Yes, the AI isn't that good when it comes to using culture modules. However, it does use them, and I've seen AIP 8 max out influencer starbases. Not often, but it did happen. Still, we could also set the techs to Category Culture. In that case, AIP 8 will go for them, if it thinks it needs more influence, but will otherwise ignore them.
@Maiden666 re: Colonisation Good that this can finally be laid to rest. If anyone asks about it in the future, I can link them to this post. re: STARS.TXT I have no idea why there are so many duplicates in that file. Removing them can't hurt though. I'll add the file to the update. @Mabus re: Planetary Invasion Sounds like a reasonable change. However, you have to keep it as Category Invasion for the Korath, or the
The new version is up. Same link as before. I changed the Category for Xeno Communications and Universal Translator to Pure Research. The AI seems to have a much easier time going for it now. I also changed Planetary Improvements back to a Biology-tech in the tech trees for the AIP 11 races. They seem to prefer Biology over Industry. The AIP 8 races are still very slow to arm up (in comparison to the Torians at least), so I've increased the AIValue of Space Weapons to 120
@Mabus Changing some of the categories is always necessary. I've no issue with that. As for that particular line of research, I've seen AIP 11 do it, but not often. It seems to depend somewhat on what races there are, where they are, and pure chance. [e digicons]:S[/e] But then, I haven't yet adjusted the AIValue for those techs. So that would be the first thing to look into, in my opinion.
@Mabus re: " Is there an ETA on the next version?" I'll put it up this evening (in 6-8 hours). I just want to make sure everything is working properly first. Once it is up, I have no problems with you doing some tweaking too. Maybe one of us can find some good values. In the meantime, I've been looking for Frogboy's post regarding AI colonisation (or rather "cheating") again. I think, I've <a href="ht
@Mabus re: " Is it worth considering turning the Precursor Library into an SP?" The Precursor Library bonus tile is once-per-map, so I'd like to keep the actual building the same. Still, if we remove the 10% civ-wide bonus, I might consider turning it into a SP. But then, this would also remove some of the uniqueness of the PL. Now it really would be just a Tech Capital with a higher base value. @DARCA</spa
@Mabus re: " I've noticed the AIP11's don't research Interstellar Construction on an AI value of 25. I recommend it's set to 35 (same for Nano Materials) as often this crucial technology is completely ignored." Done and done. I also increased the AIValues for the other hull techs too, while I was at it. @Maiden666 re: " -Map tiny, suicidal diff , all rare, loose cluster " </
GalCiv2 Forums
One parsec (pc) is one tile on the map. One sector (sct) is a 15x15 square of tiles. So a range of one sector equals 15 parsec. The display is using decimal values for the range. So a range of 0.6 sct would be 9 pc. The range for the Support Modules is designated as "pc", but is actually "sct". The range is further modified based on map-size. The bigger the map, the bigger the modifier. This makes it difficult to determine how much the range is going to change, if you
@Maiden666 re: " Basically the AI "knows" the map inside-out right from the start, all colonizable planets, resources and he further doesn't have a fog-of-war" While that is true, the AI can't colonise planets it hasn't "seen". I've tested this extensively, and it is the case. For example, in one game there was a habitable planet in a star system right next to the AIs. However, it didn't colonise it, despite having multiple colon
I'm done implementing the pre-setup bonuses. However, I made a few alterations: 1. The Yor had 1 point left, so I gave them a +10% Soldiering bonus. 2. The total cost of the Arcean setup was 12 points, so I had to remove some of the bonuses. I chose the Military Production bonus, because the Arceans already have a racial one. 3. The Korx got another bonus to Economics, instead of +1 to Sensors, because, as Maiden666 stated, the AI doesn't need them. 4.
I like those starting bonuses. However, I have two questions: The Social Production entry for the Torians is missing the value. Based on the other values, is this supposed to be 20%? The Terrans have a +1 Sensor bonus, which you remarked gives a total bonus of +2. However, the Terrans don't have a racial Sensor bonus. Is this supposed to be a Speed bonus perhaps?
