UP useless?

from GalCiv2 Forums
In the last game (galciv 1), the UP met every year, same as in this version. however, it was based on months, not years, so it met about every 12 turns, now it meets every 52! I jsut finished playing a fairly long game, where I got an influence victory over a large galaxy with 7 opponents on challenging...so yes, it was pretty long, and I only went through about 6 years. Now, that's well over 300 turns, but the UP did almost nothing because it met so infrequently. Also, some of the ingame summaries become odd. For instance, the victory summary says that other centuries I became culturally dominant. Well, actually it was 6 years.

Just a thought, maybe something should altered?
ideas
10,831 views 19 replies
Reply #1 from GalCiv2 Forums Top
It's true that the UP is pretty much useless, but I've gotten used to it, it's just how things work. Perhaps make it meet twice a year instead of once would help out a bit, but eh... it doesn't really mean much in the long run. Oh and while we're on the issue of the UP, there are certain "trial" bills that are suppose to wears off in time which lasts like 3-5 years... that's practically the entire game! The durations of these should be lowered to make the permanent ones a little different. As it is, they are practically the same thing.

As for game summaries and texts.... don't forget that there are tons of places that still says months instead of weeks. It's pretty obvious the dev changed how fast a "turn" should be in the middle of developement, but a lot of it was already done, and they just missed fixing it entirely. There's just so much text in the game, so it's bound to happen.
Reply #2 from GalCiv2 Forums Top
I'm gonna stic kmy neck out and make a suggestion. If it's completely undoable/stupid/retarded/ignorantwhatever, don't bite my virtual head off.

Perhaps you could elect a UP leader? the leader would get soem bonuses, like being able to veto a bill, 1 or 2 extra trade routes, being able to call a UP meeting, etc. It'd make the UP a bit more useful. AND also, the UP should meet more often, maybe every 3 months or so? Unless the uselessness of the UP is deliberate and Stardock is just poking fun at the UN.
SoundPackager - Customize the Windows sound scheme
Reply #3 from GalCiv2 Forums Top
I think the UP would be much more fun if it met on a bi-annual or even quarterly basis. Perhaps it could vote on 'BIG' things that last a while at the main meeting, and vote on short duration referenda that would only last until the next UP meeting at the others...
Reply #4 from GalCiv2 Forums Top
The game I just finished the UP was very important in what happened. I was going for an influence win and the UP suddenly started rolling out limit the number of modules on starbases every single time. Thankfully my influence let me vote each measure down.
Reply #5 from GalCiv2 Forums Top
I was going for an influence win and the UP suddenly started rolling out limit the number of modules on starbases every single time.


When that happend to me, I waved good bye and walked away. The increased culutre from my bases allowed me to leverage enough influence to make up for the loss of trade.
Reply #6 from GalCiv2 Forums Top
I love the evil trade route restrictions they always place. In my current game, there's 3 instead of one, which isn't fair. Once I add the Torians into my "angelic" empire, I will make sure something like this doesn't happen again.

But, I think the resolutions are moddable, so you can shorten the time. I'm all for quartelly meetings about trial restrictions or small things like taxing, and settling minor wars, and then the big issues like permanent things, evil route limitations etc.
Reply #7 from GalCiv2 Forums Top
Useless no, BUT in the game I really don't usually need to pay attention to 70% of the elections which makes it a game flow breaker most of the time.

I haven't even looked at finding out what the elections will be on ahead of time. I would say in the game I have played and payed attention to there has only ever been once where I saw that if I had known about the election earlier that I would have worked to change the results ahead of time. And that one time it wasn't a critical vote and based on the way the other races voted it would have been near impossible to influence enough to cause a change.

To me this appears to be the weakest part of the game currently. There seems to be a ton of potential for game changing events and entertainment value here.
Reply #8 from GalCiv2 Forums Top
If GalCiv II is going to have multiple fun ways to win besides war, the UP is going to have to improve significantly. More meeting, the ability to influence the topic(s!) they vote on, plus something else I have yet to think up or see. I ask for a brainstorm on a third upgrade to the UP.
Reply #9 from GalCiv2 Forums Top
Make the UP like it was in Alpha Centauri. 'nuff said.
Reply #10 from GalCiv2 Forums Top
yeah UP needs work. a list of topics to vote on which is given a couple of months in advance. allows me to work the phonelines and make sure the topic i want voted on gets selected. then the actual vote of the topic that was selected. unless you are running a dictatorship then the senate should have some input into how you vote at the UP meeting. lots of ways the UP could go, lets hope they give it an upgrade or someone can mod it.
Reply #11 from GalCiv2 Forums Top
Yeah Alpha Centauri's was really good. Baring doing it like that just make it possible for it to be convened 2-3 or 1-2 times per year in addition to the basic 1 in december.
Reply #12 from GalCiv2 Forums Top
I'd say UP for the expansion should be reworked from scratch. It's one of the few areas where GC2 is lacking seriously.
Reply #13 from GalCiv2 Forums Top
I had it once vote on a 'permanent' measure, then vote next time on the same measure. I voted it down both times, and held enough votes to crush all but a unanimous opposition. But still, the first one should have been permanent. I can't remember now what exactly the vote was on, but I do remember that there was not a 'no change' choice, but rather just different numbers as options. I just picked the one I was already using.
Reply #14 from GalCiv2 Forums Top
I want some kind of control over what comes up. I hate when a war tax vote comes up when all the races that are still left are warlike, or an antievil bill comes up when the majority of remaining races are evil. It's like, how did they even get on the ballot.
Reply #15 from GalCiv2 Forums Top
Ok, sometimes UP decisions don't do much but other times its huge. Examples: the economy penalty to civs at war can be a game winner for a peaceful influencer, there is also one that grants one civ a 50% influence bonus....definitly not useless.

