GalCiv 1.21

Quick question(s):

What are your plans for GalCiv as you near the release of AP? Are you sticking with your previous vision of 1.2 being the last major overhaul--with .01-type incremental changes occurring?

More globally--as far as AP goes, are you generally sticking with the AI as it stands, or would you consider making some substantive changes to improve balance/playability? Or is all significant AI development being deferred until GalCiv2?

Thanks,
Bam-Bam

Frogboy...

Why not make the number of free starbases based on the size of the galaxy, just as base Range is set by the size of the galaxy? In a tiny universe, one free starbase would be MORE then enough... but in a gigantic, 3 might not be enough to even reach your nearest yellow star in a scattered/rare setting.

Just a serious thought to run by your team and alpha testers.

Also, another suggestion: I understand that the minor races have their "intelligence" hard coded to Intelligent. This is why they are such "spoilers" in less then Intelligent (Tough?) level games... Why not have their intelligence be set to the AVERAGE of the Major AIs? Then the Minors would have just as much chance of building a wonder or trade good as the Majors, yes? So, on Beginner/Simple, the Alexians aren't constantly the first ones to Frictionless Clothes, Galactic Stock Exchange, Ultra Spice, etc... That's what this is to address, isn't it? If it isn't easily possible in GC1, how about doing that in GC2 then? Or just add in a option setting in the set up that lets the User set what level of intelligence the minors are at?

However, if you allow users a switch to just not have minors, then why eliminate Minors from being able to build Wonders and Trade Goods? If a player finds they are ruining his enjoyment by always getting all the big goodies before him, he would then just turn them off.

I would think that setup screen switch to turn off the Minors, with the addition of having their intelligence setable in setup or at least having it set to the average of the Majors, would more then adequately address the fact that the Minors are "spoiling" games played at less then all Intelligent settings.

Just my opinion.

Thanks for the updates! I look forward to many hours of enjoyment with GC1, AP, and eventually GC2! Thanks to you and all your team!

Bam: All significant updates from this point on will be in Altarian Prophecy updates.  So GalCiv 1.2x is the end of the line for base GalCiv.

Star Pilot: We could have the # of free star bases be the radius of the galaxy. I.e. a 24x24 galaxy would give you 12 free star bases. A small galaxy (6x6) would give you 3.

How does that sound?

That sounds like a pretty good option to me! But how well does it work in testing?

You might need to do radius for the step up between SB cost. The first 3 are free, then next 3 cost Base * Logisitical affector, then next 3 cost 2 * Base * Logisitical affector, etc.

I definately think galactic size should be a serious factor. In small maps, you need less starbases then in medium. In large and huge maps, your scale of play is bigger, so everything should scale accordingly... However, I would think in Tiny maps, you'd get zero free starbases, and you'd pay normal or maybe even more (Double?) for star bases, as the galaxy is so little, getting 2 bases in your home sector is a huge deal.

What is the "norm" for GalCiv design in galaxy size? Medium or Large maps? What is the original cost and Logistics best fits the game at?

I think a stepping system of costs linked to the galaxy size would be best overall answer to addressing the changing scale of size (and changing number of needed starbases for resources and just base range to get to that first yellow star to colonize). Something for you and your team to consider... as somehow, 12 free SBs in a 24x24 map seems a bit much to me, on first impressions. But I'd need to see it in action to know if that was actually true. That's why I suggest considering and testing a step system of star base creation cost.

I was thinking that there should be a social project where each planet with that social project gives you 1/4 or 1/6 of a free starbase. That would automatically adjust starbase counts for galaxy size and # of inhabitable planets.

I might make two or three such projects; a cheap one available early and an expensive one available later.

What I'd like to see is :


- no more "inflating planet" : where they get huger and huger to reflect improved quality

- a limit to the pop. - 100 billion is ridiculous

- an increase in the conditions to discover new techs:

one tech could necessitate another + a # of facilities of a certain type + a number of credits + a # of ships for instance. Not going to happen but still.

- more diplomatic flexibility : check EU/Victoria engine: vassals - tributaries etc



Just some ideas


G.

I disagree with G. PQ improvements good as is.



not so in abundant games in huge galaxies. I like military conquest and I need my transports. I like the 5 point 'dont ask' on population growth.

It's good to know that you're still keeping up with patches for GalCiv, even incremental ones... although I shouldn't be surprised...



