Galactic Civilizations: How do you maintain focus?

Create account

Login

Downloads

NewsGroup

Community

Purchase

Galactic Forum

Strategies

Mods

Empires

Do you still think GalCiv 1 is fun even with GalCiv II out?

758 votes

1- Yes

2- No

How do you maintain focus?

Search:

Sort by:

Go to Bottom

Go to Bottom

by Citizen Stofsk - 6/18/2003 12:50:38 PM

Hello, everyone.

My question relates to the feeling of apathy that sets in after a couple of hours of playing... ie, you don't care what's going on in the greater scheme of things, you just want the game to end so you keep on sending ships here and there - unfortunately, this inevitably results in you neglecting the strategic concerns for your empire.

I think this is particularly relevant to games on Large galaxies and above, but the one I'm most interested in is gigantic size - because I haven't attempted it yet.

So what I'm asking here is: what small (or large) things can you do to maintain your focus? And I'm not just talking about scoring a victory - one way or another, victory is assured. I mean keeping your awareness of what's going on around the map, which Starbases need support, which need modules, what colonies should get what etc... Eventually someone will win (you or the computer), but what makes a Stunning Victory? What makes a CLEAN victory?

Part of strategy gaming depends on having a plan... what do people plan for, and how do you plan it? Do you think of contingency plans - all you need is one unexpected Bad Event or Space Shark to come in and spoil your day - so how do you protect yourself against it?

Should you play for an hour, go away and relax, then return "fresh"? Should short-term/mid-term/long-term goals be put down in writing before you even start a new game? How important are the start-up ability points? Should you focus on one particular trait, or spread yourself out a little?

Especially on gigantic sized (!) maps, where the area is so huge, the whole task of 'galactic domination' might seem too daunting. Do players here look at the macro scale, or the micro? Short, or long term?

Some examples: naming stars (for prod/capitals, ship prod, frontier worlds etc) so you know instantly what star does what; naming starbases, for resources, or location (Galactic North-West) or a particular mission (battle stations, repair stations, trade stations, etc); naming ships (does anyone even bother?)... there are other things you could do, I'm sure - just can't think of any right now...

I hope I'm making sense here. I'm interested in hearing everyone's views, as I think this is an important topic. It also happens to be vague as well...

Incidentally, has anyone here thought of doing a strategy guide? Or collaborating to write one up?

Well, I think this post has gone on long enough...

Cheers,
Stofsk

#1 by Veteran fsk5809 - 6/18/2003 1:18:26 PM

I play in windowed mode, and I keep a notepad file where I keep track of the resource locations, my current plan, who wonders and trade goods are owned by the AI players, and who's at war.

I also decided that I'm only playing on tiny/rare until the expansion comes out. With rally points, it'd going to be a lot easier to play on larger maps.

#2 by Citizen OronHaus - 6/18/2003 1:41:35 PM

Rallying/way points would be a great bonus! As for focusing, I enjoy the fact that it gets confusing and big. That's where the micromanagement and macromanagement skills are tested!! However, I've seen some really good suggestions from people on these forums on how to organize your empire from the beginning to help you in the long term. Some of them were:

- Use different governors for different PQ ranges of planets. This makes it easier to determine who is getting what social benefit.

- Only utilize the best planets for production. Let the rest simply draw revenue. This limits your concern as only a handful of systems will be generating ships making their monitoring less tedious.

- Try a standard naming convention for planetary systems. The approach I use is based on location on the map as the PQ of the systems changes throughout the game. This helps you keep track of a planet if a message pops up and changes sectors.

And one thing to remember, check the PDF guide for some of the built in features. A lot of information IS available to you and in a very clean and organized fashion. Once you know it is there, it makes it much easier to understand!

I hope this helps you out!!

#3 by Citizen Franco fx - 6/18/2003 4:30:36 PM

The only time I tend to lose focus is when victory is certain and it is just a matter of time. I start looking for a quicker way to end the game. If I am 85% to a culture victory and beyond human is just a matter of researching the techs, I may try to end it with an Alliance victory. I will usually cut off all production and hit the turn button a lot. I try to keep doing the things that will win faster like upgrading sb for culture. When it get boring in the end game it also may be a signal to move up in difficulty.

I have never had a conquest victory since that is not my style of play but it is hard to lose focus when you are in a war.

Posted via Stardock Central

#4 by Veteran vincible - 6/18/2003 5:40:33 PM

I almost never lose focus when the outcome is still in doubt. When the outcome is not in doubt, ie when I'm sure I'm going to win (or lose), then I usually just quit and start a new game. I only actually finish a small fraction of my games.

#5 by Citizen Peter Harris - 6/18/2003 11:13:54 PM

I just keep playing until such time as I feel a new game would be more interesting. Like vincible, I tend to start a new game when I know victory or defeat is inevitable. If I know I can win with a long war (plenty of help is always available) I can do without the war so I just start a new game.

#6 by Citizen Stofsk - 6/19/2003 12:19:14 AM

Interesting views, from everyone. Personally, I like to finish what I start - win or lose, I want it to happen.

"...it is hard to lose focus when you are in a war. "
Ah, no, it is EASY to lose focus when you are in war. Especially if you don't have the will to fight it, or the intelligence to win it. (look at history, recent or ancient)

My most recent game had me at war with 3 majors and 1 minor. I didn't want to fight the war, but was pressured into it by my "Allies." No will to fight = loss of focus. I ended up winning the war (they were on sub-normal AI; I started the game as an experiment and didn't stop) but most of the time I didn't care what was going around me - I just wanted the game to end. So I just ended up clicking the turn button repeatedly, waiting for my slow arse battleships to arrive at the scene and dispense some "rough justice." I was so apathetic I just wasn't paying much attention, and therefore when I won it didn't feel like a win because of some innovative strategy (the baddies were on sub-normal) it just felt like a non-event.

