One of the fun things to do with games like this is try to immerse yourself in the game more by explaining away as much as you can so you can still "believe" the premises in the game. But games like this always have to balance between believability and good solid gameplay, so there are always some things in the game that make it hard to follow along. In a game like Civ it’s when the tank beats the spearmen.

I’ve always explained that one away by imagining that the spearman was an entire legion of spearmen and a tank was just a tank.

In Civ2 you had planes that would stay in the air for a year or two….

In GalCiv2, I think the game creators did a good job with most of the concepts:

The whole idea that a month is a turn is an excellent compromise; I think that works well within the game. The idea of the Star Bases starting out small and taking lots of constructors to build is also really nicely done. All in all, it seems like the game is pretty easy to geek out with and totally imagine yourself the colonial dictator.

My question is what in the game do you find hard to justify? And how did you justify it:

• You can take one 500 million people off a planet and they are all soldiers fighting against the enemy? (the families wait on the transports?)
• What about a faster ship being attacked and destroyed by a slower ship with no hope of escape? (hyperspace inhibitors?)
• Or the fact that you can upgrade a constructor to a colony ship in mid space within 4 months? (repair/ construction ships flying around unseen?)
• Or that life support systems affect how far you can go, but you can fly around dozens of parsecs from your nearest planet forever! (tiny little fast supply ships?)

Just wondering how everyone else struggles with this. Obviously you don’t need to answer if you think "it’s just a cool game".