Some scaling might not be bad here either (i.e. cheap-expensive, rather than just free-normal), although I do think that scaling the cost to galaxy size is a lot more important than scaling to difficulty level... unless the AI really isn't paying full price, in which case it makes a lot more sense.



How about drawing the base cost from the Cost entry for starbases in starbase.SHIP? Then you could set it to 150 or whatever you like, and if anybody is really upset by it, they can mod it.



Again, IMHO something scaled to galaxy size would be better. The idea of using the galaxy radius is good, but the numbers sound a bit high to me... radius/3 might be sufficient (that's still 10 free bases at Gigantic).



This should help too.



Yay!



Was this a deliberate pun...?

"Bam: All significant updates from this point on will be in Altarian Prophecy updates. So GalCiv 1.2x is the end of the line for base GalCiv."

Do these significant updates include potential changes to the AI or rather changes to other features: starbases, tech tree, metaverse, etc. I know some people are basing their decision on purchasing AP based on an improved AI.

Oh dear god tell me you are not leaving us with this kludge, and no longer updating it. That would be the worst news imaginable. I hope you intend to continue some work on GC, as I believe from these forums that you have really angered many players with the latest "patches", and I believe that will hurt future sales of AP. Just a personal opinion of course

~SDC~

Love those changes, it addressed everything I had problems with.

angered.... why????

here I am playing maso gigantic rare tight and still getting 60,000 / game...

sure its harder.. bet then thats what maso was supposed to be...

I commend Stardock for all the improvements that they've made to GalCiv... most other companyes DON'T .. generally all they do is put out 1 or 2 bug fix patches if that... StarDock however do STAND by the products that they sell.. and developement has to stop on older projects in order to allow budgets to be met on the newer projects..

think of AP as the next official release of Gciv... just like Civ 1,2,3,4; sim city , 2000, 3000, 4000; along with most other software.. if they keep working on old antiquated code then one day it'll get to be soo buggy.. and intertwined that fixing one bug will generate 10 new ones..(I once worked for a company that insisted for 12 years to keep patching 12 year old software written in cobal.. in the end they had to call it quits and get 2 teams of programmers in .. one to decipher the old code (held together with tape and spit and crossed fingers) and the other to take the info given them from the others to re-write it in C++, this took them another 3 years.. in which they had to have both systems running sidebyside to find bugs and missing info..) this is why they draw things to an end and re-write it all using updated techniques and knowledge....

Great changes

Yeah yeah yeah yeah. You are so much smarter and better than me, it's just bloody amazing.

I have heard all of this in another thread. I believe that you guys should take all your brains and make the MODS yourself -- I don't believe they need to keep modifying the game to suit you, or make it more challenging for you, or make it so you don't abuse bugs I didn't know existed. Obviously you can make a mod, you know the game inside out. I and a lot of more average players enjoye the game quite well up until now.

I don't understand this huge amount of change at the end of a products life. They didn't fix bugs (only) -- they Drastically altered the game. I will say this much though.. If the code is indeed frozen, I may learn how to play this "new" game again, by the new rules in the new universe, and maybe in time I'll come to enjoy it like I enjoyed it until about two weeks ago.

Honestly though, my personal fervor for AP is entirely gone.

~SDC~

Anytime StarDock makes changes to the gameplay, SOMEONE gets made. GalCiv is a fun game, and people don't like it when you change things that impact their fun. Some people get over it, some don't. Myself, I still liked the old 1.2 (not 1.20) version that let you choose a PQ of +15 and Luck as your racial picks. But since everyone started using that, it got classed as "Too easy/too constant/cheese" and retired.

Players complain about all the starbases in the later parts of the game. These changes (logistics, base cost * # -1 of existing star bases, maintaince costs) are all about trying to address that. The changes made so far just slow down the human, but doesn't change the tactic of stacking 2 or 4 or 8 starbases in your best world sectors to maximize your bonuses. That issue seems easy: only one starbase's modifiers are effective. end of story. But SD has chosen not to do that, for some reason. Maybe so you can build Rangers and avatars in less then 10 turns?

JT, that's what GC2 is for. All new code, from what I remember being said here on the boards.

Personnaly, I would say that a good rule of the thumb would be that the ratio between number of free starbase and average number of ressource is the same for each map size.

