Orbital structures ARE existant before they are fully built... They are partly built, right? They shouldn't just appear out of nowhere at the moment of completion.

Can't you just leave at least min. guard at every planet?

No, wedge was saying that buildings shouldn't be targettable until they've started building, not finished. This way it's not like you tell your construction frig to build something, it gets added to the end of the queue, and before there is anything even there, it gets destroyed.

Right. As it is now, when you queue a structure you are instantly creating an object with 0 hull points so 1 hit is all it takes to destroy it. That's like killing a person before he or she is conceived. Maybe the parents want to have a child but until they actually get together and "make" the kid you can't kill it.

Kind of related to the don't jump through wells debate (which I agree with - the not jumping through wells that is), ANYWAY, played a game recently where there were jump pathways (the connector things between the planets - not sure what they're called) that bypassed some planets. That's all fine except for when the pathway bypasses a planet but still passes through the planet itself (and ultimately the well). On the same map a pathway bypassed the system sun but ships moving along that pathway were passing through the sun itself!! Other pathways on the same map had ships passing through planets and asteroids to get to planets beyond. Looks a bit ridiculous to say the least.

On another note, I also agree with the "the hangars and carriers should carry more fighters" brigade

Other than that and a few technical problems I've encountered (posted in the other feed), really good so far.

I could not agree more with H5N1's position. The lanes appear to be graphic only as far as the game engine is concerned. It processes the end points as just that - end points.

The interface is nice but here are some suggestions or annoyances.

1) The "Card" pop-up for units is often right on top of the unit you are hovering your mouse over. Let us move that around so its out of the way. If we run at 1600x1200 rez there is a lot of excess screen real estate in the corners.

2) Zooming in and out. The camera zoom feels way to large when you are in close. The zoom should be dynamic based on your current zoom level. When you are zoomed in, the mouse wheel makes less drastic zoom increments. When you are zoomed out, the camera makes larger zoom incrments.

3) I love that the ships turn to icons when they get to small to see.

4) When units with ships specifically fleets mobilize to jump, they often arrive in a very staggered rate as they take time to prepare. I like this time they need to jump but there should be a couple modes. When you are retreating you want to get as much out of harms way as fast as possible so you don't often wait for slower units. However, when preparing for an assault, you normally dont go on a first come first serve basis. You wait unitl all units are ready then attack. It would be best if a fleet would wait until all units were ready they jump together.

5) In single player the diplomacy screen and AI is sort of lame. AI will present you with various types of Aliances only to drop them a few minutes later and then do it again. I can see a human player trying to through you off your "game" but I think the AI should be more like a real nation or race than a player trying to manipulate you. Maybe a real nation will repeatedly create and brake alliances but it almost makes you want to forget about diplomacy in a game which sort of makes the feature pointless for single player.

6) Something I really liked was the ability to make your own ship designs in GalCiv2. It would be nice to have that functionality in this game too.

On the note of structures that have 0 HP when they are in the "idea" phase. Not only should they not be targetable and attackable until they are beginning to be built, you should not see the proposed plans of where something will be built. It should be a friendly information that only you and anyone with an aliance for intelligence would be able to see. This is also where espionage would be well used.

Thought of another one.

7) When you go to build a unit and there is something in your way, do not remove the selection of the item, simply return the "error message" but keep the item selected. This keeps users from having to reslect the item they are trying to place.

7a) When building structures, keep the same item selected by defualt until the player chooses other or clears the item type. Makes placing multiple structures quicker.

I like the idea of scalling the planets more to reality with the other vessels and orbiting platforms, but if you make it to "realistic" (and I use that term loosely) that the ships are specs of dust compared to the planet and moving anywhere takes forever. I small bump in relational sizes would be good. However, I would find myself always looking for the time compression hotkey if moving through hyperspace took 2-3 minutes to move from one world to another. At some point you have to balance game play with realizm (or perceived realizm since this is all fantasy anyway *grin*)

Comment about the jump through gravity wells.

I am OK with it. I understand the 3D nature of space and since hyperspace is fantasy with maybe at best some theory to support the fantasy, we do not know you could not hyperspace through a planet. I like that you can immediately retreat or move on to another planet if they do not have a jump inhibitor.

Actually I would prefer the planets be spaced in a ring orbit around a star system with various belts and moons etc. Warp can happen between planets in the same star system but should be very fast or otherwise some other sublight speed can be used. Jumps should really happen between star systems. This would be a bit slower and more neccesitate jump lanes which you seem to use. Otherwise travelling between planets should be direct or direct with accounting for other system bodies.

