Range-Pick too cheap?

I concur. That's what I pick as well. And I have found to be able to even take resources with ease because of the +2 speed .

+1 range is utterly useless on a tiny map. Its value depends vastly on the size of the map you use and of the actual map. So, without Ctrl-N, it may be of little use in some games, while it helps a lot in others. I don't think it is overpowered. But then I don't tend to expand like crazy and use +speed only to boost trade ships.

Is it really that useless, when the only colonizeable system is out of your range and with +1 range and +2 speed you could get it while without that the Torians will be there first?

I don't think so!

+Range can be quite helpfull on all mapsizes!

I do think so because I play tiny with rare stars, so there are usually NO stars you can settle. Since you can't guess where there are, sending the colony ship to the right star would be pure luck and totally uninteresting from my point of view. (I actually miss a 'No yellow star' option.)

I think its pretty useless, if I lack the range to
get somewhere, I just colonize a crappy planet
and buy a colony ship and then jump off from there.

Im talking really crappy, like PQ 1 crappy, just land
a colony ship on a pq1 planet, buy a new colonyship
and move all ur pop but 1 onto it. Instant range boost
for a mere 171 or so down payment

@LDICesare: Well, I don't think many players like playing the game in the style you do. Not having any planet to colonize seems a bit ... ridiculous for a game like galciv.

@Staffa: I think I got your point... So it's not the +1 Range ability that makes the AI not beeing able to colonize that fast, it's its inability of using that trick...

In all my dozen or so games, I have used that trick
'once'. I might use it again someday, its in by little
bag of tricks, but the reason the ai can not keep up
with me is because of the +2 speed which it doesnt
have, as well as not being nearly so cut-throat and
devious about going for strategicly important planets.

I agree that the setting is very peculiar, but considering the ai can expand better than you unless you use a trick (+1 speed, +1 range...), I think the expand phase and the map are random elements that don't really help improve one's skill. The no planet setting is just a galciv game where you start with the same resources as the others. It would be the same as a 'fast start' option as existed in Civ2: Skip part of the expansion phase.

Just wanted to mention that the +1 Range only is +1 in the smaller galaxies. In a gigantic one it's 3 Squares more! That's often enough to expand from one cluster to another without the need of building a refuling base inbetween.

I tried that Tiny/Rare setup now for fun.

The Yor had a 2nd planet in their system and seemed to outclass the others.

However, the Drengin did increadibly well and bombed my planet defenseless with one of their first Battleships, so that the Arceans could take it over with their Transports-Only-Attack.

I used speed quite a bit, it is fairly powerful. There is a reason its cost went up in one of the patches! I wouldn't be surprised to see +2 disapper entirely, and +1 costing even more.

On larger maps, it is even more powerful. I often sent a ship or three out towards the furthest points I could go with a colony ship (after getting a few in nearby sectors), trying to get systems that my opponents could just get to first, making it harder for them to even try to get the systems closer to my home.

fleabitfox

I hardly ever use it, it's defenitely not too good.

~SDC~

Apparently accelerated start will be a feature in 1.1

On tiny/small - abundant, range is not as useful at it seems. I have never found a yellow available outside the normal range of the colony ships, so adding range just got me to more already colonized yellows.

I am hearing more people choosing luck + econ/diplo/morale. Any stats on this?

I might seem odd but I almost always choose the +70% population. Perhaps because I'm used to the way that Civ3 based production off how many people were on a planet. Am I entirely crazy for doing this? I've found that I can get up into the high 10's of billions while other civs are down in the 20's. I'm not sure if it's that much of a bonus or not. I'll have to try the speed thing, just to see what happens.

Pop growth is nice, but speed is better. Growing
population on twice as many planets is greater pop
growth and greater production and greater pop limit.

And I think you mean moo3 not civ3

Wow, cool, they changed it to a cost of 3!

Now you cannot combine it with Speed +2 anymore!

Was that change in the beta aswell, or did this thread probably initialize that change?

This thread.

I just finished my last game as Universalists plus pop +70 and luck +25 among the picks. Just wanted to see how nice the +80 pop and +50 luck would be. Just not seeing the benefit of luck. I got two precursor Rangers but it was after I was already cruising around in Overlords so it wasn't that nice.

My philosophy is to always take PQ +5 and then whatever suits me for that particular game. I like loading up on picks/parties such as War Party and then adding +50 hit points and +15 attack or repair. Range and speed just don't seem worth it though. I have never used Range and probably never would. As for speed, I can't see spending all your picks basically for +2 speed. I guess I'm too attached to the PQ +5 pick to want to give it up. I may try a game with +1 speed and see if it makes much difference. It just seems like too much for 2 speed. Of course, I'm always rushing toward gravity accelerators so maybe I should rethink things. And if you could really grab twice as many planets in the land grab phase then maybe so.

~SDC~

Speed is totally neccesary in a gigantic, very nice
in large and progressively less interesting as you
get into smaller(or less abundant) maps.

And its all about the early expansion, once the
expansion is over, the speed bonus isnt that useful
anymore.