And as star pilot suggested:


So the size of the galaxy won't affect drastically the use of starbase.

And since we are speaking of scaling, why not put a factor that depends on the habitability of the galaxy: since you can have more planet an abundant that on rare, it is easier to generate more cash on abundant than on rare. So you should have less free starbases, since you can generate enough money and you won't specifically using them as range extender to colonize new system.

I must say Im really impressed with Stardock and there game GalCiv. I dont know of any other company that offers so much more to a game after it's release for FREE. We get continual new features, bug fixes, updated AI to make it harder on the more advanced players. It's been a while since it was released and were still getting updates for free, people need to keep in mind that Stardock doesn't get paid for these updates and we dont pay them for these patches so it's eating into there OWN pocket to continually give as such an enjoyable game, even though they already delivered on a great product.

There continually listening to people and add in what the majority of players want into the game, so give them a thank you instead of a kick in the face. There is always going to be some bugs or something you dont like with every patch that adds new stuff, but instead of whinging about it go tell Stardock something useful like what the problem is. They will listen if your polite and will help with any problems. Just dont say "Oh dear god tell me you are not leaving us with this kludge, and no longer updating it."

Im very happy with the game and it's updates, (keeps the game fresh and exciting), and I will continue to support Stardock, and will definately buy AP, and GalCiv 2. Why? because we know it will have excellent post release support that keeps the game alive.

Hi Monte Carlo,

you are absolutely right. But I'm confident that Stardock knows that there will always be complains whenever they do anything. And that they can handle that. But I guess some kind words are always welcome.

Back to the star base topic. Galaxy size scales quadratic with the radius. Star base cost scales quadratic with the number of bases. But income (number of planets) scales with galaxy size as well and the effects of the star bases work galaxy wide. Thus you get more for more money and Brads proposal is quite balanced (you get those free star bases for range extension etc.).

My proposals are
1. Scale with a third of the radius for the free bases.
2. Don't scale with difficulty level. It's not necessary.
3. To put the basis value (150) in a mod file seems to be a good idea.
4. I don't mind minors building Trade Goods, you can always buy them, but the change is fine with me.

When we still get bug fixes what else do you want?
[Message Edited]

Are you speaking of the cost a starbase or the total costs for all starbases?


That is only true for ressources starbases. Other benefit are for the sector or adajacent sectors.

As a first approximation it scales quadratic for the total number of star bases. For one star base it is
Cost = A * (n - M) * Logistic

n is # of existing bases. The formula is only valid when n > M.

Currently A is $200 and might be changed to $150. Bard of Prey suggested putting this value in starbase.SHIP.

M is the number of the free bases. Currently it is 1. Brads suggestion is galaxy radius. My favorite is radius divided by three, i.e. 1 for small maps (6X6 => radius is 3).

The logistic factor is (100 - log. ability) / 100, i.e. 0.6 when you have 40% logistics ability.


Yes, but this is the aim of the change. To get rid of these pesky star base hordes
[Message Edited]

On the subject of minors. Why not be able to choose:
- if there are minors
- their intellligence
- if they are allowed to build Trade goods / wonder
- their aggressivness in term of colonization

That way, everyone should be happy on how the minors will react since they can tweak their behavior to their needs

I would love it but I guess it will not come with GC1.

Walldorf, with your suggestion we will have:
Galaxy size radius free stabase
Tiny: 4x4 2 1
Small: 5x5 2.5 1
Medium: 8x8 4 1
Large: 12x12 6 2
Huge: 16x16 8 3
Gigantic: 24x24 12 4

So I fear that any tweak on the minors AI will have people complaining .

The game has NOT been drastically altered. They developers have tweaked a few things to close some of the more powerful loopholes or to help balance out the game. The scope of what Stardock has done to the game is similar to what Fireaxis did for the Civ3--and I would argue that what Stardock has done to the game is less than the gameplay changes implemented by Firaxis for Civ3 and its expansions. This is not about what level you play at in the game--the game has been tweaked for more balance and longer game legs.

There is a whole lot more that can be done to improve the AI and to address other balance issues. I am sorry that you find the recent version unplayable for you. I can assure you that there are still PLENTY of ways to approach the game and win. Like I said--I will be running a succession game in the near future to walk folk through learning of the game--you are welcome to join or lurk about. I hope this will give folks some more window into the fundamentals of the game and how to build your own recipe for success.