3) You can't suddenly decide you need massive production, again lending this to games where one uses a lot of caution. I tend to do the same. Not so much caution required, I think, as strong forward planning.
bodyless, I've seen that on my 2nd world before. There are several different types of planet. They all have a possible range of starting PQs and an improvement potential which is a percentage of the initial pq (plus race bonuses). The starting PQ ranges often overlap, so for example there's one type of planet that can be class 7 with 1 bonus tile, and another that can be class 7 with 2. It's the planet types that can be random (not sure if that's true for all races, but definitely for some).
They are aware that there are issues like these, but time and budget limit them from fixing them right now when other larger bugs exist. This particular issue is literally a 2 minute fix. The only thing lacking is a coherent well-structured thread collating all these issues together and free from extraneous comment. I'm certain the community c
Sigh. Edit for the forum "post to wrong thread" bug.
That *is* a strange result. Bonus tiles are calculated as a percentage of overall tiles rounded down, the exact percentage depending on the planet type. Thus PQ ability can either increase the number of bonus tiles, or more often have no effect. It can *never* decrease the number of bonus tiles. And it doesn't in my game. (10% bonus with Thalans for example...you still have 2 bonus tiles) Can you doublecheck? I've never seen any problems like this with the bonus tiles before (and
No. Not only can you send them out from one planet, you can also send them *to* one planet. There's nothing to stop you having all your routes be identical. In fact, if you're confident the route won't get disrupted, it's the best thing to do.
Just the ships.
If you want to help them out with tech, you could try giving away some of your older, near obsolete ships. Odds are these will still be better than their latest. The problem with giving away tech is that they may very well turn around and sell it to somebody you'd rather they didn't!
How much does that make you? I was thinking about this the other day and if I did the calculations right, I think this is the one and only situation where it's *economically* better to have a massive population than a "one farm, stockmarkets" setup. There are, of course, other reasons for high populations.
It makes for a tougher game provided *you* don't trade. Suicidal with tech trading on, but you refusing to trade...has to be about as hard as you can make the game.
are fleet attack values turned into a combined attack? No. if I have 40 defense on my ships and they have 100 ships with attack 2 will they be able to do any damage or will my single ship nibble its way through the
The original game was not nearly done. It was playable, but no where near up to par with stardock's previous games. It may not have been up to stardock's standards, but it was nearly done by general industry standards IMO.
Bldy hell, Bob, you're *still* winning on suicidal? I thought they'd notched it up a bit further. But then I guess you were being massively outproduced and researched before and still winning, so that's not going to change anything. So now planet development is in decent shape, what are you finding to be the weak link? Diplomacy?
As you've discovered, it is impossible to compete directly. So don't even try. One option is to focus on economy and just buy in all your tech, then rely on superior shipbuilding skills and organisation to overcome the fact the AI will turn out ships much faster than you. Another is to go the diplomacy route to avoid being attacked (and buy your way out of trouble if you are), and look to pick up scraps when a strong civ attacks a weak one. Get your transports down to the f
Not according to Stardock. I asked several times about it being fixed, and they said it was a feature, and that "if I dont like it, I shouldnt build it..." There is absolutely no way in hell an extremely expensive building that requires research which is worse than one you can build immediately can be described as an intended feature.
It's very funny to see somebody complaining about AI then going back to RTW. Fun game, but I won the campaign on very hard/very hard first time I played it, and it's not as if I'm particularly experienced/good at these sort of games!
It's basically all about relative tech levels. Defences are a luxury that enable you to cash in on a suitably strong tech lead by building near indestructible ships. The high cost is worth it 'cos you won't have to replace them (which also has huge logistical and strategic advantages). If you're on the wrong end of the tech race and are going up against well shielded ships, then you know you're going to lose individual battles and your only hope of success is to try and wear the enemy
Sadly, that's 4K not 40K for the superplanet (before stockmarkets). You could probably get it somewhere near 10K with a suitably high class planet, economy bonuses, stockmarkets and great trade routes, but nowhere near 40K. The main problem is you'll need an average of at least 100% starbase bonus all along the route before it becomes financially more worthwhile to build extra farms as opposed to stockmarkets, and that requirement gets more severe the higher your racial economy bonus. A
Edit. Stupid forum bug. This message was meant to be posted elsewhere. Sorry.
so there is no real aim to having a bigger population Not really. It'll make your planet virtually unconquerable by the AI, but that's no huge bonus. It has a small effect on trade value...if you have 10 freighters coming from one planet you'll get roughly 40BC per turn extra per 10B people on a gigantic map. It is just (JUST) about worth it i
It's a logical strategy. Defences are expensive relative to space so unless they have a good chance of keeping a ship alive, they're a waste of money. It depends how much of a tech lead I have, but I will rarely put defences on anything smaller than a large hull.
Also, the Secret Police Center is useless as it gives only a 20% happiness bonus to the planet you build it on. It is supposed to add 20% to *base* approval, ie unmodified by population size like the high quality planet bonus. This would make it nearly twice as effective as a VR center on a 25B+ planet. So it's not useless *in theory*.
To keep 25 billion or more people happy, you need any one of the following: Four Entertainment networks (+25 morale each) Three Multimedia Centers (+30 each) Two of anything higher. No, it doesn't work like that. The penalty from your nice graph has two effects...firstly a straight drop in morale, and secondly (and more importantly) a s
Unless you want to batter your tax rate (not a good idea unless that's your only planet!) you'll need between 6 and 12 high end entertainment buildings depending on just how many morale trade goods and resources you have tapped. By the way, morale never gets worse past 25B, so if you really want a population that high, you might as well go ahead and make it a really mega population. Large populations are not good for making money because taxes scale with the square root of population. You nor
Considering the amount of stuff that's shaping up to be in the expansion I think $25 is looking very good value. And (I can't believe I'm saying this 'cos I'm a really tight-fisted SOB) I feel the amount of hard graft and improvement SD have put into the game post-release merits me giving them extra money! The game was released in as finished a state as most end up after the last patch, bar some minor showstopper bugs (which never hit me) so the amount of extra work put in is even more incredi
GalCiv2 Forums