Procellous

Can we have troublesome governors assassinated? :)

Same here. MOO3 was my second most crushing disappointment in gaming (Ultima 9 being #1). I read somewhere online that GC1 was pretty good and a good alternative to MOO3, so I went and bought that. Never looked back. MOO 1 and 2 are some of most my favorite games ever, so that would've been a tough act to follow even if MOO3 was actually good (it wasn't). MOO3 didn't even feel like an actual game lol

Oh snap, I guess I'm out then lol I'm still using Win7 (I doubt my machine could handle 10 comfortably) and my graphics card (GeForce GTX660) won't cut the mustard. I was planning on buying a new machine either this year or next year (probably a pre-built gaming PC, since the market doesn't seem favorable to building your own atm). I guess the main reason why I haven't bothered upgrading my machine (besides covid/shipping problems/etc) is my machine still handles all the games I

Since planets are resource generators now, I hope we can colonize all planets now (including those ubiquitous dead worlds from previous installments). I wasn't a fan of asteroid mining in GC3. Same with constantly upgrading factories/research labs on planets and starbase modules. Its ok for a few planets, but going through a list of 50 or so gets rather tedious (esp. when all I want to do is force end turn). I'm curious to see how GC4 handles it. I do like the changes I've seen so far

My computer is 11 years old (lol) so I was assuming I'd have to buy a new machine in order to play this. I can run GalCiv3 reasonably ok with low settings and not the larger galaxy sizes (huge/gigantic tops). Maybe I can delay getting a new computer until next year or something. I was planning on getting a new machine to coincide with GalCiv4's retail release, but I may get the beta this year if my machine can actually handle it.

I almost wonder if terraforming should be reworked. Like instead of opening up usable squares on the map, it either changes the planet globally or allows you to utilize hostile planets. I do like the idea of zoning planets based on terrain and specialization (eg, you have a part of a continent that is grassland, it becomes a farming district, etc), but I'm not sure it works when lined up with a geographical map, adjacency bonuses, and buildings. One side of me finds all that very appe

I guess all players will have different priorities (eg ship designer, combat). Personally, I find the ship designer neat, but I never used it. I do appreciate the cool designs some people come up with though. If we had tactical combat, I'd just auto it (just like I did in Master of Orion 2). I'd auto colonies after the 10th or so, if I actually trusted the AI to do a good job (I don't think I've seen an AI in a 4x handle cities/planets/improvements well, I have to do it myself lol). I

Will minor factions be in GC4? I personally didn't like how they were handled in GC3. I feel they serve a purpose for populating the galaxy (the more filled up the galaxy is, the less prone the AI is to rapid expanding, IMO). Now this brings me to my second point: vassalage. I felt this may have worked in GC3 for absorbing minor civs and other conquered empires into your civilization. It would've been better than the ill-fated commonwealth system (I can see why that was implemented th

I have mixed feelings towards adjacency bonuses. On one hand it is kind of fun and adds challenge, but I think it clashes with the RNG planet generation. Personally, I think it and planet development both need to be reworked. I like micromanaging my first 5-10 planets, but it is pure torture doing it for hundreds (or thousands) of planets. I'm curious to see how GC4 handles planets and galaxies, because I felt GC3 was strangely enough too small (but still too overwhelming with microma