I suspect some of the pushback, ccarlton, against the idea of increasing the available speed settings is a matter of proprietary pride. Having such an option might indeed turn the game into a clickfest, where the person who can rapidly build up a rush of frigates will overwhelm their opponents. And the idea of that is jarring against the slower sweep of the game as it is. To use an example from a board game, I know a few chess players who *abhor* Blitz Chess, where the player
Jvstin
[quote] I just bought the collectors edition digital only. How do I download the extra content? It'll be posted tomorrow. [/quote] Great! Where exactly is the download link?
I have said before that I am not a big fan of RTS. Sins might be one of the few examples to that rule. And I admit that the delay in Gal Civ (even with the betas) is leaning me toward picking this up in the meantime.
[I][NoRangeLimit] An over-eager archeologist intern participating in the dig on planet %s in sector %lu-%lu uncovered a mysterious PreCursor device and started fiddling with the controls before the other archeologists could stop him. The device emitted some kind of energy beam, setting off a chain reaction that spread from planet to planet, triggering other hidden devices on each planet. At first, the beam seemed to have no result, but reports have been coming in from all over the galaxy: it see
To say nothing of getting some quick cash from the other races (especially minor races) for the less useful techs. This can be important if you are still running a deficit in your economy.
[quote]I think theres pretty close to 0 people playing multi-player on that game. I couldnt imagine why. [/quote] My friends and I have a few slow motion hotseat multiplayer games going. Or did, before it became too much of a chore to continue them. A multiplayer GalCiv 2 would become laborious, even with "simultaneous turns". Either you would be under a time limit or the game would devolve to the slowest player. While a tiny map might work, other sizes of maps aren'
January, without question. As much as I want to sink my teeth into it...I'd rather the time taken to do it right, rather than trying to get it out the door. There is no point and no good reason to rush it.
[quote]The AI does that all the time. Their defenders are extra tough because they have no engines whatsoever. Only weapons (at least on tiny map at low tech they do). [/quote] I have done this myself. I call the ship designs "monitors" after the slow and pokey ships from Star Fleet Battles. I did it in a recent game (and removed life support too) because I was playing on a relatively small map, and I got the Mega Event that gave all ships unlimited range.
No surprise: Not all game forums are as friendly as the ones here at GalCiv. (Not that we don't have a share of dustups now and again--the 1.8 revision, for example). However, we are a relatively friendly and positive bunch here. Now I have to wonder aloud--is that because Gal Civ 2 is NOT a multiplayer game, and the competition (via Metaverse) is indirect?
Is it as good as getting YES to do a song for Homeworld, I wonder? I'm only moderately interested in SOSE, not enough to pre-order it.
Just finished a game as the Iconians. It was a challenge in that their Super Ability didn't really come into play (the galaxy, large, was not chock full of extreme planets). I finally managed a win, despite the "handicap". I'd rather play as the Altarians or one of the other races. I do wonder how the Iconians will be rebalanced in TA.
[quote]Thanks for the tips! I've been playing my first game throughout the morning, and am learning quickly ... at first trade routes seemed vital because I was suffering economically (I think maybe I was colonizing too quickly, and the maintenance for the colony sites was killing me), but now I'm starting to see the benefits of moving up the tech tree, and realizing that they're probably more useful for diplomatic purposes. [/quote] It can't be said enough. For all of reading tips and
[quote]2) Is it best to concentrate trade routes from one highly populated, wealthy planet, or to spread them out ... i.e. are there diminishing returns for having multiple trade routes to or from a particular planet?[/quote] If you are a fan of economic starbases, concentrating your routes on one planet allows that one planet to maximize income when you trick out the starbase with all of the trade route bonuses. As it has been said elsewhere, though, trade routes often ge
Yes, thank you!
[quote]I notice that races like Drengi go Invasion rush really early anyway. [/quote] This is true. In the game I am currently playing, the Korath have beat me to PI. As a result, I'm getting troop transports and spore ships and fleets up the wazoo aimed at me. Already lost a planet before I started getting in gear.
[quote] Frogboy brought up a good point - look at our own history. Some tribes were still hunters and gatherers while others had gunpowder and powerful ships capable of transiting the high seas. Actually, a whole book has tried to explain that situation - essentially why Native Americans were conquered by the technologically superior Europeans and not the other way around. I mean, Native Americans were on North America at least as long as Europeans were on Europe right? Why indeed didn'
So how do they stack up, do you think, as a player race (especially in DA)? Is their Super Ability so weak so as not to be as worthwhile as a custom race or another of the races?
[quote] Humans made the breakthrough that allowed small-scale fusion to power warp tech on every ship. But why wouldn't the other races make the breakthrough over thousands of years? To me, it is unrealistic.[/quote] Perhaps. On the other hand, its a way to have both a backstory AND have the humans not at a horrible disadvantage to the other races. Consider Babylon 5, where the humans are usually not on an even footing with many of the alien
Looking forward to Tuesday. I probably should finish the game I am slowly working through beforehand. I *have* made the mistake in the past of abandoning a game, and then trying to pick it up a few days or weeks later. It's a challenge for me to recapitulate what I was thinking at the time with plans and strategies.
[quote]Anyway, we put this update today because we really love this game too. Just try to remember that the next time you're about to hit the submit button on that flame, ok? The less time we spend reading your flames and getting mad about them, the more time we can spend on coding.[/quote] Amen. As I have said on my blog and to friends, Stardock (from Brad on down) goes above and beyond on their games. I give them my hard earned money for d*mn good reason. And I want to thank
[quote] We find this act of murder to be beyond reason and call for all other federation members to publicly voice their horror at such a callous act! I was attacked first! I swear! [/quote] Sure, that's what they all say. Looking forward to getting home and getting the update.
Also, military starbases don't provide the benefit to ships in orbit around a planet, only those that are "launched". - Wyndstar Aha. And here I had been destroying military starbases on the theory that it would make attacking ships around a planet easier to handle. Hunh.
What is a Precursor Ranger? Hmmm... no one responded to my last post in this thread either. A Precursor Ranger is a ship that as a random event you can find on a planet that you own. Early in the game, especially, its fairly powerful, with stats in the low double digits.
Yeah! I have been waiting for the Terror Star's return and larger galaxys for a while now. Uniqe weapons, techs, improvements, ect. for each race are very welcomed by me. No longer is each race to similar to one another. Does the title indecate that the Arnor will be in this one? I can't wait for it to come out. I can't put it any better. Stardock gets my hard won gaming dollar because they put the blood, s
SO basically my opinion is that if you loved GC you should indeed buy Dark Avatar. I don't think anyone goes back to Dread Lords once they get started with DA. I haven't. I certainly haven't. DA rocks.