You should be able to pick out the location outside the gravity well in which to arrive and depart. The lanes between systems should be more like a guideline. This would make defense a more interesting than parking platforms at the "front door". And since you are jumping between systems in this scenario, you could jump to any area in the system (sufficienty out of the gravity well of system bodies). Perhaps larger planets and the sun would have larger gravity wells and asteroid or planetoids would have smaller. Large moons would have thier own gravity well within planets orbits.

There is a ton more strategic and tactical options when dealing with combat in this manner. Currently, as fun as the game is, it feels like everyone is just capturing flags.

Star systems could have various benefits or detriments like resource rich or gravity negating effects, or jump enhancing effetcts. Also technology advancements could give players the ability to navigate jump space much closer to gravity than others.

To make star systems feel more legitemate and the galaxy much bigger, good habital planets should be a variable but defaut to rare with various other planet types supporting colonization with technology or racial bonuses.

Just my thoughts.

I fully support a 20% scale increase in the planet size as well as at least a 10% reduction in the sizes of some of more obviously over sized orbital structures.

Additionally maybe it is just me but the ship repair object seems as if it should be on its side. In fact I'm all for a remake of the model because there is something just not quite right with it but I cant put my finger on it.

One strang thing I noticed. I dont know it belongs here or in Tech. I think here.

Sometimes when you have a fleet selected and you attempt to warp to another area, some of the ships want to fly back to your originating area. They also don't want to accept move orders within that sector. I THINK what is happening is that when the fleet was created I selected a unit that could not fly to the new site (like a local figther group). So when they got to the new area, the ships, or some of them, would want to try and rejoin the part of the fleet that did not come over.

We also need an easier way to add and remove from fleets. Moving averyone to one area and then draging a box around them works but needs to be suplimented by things like CTRL-LeftClick so we can add and remove units easily from our group. Right click functionality would be nice too. So things like planets, ships with sub menus could be right clicked and the sub menu could be slected without first having to selct the item then move to another display to make those selections.

Hehe and lets not forget the easy moding of things like ships, objects, scripts, etc so modders can add and remove things to the base gameplay.  

what would you think of a morale or battle fatigue option that incites you to pull out of a no win situation ie withdraw as long as there is still something to be saved. it would mitigate a tendency to lust loose the whole fleet (or attack group as in other rts games) and add some tactical depth imo.

@Shadow - that idea has already been fielded and appears to be rather well supported by the community. We have not received any feedback from the devs about it however.

A player who tries to save his units will perform better than one who doesnt anyway. Do we really need some kind of artificial incentive that penalizes risk?

is it artifial (remember this should be people on those ships not mindless machines)? I remembered it from the total war series and it didn't work too bad. just a thought.

I think it would work better as an AI incentive. To keep the AI from mindlessly sending ships to thier doom.

Otherwise I agree that the incentive is already there for the player which is to not waste resources.

Some Suggestions
1) improve the dynamics of plantary assault - incorporate troop ships and allow defenders some chance of staving off an assault for a limited time ( maybe until help arrives etc ) . Also make a full blown planet orbital assault at least damage the planet for future use ( maybe bacause of damage done to planet ecosystem by constant bombardment (timed ) etc).How about incorparating plant based automated defense canons to attack ships attacking from orbit to make it just thatt bit harder to take a planet .
Im not asking for first person planetary assaults just more depth .

2) Random events a must - ie metorite strike to damage civ for a period of time or solar flare to make communications difficut for a time etc.

3)Allow more planet based structures .

4) slow down production of ships by build facilities ( make time longer - capital ships should take a long time to build ) to limit massive fleet domination as happens later on in game.
If you increase build time for ships it may make the strategy element of using the correct ships for the correct job more evident .
It spoils the game with the my fleet is bigger than yours mentatlity that the game seems to produce ( particularly evident later in game ).

5) make capital ship advancement ( level ) more difficult - seems ridiculous you can build a heap of capital ships and if you have enough cash just keep them in base until they reach level 10.
Maybe consider some abilities combat exp based rather than purchase .

I found i followed the battles of one particularly capital ship in one of my recent games - BEST game so far - really liked watching my fav ship survive battles intact etc.
I feel this is the element Ironclad should target more - make it more difficult to build capital ships , to create the sense of ownership of the ones you do have.Which simply isnt there with the " my fleet is bigger than yours mentality " at present .

