Martok

No. Campaigns in 4x games generally don't work very well conceptually, and GalCiv3 proved that. I've said it before, and I'll keep saying it: I really think the lore for the GalCiv universe should be worked into the sandbox campaign (via locations, events, missions, etc.). Both Stellaris and the Total Warhammer series have shown it can be done (and how).

I actually thought this was how combat in GalCiv4 was going to work all along (take place directly on the main map, ala Stellaris ). The battle-viewer has always been useless/pointless anyway, so yeah, I'm all for it.

Ah, brilliant. Thank you!

[quote who="ForesterSOF" reply="40" id="3809196"] It has changed since that post. Now if you want to you have to buy the game from Epic https://www.galciv4.com/store [/quote] You only "have" to purchase the game from Epic if you're wanting to get in on the alpha/beta. Otherwise, the game will be available on Steam sometime next year.

[quote who="PPK" reply="25" id="3809255"] I'm disappointed , no Steam game no buy is very simple. I use the same account for W10 and Manjaro I can run 90% of the game with Steam engine (Proton is a good wrapper ) why I have to install Lutrius ?? I don't see the difference for a publisher to sell on both platform ?? [/quote] GalCiv4 will be available on Steam when the full game releases next year. It's only an Epic "exclusive" while it's alpha/beta. </p

...Or at least, not as I thought it was supposed to. I thought that when I exercised the "stop emailing me" option, that I would no longer receive email notifications for all current *and* future threads I posted in/subscribed to. Instead, I continue to receive email notifications that I have go and manually turn off every. single time. It drives me up the wall. I'm sure some folks appreciate this feature, but personally it irritates the hell

Personally, I've discovered I'm definitely a fan of choosing between a handful of new techs to research, and *not* having the entire tech tree laid out in front of me. I like the uncertain nature of it all. It feels both a little more realistic, and less tedious -- mapping out and/or knowing exactly what techs I'm going to research, and in what order, becomes dreadfully boring. [quote who="Anguille" reply="6" id="3807844"] Is it onl

[quote who="Frogboy" reply="2" id="3808407"] Quoting Martok, reply 1 Am really digging this concept. However... Will certain technologies and/or ideology perks increase the number of Colonies we can feed to a Core World without sparking rebellion? As otherwise, I would imagine

Am really digging this concept. However... Will certain technologies and/or ideology perks increase the number of Colonies we can feed to a Core World without sparking rebellion? As otherwise, I would imagine that late-game empires on larger maps might still have a lot of Core Worlds to micro-manage.

Also (more a request that a question, I guess, but): Could clicking (or double-clicking) on the notifications in the corner of the screen please take us to the corresponding location and/or menu? That would definitely be a nice little QoL improvement.

Nope, I don't miss them. Not that I hated the squares, but I didn't love them, either.

Questions (in no particular order): 1.) For those of us who only want to create functional ships (and don't care about adding all the pointless cosmetic parts), will there be a "simplified" version of the ship-designer this time around? 2.) Similar to the risks of letting a governor have too many planets, could an admiral with too large/strong a fleet decide to break off from your empire (or make a power grab)? 3.) It's been mention

Looking forward to seeing the story-based missions and lore being worked into the main game. I think it'll help a lot to "enliven" the galaxy. I'm also curious to see the new planet/colony system in action, along with the implementation of "star sectors". If they do even half as well as advertised/hoped, it could truly be a game-changer.