Zenicetus

Reply to Tech trees are harder to learn in Beta Reports GalCiv2 Forums

[quote]Just wondering if there is going to be some external way to learn these trees. Paper would be nice. At least an online version. Cuz right now switching between races in new games is a rough way to learn and I am timidly aware of how many races are not yet in the game.[/quote] It's not ideal, but I think the best way to learn the different trees is to set up a dummy starter game for each race in a tiny galaxy (so it loads fast), save those games with a name like "Tree: (Race)"

Reply to 1 sided scoring in Beta Reports GalCiv2 Forums

I do think Evil is a bit overpowered, but I'm not sure I'd like to see a big boost to taking the Good path. Here's my thinking, and it's based on (imagined) sci-fi "realism" and not abstract game balancing: A mature planet-wide civilization might eventually reach a point where a "good" path is eventually adopted, within that civilization. Our current world civilization isn't there yet, but it's a much less brutal planet than it was in the Middle Ages. We wiped out any close intelligent

Reply to Curious about what the T.A. expansion will do for D.A. in Dark Avatar GalCiv2 Forums

It will set up and run from its own folder like DA, without touching anything else. IIRC, at some point after TA's release, there will be a (final?) 2.0 version for GalCiv2 and the prior expansions that will bring them up to date, aside from the unique features of each expansion. Hope I got that right.

Reply to Tech trees are harder to learn in Beta Reports GalCiv2 Forums

[quote]From what I understand with these unique trees is...obviously the unique techs are marked with the race icon. However, I've played quite a bit and I still forget the basic trees. Weapons and defenses are easy but some of the 'social' and economic branches I forget the details of.[/quote] I've been griping about this for a while now -- the "unique" race icons actually aren't that easy to see. They're too dark, too small, and they're easily hidden by the text. There's also no ind

Reply to Beta 3 Terror Stars in Beta Reports GalCiv2 Forums

[quote]Speaking of nuisances, wouldn't an effective defense against Terror Stars be to build flocks of fighters and surround your stars with them so that the Terror Star can't get in close enough to detonate them? That reason alone is enough to justify giving Terror Stars some weaponry. [/quote] Why bother, if you have a screening escort of fighters or frigates to punch through? You'll need those anyway to insure safe travel to the target, if the AI is at all reactive to the threat

Reply to Beta 3 Terror Stars in Beta Reports GalCiv2 Forums

[quote]I sorry to say your analogy is flawed by its own strengths Have you seen the AA/Anti Missile batteries on a Aircraft Carrier? 1000 rounds per second and phalanx guns, even on WW2 ships they had aa batteries. Aircraft carriers are not sitting ducks, that would be stupid as someone can just suicide a fighter and launch all 4-6 missiles, and there goes billions and billions of dollars.[/quote] It's all about who has the better tech, right? Have you seen this? <

Reply to Beta 3 Terror Stars in Beta Reports GalCiv2 Forums

[quote]I agree, giving them starbase defenses only makes sense since they are just huge starbases. Also there really should be a way to make them faster with "large mass warp" or something even if it is really hard to get at.[/quote] I disagree -- just personal opinion here. In my current TA beta 3 game, playing as Iconians, the Terrans lucked out with a system that has five habitable planets around one star, with no exotic tech needed. One Terror Star successfully moved in there and..

Reply to No Alliances possible with tech trading off in Beta Reports GalCiv2 Forums

I always play with tech trading on, because it increases the options for manipulating other civs. I can throw some lower-end tech to a race in trouble, as a distraction for my main opponent. Options are good, and we can have it either way.... except for this Alliance thing. The new TA non-trade-able racial techs might help slow down the transfer and "homogenization" of techs so everyone has the same thing. I haven't played the TA beta enough yet, to get a feel for how that's working. He

Reply to Beta or release? in Galactic Civilizations II GalCiv2 Forums

You get both: access to the beta now, and the final game when it's released. You should have received an email that has your TA serial number. You can plug that into the Stardock Central applet, and it will enable the beta download. Keep checking every week or so for new betas, usually released on Thursdays (the beta schedule is on the GalCiv2 home page).

