u/HedraGames

I’m the solo dev behind Galactum Meridian, a research-first space strategy game about leading humanity’s first deep survey beyond Sol.

I wanted to share a short video of the part of the game I’ve been spending a lot of time on lately: the star map and the way territory / control is represented in actual 3D space.

A lot of 4X games, even space ones, still handle strategic control in a mostly 2D way. Stellaris, Civilization, and similar games usually show borders as flat regions or overlays, sometimes with visual effects to give them more depth. That works well for readability, but I’ve always wanted to try something where the map is genuinely spatial. Homeworld did something similar to this many years ago, but I can't think of many other games that do this.

In Galactum Meridian, the star map is not just a backdrop. Nearby stars sit in 3D space, distance and depth matter, and the player’s science expedition is trying to build a working picture of what humanity can actually reach, study, and coordinate. But, it turns out... so are other expeditions, and you are competing against them for "control." Territory control is also being treated more like a 3D volume of scientific authority / stewardship rather than a flat painted border. The idea is that control is not just “I own this blob on a map,” but “we have enough survey data, probe coverage, research presence, and logistical reach to meaningfully operate here.”

I also have added a way of viewing stars in "slices", which only show a small snippet of the area of space in question. This works well for situations with dense star clusters.

The game is still deep in development, but I think I'm getting pretty close with how I want to present this part of the game. I may end up showing two expeditions with "contested" control over a star system, which I think could look very cool. The 3D map/control layer is one of the core things I want to get right because it affects how the whole game reads as a 4X.

I’d be curious what people here think about this kind of map presentation. Does a true 3D strategic map make territory/control feel more interesting, or do you think 4X maps need to stay flatter for readability?

Steam page is here if you want to wishlist/follow development:

https://store.steampowered.com/app/4690110/Galactum_Meridian/

-Hedra Games

Hi r/Space4X! I’m the developer of Galactum Meridian, a space strategy / 4X game that just went live on Steam for wishlisting.

Steam page:
https://store.steampowered.com/app/4690110/Galactum_Meridian/

The basic pitch is: Where Discovery Becomes Strategy.

The thing I’m trying to do differently is make exploration and scientific research the main part of the game... and yet still be a 4X game at heart. In Galactum Meridian, the core strategy is built around surveying nearby star systems, doing fun scientific research, deploying probes, building research capabilities, and deciding which discoveries are worth following up.

A few of the main ideas:

• The star map is built around real nearby-star data where available (from NASA!). It's 3D. Not a flat plane.
• Known exoplanet and orbital information are used where possible.
• Unknown or incomplete systems are expanded with modeled and inferred discoveries. Procedurally generated planets, each of which you can explore.
• Research progression happens through a 3D Research Tree instead of a traditional flat tech tree.
• The Far Horizon expedition is the player’s main survey vessel, with probes, crew context, and a growing discovery archive.
• Gain "territory" by gaining Stewardship points, allowing you to take over systems.

It is still in active development. I’m planning to post regular development updates and change logs as the game moves toward launch.

I’d be interested in feedback from 4X players specifically:

• Does an exploration-first 4X structure sound interesting?
• What would make discovery feel strategically meaningful instead of just being flavor?
• What would you want to see in a demo before deciding whether this is a real 4X game?
• Are there any obvious red flags in the Steam page or screenshots?

If the premise sounds interesting, wishlisting helps a lot, but I’m also genuinely interested in hearing what 4X players think this kind of game needs to get right.

There should be a trailer available I just uploaded to the Steam Page.... have a look and let me know what you think!

https://store.steampowered.com/app/4690110/Galactum_Meridian/

--Hedra Games

Hi r/aigamedev. I’m the developer of Galactum Meridian, a discovery-first space strategy / 4X game that just went live on Steam for wishlisting.

Steam page:
https://store.steampowered.com/app/4690110/Galactum_Meridian/

The short version: Galactum Meridian is about leading humanity’s first deep survey mission beyond Sol. The player commands the Far Horizon Expedition, explores nearby star systems, investigates unfamiliar planets and moons, launches probes, builds out research capabilities, and turns discoveries into strategic choices.

The 4X angle is a little different from the usual empire-first structure. I’m trying to make exploration itself the main strategy layer. Instead of exploration being only the first phase before the “real” game begins, the design is built around surveying, interpreting data, choosing follow-up targets, upgrading expedition systems, and gradually turning knowledge into strategic reach.