Maybe it mets only once every 52 turns but the decisions it makes last a long time (usually at least 1 year or more ie. 52 turns minimum)
Reply #16 from GalCiv2 Forums Top

I'm gonna stic kmy neck out and make a suggestion. If it's completely undoable/stupid/retarded/ignorantwhatever, don't bite my virtual head off.

Perhaps you could elect a UP leader? the leader would get soem bonuses, like being able to veto a bill, 1 or 2 extra trade routes, being able to call a UP meeting, etc. It'd make the UP a bit more useful. AND also, the UP should meet more often, maybe every 3 months or so? Unless the uselessness of the UP is deliberate and Stardock is just poking fun at the UN.



That's a perfectly great suggestion. In fact, the U.P. in GalCiv2 is downright boring, useless and not fun.

As others have said, the system in SMAC was awesome and it pains me that games use these super-simple and super-dumb systems when there is a great system you can pretty much copy from SMAC that was released in Jan of 1999.

Here's how the SMAC system worked (from memory):
-Leader gets elected once all races are found. Leader gains:
-extra economy(like a +10% econ bonus in GC2)
-better spying ability
-the power to veto which can be overruled by a complete majority vote (ie if they all vote yes and you vote no, the yeses have it)

Anyone can propose a bill like every 20 turns, the leader can propose one every 10 turns.
Bills included:
-Praise _nation_ This bill gives everyone a bit +diplo to that nation
-Censure _nation_ This makes everyone hate the given nation a bit more.
-Sanctions/Embargo No one trades with said nation
-Declare war on _nation_ Everyone declares war on that nation
-Expel _nation_ Expels nation from UP, loses trade and positive diplomatic bonuses that all UP members get
-Repeal UP charter This bill allows super nukes and other very evil acts like genocide and such.
-Diplomatic Victory

There were other bills that had good gameplay significance that I am forgetting, like a bill that gives everyone 500 credits, and one that increased the effectiveness of research and trade pacts. Add in the GC2 bills and you have a very good list of bills.

Also, one of the best options, you voted last so you could bribe anyone at the vote screen before the bill is passed, but it usually takes a lot of stuff to get someone to switch votes. Also you could abstain in every election if you wish to just stay out of it.

Very odd how that SMAC's system was so great and no other game even attempts to use it.
Reply #17 from GalCiv2 Forums Top
@xflukex : To me, this sounds very similar to the System Moo3 had... With some exceptions... In MoO3 bills could be proposed every turn, but proposed bills had to be supported by at least 1 other party before all had to vote... And becoming the leader made you win the game...

Whatever - I'd love to see the UP becoming more important and the proposal of custom bills with a wide range of options to choose from would be great!
Reply #18 from GalCiv2 Forums Top
I don't want to see the UP become too complicated though. Simple changes will probably take quite a bit of time to impliment but I can wait since the UP currently doesn't cause any damage to the game. It's just as is if it were completely removed I doubt it would change many people's games. But I DAMN well don't want it removed

But that's not going to happen. Going to have to play some mroe games to see what ideas I can think would add to it. I don't think taking a bunch of ideas from other games for the UP works. It works for certain play mechanics but I feel GCII's UP needs to have a unique feel.
Reply #19 from GalCiv2 Forums Top
I am the originator of this post line. I have changed my stance on this issue, though. In my last game, a war tax came up really early. Now, I usually win alliance or tech or influence victorys. actually, I've never won a conquest one. but I always use war as a tool, once I become really powerful. I couldn't afford the 20% tax that got voted on. It changed my entire strategy for playing. Eventually, though, another bill came up that overided that one...and we eliminated the tax. I found the whole thing just annoying. I had to realign my strategy again. but it does seem to have not been useless. I still think that just having it meet more often would fix it entirely.