Zenicetus

Reply to TA - two minor notification bugs in Beta Reports GalCiv2 Forums

No, no autosaves unfortunately. I'll keep an eye out for it, and send a prior save if it happens again. [quote]There is a message that will appear if a foreign mining base changes ownership. Is this what you saw?[/quote] Oh, maybe that was it... I'm not sure. There was no other race name mentioned, just a generic notice that mining base 30-something was under influence pressure, and then another notice a few turns later that it had flipped. The wording made it sound like it was

Reply to Space Miner pathfinding bug - orbits planet in Beta Reports GalCiv2 Forums

I don't have a saved game, but I did take a screen shot just after I launched the miner from orbit to kickstart it back on auto-mining. It shows the direct path from the previous asteroids to the new one, with the planet in the way. Should be easy to set up a test like this. Emailing it off now...

Reply to bussard ramjets, cryonic stasis, and exoplanetary colonization in Off-Topic GalCiv2 Forums

[quote]ok here is a question for you if nothing can travel faster than the speed of light. then how come just after the big bang the universe started expanding faster than the speed of light. source science channel this weekend i believe the show was, how it all began.[/quote] I shouldn't jump into this right at the end, but it's a huge thread, and I'll read the rest later. Answering this specific question (or at least pointing the way to more info): <br/

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

Dystopic, thanks for the heads-up! I'll check that thread out. BTW, here's some info I found on Wicki about the nuke-pumped laser idea. Apparently the U.S. military actually tried a few tests before the A-bomb testing ban kicked in, without getting very far. The Soviets were looking into it too. It's still an interesting idea, and IIRC, Niven used it in his "Footfall" alien invasion novel: [quote]Another idea to come from the SDI project was the nuclear-pumped X-ray laser. This was esse

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

[quote][quote]...nothing like real space combat.[/quote]Two things: one, we don't have such a thing yet, so it's hard to say that.[/quote] That's true, and some technologies would really change things drastically, like instantaneous warping through space instead of linear travel. You'd have ships jumping around each other trying to get a shot. However, if we go too far in that direction you end up with basically magic tricks, and anything is possible (that old Arthur C. Clarke line abou

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

[quote]though the visuals in the show made it look like ships were getting up close and personal in B5, the distances of real ("real") space combat could be very great; targetting by using eyes alone would be vastly more difficult than we've ever experienced historically. my sense is that targetting computers, among other things, are helping to compensate for the massive distances between ships (and thus delays between the weapon being fired and it potentially hitting something).[/quote] <br

Reply to TA beta 2A - Concerning anomalies... in Beta Reports GalCiv2 Forums

Agreed about the potential cheese with an armed flagship right from the beginning. It wouldn't be fun to be on the other side of that either, if the AI is programmed to use that tactic. It might make sense to allow arming the flagship with an upgrade, at the point where you have the appropriate tech researched, bought, or traded. By that time, most of the initial colony rush is over (except on the larger maps), and you have better ways to spend money than sniping at other races' colony ships.<br

Reply to Torians, Torians, Torians... in Beta Reports GalCiv2 Forums

I think this was suggested in another thread, but I'd like to bump the request that we have some way to see planet improvement graphics large enough to appreciate them. Most of that nice artwork is lost when it's shrunk down to icons on the planet view. Even the slightly larger image in the lower left corner of the screen doesn't show much detail. Could we get a pop-up window that would show the full graphic if we hover over that lower-left image?

Reply to colonizaton question in Galactic Civilizations II GalCiv2 Forums

Just agreeing with what the others have said here: don't worry too much about other races grabbing low quality planets deep inside your main area of influence. After setting up the main high-PQ planets in my initial empire, I'll try to colonize the low-PQ planets out on the "influence borders" first, before I worry about the ones deep inside my areas of influence. If another race grabs those, I can either flip them with influence, or else take them by force. They're easy to invade becau

Reply to TA - two minor notification bugs in Beta Reports GalCiv2 Forums

Okay, but it's still a pretty big spoiler to have that message pop up when you haven't even contacted the Drengin yet. Especially on a map where you're using randomized opponents, and don't know who is out there.

TA - two minor notification bugs in Beta Reports GalCiv2 Forums

Two small bugs in the latest build: Very early in the current Yor game, I reloaded a saved file. Instead of seeing the usual quarterly report (I have them enabled), I got a weird intelligence update on the Drengin, saying they were pursuing a peaceful path -- which was funny because it ended with something like "for example, they are now researching Space Weapons." This was still so early in the game that I hadn't actually discovered and made first contact with the Drengin yet. <br/

Reply to Controlable combat in Galactic Civilizations II GalCiv2 Forums

It's been discussed for a long time. Last I heard, the devs were still of the opinion that tactical combat is tilted too heavily in favor of the player, who will always take advantage of whatever chinks and flaws are in the combat system. So that's why this is a strategy-only game. Also, having just one AI engine for strategy means the devs can focus 100% of their time and attention on that one set of code, instead of dividing it up into two modules. At least I think those are the major argument

Space Miner pathfinding bug - orbits planet in Beta Reports GalCiv2 Forums

New TA Yor game, very early in the colony rush. My Space Miner finishes building the three mining bases closest to my home planet, then it scoots off for the next closest asteroid field. However, as it happened, the next field was directly opposite the home planet, directly in the pathway. When it started heading there, I could see the autopilot path bending around the planet. But it didn't do that; it went into orbit around Iconia instead. It took a few turns to notice that ("Hey, who

