Odd, I've had no real trouble. The AI's a little tougher, sure, but I've been able to make plenty of mutually helpful trades under the new patch. Early game it's hard to pry much out of them, but then that's just sensible.
Assassinations aren't mega events, they've been in the game since DL. I've not actually seen a single mega-event since the patch. I don't have them turned off, one simply hasn't come up. Even pre-patch, in 12 games, I never saw the pirates or peacekeepers, I just got the Dread Lords popping up and prompptly getting eaten. Brad mentioned he'd buffed the Dread Lords a bit in the patch, so I'm hoping that the next time they turn up they'll actually be a threat.
The only way that this is going to work is if everyone starts using some type of map standard (i.e. large map, common everything, average research speed, all victory conditions on just to see if any race excels at some types of conditions, etc.) in order to make this survey work. Otherwise, the results are going to be skewred as hell. Not so much skewed as totally random, which is kind of a result in itself. The implication is that, with a couple of exce
I'm aware of your opinion on the matter Bingjack, and like I said as far as I'm concerned you're welcome to a toggle. I prefer this system to the old, because in the old it was simply too easy (and too inexpensive) to build up a mass of intel and start stealing techs from other civs. This is far more directed, the sabotage effects can be put to good use under certain circumstances, and the money sink aspects actually help balance out the runaway train effect becoming a top tier civ tends to prod
I quite like it, but don't have any problem with the idea of a toggle for it. Still, it's no reason not to get the game, which is a vast improvement over DL (which was already a great game) in almost every respect.
Regarding the Drengin, they must be very dependent on map settings. In my last game they had an even stronger showing than usual, taking literally half the map before squashing my poor beleaguered Iconians like proverbial bugs.
That's just trippy denyasis. I'm beginning to wonder if there really is any pattern to be pulled out of this, or whether it's strictly a matter of setup and environmental variables. Of course this is further confused by the fact that it may be the racial abilities, rather than the AI, that's resulting in great performance under certain circumstances. Ah to have the time to study thi
If I want to temporarily disable a given custom opponent I've created (to keep it out of the random opponent pool, basically), is it a simple matter of taking the customracexml file for that custom race out of my GC2DarkAvatar folder? If I do that while I'm playing another game that happens to have that race in it will it screw that up?
I'm finding 1.5X to be a drastic improvement over 1.5, which wasn't bad to begin with. I have to agree with you on point #1, though. Once the AI has you pinned (and they often do, I haven't won a game since 1.5X came out actually) they seem to take their sweet time with the invasions rather than pressing the advantage.
But why Torians only if OFM are in general a bad idea (an idea I don't agree with?) I would guesstimate that it's because the Torians would rely on planetary defense rather than space defense because of their high population. And hi Vinraith. We miss you. It's not about OFM's being a bad idea, it's that the Torian AI in particular (keep in mind they're all different) seemed to have a bit of a fixation wi
Why the Torian Orbital fleet manager change? They tended to prioritize them a little too highly. I recall capturing a Torian world once that only had two tiles, a starport and an orbital fleet manager.
To those of you that use a lot of custom opponents, do you notice any trends associated with the specific race AI you're using? For that matter, how does the "generic" one compare? Thanks to everyone for all the feedback, this is interesting stuff.
Starstriker: Have you played enough games to give us a sort of overall, general feel for how the enemy AI's do in your game? Not that your current experience (especially a strong Dominion of Korx) isn't interesting.
i'd be very interested to see how the different AIs would play in more controlled circumstances. i did several test games on this for DL, controling and regularizing number of planets, boarders, etc. Yeah, I'd love to be able to correlate AI performance to the various environmental variables as well, but there's so damn many. I'm just trying to get a rough su
It's interesting to see how many differences there are in our respective lists. Maybe if enough folks post I can generate some kind of averaged consensus at the end, it might even constitute useful feedback to SD.
It occurs to me that, by and large, I tend to see the same endgame players in a lot of my games. In the interests of empiricism, then, I figured it might be interesting to see how other people's experiences mesh with mine. I'd like to sort the different AI players into three categories: those that usually survive awhile (unless of course *I* kill them, which'd skew the results) and build up a large territory, those that usually die early and ugly, and those that vary from game to game. In my exp
Well, like i said mine worked fine for quite awhile, which seems odd. I'd say 50-100 turns in I hit a crash bug on pressing "turn" that seems to crop up at around the same point every time I try to play past it. Anyway, I'll update this thread when I find out more about what's going on.
Please do send the SE log to [email protected]. Ah, not to support then? In that case it was worth asking here just for that clarification. Thanks kryo, as always. Whatever you get paid, it's not enough.
ASSERT ERROR in file .\Source\Starship.cpp at line... This shows up a couple times, which may have something to do with the problem. Very often with updates, games saved in a previous version are not compatible. That is why it is best to only update between games. Well, that's why I asked in the main thread and Brad seemed to think it'd be ok. Maybe he
I do have to ask the perennial question, though: How will it affect pre-existing save games? I'm in the midst of a huge map (on the metaverse, no less, my first incidentally). Should I wait to download this until that game is finished? They will work fine. I made special effort when I added new AI variables to make sure they wouldn't affect saved games.
So after having checked in the update thread on the home page I went ahead and updated to 1.5X of DA, then went back to playing the game I'd been playing under 1.5. For awhile everything was fine, but then the game started crashing. I've isolated it to the point where I have a save game where, on my system at least, all I have to do is press the turn button and the game crashes. I've never had crashing issues with this game before that weren't directly related to a known issue (like the Jagged K
I do have to ask the perennial question, though: How will it affect pre-existing save games? I'm in the midst of a huge map (on the metaverse, no less, my first incidentally). Should I wait to download this until that game is finished? They will work fine. I made special effort when I added new AI variables to make sure they wouldn't affect saved games.
Three words: You Guys Rock I do have to ask the perennial question, though: How will it affect pre-existing save games? I'm in the midst of a huge map (on the metaverse, no less, my first incidentally). Should I wait to download this until that game is finished?
This appears to be fixed in 1.5X, according to the discussion in its accompanying thread. Good thing too, it was a seriously irritating bug.
I've never actually played it, but I've heard nothing but awfulness (except for a few people who said a user mod fixes some of the problems and makes the game better). iMod helps a lot but, honestly, there's just no reason to bother with it if you've got DA. hiddenranbir: We'd all love the choices of SEV with the polish, look, and AI of GC2. The problem with having all kinds of neat stuf
GalCiv2 Forums