic.

I actually like the weeks measurement in GC2 better than other 4X games.  It makes sense to me that it might take a civilization five weeks or so to build a ship.  I just assume they have a large, advanced factory.   In Elemental they changed it to "seasons", basically 4 turns is a year, and I feel like it cranks too fast through the years.

The weeks idea is one that i also like as it helps to keep a guide to how long it has been since i visited the other majors and tried for a new trade etc. Try to do that at least once a month if i can and the weeks measurement helps to remind me to do so.

Besides if it starts to bother me any then i can always click on the weeks at the top and turn it to game turns instead

Akka, I understand how Europa Universalis might work but I said "Civ-type" and to me that is TBS by definition. The only 'real-time' stuff I've ever enjoyed are sims, not combat/war games.

Not holding my breath to see something revolutionary any time soon, but whatever genius works through the problem for the TBS genre should be richly rewarded with admiration and cash. It's probably a single-player thing, too. I want a game that can sense when I'm in a low&slow phase and move development tasks along 'briskly' while maintaining a connection to the AIs so that it can interrupt to inform me it's time to get busy dealing with a diplomatic, military, or trade problem.

GC1 used months, which I (and some others?) felt was more appropriate.  Interestingly, this appears to be where the 12-turn minimum legal game limit comes from in GC2 (or was it 12 is illegal, 13 is legal?)-with regards to the MV, of course.

One thing i have found to be a bit more 'interesting' was to change the english.str so that weeks became cycles. It doesnt effect the game but if you change jan-dec as well to other names it adds a bit more of a 'spacey' feel to the game.

I preferred GalCiv 1's months as well. Aside from anything that's been already mentioned, it struck me as unrealistic that my civilization could go from a single planet to a sufficiently advanced species dominating the galaxy in, at absolute most, 12 years or so. GalCiv 1 struck me as somewhat more likely.