1. What is your favorite aspect of the proposed game? Why?

A strategy game without real enemies (apart from the environment) that mainly aims at surviving is quite interesting. And I really like that the game inevitably ends with the destruction of the planet's ecosystem, even though that may seem a little dark.

2. What is your least favorite aspect? Why?

The aspect that the climate effects are entirely random could be too punishing. To keep the game challenging without penalizing the player for something he can’t control, different / additional climate effects may be better. For example a rising water level or spreading fires that damage buildings more predictably.

3. Which single change or addition would you suggest to most improve the game? 

Keeping each playthrough reasonably short is probably a good idea, as the player could feel like he loses his progress when he wins (or loses depending on how you want to look at it). This means the procedural terrain generation should receive sufficient development focus to keep the game interesting over multiple planets.

Your game sounds like a lot of fun for players who enjoy min-maxing and watching their resources grow!

I believe the goals you set for yourself are realistic considering the time constraints and the fact that your team consists of only two developers.

My main concern is that the game may feel a little bit too much like a simulation. Especially in the beginning of the game, the player probably has to wait a lot for buildings to finish and resources to stack up for the next investment.

I would suggest to add some more action to the game by introducing more radical changes to the biomes. Maybe you are mining a volcanic planet where tiles can be razed to the ground? Maybe the Ocean can drown entire tiles? Maybe the temperature increase can turn lush greenery into deserted wastelands?

Your technical achievement isn't quite clear at the moment. You should be able to specify one main technical achievement and concentrate on that. For example, "planet-wide climate simulation" or "procedurally generated evolving planet" would be possible.

What is your favorite aspect of the proposed game? Why?

Having a limited and somewhat predictable game length isn't something that you can always rely on in strategy games, so being able to balance the game around a certain session length does make the genre a bit more appealing.

What is your least favorite aspect? Why?

I don't quite see where strategic thinking really comes into play with the way the game is described. Maybe I'm missing something, but it seems like the player is basically supposed to balance high risk with high reward, which in turn basically means that if you want to achieve a high score, you go for a high risk strategy until RNGesus rolls the dice in your favor. If there are too few factors to affect the player's progress and of those factors too many are random, I don't see how players will feel like they are in control of the game's outcome or have options to consider.

Which single change or addition would you suggest to most improve the game?

For this kind of genre I'd put more of an emphasis on building placement and building synergies, meaning that not every building is related to resource gathering and pollution, but rather to modifying the properties of buildings surrounding or connected (in some way) to it. This would also make different types of terrain more relevant.

In return, I don't see much value added to the gameplay by having it take place on a sphere-like world, so if you're looking to save time, that's what I'd axe first.

What is your favorite aspect of the proposed game? Why? 

I like the idea of conquering the whole planet, overcoming the different biomes and generally balancing the whole resource gathering and spending mechanisms. If the problems become harder and harder to solve, depending on the environmental situation, the players should feel appropiately challengend.

What is your least favorite aspect? Why?

If it is just a single player game, I would prefer to play it endlessly, instead of having to forcefully lose at a given point in time. Just the goal to gather/produce as much money as possible seems kind of unecessary, since what would be the usage of said money?

Which single change or addition would you suggest to most improve the game?

It could be nice to use the earned money to buy further planets(which may include different or harder conditions than the starting planet). E.g. instead of gradually building up the difficulty, natural disasters such as lightning strikes could already happen from the beginning. Maybe also having limited types of resources, could lead the player to being more careful when spending them. 

What is your favorite aspect of the proposed game? Why?

I like that the consequences of exploiting a planet's resources are shown in the form of natural disasters. It shows the player that focusing only on economical growth can lead to uncontrollable disasters.

What is your least favorite aspect? Why?

I personally don't like that the player has no choice to be really successful in the game since the planet is always going to be destroyed in the end regardless the player's action. Making the game endless would kind of avoid that e.g. by letting the player balance destruction of the planet and resource exploitation.

Which single change or addition would you suggest to most improve the game?

At the moment, I don't see the main goal yet behind earning as much money as possible before the planet's ecosystem collapses (as stated in your game description). I would suggest to add a feature that allows the player to spend the money.

1. What is your favorite aspect of the proposed game? Why?

I think it's an interesting take on the topic, as it's actually kind of believable: you specify that we're an alien race, but I can imagine that some humans would do such a thing, too, if they could. Also, people usually like to feel empowered, so for a player who likes strategic building games, this could be an interesting take on the genre, as he/she tries to farm the whole planet with a little variety due to the climate effects.

2. What is your least favorite aspect? Why?

Me personally, I'm not a big fan of turn based strategy games like this, but that shouldn't stop anyone from creating that kind of game of course. Now since I have to pick something, I'd also say that I don't like that we only care about exploiting a planet without building the actual habitat of the alien species. What are they actually doing it for? They try to expand to the whole universe, but... where do they settle? It's out of the scope for your small team I guess, but I would like to have planets that are the actual habitat of the aliens and planets that are harvested. The player has to balance the ecosystem of the one he lives on, but can exploit the others. That would also make the game playable for a longer duration without the need to stop after one planet "dies". You'd just have to build a huge ship to get to the next planet to exploit or something like that.

3. Which single change or addition would you suggest to most improve the game? 

I would like the climate effects to also shape the world in a predictable manner, like rising sea levels, so that their effects are not entirely random and can be countered strategically, as they are the main difference gameplay-wise to other games like this. Correct me if I'm wrong though - as I don't play strategy games like this, I can hardly make an informed suggestion.