@Mabus re: " Alright. I'll set it up." Okay. I had a look at your new descriptions in the FlavorText.xml, and they are mostly okay. However, I didn't like the Homeword-description for the Yor, and the A New Journey-entry for the Korath. Here is what I changed them to: Evil Yor (haven't come up with something for Good and Neutral yet): The [SHORTEMPIRENAME] are one of the oldest civilizations in the kn
@Marvin re: " Tell you what, why not try somewhere in between 30 and 60 and then with a playthrough we can see whether it needs to be changed further." Okay, I'll set it to 50%, and see how that goes. @Mabus re: " You can add those tags to RaceConfig.xml and it will work. " Huh, I wasn't aware of that. Good to know. re: " Of
@Mabus re: " none are using anything higher than small hulls so far. " The AIValues for Advanced Hulls and upwards were still on 10 in the last version. I adjusted them in my new version, which should make the AI more likely to go for them. re: " the Iconian research structures just rock." What do you think about the Precursor Library as a GA? I'm still not sure, if that was the right move. However, it was the only thing I could
@Mabus Sure, go ahead. Just try to keep the general sorting intact (no Trade techs under Entertainment, for example). You'd also need to edit the changelogs though, because I've sorted them after the tech tree. @DARCA Sorry, but I just want to forgot that the farming problem exists. I've spent years trying to find a way to fix it, and now, that I've found a working solution, I don't want to waste any more time on it. Maybe one of the
@DARCA re: " I honestly hope we thought of everything before we changed something this big, we could have made farms one per-planet, we could have simply reduced the bonuses?" We've tried all of those methods over the years. Along with several more. None of them worked out. @Mabus I like that. "That's a nice freighter you've got there. It would be a shame, if something bad happe
@Marvin re: " I recently got an e-mail from Dropbox, which says that you can create shared folders:" I'll have to look into this. @Mabus re: " I think we might need a new manual." You're right. The lists of starbase modules and planetary improvements in the manual are completely outdated. That was the case even before we started with the update
@Mabus re: " I'm not to worried about the farm bonuses tbh. If we're going to put out a fix it might as well go all the way." Okay, I'll add it. However, I'm still not sure about this. The manual explicitly mentions the bonus tiles, and I don't know, if Stardock is willing to adjust this part in order to accommodate the change. re: " On a side note. I've done some other UI
Nice work, Mabus. [e digicons]:thumbsup:[/e] However, I don't know, if we are allowed to make any changes to the UI in this update. If we are, I'm going to need a changelog for all the changes you've made, before I can add your files. Still, I'm a bit worried that removing any signs of the farm tiles might cause problems in the future. For example, if somebody decides to give the farms their regular food production again. How would they know, if there are any
Hi Mabus! Good to see you around again. Regarding those starter buildings, I want to keep them as GAs, because they all provide civ-wide bonuses. It would be quite OP, in my opinion, if you could get multiple versions of them. However, I gave the Stellar Forge its original bonuses again, so I see no reason why we couldn't turn it into a SP.
@Marvin re: "If you like, I could add a weapons&defences analysis sheet to the spreadsheet you have and Dropbox it back" That would be great. Thanks. @Maiden666 re: " Standalone ships that muster maximum defenses will be very hard to be defeated. " So what do you suggest we do? Increase the size of the defences a little? Reduce their absorption? Both? Nothing?
Well, that depends on the tech. I like some of the descriptions as they are just fine. Though they all still need to be proofread (along with everything else). As for Courage, I've already said all I know about it. It provides a bonus to the underdog in ship combat. The debug.err makes a note when somebody gets the bonus. Though how it all works is unknown to me. Luck also increases your base defence roll, and not just the damage roll. Calling it "accuracy" doesn'
@Maiden666 re: Asteroids That's the original name. I haven't changed it. Nor do I have a problem with it. Both the planet and the asteroids are named after Lord Kona, the ruler of the Drengin. All your base are belong to him, so to speak.
@Maiden666 re: Doomsday Generator Yes, it is OP. The reasons for the change were threefold: 1. The AI can't use this GA "correctly". 2. The HP bonus makes no sense. I mean, when I hear words like "Unimaginable Destruction" and "Doomsday" I'm not thinking of turtling (giant, flying, fire-breathing turtles not withstanding). 3. Making the 50% HP bonus civ-wide, in order to fix the first issue, would be too powerful (plus, losing that bonus would be extreme
You can disable this behaviour. In the Options, go to the Interface tab. There, under Ship Designer, disable Remove Functional Components When Upgrading A Ship Design.