I know some people says that "never put defence on a ship it's worth nothing", but they are wrong. Just plain wrong, and in my actual game, I tried once to send un-armor ships. They were powerful, all right, but they had a life-expectation of about 3 battles. With a decent defence, I can raise that up to 6 battles. That is, since the AI doesn't put ANY defences on it's ship, I don't need "that" much to put superpowerful weaponry.
Cikomyr
I would prefer to see the AI simply massing up ships to protect its planets than to blindlessly declare war when there isn'T a wall of paper to protect them. The AI doesn't prepare itself to war before being IN war. He simply moves its ships around, not seeing the inevitable (Except if he wants to start the war himself, as the agressor)
I had an idea: the game should consider another military rating during the game: the Troop Rating. It is something totally alien to the actual military rating (that uses only ship attack/defences point), but should not be taken lightly. The way I see it, your "troop power" should be the # of troops you actually have in transports x Soldiering. That way, you could measure up when alien civs are readying for an invasion, or they could measure when YOU are. Troop Power should also
Actually, it would rather cool to have a module representing "space police" (ships that has a % of chance taking the blow instead of the mini-freighter), you could assign those ships to a trade route, making your precious $ safe
You create the "aphrodisiac starbase", that attracts every dangerous space shark, right next to the Altarian's homeworld..
Wow.. I would love to see that kind of ship in my opponent's fleet.. personal bug? maybe.. I use 3-weeks old version of the game, has it improved since?
Mascrinthus, not the freighters of established trade routes, but the "true" freighter. The one that can move quite fast, and establishes trade routes. The mini-freighters are defenseless, whatever you do to them
I guess many of us noticed it during their game: the AI sure loves to build freighters, and send them everywhere. And we sure love to build isolated small-quick-ships to hunt them down and destroy them. (Sometime, we don't even bother to build small-quick-ships, we simply used outdated ones). However, if the AI would put some weapons on these freighters, we would certainly have problems. Since they removed First-Strike rule, a freighter would have the opportunity to fire at least once o
I don'T play with random intelligences, and I set all my opponents to the highest level without them cheating (sometimes, 1 or 2 of them can cheat). But during the game I actually play, I am somewhat disapointed to see how pitiful the AI develops it's colony and homeworlds. I conquered New Iconia after 5 years of play, and it had barely 5 constructions on it! I had more developped colonies 3 years ago! And since I have Advanced Espionnage on everyone, I check around.. to see that the Ic
In my actual game, pretty much all the galaxy went for the missile weapon branch (the sole exceptions are the Iconians, but they are crappy anyway). However, I was the only player in the galaxy to actually research heavily missile defences. While I have "Droid Sentries II" most of them don't even have POINT DEFENCE! The frigates I built have a rating of 25 missile attack/20 missile defence, and to tell you, it shows a lot during battle. More often than usually, Arcean and Altarian ships
Which is one of the imbalance in the game, I think. Eye of the Universe is at the end of a pretty much cheap tech line, that the AI rarely take on to the end (they don't prioritize it). I always rush to EotU, and there isn't a game I don't end up with it. I know sensor doesn'T make you win the battle, but I still gives the player an unnecessary edge (considering how much advantage we humans already have against a computer. AI is good, brain is better). I think Eye of the Univer
So the answer is: Does speed matter in combat? None at all Does speed matter in the game? A lot
I play the Yor in my game, and my 3 closest neighbours are the Arceans, the Terrans and the Iconians. The Iconians, in peticular, were my main concern at first during the game. They were the closest to my border, and we shared 3 solar system (1 planet each in the same system). So, naturally, when I built my military, I stockpiled many ships on criticaly-placed planet (in addition to a minimum of 1 defensive ship/planet). the 3 shared shared solar system, and 2 planets bordering the Arce
I wasn't talking about the speed of implimentation into the game, but rather a discussion over what should/could and shouldn't/couldn't be done. Starbases modules made to increase the tributes paid by crossing trade routes wouldn'T be that hard to mod.. (I think). The post was mainly to ask the opinion of someone qualified (modder or dev)
I guess it's a "no-go" idea
you cannot begin to apply real-world economic models to GalCiv2. When you think of it, a race's entire economy can grow up by at least 30% every year. That's just plain impossible.
I think the OP wanted to see how you can raise money in the normal way, not by selling stuff.. But, IMHO, I always though that having morale bonuses is much better than any economic bonus. Morale allows you to have more people on planets, which means much more taxes. Example: Think of it, you already have a +10% economic bonus (ressource? race?). If you take another +25%, you increase your revenue by only (0,25/1,1)%, since I don't think the additionnal 25% is composed with yo
when I saw that in the most recent version of the game, evil civs gather a tribute of 1bc/week on all trade routes crossing their territories, I was so happy. Finally, a way to be truly evil > So now, I send constructor to build influence starbases at the crossroad of many trade routes all around the galaxy, and I fortify them so no rogue warship can clean them up. Sadly, the 1bc/week is not what
So, the next time someone wants to take a chunk of the Krox, I should abandon my alliance? Should I have accepted to join the war against the Drath? (not knowing that the Drath had the Altarians as their good friends)
I want to tell you about what I done in my game so far, and I wonder if I have done the right or wrong choice at one point. I play the Yor on a gigantic galaxy. The Iconians, Terrans and Arceans are my closest neighbour, and me and the Iconians have an history of violence (they started it, and they regretted it). The only trade partner I choosed to have is the Terrans (but Arceans, Krox and Torians begun to trade with me) I am EVIL. The top-4 peoples of the galaxy are the
If you turned trade tech on...
sure. But the "Federation" is actually the alliance between humans and a whole bunch of minor races. Humans being the center of power.
Well, I play the Yor in my game, pure evil, and recently, the Drengin turned good (arg! they were the evil #1). so, now, me and the Krox are being gang-banged by the Torian, the Drengins and the Altarians. We each have 77 of military, and the Altarian have around 250. 230 for the Drengins and 210 for the Torians. If I ever win this one out... off course, I'm using the Krox as meat shield until.. ehh..I don't know what. But until!
Actually, Andorians, Vulcans, Tellarites, Bajorans, etc.. would all become Minor Races.. And I would add a LOT of Minor Races. IMHO, in a Star Trek universe, minor races would represent about 60% of the whole galactic powers. They are just scattered, and they would join the "big guys", like Federation, or accept to be watched by gentles Klingon "Overseers"..
I don'T think you'll make diplomatic victory just.. yet. After all, France is still the one standing up to you when U.S. gets too arrogant. And your previous cultural domination strategy, while being incridebly effective from the 50s to the 90s, is beggining to fade away. The U.N. is even considering a proposition to restrict cultural dumping.. That should be something included in the game.. when you are the sole superpower present, a trend of.. anti-superpowerism culture is de