The current stack is roughly:

• Godot 4.6.1
• GDScript
• Terrain3D
• World Creator for terrain source work
• Blender for model cleanup/blockouts
• Meshy and other AI/image-to-3D tools for asset prototyping
• Python ETL and validation tools
• Offline astronomy/catalog processing for nearby-star and exoplanet data
• AI coding assistants for implementation, debugging, documentation, and workflow planning, specifically GPT5.5, and Claude for cleanup in specific situations.

The hardest technical area right now has been terrain.

The game needs to move between high-level space/system views and local planetary survey scenes. That means I need terrain that can support science-site presentation, probes/rovers, readable local features, and eventually a sense that the location belongs to a specific world rather than being a generic diorama.

The current terrain path is roughly:

World Creator -> repo-owned import workflow -> Terrain3D -> Godot local surface / field study scene

The challenges have been:

• Keeping World Creator exports consistent and repeatable
• Getting height/splat/colormap/roughness data into Godot cleanly
• Preserving useful object placement data from World Creator
• Making Terrain3D imports line up with the game’s local-site coordinate system
• Avoiding Terrain3D region-grid mistakes
• Grounding markers, probes, and objectives accurately on imported terrain
• Making close-range terrain read well instead of looking too broad or painterly
• Keeping traversal performance acceptable
• Making the local scene feel connected to the planet/world view that led to it
• Deciding when to use terrain alone versus adding Blender/Meshy/hand-authored props

It is definitely a work in progress, but coming along nicely.

One specific issue I keep running into is the gap between “terrain that looks fine from a strategy-game camera” and “terrain that still looks good when a probe is close to the ground.” Terrain3D plus World Creator can get me pretty far, but close-range material fidelity, steep cliff faces, object scatter, and consistent local-site framing are still difficult.

The importation of World Creator terrain into Godot is difficult at this point, but it works. That is where I would like feedback from people here.

Questions I’m especially interested in:

• Has anyone here had a good Godot 4 + Terrain3D + external terrain tool workflow?
• If you use World Creator, how are you handling reliable export/import into your engine?
• How much AI-generated or AI-assisted 3D asset work have you found usable after cleanup?
• For an AI-heavy solo project, what kind of technical transparency do players actually care about?
• Does the Steam page communicate “AI-assisted but seriously built,” or does anything read wrong?
• For a 4X / strategy game, would an exploration-first structure be interesting to you?

Its a big project... I think I bit off too much, but I am in it until the end, at this point.

I’m trying to be straightforward about the state of the project. The Steam page is live for wishlists, but the game is still in active development. I’ll be posting updates and change logs as systems improve.

If the premise sounds interesting, wishlisting helps a lot. But I’m also genuinely looking for feedback from people building with AI, especially around the terrain/art pipeline and how to communicate this kind of development process honestly.

with respect,
--Hedra Games

Hi r/4Xgaming. I’m the developer of Galactum Meridian, a space strategy / 4X game that just went live on Steam for wishlisting.

Steam page:
https://store.steampowered.com/app/4690110/Galactum_Meridian/

The basic pitch is: Where Discovery Becomes Strategy.

The thing I’m trying to do differently is make exploration more than the early-game map reveal before the “real” 4X systems begin. In Galactum Meridian, the core strategy is built around surveying nearby star systems, deploying probes, building research capabilities, doing fun research, and deciding which discoveries are worth following up.

A few of the main ideas:

• The star map is built around real nearby-star data (from NASA!) where available. 10,000 stars, each one unique.
• Known exoplanet and orbital information are used where possible.
• Unknown or incomplete systems are expanded with modeled and inferred discoveries, meaning, some worlds are real (as far as we know) and others are made up.
• Research progression happens through a 3D Research Tree instead of a traditional flat tech tree.
• The Far Horizon expedition is the player’s main survey vessel, with probes, crew, and lots of cool capabilities.
• As you complete research, you gain "Stewardship" points, which allows you to expand your "control" of known space.

It is still in active development. I'm two months in, but it's moving quickly. I’m planning to post regular development updates and change logs as the game moves toward launch.

I’d be interested in feedback from 4X players specifically:

• Does an exploration-first 4X structure sound interesting?
• What would make discovery feel strategically meaningful instead of just being flavor?
• What would you want to see in a demo before deciding whether this is a real 4X game?
• Are there any obvious red flags in the Steam page or screenshots?

If the premise sounds interesting, wishlisting helps a lot, but I’m also genuinely interested in hearing what 4X players think this kind of game needs to get right.

I hope to hear from you!

--Hedra Games