btw, where is this 1.11 patch anyhow?
Mistoffeles
Must be a really, really big ship. I thought Terror Stars weren't going to be implemented, at least not yet
2) Yup, the weapon tech list (No, it is not a tech tree, don't even try to pretend that it is) is a bit weak and needs more flavour, (BTW does anyone know if the neutral civs get any of the weopons and defences we are promised or is increased morale and those loverly tech buildings it....?), hell they could even make the tech list into a tree by making sure you have to som
+ Double clicking on a a ship in the stacked ships list will now open the planet screen umm...what for?
On build 13 the game seems to have forgotton what "common" and "uncommon" mean. I keep getting lots of stars with 5 PQ0 planets, or 4 PQ0 and one PQ5, and a few with 4 PQ0 and 1 PQ7 or PQ8, and maybe 1-3 that actually have a decent planet (PQ10-17, with anything over 12 extremely rare), while habitable planets are set to common and planet and star occurrence and both set to uncommon, which almost never happened before this update. It used to be that I would get 2-3 times as many usefu
well dont expect me to believe that crap. Even if the game ran and didnt crash you'd have a debug.err file in the games install directory. Get your head out of your behind, dork, the file is not there, and nothing you say or do is going to change that, no matter how holier and thou you think you are. Just because you don't believe something do
Think about it this way: Any tech at level I and II is the new, unrefined, "primitive" version of the technology, III and higher are refined, improved, and eventually perfected technologies. It is no surprise to me that a lower-tech weapon with a high degree of refinement would be better than a higher-tech weapon in its infancy, but you need the I and II versions to get to the III and higher.
Go into the metaverse manager and set your primary character.
*snicker* I am always amused when people state their opinion as fact with absolutely nothing to back it up. Presenting evidence to back yourself up, as some posters have done in this thread, is the * only * way to gain any credibility, anything else and you can be certain everyone else is laughing behind your back, just as I am.
Why in the world would you put phasers on tiny hulls?
The last post visible to me was April 17th, it is May 6th now, fanboi. Perhaps not a month old, but much older than a post should be to be in the "Recent Posts" list. Either the thread is marked wrong, or the forum is messing up badly, if it is showing different data for different users. And yes, I went to the last page of the thread, so either way it's something Stardock should know about.
A fleet with 4 ships reaches a Korx planet with 6/12 move points remaining. After just 1 attack, the move points visibly click over to 5/12, but when the attack is over the game moves on to the next ship, and when I manually click on the original fleet the move points are now 0/12. This never happened before 027, but has happened a few times since the update.
It happens only when I load a saved game, no other time, and not every time.
Specifically, the "GalCiv2 shirts are here!" thread.
It takes zero effort to blow up a barge at short range. You will not become an experienced marksman from shooting at a slow-moving, unarmed barge. Likewise, you should not gain experience in a game from putting no effort into a kill, otherwise you might as well be playing "monster-in-a-box" style Dungeons & Dragons.
Lets say you have 3000 soldiers and your enemy has 20000. You determine your odds of conquering the planet with tidal disruptors is between 15:1 and 19:1. You attempt to invade, but use less soldiers than you would need to actually succeed. Take a single transport and choose Tidal Disruptor invasion. At the end of the battle, you lose, but it whittles the enemy down to 250
A new planetary improverment, Jedi Acadamy would produce Jedi to help defend the planet. That is called Tir-Quan Training in GC2.
Seems to me more like "win one way, win another way".
No alignment means that they haven't researched Xeno Ethics and chosen an alignment, and leaning towards good or evil means that their actions to date have indicated their inclinations. This is the same as a player who has chosen mostly good or evil moral choices, when presented with them, you can look at the alignment graph for your civilization. I have had the "evil robot" or "good robot" show up in the tech research announcementswhen I was only a little ways off of neutral, i.e. "leaning towa
I'm using the newest NVidia WHQL drivers * snicker * did you check the case for an actual bird? i wouldnt wa
B2 attacks B2 ??? ???
The settings I play, I frequently get as many as half of my stars having no planets whatsoever. I have yet to see even the slightest difference between stars with high and low quality planets on the minimap, either before or after I have explored the area they are in.
Here's a thought or two: 1) Automation - you set the starbase to build a queue of modules just like you set a colony. When the resources (whether it be a constructor ship arriving, or supplies, or some other mechanism) arrive, the module is constructed (or progression towards constructiojn occurs). 2) Self-control - when you assign a starbase to build a module, it sends out a special ship that "comes with" the initially constructed starbase (i.e.: the Defiant <img src="ht
A lot of the discussion here has already been realised in an upcoming game by Will Wright called Spore: Link Link Link I don't think I'd give up a lot of my GC2 time for it though. The real question, though, is "where do you stop?" <b