Reply to No Alliances possible with tech trading off in Beta Reports GalCiv2 Forums

I agree that you shouldn't be forced to switch tech trading on, to get access to Alliances. But I'm not sure it should be automatic. Maybe the AI could be tweaked to start prioritizing research for alliances if 1) it's already running trade routes, and 2) relations with at least one other race are reaching some threshold value. If you're pushing for an alliance with another race and relations are ramping up high enough, you could basically "force" your target race to research Alliances that way,

Reply to Beta 3 Terror Stars in Beta Reports GalCiv2 Forums

[quote] i think they should remain defenseless. i just hope the AI will be able to guard them. [/quote] Same here. They're not supposed to be mega battleships, and I like having to protect a valuable and dangerous asset like that with a fleet. OTOH, it could get a little tricky using it in Yor influence space, where they have a speed advantage and could sneak in an X-Wing... er, I mean tiny ship to take it out. And ditto on the AI comment too. They won't be scary at all

Reply to Beta 3 Tech Tree in Beta Reports GalCiv2 Forums

One more thing, just reinforcing what was said earlier.... I'm playing a new beta 3 game as Iconians, and just made my first contact with a minor race. I'm hot to sell off techs for cash at this point in the game, but why do I see my racial techs that I can't sell, like "Precursor Legacy" on my side of the trade screen? I've also made recent contact with the Torians, and they're happy to sell me "Inherited Technology -- the sad history of the Torian species" for 100 bc. If I buy it, it

Reply to Beta 3 Tech Tree in Beta Reports GalCiv2 Forums

It's great to have that right-click info on the fullscreen tech tree view. Two things still bug me though... 1) Right-clicking still *selects* the tech for current research (assuming it's available), instead of just giving you the info. Why can't we have left-click for select, and right-click for info, the way it works in the diplomacy trading window? It's too easy to accidentally change your current research project when you're just trying to find out what something does. 2) A

Reply to Beta 2b -- Yor can't culture flip planets! in Beta Reports GalCiv2 Forums

[quote] It's not necessarly a bad thing... but the Korath want to exterminate all life (not just Organic life) in the universe, so why do they have a good influence but the Yor don't? Wouldn't they be just as "uninterested" in an Influence victory as the Yor? [/quote] I'd think so, yes. However, if the Korath have the same limited influence upgrades as the Yor, then the Yor lose that distinctive difference. It's the problem of having more than one evil, extermination-orien

Reply to Beta 2b -- Yor can't culture flip planets! in Beta Reports GalCiv2 Forums

[quote]About the Yor: Consider that you are barring them from an entire victory condition. That is a HUGE limitation on their options, as well as on the number of playing styles they have access to. It would be like having a race that doesn't get the Alliances tech and can therefore never win a diplomatic victory.[/quote] Is this necessarily a bad thing? I thought the point of TA was to further differentiate the races, so why should all the aliens be interested in every one of the vi

Reply to Peopl Against Robot Defimation! in Galactic Civilizations II GalCiv2 Forums

[quote]I know there have been individual robots that stood for good, Data, Robbie, etc, but can anyone think of any robot races that tend to be human friendly?[/quote] I hesitate to mention this because it's such a terrible, TERRIBLE ending to an otherwise good film, but... the robots at the end of Spielberg's "AI" movie, that rescue the lead character/robot. They seemed well-intentioned and "good" to me. Another example of a race of good robots, although it's a "tough love" va

Reply to total mp vs. actual mp?? in Dark Avatar GalCiv2 Forums

[quote]Now that's the pivot. I reckon one wants a monopoly on high-class planets (therefore surveillance), nearby space resources, very early starports, good research... and the price tag for all this is considerable. Considering that one starts with 5000bc that quickly starts going yellow, and that praying for those "1000bc" anomalies is hardly a sound economic strategy, I think there must be a reliable method for buttressing one's capital early-game, in order to cope with an aggressive expansi

