tid242

[quote who="Litjan" reply="3" id="3844303"] Ships do cost maintenance, but not tiny or small hulls, I think. I start seeing costs with medium hulls (but maybe its also due to total ship construction cost?). [/quote] Yea, I'm not sure. The medium hulled ships I've got going current game have no maint costs. I'll keep an eye out for this when I get larger hull sizes (damn RNG tech cards!!).. <img src="https://cdn.stardock.us/forums/31/64/3164446/8f

[quote who="tid242" reply="2" id="3844287"] Quoting slarjy, reply 1 6. OBSERVATION : Citizens and improvements (and asteroids) barely matter relative to colony worlds. I won't comment on balancing, but I also find it hard to care much about citizens on my planet(s) eithe

[quote who="slarjy" reply="1" id="3844257"] 6. OBSERVATION : Citizens and improvements (and asteroids) barely matter relative to colony worlds. [/quote] I won't comment on balancing, but I also find it hard to care much about citizens on my planet(s) either. Perhaps some sort of small leveling up mechanic for citizens (their bonuses just increase over time if they're not reassigned or whatever) would change this. <

Agree with you about the visuals . One of the few races on the diplo screen that I can't help but to watch for a few seconds whenever they appear. Looking fwd to playing a Drath game myself. Maybe next game (currently on a Yor game, trying to see if I can get the Festron to eat them or if this has been fixed)! They always seem to shake out on top of the pile of AI's in most of my games, so they must play pretty decently. ! -tid242

FYI Derek just noted that some of the background issues would be addressed in the 0.9 patch dropping (tentatively) early next week. ya'll need to set your monitor brightness lower! [e digicons]8O[/e]

That's an extensive list, thank you. Someone's going to ask when the proposed drop date will be. So it might as well be me - when's the proposed drop date?

My assumption is that this is the idea. However, I'm not sure that this system is really in the game yet. Or at least not in a way that really matters. I think that this was the idea behind citizen stats generally and would apply with the citizens used for colony worlds, starbases, and whatever else you burn a citizen for..

[quote who="DerekPaxton" reply="4" id="3842130"] I appreciate the feedback. We will add sandbox mode for MP in the next update. [/quote] That's fab, It'll be much appreciated! Thanks Derek,

[quote who="dg551" reply="2" id="3842035"] All my friend and I wish to do, is play MP against a picked number of AI players, with typical galaxy setup choices and multiple choices for victory conditions, including Prestige points. Otherwise, we love how this game is shaping up. [/quote] Agreed, a normal Free For All mode is definitely needed. One further note on the available game modes. Diplomacy is a HUGE mechanic in the GC franchise, IV included.&

The icon moved to the upper left of the planet screen. Sorry, I don't have a screenshot for you atm..

We were talking on discord about this, but I tend to agree with slarjy. It's nice being able to look for star color when attempting to find the resources you need. As an aside, this is a straightforward way to modify resource distribution between sectors - just alter the % of each star type.. cheers. nice observation.

MP has serious stability issues. I've posted multiple debug.err's in the sitrep-81 discord thread. started a MP discussion thread here: https://forums.galciv4.com/510860/multiplayer-discussion Games coming along well! -tid242

[quote who="Nastytang" reply="1" id="3841798"] edit: ugh, they moved it to the top. yup this got me too! [/quote] And me!! It's fine once you know it's there, but why it's somewhere different from everything else you build is not intuitive to me at all! If they want it in the upper

Hey All! Making a thread to post aggregate MP feedback & discussion, please share your thoughts! MP is coming along OK. I was disappointed with the playability of MP in GC3 and was pleased to hear that it would be implemented sooner and a more core dev goal for GC4. Since covid I've been doing a LOT more MP games generally and MP is now a much greater 'must have' for me than in the past. So this is to say that I want to see MP be everything that it can be

There's a learning curve to be sure. Stardock has continually tried to make the on-ramping process easier throughout the series, but at the end of the day it's simply a complicated game. At heart it's a tinkerer's game. Lots of fiddling around with stuff, trying things different ways - succeeding some of the time and failing some of the time. It's a great game and I've always felt like I learned something new, or exploited a unique situation in an intuitive w