Reply to TA Bug report (BETA 2A) in Beta Reports GalCiv2 Forums

Alt-Tab stability with most games I've played, unless there really is a critical bug, is usually related to available RAM and how much other stuff is running in the background. I just did a re-install of XP SP2 a few months ago to clear out DLL rot, and I try not to run too many background processes. It has 2gb RAM. I've always been able to Alt-Tab back and forth from GalCiv to the desktop with no trouble, including the current TA beta. OTOH, I don't play anything larger than medium or large gal

Reply to Beta 2a Bugs in Beta Reports GalCiv2 Forums

I'm seeing the same problem with morale in my current Yor game. This doesn't feel right, for a race of robots. I'm getting visions of Marvin the Paranoid Android going into combat, muttering about how they're all going to die. It also doesn't jibe with Stardock's original description -- "Impossibly strong, infinitely patient and meticulous beyond compare, the Yor have no pity, no mercy, no second thoughts." I'm not sure it would work for the Yor to have zero morale issues, since that wo

Reply to I'm a bit confused by Planets in DA. in Dark Avatar GalCiv2 Forums

[quote]PC0 planets are why I'd like to see an additional tier of the Terraforming technology track that makes them habitable. Certainly, not for free, but still.... [/quote] I try not to lean too heavily on realism with games like this, but the idea that every single planetary body in a star system could be made habitable pegs my realism meter on the low end. It would be believable if the game modeled things like moon colonization, or huge "L2" type space habitats, but that's not part

Reply to Racial techs - hard to recognize? in Beta Reports GalCiv2 Forums

Evil Roy, right, we need to ID them for tech trading reasons too! They need to stand out as something really special. Right now, these unique techs are buried in the tree if you're not familiar with them.

Racial techs - hard to recognize? in Beta Reports GalCiv2 Forums

Not a bug as such, but a comment on the ability (or not) to see racial techs. The first thing I did when I got the two betas was jump to the tech screen so I could see the groovy new race-specific techs. It took a while to realize that they're ID'd with race icons on the left side, but those icons are really dark and hard to see... maybe because they're the same color as the background graphic, but mainly they're just too dark. I'm using a color-calibrated pro graphics monitor, so I don't think

Reply to Tactics of tourism (too much of the good stuff) in Beta Reports GalCiv2 Forums

From the change log: [quote]+ TWEAKED:Tourism income is now equal to ones effective control of the galaxy as a percent (0 to 100) plus the a small .001% of the millions of people who live in the galaxy that live in your sphere of influence. Net result, tourism is very high at the beginning of the game but levels out quickly.[/quote] I'm still not sure what "control of the galaxy" means. Is that still linked to influence, or number of planets you own, or what? Also I'm

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

[quote]One more thing, why does blizzard think that bad graphics make better games, than say, a game with great gameplay and great graphics. It doesn't make sense.[/quote] Economics 101: If you make a game that can run smoothly on 100% of the PC's out there, then you make twice as much money as a more graphics-intensive game that can only run on 50% of the PC's in the market. It's about the money, and market penetration. Also, I wouldn't call anything Blizzard

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

[quote]I believe it was the first campaign that was the human campaign, which is what i played. I had no interest in suddenly being the bad guy while i had just spent all that effort beating them![/quote] That's not so unusual in strategy game scripted campaigns, although Blizzard might have been one of the first to do it. In a game where the different factions aren't just re-skinned versions the same army for everyone, it's useful to learn a faction's advantages and disadvantages from

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

[quote]3. I might be willing to try Starcraft 2. However, why doesn't Blizzard make a game with nice graphics? More people would by SC II if it had nice graphics.[/quote] Yeah, what das88 said... Blizzard makes "good enough" graphics. They'll never make a game with bleeding-edge graphics because it isn't required if the gameplay is brilliant, and it maximizes their customer base. They've made a fortune off the World of Warcraft MMO with that formula. I remember the first time

Reply to Capital World---really that vital? in Dark Avatar GalCiv2 Forums

When I first played the game (GalCiv2, pre-DL), I thought it was odd that the AI doesn't prioritize re-taking a lost home planet. But I guess that just means the enemy is unusually dangerous... willing to make unemotional decisions about the best strategy, and adapt to changing conditions. I like that better than some pre-programmed urge to re-take the home world, that might be manipulated by the player. As Feud says above, it turns out to be mostly just a role-playing opportunity. I do

Reply to Tactics of tourism (too much of the good stuff) in Beta Reports GalCiv2 Forums

It doesn't seem very logical to me that tourism income should be strictly tied to cultural influence anyway (assuming that's how it's working). Arguing from Earth history... tourists do flock to culture-rich zones like Rome, Florence, and Venice. But they also go to places like Tahiti or even Antarctica for the natural beauty. They go to other places for sports-related reasons like diving the Red Sea, or skiing in B.C., Canada. In a real galactic civilization, there might be culture-free planets

Reply to Tactics of tourism (too much of the good stuff) in Beta Reports GalCiv2 Forums

Yes, we need some feedback from the devs on whether this is working as intended, or needs a re-balance. I never thought the economy crash during the colony rush was such a big deal. That's one way you learn, as a newbie, how the economy works in the game. Once you learn how that works, you can deal with anything.