First post,

You cannot design ships. There have never been any plans to allow ship design. If you really really want to design ships you shouldn't get this game.

Combat is much like in Civ... attacker moves onto defender, and one or the other is destroyed. Outcome of combat is determined by the units' hit points, attack values, defense values, and luck.

That said, its an extremely well-done game in most respects and has held my attention for longer than any other game has in years.
[Message Edited]

I don't quite follow what you're trying to get at here...

If you are saying that people have trouble dealing with the AI and have trouble micromanaging, that isn't exactly true - there are some reports of people actually finishing the game on the hardest difficulty level. There are also some impossiblechallange games/victories that some people go after - and succeding.



You can't design ships in the MOO2/3 sense, but you don't really need to. If, however, you wish to add more ship types, you can easily create new designs using a text editor and deploying them in combat. Be advised that the AI will use the same ships as well - including the devastating Excalibur.

QUOTE: Seems that nobody can get the a.i. and micromanaging at the same time. ENDQUOTE

Not sure what you mean.

Although completely different from Chess, GalCiv is a game that is also easy to play but difficult to master.

I find that the amount of micromanagement in this game compares very favourably to most TBS games. You can use AI Governors for your low value colonies, just set them to build planet quality and economy improvements so they chip in a few dollars each, a few research points and the occaisonal constructor. I find only the biggest richest worlds need micromanagement because they really rake in heaps of money and churn out warships, research and influence.

What he means is that game designers can't seem to design a game that has a good AI and yet allows good micromanagement. MOO3 has terrible AI but allows you to take charge of everything. Galciv has great AI but doesn't let you micromanage much of anything.

If that's what he's referring to, then the statement isn't correct.

The level of micromanagement available in a game is completely independant of the computer AI. If you check the MOO3 forums for bug reports, you will see numerous places where the AI both overbuilds (12 Mining DEA when there's already excess) and builds incorrectly (e.g. building Infantry instead of Infantry * 10).

Also, taking charge of everything is not related to "good micromanagement". MOO3, as stated in the messageboards, currently requires you to visit every planet as soon as a single production item has been finished as there is no way to tell whether it's starting to build another item in a queue or not. This should change soon, as I have made that recommendation.

In the case of GalCiv, there is an implementation on micromanagement, specifically with accurrate placements of planetary improvements and starbases. It's implemented to smaller scale in the domestic policy, as you tend to have to tweak a few sliders in a small amount to hit the magical Sweet Spot for an optimal economy.

If there is a micromanagement problem with GalCiv, perhaps there should be a specific example as opposed to Personally, I don't see what is missing.

LOL

Galactic Imperium - now there's a trip down memory lane. I still have my Atari 800XL - not been turned on for years.

Pete Harris is dead on with the chess analogy - this is a easy game to learn (lousy manual not withstanding) but very difficult to master