Jeff Yutzler

We're early in the Beta. The mechanics aren't even fully fleshed out. AI tuning will come but it's going to be a work-in-progress for a long time.

I don't know what difficulty level you were playing on. Every game I bump the difficulty up a notch. By the time the game releases, I expect to be playing at the highest level.

Don't fear the Tribbles Mimot. They tend to overexpand and are easy pickings.

[quote who="Imperious-Leader-1" reply="21" id="3839262"]Slight derail, but similar. I got a request from the Corporate Sector for a thousand credits, because their economy was collapsing. They were my number 1 trading partner. But I didn't have a thousand credits, I did have over seven hundred though. Their economy crashed and they blame me. They went from potential allies to potential enemies overnight. It would of been nice to have an option to pay installments over five or ten months. With

[quote who="Old-Spider" reply="31" id="3839218"] The summary for this mission has {PLAYERFACTION:1} in the text. I think the correct name appeared in all the other text concerning this mission. This is the result of choosing the second option - to fully support their investigation. I've been exploring a lot of anomalies, but the mission is still incomplete. [/quote] I believe I have completed this mission before, but not in the Beta.

[quote who="Elhoim" reply="19" id="3839192"] Quoting Frogboy, reply 16 I think we should name them ideology points and ideological awareness. I'm not sold on the concept of it being a two-step thing. Instead, perhaps there should simply be ideological points earned in different cat

The "fire governor" mechanic is turning out to be a major misstep as currently devised. The 10% empire-wide penalty has to go. IDEA: when firing the governor, there is a 5-10 turn cooldown before the governor can be reassigned. No other penalties other than to the leader's own loyalty.

I don't think it is session duration. I've been known to leave the game running and it does not appear to have any effect.

Another in a never-ending list of mystery mechanics.

Interesting idea, but maybe better as an option for an expansion?

I'm afraid you're going to have to be more specific. I've played dozens of hours and have no idea what you are talking about unless it is #15 .

This question is popping up a lot for some reason. See https://forums.galciv4.com/510239/get;3839009 . For core worlds, you can just lock in generating credits when there is nothing better to do. Agreed with DW that we need to be able to lock missions and resources as well as ships from the shipyard screen.

[quote who="Wafer Skater457" reply="10" id="3839028"] Trying to understand what the # in bottom right of each leader means. Seems Higher = Better but what is that all about? [/quote] "Now, besides the fact that every character (or most characters anyway) have a backstory based quest event that can potentially come up, they also have 4 stats plus how loyal they are to your civilization." Loyalty below 30 is bad - they might rebel. If they are a governor/command

[quote who="Oliver_Sc" reply="26" id="3838932"] - In GalCiv3 shipyards could be set to "silent" or no production, that should be implemented here, too. Sorry if it's already there, I didn't find a possibility to do that. [/quote] Why? At least have them treasure hunt or something. What they need is to be able to lock production on projects. (See #4 )

I'm afraid you'll have to produce a proper bug report with a save file and all. FWIW, I have successfully decommissioned a starbase in 0.77b.

So combat is basically unchanged from GalCiv III? Since I didn't play GC III but did play GC II, I relished at the opportunity to participate in the Alpha/Beta because I was a fresh set of eyes. If Stardock wants attract non-GC3 players to this game, they have to make the combat system less opaque. I will fall on my sword with this point of view.

I think planet management is a major net positive. Do I think citizens could use more "oomph"? Yes. Do I think that the penalty for firing governors is too severe? Yes. The thing is that as I approach 100 hours in this game, these "balance" issues are nowhere near the top of my gripe list. The large number of mystery mechanics are a far greater concern. There are 5-10 key mechanics that are completely unexplained and dozens more that, while explained, either require mental calculation or gues

[quote who="DerekPaxton" reply="14" id="3838816"] Quoting Publius of NV, reply 8 I hope this doesn't come across as snarky, but wouldn't it be a good idea to make sure that at least one of the Galactic Achievements actually work before adding new ones? I have yet to see any of the alpha/beta testers report either here or o

[quote who="Publius of NV" reply="8" id="3838727"] I hope this doesn't come across as snarky, but wouldn't it be a good idea to make sure that at least one of the Galactic Achievements actually work before adding new ones? I have yet to see any of the alpha/beta testers report either here or on Discord that they have managed to finish one of them, even the Penultipox one which only requires some research and building a planetary improvement. [/quote] I successfully finished

[quote who="xtombo" reply="1" id="3838679"] I'm not so so sure. I wouldn't want a civ strengths balanced into bland meaningless so the idea they can crank out more Yor on an automated production line seems fine to me and a cooldown on it might be annoying. If they are too OP then maybe a nerf of somekind in another area would more interesting. [/quote] I think the OP (sorry, original poster) has a point. The Yor do appear to be OP (sorry, overpowered). I think a nerf would b

This comment is OBE.

[quote who="Crimson8472" reply="14" id="3838612"] yeah Victory Conditions are hard got into a similar mess, I just happend to reach tech, assension and Prestige thresholds in just a few rounds, even my 2 allys went at me, even nearly every diplo bonus, I could get, not to bad since I at that point had some big ass ships worth nearly 2k produktion that could clear out whole fleet on their own, but still nasty, for even allys turning on you [/quote] I'm just not inclined to pl

[quote who="DerekPaxton" reply="11" id="3838599"] 1. We are changing the circle logic to be more accurate. [/quote] It is still important to see what the line is because of the upgrade that increases starbase range by 2. I need to be able to tell if other resources will get grabbed if I upgrade. It looks like the rule is that starbase range is 10 by default. If you're not going shade to show this range, I say get rid of the circle and just make the players count hexe

[quote who="ForgottenSlayer" reply="12" id="3838576"] If an ascension victory is close the computer should flip out on you unless you are like allies. You are about to sail to victory. [/quote] I'm not saying you're wrong and that's why I specifically called it a warning and not a complaint. This feedback is as much for other players as it is for the developers. The problem is that ascension is a mystery mechanic (see #17). I didn't even know I was approaching an a

[quote who="trancejeremy1" reply="5" id="3837860"] I hope this gets better implemented in the final version, so far I've run into two problems Firstly, leaders are basically a random draw. You pretty much have to hire who is available and put them in the least worse position. Instead of putting the player in control of how he wants to manage the empire, RNG is taking over. This isn't necessarily bad, but I'm going to say I liked the sliders better. Because you had to cho