1. I like and already support - minus the time requirement option.
2. I lake and already support - see other thread.
3. I like and would love to see given that their aren't any at the moment unless I'm missing something rather important.
4. I have to agree.
5. I'm all for restricting the ability to buy upgrades. However for the trader faction it makes a lot of sense to be able to do so at least in my mind.


I also agree with you position of "ownership" and have advocated as much in other threads.

hmm, sounds like some good ideas.

if you are not exactly excited about the idea of buying upgrades, how about limiting the level you can buy? say the TEC can buy upgrades up to level 5 and the for rest they will have to fight (which will likely occur to some degree in any game anyway)

this also opens two further interesting elements: one, the different factions could have different "buy upgrades" limits. two, research, in particular for the TEC, could raise your limit.

this would also be somewhat realistic as training can only substitute real fighting experience to some extent but not fully. its more of a preparation to fighting.

heres my list:
1) frigates are almost fodder more than firepower, I often find myself using the scouts and the flaks for taking down capital ships and frigs, not a pretty, or efficient sight to see.

2) planets are far too small, I understand that theres a certain point that making them too big is an issue, but they dont need to be the size of beachballs

3) fighters and bombers like to fly through things rather than go through empty space (probably a tech issue, but I'm too lazy to move it )

4) the nebula contrast the color of the host star. perhaps its just a taste issue, but I think its more pleasing to have a blue star on a black/dark nebula, a red/orange/yellow star on a red/orange/yellow nebula and a green nebula on a green nebula. its too wierd to see a red star in a green background...

5) the star's GWs are the size of dead asteroids. thats a big no no, if anything stars should be the grandmomas of all fighting zones. their gravity wells should be proportionately H U G E.

6) already been mentioned, but the way planets are tied together is freekish. they need to be more uniformly spread out and you shouldnt have to go away from a planet in order to get to it. (although I like the choke points, strategically useful)

7) AI is too figity, it will jump away if I so much as apply a little pressure to its kol battleship

8) AI is too tunnelminded, it will jump through any amount of planets just to get to one it wants.

9) a tad more cinematica. for instance the gauss cannon platforms should recoil, thats a really nice touch (and hopefully not too taxing, I dont know though)

10) the third dimension is ominously missing... its almost as if it never existed...
or maybe the devs didnt let us have it (30 Rock reference)

11) The Solar Systems when over 10 (yes, I modded it so that may be the issue) they make themselves uniformly arranged around a center Solar System, that makes things... odd, to say the least.

12) planets and solar systems are not arranged in the third dimension... just a tangent off another point, but still, would be nice for them to be slightly off-kilter.

13) great opening gameplay, but the mid-late game is weak. I often find myself starting up new games rather than continuing old ones. this can easily be fixed by making later researches or artifacts have wacky or significant upgrades (new buildings or ships, perhaps a single-shot long RC missile silo on the asteroid etc. do wacky things to stars)

14) stars are not center! they should be IMO. they should provide something that makes them more important than simply the staging ground/entry point for an offense on/defense of your solar system

15) only one entry into a solar system! this makes turtling late-game too too easy. there needs to be some sort of specialty ability/ship or taxing capacity to leave and enter solar systems outside the star.

16) turtling... too too easy, and I'm a personal fan of the strategy.

17) AI should be a bit more agressive IMO.

now, this is a lot. I've got no delusions about that. additionally people will probably not agree with the majority of it, thats fine. but this is the stuff the devs need to pay a little attention to IMMITYO. (in my more-important-than-your opinion )

Big list Schem,

Isnt just a huge coincidence how you post this after the devs request useful feedback.

A littel too negative at parts, but I give a S, for... something.

...
I practically yelled it out in the other post, you really didnt catch that part?

really, how is it negative?
I give hardly more than a dash of bitterness and only a sprinkle of sarcasm.

ok, I'm going to take this time to ask something;

I know for certain that this game is bound to be solid, its a very strong concept built on many tried and true games melded together. I think its a beautiful work of game mastery.
however
I have difficulty seeing where novelty is going to come off of this. thats not to say I dont trust that the Devs will do it, but I have difficulty seeing where this game's staying power is. the early game is addicting as hell, but after that there needs to be more spice or else I get easily bored (damn you, television and internet for ruining my attention span!), I'm quite certain other people would get just as easily so.

so tell us, please tell us how you're adding on to this beautiful frankenstien to make it even better? (I know you've already done it... somehow)

simply put; this game is a strong base, undoubtedly. however I dont see what interesting elements could be added to it to make it more addicting and less monotonous, as thats the biggest issue this game has to climb.