So I just listened to the podcast. I liked the enthusiasm of Paul, but grew concerned at the focus of most of the interview being on the interviewers complaining about how difficult it was to understand the slider interface and how great it would be if there were advisors like in Civilization. I remember reading a lot of reviews on GalCiv 2 and I can't remember a single complaint about the interface. Could it be improved? Sure - but there is always diminishing gains to be had here - and I worry when resources are being spent on chasing demographics that aren't likely to be interested in the game in the first place. I'm not trying to be snarky here - but if someone is having difficulty understanding the concept of the slider system on spending then they are probably not a demographic you should be trying to entice in the first place. Personally - I hate RTS games - but even I agree it would be foolish for a company to neglect or "Streamline" or "Make more Approachable" the core mechanics in an attempt to woo me over. Don't bother - keep your fan base happy by doing what it was that made them love the previous games and improve what they didn't like. When it comes to Gal Civ 2 the only thing I hear people sort of meh on was the Combat and the Tech Tree.
As for what should be improved on - why I would say it is the politics. The only thing I agreed with in the entire interview (When I wasn't gritting my teeth about the slider and advisor suggestions) was when they defined GalCiv 2 as primarily an economic and political simulation. Absolutely! So expand the richness of these areas. Build a whole host of gameplay mechanics that encourages factions to interact or plot against each other.
The two most brilliant mechanics in GalCiv 2 IMHO were
1) The enormous power of trade to increase over time - now I can't afford to let Power X gobble up my trade partner
2) The ability to sell ships to factions. Such a simple thing and yet it opens up such glorious possibilities. I have propped up entire nations by selling/giving them hardware and got the thrill of seeing said hardware stop invasions cold. Giving a lump sum of cash is not the same thing. I have no idea if this helps - but when I see ships that I sold driving out the invaders ... ahhh ... I feel like a real PARTICIPANT in this glorious space opera. I have also fostered terrible wars and sold arms to both sides. I was disappointed to see this mechanic absent in both Civ 5 and Fallen Enchantress for Gal Civ 3. Please, PLEASE do not get rid of this mechanic. Some may complain it is exploitable but it gives such rich interactions and allows me to always participate in various proxy wars rather than the very tired strategy of turtling up until I reach God Tech. And if it IS an exploit (rather than just ruthless politics) then crank up the difficulty. These things that make me feel like a PARTICIPANT in this dynamic story is what is gold - slightly better interfaces, advisors or bling on my space ships - not so much.
Please expand on these types of participatory mechanics. Other ideas
Galactic Council interactions much like Civ's latest expansion.
Different kinds of Trade agreements - Maybe I will help you in a war if you sign agreement where you profit little to none but I profit like a bandit.
Unmarked ships - Allow me to raid and attack but if destroyed there is a chance your meddling will be found out and your reputation take a hit
Perhaps your reputation will take a hit the more friendly your status is with someone before declaring war on them. Perhaps you need to actively work to change your status as sort of a light casus belli system
Space Terrain with real strategic factors
When I demand something let me also do it in a way "Or There will be War". They can call my bluff and I can not go to war, but at the cost of my reputation across the universe.
