Review based on Test Edition V0.50.190544b
Played as Terrans, Arm, Normal Difficulty, Huge Sectors, Distanced from AI, mix of abundant and occasional settings, Conquest Victory, Very Slow in both Pacing and Research, 8 AI opponents.
If playing on a map with abundant anomalies, do rewards like +10% Influence Growth for 50 Turns stack? If not, suggest adding this to alert player.
As in my last feedback, I know it’s early. Having played 577 turns in my current game, ship design—the slot system—is not satisfying. A recommendation:
Tiny – 2 slots
Small – 4 slots
Medium – 8 slots
Large – 16 slots
Massive – 32 slots
Weapons/Defenses number of slots required:
Tier 1 (early tech) – 1 slot
Tier 2 (middle tech) – 2 slots
Tier 3 (Late tech) – 3 slots
(Maybe add an “anti-air” defense module to counter interceptors, etc.?)
Tier 1 (early tech) – 4 slots (2 interceptors)
Tier 2 (middle tech) – 6 slots (2 interceptors, 1 bomber)
Tier 3 (Late tech) – 8 slots (5 advanced fighter/bombers)
Specialty modules (e.g., Survey) would all require at least 3 slots so they can’t be carried on tiny hulls.
The above suggestion gives designs more versatility. Tiny craft can have a weapon and defense early, and can mount a tier 2 weapon mid game. Small craft can mount a tier 1 weapon and 3 tier 1 defenses, or a tier 1 carrier module with no weapons or defenses, or even a tier 3 weapon late game. And so on.
Right now, the slot system is too confining. My large hull ships are losing after only ~4-6 single combats with tiny space monsters.
I would also like special events or end game tech that could increase slots, the equivalent of getting better miniaturization in GC2 and GC3.
Have to vote thumbs down on current implementation. Commanders are simply a different way to get the Bazaar ships from GC3. In GC3, I used commanders to lead my best battle groups (fleets, whatever). Some led my best combat groups “designed” to clear an enemy’s defense forces, others led my major invasions forces.
I rarely used GC3 Bazaar ships in my mid- to late-game battle groups: They were simply not powerful enough compared to ships I could design myself.
Recommendation: I don’t mind requiring leaders to unlock Bazaar ships. I would prefer commanders be assignable to command battle groups and boost their stats (or lower them?). Maybe even have commanders in charge of several battle groups assigned to them. This would mirror current military organization: an admiral or commodore or senior captain commands a carrier battle group but works for an admiral who commands all the forces in an area. Same for generals.
(For instance, General MacArthur commanding the island-hopping campaign in the southern pacific and retaking the Philippines while Admiral Nimitz did the same in the northern pacific eventually taking Iwo Jima and Okinawa during WW II.)
This would make commanders genuinely important to the game, not just a different mechanism for getting GC3 Bazaar ships.
Same opinion as with version .45, Ideology is just too complicated. I like the option of saving points and selecting a more expensive ideology option instead of having to select every item in a progression. There are just too many trees. In this case, simpler is better. My opinion, of course.
Recommendation: Maybe have only 6 trees, 3 each on either side of good versus evil. Players could select from either at any time, but would have to do something consequential in game to earn points on either side (not just exploring anomalies, settling planets, etc.). Having "good" options that could avert a war with another player or help them through some difficulty, while "evil" options may actually start a war or significantly harm another player—something other opponents would remember. A "neutral" option would be "not our problem." More like the good-neutral-evil system from ye ol’ Dungeons and Dragons where in-game choices could actually change your alignment and how the “world” reacts to you.
Oh, I still don’t fully understand the mechanism for getting Culture Points. By mid game, I wasn’t getting any at all.
I know it’s early in game development but something is wrong with the AI. At turn 577 on normal difficulty (just testing game mechanics not min-maxing yet), I have 12 Core worlds and 55 colonies. My nearest AI competitor (Mimot) has only 9 colonies. The Navigators have 6, Drengin have 5, the Arceans and Krynn 2 each, etc.
I have all resource settings at abundant. No Precursor Nanites to be found so far with 12 sectors scanned. Not in my territory, not among any of the AI. The algorithm needs to distribute a selection of every resource, even if only a few players get a particular one.
While we’re on the subject of resources, requiring specialty resources for starbase upgrades is almost game breaking, especially when some resources are so hard (or impossible) to find. This potentially cripples players without access to the specialty resource. Tetropod Hive for production upgrades? It cost Durantium in GC3. My starting sector has only 1 Durantium resource. That’s rare enough.
Bug: Very early game, I had 36 control points. I hover over the enforce law option and it says -6 control but the option is grayed out, not usable. Actual cost is (50?) control points.
Bug: Several times (about every 20-40 turns) clicking on a target to resolve combat results in no resolution. The visuals play as normal, but no damage occurs to either side. When this first happened, I tried on about 10 successive turns to resolve combat with no result. Exiting and reloading the game fixed it. For the remainder of the game, every time a combat failed to resolve, I would exit and reload the game, and it would be good for another 20-40 turns or so.
Bug?: I encountered a world that was an 8 quality. When I added a governor, it suddenly became a 77 quality world (every tile usable). Not complaining, just seemed odd.
Bug?: From within a game, clicked to load a different save and game hung for about two minutes after clicking “Yes” on the Confirm pop-up. Loading the same save from the main menu was much faster.