Xtropy

Reply to Huge capacity colony ships and mass instantaneous conscription. in Galactic Civilizations II Stardock Forums

Also, for anyone lacking an explanation, a game wont put every single detail like chosing the training type, training the soldiers for 6 months, etc. Only: Pick the number of soldiers, put them in ships, go. The rest is implicit, except if you want massive micro-management. What I am curious about has less to do with troop training/l

Reply to Huge capacity colony ships and mass instantaneous conscription. in Galactic Civilizations II GalCiv2 Forums

Combining that with suspended animation, it becomes far more feasible. 2000 cubic meters is nothing, assuming 2 cubic meters per suspended colonist. Oil tankers hold about 20 times that much, so I think there's room for a fudge factor. Even if that's one million people, that's still reasonable for a multiship colonization fleet. Agreed. I didn

Reply to Huge capacity colony ships and mass instantaneous conscription. in Galactic Civilizations II Stardock Forums

What you are suggesting is TEH ANTI-FUN. TEH ANTI-FUN IS TEH BAD. I'm not suggesting anything, I was asking for an explanation.

Reply to Huge capacity colony ships and mass instantaneous conscription. in Galactic Civilizations II Stardock Forums

troop transports could have support craft carrying vehicles and such attached to them. That's a good point. I guess troop transports just come with weapons and support craft for ground warfare.

Reply to Huge capacity colony ships and mass instantaneous conscription. in Galactic Civilizations II Stardock Forums

hey use suspended animation. Which changes the requirements for one person from two hundred cubic meters to two Well that does make the size more managable. At that rate a ship carrying 100 billion people would be a mere one-hundredth the size of the earth's moon. This is easier to come to terms with as that would be about the upper limit of

Reply to Huge capacity colony ships and mass instantaneous conscription. in Galactic Civilizations II Stardock Forums

What would people from the 16th century think if they saw a 20th century aircraft carrier with thousands of crew members? They'd crap their pantaloons! It's the future dude. Yeah but it's not consistent with the rest of this future. Larger ships, Battleships, Dreadnaughts, Rangers, etc. typically take a lot longer to build and are more expensi

Huge capacity colony ships and mass instantaneous conscription. in Galactic Civilizations II GalCiv2 Forums

I've never understood how these two things were possible in GalCiv. How could a colony ship carry billions and billions of people? Wouldn't something that enourmous take a long time to build and require whole planets worth of resources to construct? Also, what type of people would let their government conscript soldiers of such vast numbers? Not to mention the expense of training and supplying them. One would think that at the very least it would hurt approval rate and overall morale.

Reply to Why no multiplayer? in Galactic Civilizations II GalCiv2 Forums

Personally I'd like to see a multiplayer component. I've heard comments that suggest multiplayer and replayability are mutually exlclusive, or at the very least conflict with one another, I would suggest that the opposite is true--particularily for 4X games. Let's face it, no matter how hard developers try to make a clever AI the computer's flaws and idiosyncrasies eventually become exploited and most gamers lose interest soon afterwards. OS/2 Galciv1&2, PC GalCiv 1, Civilization 1

Reply to Names in Ideas GalCiv2 Forums

Actually it depends on one's definition of a planet. A universal definition doesn't currently exist, and for the most part planets have their definition by virtue of tradition. On the other hand many astronomers agree that only eight "major" planets exist, which includes the familiar nine minus Pluto. The informally dubbed "major planets" conform to Mike Brown's (the one credited with first discovering Sedna) proposed definition: A planet is any body in the solar system that is more massive