Quick notes: I LOVE the non-intrusive implementation of the BV by having it be accessible as a map point-of-interest. The "there was a battle here, would you like to see it" presentation is AWESOME! Whoever thought of this presentation of the feature deserves a pat on the back. Ship roles. I don't have much input on ship roles because in GC3 I could /never/ remember which roles did what. Please MAKE THE SHIP ROLES INTUITIVE!&nbsp

Late to the party but something that struck me as an obvious tweak to policies (since you added so many and they look hella interesting). Some policies should scale on an amount of time obligated to enact them. IE Policy XYZ is a +5% bonus to food but a -5% penalty to income (or whatever), but if you keep this policy in place for 20 turns it's +15% - 10%, or 50 turns it's +25% - 15%, etc. That kind of thing. This actually makes another layer

[quote who="Frogboy" reply="49" id="3827437"] So we've decided to have an AAR option where players can review battles that occurred which includes an updated battle viewer. We're going to be delaying the beta as a result. [/quote] Intuitively it feels to me like this is the right decision. The battle viewer (although I'm not married to it) is a bit of a core feature in the franchise - it'd be difficult to give it up entirely. I'm looking

[quote who="Commander4X" reply="1" id="3826885"] I second your opinion. One thing that can be a big difference at higher zoom levels (credits to caboose_corsair): Options -> Interface: - Dead Planet Icon Zoom around 15 (you filter them out at higher zoom levels) - All other zooms to maximum (100 or 70) [/quote] Good to know, I'll have to play with the zoom levels. I played with them a bunch a while ago and couldn't ever f

[quote who="Commander4X" reply="15" id="3821558"] Detailed information is important to me. I want to be able to check if my tactic works and if not why not. Battle Viewer in GalCiv3 helps a lot to understand how attack, defense, tactical speed, ship roles and tactical repair work - more by text than animated visuals. [/quote] Can anyone confirm if the detailed battle "after action report" still slated to be a game feature? Because I feel like the prese

[quote quoting="post"] I played a game for about 4 hours (Ver 0.6) in which it was impossible to trade or do diplomacy because the Universal Translator tech never appeared after choosing to research it myself, nor could I cycle the tech choices for Cultural, so I couldn't encourage it to do so. [/quote] Team would have to weigh in here. There was a tech weighting bug that occurred in one of my games (I think it was 0.60, but might've been 0.55), so this

I'd put a comment up on the Discord with respect to my complaints about the cloth map and Schism guilted me into throwing up a post here also. Hopefully it will generate some discussion.. It'll be a general re-hash of my issues outlined there. <span style="font-family: Whitney, 'Helvetica Neue', Helvetica, Arial, sans-serif; font-size: 16px; font-style: normal; font-variant-ligatures: normal; font-variant-caps: normal; font-weight: 400; letter-spacing: normal; tex

[quote who="Frogboy" reply="11" id="3808281"] Done. Except for ghosts. [e digicons]:)[/e] [/quote] Poor ghosts, everyone hates them ... LMAO. I'll de-ghostify them and see if they don't rub everyone the wrong way. You guys all hate Casper too? [quote who="Schaefespeare" reply="12"

[quote who="DivineWrath" reply="16" id="3808239"] Don't worry, we probably won't have intelligent dinosaurs. We already have space dragons (the Drath). [e digicons];)[/e] [/quote] I think he secretly wants a sharknado-based race. Sharks are dinosaurs.. ;p [quote who="krejci" reply="14" id="3808160"] I always liked how diverse ideas (not the actual gameplay though) there was in aliens in the Ascendancy game. Since that most of aliens in the mainstrea

re: complicated races. One that that did occur to me when building these was that there might be some benefit for SD to just have an "easy, medium, complex" designation for races. So for the ones that are difficult to navigate their systems, or do the setup for their "thing" to work well would be labeled as "complex" so ppl trying these races would know that beforehand. Because, for example, I think that the Crystal Mandate would be a /hard/ race to play, because the obv