Well, you could use some social skills, but your points are valid.

I'd think rewording those items into a request rather than an insulting rant would be much more effective.  If someone complained to you the same way about, let's say, your breath or how you walk or such, you'd just blow them off, right?  

It would be a shame for Stardock to ignore your valid points just because you're being a tool.

@mottikhan

Although I could reword the listed items, I prefer cutting out the ol "ass kissing and beating around the bush" routine and getting straight to the point. As a fan of the Galactic Civilizations series and a customer, I love this series, but the game is clearly unfinished and it stinks. There are a lot of bugs and a lot of things that were implemented into the game, but they havent been used to their full potential and it seems as if the game is still in its beta stages. For the listed price, I expected a fully functional game with almost no bugs and a friendly UI. And what do we get? An incomplete game with a bad UI that has more bugs and issues than Galactic Civilizations 1 and 2! even surveying anomalies is glitchy! if an automated ship comes across a bugged anomalie, the game gets stuck and you can't end your turn! In the ship designer, when I group a bunch of objects together and save it as an object, it's not even the full object and its dimentions are warped! Who cares about formalities, fix the darned product before your company loses its reputation and it's customers!

Read some of the comments on the reviews from PC Gamer: http://www.pcgamer.com/galactic-civilizations-3-review/

@stellioPaultos

You're right. Buying a complete game these days is a tough challenge. One of the main differences here though, is, this is the same developer. Paul has made this his life's work, clearly. There is ownership, unlike other titles. This in my mind means there is a lot higher chance of this game being made into an actual good game....not just fun bits here and there, as it is now. This is similar to the situation with Starcitizen's Chris Roberts; whereas Chris though is trying to make the game, a game with polish from launch, here in GalcivIII it seems the rush to exit Beta with an incomplete game (Planetary invasion, wheel being removed, ludicrous Technology progression, map balances, bugs, micro management, etc.) took priority.

I'm sure in years to come this will be a great game. Should we have to wait for that though, as the frustrations mount up?? Newer games, new MOO and Stellaris, seem to be making an impact on Stardock, as a noticeable surge in activity on the forums, wanting to ask our opinions on gameplay mechanics and making a good 4X. So I'm hopeful of improvements sooner, rather than later.

2. Coming in 1.3. Available now as opt in.

3. Not filly understanding. Could you walk me through this?

4. Agreed. should be an option or have it remember.

5. It's coming. We had complains I GalCiv II about e micro managey feeling it had but it was a mistake t remove it for gc3.

Ah, I see. That makes sense.  How would you imagine the UI working to let you do this?

Personally i could think of two ways 

1) allow me to set a build order that modifies the que 

so i could set factorys as priority one

approval = p2

population = p3

research =p4

wealth = P5

what this would do is sort the build que automatically to keep the buildings in the order i specify

this would allow me to set up a planet purely on adjacency bonus's and let the ai set up a build order

it would need to have a checkbox to turn it off per planet 

2) have an optimize button button that could be pressed and would then sort the build que to make it as fast as possible 

this would need to account for bonus manufacturing from factorys bonus production from approval and population as well as adjacency bonus's and building levels 

@androshalforc

you are exactly right, this is exactly what I meant. Same with the priority idea. You should have the build queue option under the govern tab. I swear this used to be in a previous Gal Civ version as well but it's been so long.

On another note, thank god they've added the filters, but I was hoping for something a little more useful. Sorting planets by class or what they are building should be an option and sorting ships by name, type, hull size, and whether they are in orbit around star bases, or planets or not should be an option as well. 

For example, rather than having a long list of fleets and ships, grouping them all by type would look like this:

- Scouts (16) ^

- Surveyors (4) ^

- Battle Hammers (6) ^

- Overlords (3) ^

- Colony Ships (4) ^

- Constructors (8) ^

...etc

grouping them by hull size would look like this:

- Light (12) ^

- Small (8) ^

- Medium (8) ^

- Large (14) ^

- Huge (24) ^

- Cargo (30) ^

grouping them by orbit would look like this:

- Starbase

- Planet

- Unorbited

which would be way more useful in my opinion during huge maps where you can easily end up with hundreds of ships.

Here's my list of gripes:

1) When using a constructor with multiple modules to build a starbase, I have to click to build the base, then click on the remaining constructor, click to move it OFF the base and then click again to move it BACK to the base. Really? I mean... do we really need to have to do this? I seem to remember that before this last patch the reduced constructor was just put 'on' the base and could be used. Can we go back to that?

2) Seems to me something changed with system and planet abundance. I used to get more planets and closer together; the last couple of games, with abundant stars and planets, I've been lucky to get 2 habitable planets out of 25 stars. Either I'm having a RNG run of bad luck or something is badly off.

3) Resources. Even on the lowest possible setting it is possible for every person in the Galaxy to have their own durantium mine, which has no use or value except the aliens all think the stuff is rarer than Latinum and will trade their wives and children for it. And Elerium and anti-matter... I just run up a few mining techs and then equip all of my ships with Prototype weapons, no need to ever research anything else. Can we please get some reasonable distribution curves for resources? I've taken to just shutting them off...

4) The designer defaults to show ALL designs. And so I click on User and delete an old design... and it defaults to ALL, so I click on User... I design a ship... and can't see it because the list defaults to ALL. Please let it remember what I've selected before and default to that.

5) On the map, once I've seen a pirate (or at least a pirate starbase) there should be SOME symbol on the map even if it is no longer in scanner range. Airplanes that can't see a hazard on radar still know where it is because whoever saw it first, mapped it. This would be a small change but a nice one.

6) When I'm in the UP and I vote on a proposal, the proposal resolution graphic blocks out how everyone voted. Please fix this or don't bother trying to show me how they voted. I mean, I have no info to help predict how they vote, so I guess I don't need to know what they actually did either, but if you are going to show it please display it so that it can be read.

7) Fleet naming. Add a ship, rename the fleet. Take out a ship, rename the fleet. Abandon renaming fleets as another nice feature made useless by having to redo it over and over and over.

8) If you are going to have the planetary wheel, SHOW WHAT HAPPENS TO GLOBAL LEVELS when you change it. And show on the planetary page whether a planet is under local or civilization production - and show WHICH GOVERNOR if any. Please. Really. Please. It's not the micro, it's the hard work and many clicks it takes to assemble the information you need before you can do the micromanagement.

9) Defensive systems are too 'blocky'. I'd like to see them broken down to smaller values - less combat value, cost, mass and all. This would make them much more usable especially with mixing and matching.