GalCiv2 Forums
It wouldnt surprise me if it meant that there are not more planets to sent colony ships to; I've not tested this, though...
GalCiv2 Forums
I realy hate misleading and inacurate discriptions. They are even worse than fuzzy hand waving discriptions that basicially say 'go test this'.
Personaly, I would build more starbases. Economy starbases to make it easier to crank out the big ships in one turn. Or fleets of constructors to make instant military starbases covering multiple enemy teritories, for massive conquest. And make your you are storing away transports of troops, taken from whatever planets are nearing their population caps.
Depends on galaxy size. Hmm, I would have thought it should depend on how close the enemy (or potential enemy) planets are to friendly planets or starbases. Which is not so much dependant on galaxy sise as on habitable planet sparsity.
GalCiv2 Forums
If I reply to this post, does it now appear in the forum in which I initially tried to put it?
Goverments are suposed to increase your Economy, your Industry and your Research, according to the discriptions from the 'goverment and ethics' tab of the civilisation manager. Testing with changing goverment types has shown that only my economy (income) is affected; my military production, my social production and my research output are not affected by changing goverment. I dont know if this is intentional behavior, and the discriptio
GalCiv2 Forums
As it is a deliberate design decision on the part of the game designers to make it work like it does (did see a post from frogboy), one would assume that doing intentionally it isnt an exploit. Personally I would think that the tactic of sending in a small transport intending to reduce a planets quality without winning seems like a more reasonable and plausible tactic, but aparently that was considered an exploit, so it is designed so that o
I'm running windows at 1024*768, and have galciv2 running in windowed mode at 1024*740, so that I can see my start bar and clock. Sadly I had to make the prefs.ini read only, so that it didnt keep getting reset to a 1024*768 resolution. It seems to work fine, however.
My impression is that the only planets worth specialising are those that are intended to make you money: one wants to combine the high population (farms + entertaininment) with lots of economy buildings (go stock markets!). + specialising one each of industry and research, to use the relevant capitals to their maximum potential. Influence and economic capitals dont appear to be multiplicative with the basic influence and economy buildings, so
Note, Influence starbases DO provide influence before they have modules; I've definatly changed my borders with them.
A ship orbiting a planet isnt affected by the boosts from a nearby military starbase, I think.
Well, not quite all. There are still things that are discribed as percentages, such as ship speed, that are blatently not.
Possibly part of the problem is the AI's habit of declaring war then not attacking for weeks and weeks.
Quadruples the military rating of a given ship in orbit (If you have a ship rated at 10, it'll be rated 50) That would be Quintuples, with your example (50 = 5 *10). If it is Quadruple, it would make them look 4 times as good.
http://www.the-battlefield.com/index.php?page=reviewgalciv2&setlk=en Result: Summarizing this review i am really happy about GalCiv2, its worth to be a sequel ! Just the missing multiplayer part and the automated fights could be improved but the high replay value make this game a SILVER MEDAL awarded Title! Well done! Graphics : 81% Sounds : 82% Motivation : 89% Multiplay : -% TOTAL 84%
I dont think it is just the campeigns, either; I got some inapropriate messages about haveing attacked and made peace before ever having gone to war against someone, while playing in sandbox mode.
So, if you have any sort of defence, you get all the addative starbase defensive bonuses. And if you have any sort of attack, you get the addative starbase offensive bonuses.
One possible tactic for killing fortified bases would be to use the suicide cargo hull. Pack a cargo hull with nothing but weapons and engines. Prepare a fleet of such ships, and get one good hit in against the starbase. Repeat, till it goes down.
Might it to be to do with miniturisation? If you started with the Yor, who have a starting miniturisation bonus, or with a race that starts with tech that gives this bonus, it might stop your hull designs from showing up in future games without this bonus.
Well, when you have a design in-game, you can delete it (which removes it utterly), or obsolete it (which leaves it for a future game). This poster asked for a quick way of doing it, presumably on mass - that involves deleting the files.
True. But it isn't because that there is currently an offensive tactic against which the AI can't defend that this rules out the need for a better calculation of military rating, depending if you are attacking or defending. The idea was to allow the AI to better see who are easy targets and relatively tough targe
I agree that the AI needs a way to stop repeatedly loosing battles. One possibility would be for it to have a combat simulator algorithm, which gave a % success rate for an attack (and possibly the likly health % of the survivor), possibly using an average of 10 (or more, depending on computational effectiveness) simulations. This would allow it to decide for any given attack or defence plan if they should instead be doing a bunny impre
There was a bug at one stage (dont know if it is fixed yet) where the ai ignored any ships you sold/gave them untill you saved and reloaded the game.
Neat, you are abusing the most overpowered component (does too much damage, at too cheap a price, and fits in too small a space), and combining it with a 'free cash' technique. Next you will be getting a very high diplomacy skill, and trading said ships to computer players for lots of cash, then trying to buy them back for less cash....
It would seem sensible to cap the research output at the research one gets at 100% research.