Reply to Beta 2b -- Yor can't culture flip planets! in Beta Reports GalCiv2 Forums

[quote]Another thing to consider with the lack of Yor Influence is that their Super Ability heavily depends on it.[/quote] True, but maybe that's also intentional, since it's already one of the most powerful Super Abilities in the game. Building the full range of influence upgrades gives the Yor a huge strategic advantage in ship speed. I'm not sure the AI knows how to take full advantage of Super Isolationist fleet movement, but the player sure can. And yes, their planets can

Reply to Beta 2b -- Yor can't culture flip planets! in Beta Reports GalCiv2 Forums

Isn't the counterbalance that they're very hard to flip with influence? They can't use that as a way to gain planets, but they also won't lose many planets that way either. If they don't have to sink much money into countering influence pressure, they can spend it on other things. It does steer them along a certain strategic path, but it would make sense that not every race would be able to get an influence win. An evil/scary race like the Korath could get an influence win just by frigh

Reply to Some kind of topology for maps in Ideas GalCiv2 Forums

[quote]"I don't like fantasy effects like gas or dust nebulas that cause ships to slow down," Are you sure that wrap drive will work in gas or dust nebulae? It is quite possible that in order to "wrap" the space one needs very clear vacuum, more clear than in the nebulae. But in any case I am of course more worried about the gameplay.[/quote] Well, there isn't much actual clear vacuum out there, at least inside a galaxy. Gas molecules and dust are everywhere in very lo

Reply to Orbital planetary surveillance in Ideas GalCiv2 Forums

I usually rush-buy two sensor ships (cargo hulls with one engine and the rest sensors) to scout out ahead of my first colony ships. For the first few turns I'll also manually steer my flagship to a promising system before setting it to auto-survey. That's how I get a feel for the local neighborhood, and where to colonize first. It works better for me than "scouting" with colony ships, because sensor ships keep going ahead when a colony is established. Colony ships just disappear to hel

Reply to Some kind of topology for maps in Ideas GalCiv2 Forums

Not to throw cold water... but I like the way the current game sticks at least somewhat close to realism, with space being mostly empty and easy to cross between star systems and inside planetary systems. The only "barriers" are areas of effect from military starbases, mobile enemy fleets, and asteroid fields. And even that latter isn't very realistic as something that blocks movement, since asteroids and other debris mostly orbit in one plane in real planetary systems. We've managed t

Reply to Space and land battles in Warfare GalCiv2 Forums

There's been a lot of discussion about that, if you want to search for it. Start with "tactical" as a keyword. The word from the devs, AFAIK, is that they don't favor player-controlled tactical combat because it's too easy to exploit flaws in the AI. The game is more challenging for the player as a pure strategic game. It would also require more time and testing spent in areas apart from the main strategic game. Right now, we're getting great strategic AI because they're only focusing

Reply to Starcraft: Is it over rated? in Off-Topic GalCiv2 Forums

[quote]If your using a mag tube to launch a missile ahead then it will definately slow the ship down. If you fired a missile with its own power source that dousn't rebound off the ship then it will not change the ships velocity at all.[/quote] It won't slow by much, considering the huge difference in mass between an electromagnetically-launched projectile and the host ship. Especially if the ship is large. An A-10 ground-attack jet pilot does feel some recoil in flight when that huge 30

Reply to Starcraft: Is it over rated? in Off-Topic GalCiv2 Forums

[quote]Also, making a small missile capable of more than the speeds we're assuming ships would be travelling in combat is entirely ineffective. The missile would be so massive that a ship could only carry two or three shots. Reasoning: Missile is better because ships travel too fast, therefore distances are too far for optical or other electromagnetic targeting ship-to-ship. Ships travel too fast means they're still travelling basically at cruising speeds. Missile now has to travel fast