You can see what the AI is feeling in regards to your race on the diplomacy screen, though it is a little basic. Trade goods you can trade and still get the benefit. The AI never offers it- it should. Make that point number 16 16) AI should offer its trade goods in trade
This is just a list of options and things I'd like to see added to the game, that aren't in 1.1 1) Random alignment for races 2) Political events and party-switching events, as well as events that carry penalties. 3) The ability to make races major or minor- so if I wanted the Snathi as a major, and the Iconians as a minor- I could design the game as such. 4) The humans and the AI to play by the same starbase
I believe the AI can't trade without universal translator- then again, I can't exactly prove it. Cheat mode might, if someone sets up a scenario with pre-placed ships, and no universal translator techs, but all the other low-level techs researched. Maybe someone should experiment? I don't think the AI is cheating on this though.
E-stab: That's what I mean- thanks for clarification. THe reason I wanted cost, was I figured that would slow the AI down, and the human- not allow for so much universal trading. Might also slow the early game rush down, and encourage raising your own research rate, to cut the cost. The problem with that is everyone would go 60% research. Maybe base it on max research capacity instead- so that exploit doesn't occur. Another possible expl
Adding the no tech trading option in 1.1 is a nice touch, but there is a community of "middle ground" players who think tech trading is good, but overdone. I want to see some suggestions for handling it in between the two options. My solution: 1) Transfer cost for tech trading. The cost would be equal to the weeks required to research*100, with a random reduction of 0-50% for creative races... 2) Acquiring t
I really don't have a problem with the time period. Guerilla warfare would be more difficult in the future- just slay all the enemy with designer viruses- things along that nature. Insurgencies do grow more difficult with advanced technology...
I hate to nitpick, and I like the no tech trading option, but I'd like to see a middle ground option as well How about each time you tech trade, you lose 1% of your research bonus pernamently? (simulating lack of innovation) Or maybe, how about each time you tech trade, you have to pay a transfer cost of tech value in weeks it would take you to research*100 bc to "integrate the tech into your infrastructure". I think that alone would
Please include some options for handling AI tech trading, or redo the algorithms to the AI values its unique techs a lot more?
I think you guys are being held up as an example right now, due to a undercurrent of angry backlach against copy protection in general- that is a combination of legitimate users and thieves (though the thieves know how to get around the protection- and strat gamers rarely pirate, as compared to other genres) . I think you guys are basically being swept up in a crusade right now, which is helping your sales a bit. May as well ride it out.</
One thing I"d like to see- ZOC on military starbases as a module- where to move past the starbase you have to destroy it, or the starbase autoattacks any fleet that moves within a hex of it...
That's what rush building is for... Rush build a factory, and the rest will come in more reasonable time...
Hmm, I just thought of an exploit. Go to neutral, get the tiles upgraded, then switch to good or evil for the other benefits... 2500bc to save a lot of time... Overall, I'm thinking the alignment system, while a good idea, needs to be reworked in the expansion- make it harder to force-change your alignment, and maybe tone down some of the benefits...
We need some interesting goodie races now...
Honestly, if it takes a good game being trashed down the shredder to get rid of Starforce, so be it... I figured out the results of my computer acting quirky- costing me hours of tweaking to try and get rid of the problem, on my last computer, HAD to be due to a Starforce game. Therefore, Starforce's mafioso tactics cost me several hours.
One thing I'd like to see economics-wise put into the game, that is in CivIV, would be inflation. Inflation would be caused by economic buildings, deficit spending, and rush-building. Deflation would be caused by turning down spending, and economics ability of the race. Inflation would be taken into account on trades, your inflation rate would decrease the effective value of your credits. This might be too complicated, o
But weren't they ultra-expensive as well, cheaper to just build an engine and cart it there...
different AI managers? The AI develops based on the tactics you use?
I wonder if for a patch the devs could add in some quicker transports to help the AI out?
I was using ridiculous speed though- I think the speed I ended up with was 16... I could build it, and send it to an enemy planet in some cases the same turn, so I never had to guard it. Maybe I should head up to intelligent- but I'm barely winning at Bright right now.
I did this to win my last game. I was slightly up in tech, but down in production basically korx vs Drengin. What I ended up doing... I created my fleet to hit and run , taking out a planet here and there. Meanwhile, I put 5 warp drives on a cargo module, and some troop modules- these things were VERY fast. They got from my homeworld to whereever I needed in 2 turns, did their invasion, conquered the planet before the AI could
I just thought of a solution... The effectiveness of a planetary attack that fails is reduced by the amount of enemy troops you destroy. If you destroy say, half their troops, you get a half effective planetary bombardment. This would stop the 1 trooper exploit.
Bumping them up to Bright makes a big difference- they've already knocked off the Torians in my game, and helped to knock off the Altarians. Dealt with the HUmans myself (they got a real crap start). Now all I gotta do is keep the Drengins from turning on me...
Civ 4 has its strong points, GC2 has more strong points... As for no MP- SD does deserve a hit on it- because it's something people expect now. THat being said, they would have taken more hits had they put MP in- for a weaker AI and fewer features. I'd like to see a MP expansion sold completely seperately, just MP for $10, and see how well that does- that would be released and supported alongside a regular $10 expansion... </fo
The only thing that would really work- is reducing starting credits... That would just slow down the land rush though... There is nothing that doesn't make that the optimal strategy- outside of possibly making the maintenance cost for colonies much much larger, then have an early-game tech to cut it down...
The only thing that would really work- is reducing starting credits... That would just slow down the land rush though... There is nothing that doesn't make that the optimal strategy- outside of possibly making the maintenance cost for colonies much much larger, then have an early-game tech to cut it down...
GalCiv2 Forums