The difficulty isn't the issue (he says, never playing anything harder than normal...). Because I was apathetic and the AI was sub-normal, I should have won much sooner than I did. The reason why I didn't is because I lost focus.

Anyway, thanks everyone.

Stofsk

#7 by Citizen Peter Harris - 6/19/2003 12:39:14 AM

So I am not the only one who loses focus in a war. I want a peaceful game so I tend to supply someone else with the stuff to put down my enemies.

#8 by Citizen stoplis - 6/19/2003 3:57:23 AM

It's not too hard to stay out of wars, you just need a strong military as a deterrent. One of my favourate tactics is to trade for the AI's ships - it weakens him & strengthens me at the same time.
As for allies, well you don't need them if you are strong enough, they will just drag you into their petty wars. My last 2 victories have been Alliance victories but I don't enter into the alliance until I've got everyone at Close & ready to go.

#9 by Citizen LDiCesare - 6/19/2003 12:34:16 PM

I think bigger maps mean loss of focus. I can't think of anything to avoid that. That is why I tend to play smaller maps. Governors help, but when you've built everything planet X had queued, you suddenly remember the small useless planet is there and tend to wonder, "what am I going to do there?". When it happens too often, it gets boring.

#10 by Citizen GenKnight - 6/19/2003 12:47:36 PM

I don't know if this will help you focus more but you could try "other" abilities/political orientation just to see what the differences are in your game. Being oppressed more or less by other civs? How quickly is your influence/economy growing/shrinking?

Up your level of play? Decide that you WANT to win and not the computer?

My problem is that I probably get a little addicted to this game and a few others that I play. Passion, baby. The energy is there being hooked up to the computer and I just want to get to the end and win, sometimes ignoring the hours and not really minding the T&E. If the game is too hard or too easy is when I have issues.

I take the game in stages. First I colonize, make trade goods, build freighters and usually stop by the time someone wants to kick my ass. Tomorrow..

Then I build my military up and stop or eradicate the oppressor(s). Break because this takes me a couple of hours.

Then I look at the pitiful cultural influence I have [had] and start to correct this while building economy and techs leading to the Dreads.. Break.

Strategy time. How are the relations around the galaxy? Anyone allied together? Who is fighting who? If some small major is getting pounded by a larger major do you help him out covertly? Or do you join in because you know his planets are going to fall to someone and it might as well be you? Warfare for me is usually a civ at a time and then a break (marriage and working at a job has advantages and disadvantages).

For me when one or two civs are left its time for more strategy. Attack, become an ally, and/or generate cultural and money? All the while (just learning this) trading with the minors the goods I've developed (a priority) or techs, specially when new minors "appear". Oh yea, taking out a minor civ that decide they want to fight me thru some sort of allaince with a major.

Maybe because I'm an accountant the minimal minutia (sp) of Gal Civ doesn't bother me. However, these types of thing are inherent in TBS games as opposed to RTS, where you are constantly engaged with warfare/upgrades/economics.

My goal is to get quicker to whatever end strategy I use at increasingly higher levels...and not let the computer beat me. Oh, and more medals!

[Message Edited]

#11 by Citizen LDiCesare - 6/20/2003 10:18:08 AM

these types of thing are inherent in TBS games as opposed to RTS, where you are constantly engaged with warfare/upgrades/economics.

I disagree. TBS include go and chess, where you don't lose focus because there is only one thing you can do on your turn. I might even say nethack is a TBS because turn by turn you need strategic thinking, but still can do only one thing per turn. Note that MOO3 wanted to go that way (IFP) too, but didn't. I'm sad they didn't, I would have liked to see what it was like for a 4X game.

The problem with GalCiv and 4X games is that there are many things which call your attention. If you can't break up your planets in a small set of categories, you cannot think of all of them at once, so either you go methodic or you lose focus. Methodic is OK only as long as it remains fun. That's why we should be able to rename planets: If you could rename Hoth II into LittleUselessPlanet42 and HothIII into ProductionMammothPlanet, it'd be easier to react when you see that Hoth II has finished building a constructor or its social queue is empty.

#12 by Citizen CypherPax - 6/20/2003 3:05:21 PM

I like this game because it is like a complex board game. Whenever I lose focus on a game, I increase the difficultly of the next game.

I've found that at higher difficultly levels, it is hard to achieve the type of operational superiority that allows you to break focus. I like to use the governors, also even on the smaller maps I tend not to worry about protected star systems (star systems that have 2 or more sectors into a protected star cluster) and I concentrate on not leaving approaches to my star systems exposed. I also favor conquest / alliance victory which means I'm fighting up to the last turn.

Having said all this, I don't think I'll play many gigantic games - they'd take to long if you don't zone.

#13 by Citizen GenKnight - 6/20/2003 5:15:40 PM

I disagree. TBS include go and chess, where you don't lose focus because there is only one thing you can do on your turn

You're right - I didn't choose my words carefully enough, LDi. I should of said in TBS you control when the action occurs, as opposed to RTS where the amount of action is, outside of some strategies (and the Pause button), out of your control. Chess is an excellent example of an all-encompassing TBS.

This game does it for me too - love it!
[Message Edited]

<<	(1)	>>
Page 1 of 1

Go Back to Message Board

To be able to post something you have to become a member
Click here!

Copyright 1995-2024 Stardock Corporation. All rights reservered.
Site created by Pixtudio and Stardock, designed by Pixtudio.