Not really a 180. They were not Clan really, not at the time of the Clan Wars, actually not after the 4th SW. Their doctrine and training was still Clan inspired, but their ranks were almost totally IS.
You're warp-travelling in bent hyperspace; If you're in bent hyperspace, then you're "warp-travelling", but you can never exceed the speed of light. wouldn't you be able to warp to another planet and then o
2. Seems like tactical combat to me?! Do you even know what tactical combat means? It means you control your units in combat hence it is tactical as opposed to strategic combat where you dont control your units in actual combat but rather manage them. What I was saying was that it *is* tactical combat, only you want the AI to do it for yo
for me, GCII is by definition a game about politics. the art of resolving conflicts over scarce resources. Seems to me you could accurately define GCII in very similar terms. If you go that way, is there really any strategy game (or any game, for that matter) that isn't about politics? In the end, this is a silly argument IMO.<b
Combat enchantments. You mean like "Bless"?
It allows you to research low level techs at the same time as more advanced techs. I guess it's all those other games that have it wrong, right?
Other space strategy games allow you to spread your research in a turn...
1. I thought MP was also one of those "most likely not added" issues... 2. Seems like tactical combat to me, disguised as new techs or more of a strategic approach. 3. Shouldn't even be an issue... "not fun" sounds really lame.
The game is fundamentally political, Nope, if it were to reflect RL, it'd be. But it's a game, and like every aspect of it the political part is just another piling of bonuses. Did anyone in this thread say that a
Also remember, the parsecs are the space traveled in bent hyperspace Actually, no. It can't be, simple math will tell you that. c is still the limit in normal/bent space, so you can't travel several parsecs in a week.
Two answers here: either "Absolutely" or "It already is one." I could swear these are mutually exclusive... And if you're thinking "but it's a wargame," that's no defense Good thing I'm
What's wrong with adding a political system that is at least as sophisticated as the diplomatic system? I'd say it's much more sophisticated, emphasys on much. The diplo system, as well as the econ system, and to a degree the whole game, can hardly be considered minimally realistic. The system you propose goes against that <img src="http://ima
You have a ruling party, Yep, even in Imperialism, which is odd at best... None of these should be inherantly superior, all of them should have benefits and penalties Yep, although I und
(and no mining or ship-building to worry about!). But mining is one of the Xs in 4X which GC doesn't really have (except for those resources that were misteriously planted in space just to give you bonuses which feel completely artificial...). As for sh
All it would take is a telescope. I assume those will still be around in 2226. I'm not sure why there's such a thing as fog of war, with telescopes and all...
It´s a good thing that you can find a Mitrosoft rep *anywhere* in the galaxy, not just in human space. They're actually fantastic, not only do they have *everything* in stock, they also deliver it *anywhere* you need it.
What technology should I research? There's over a dozen distinct, non-connected branches in GalCiv (look carefully at the # of branches in other games -- usually less than 3 or 4). Pick the wrong one and my economy might be weakened or maybe my industry weak or my military weak or my morale weak or maybe I won't be able to get those special worlds or maybe my logistics wil
There are a lot of things like that that I don't put in because it just wouldn't be enjoyable (not for me anyway). Another example is I don't have the AI zip out of orbit and nail transports. It could. Easily. Isn't that what different AI levels are for?! I'm confused...
Ship A firing order: 0-4 ballistic vs. defense 0-2 = avg 1.2667 dmg. 0-4 beam vs. defense 0-2 = avg 1.2667 dmg. 0-4 missle vs. defense 0-6 = avg 0.6667 dmg total = 3.2 avg. dmg. Ship B firing order: 0-4 missle vs. 0-6 PD = avg 0.6667 dmg 0-4 missle vs. (avg)0-4 PD = avg 0.8 dmg 0-4 missle vs. (avg)0-2 PD = avg 1.2667 dmg total = 2.733 avg. dm
Did you take into account the fact that a ship with 3 different weapon types has to degrade all 3 defenses seperately (even though 2 of them are lower in value), whereas a ship with only 1 weapon type only has to degrade one defense?
(Man stardock made *tons* of patches for Galciv2) You know, tons of patches ain't necessarily a good thing. If things need fixing, most probably they weren't made right, correct? Small developing teams do have a tendency to be more "active" with the pl
Maybe Luck should also have some part in that extra "critical hit" phase of combat, increasing attack value so that even outgunned you may actually have a chance to win.
You could give engines a small size, large sizemod value, and set them to only allow one per ship. Now that sounds good, and it actually makes sense. Why don't you guys implement that in DA too? Engines and defenses, they should work like that (1 per
The slower that a freighter travels, the longer the time at a distance, therefore, higher revenues. But also longer the time closer to your planet, right? Anyways, doesn't make any sense. But we're used to that, huh?
Hmm, Kryo had already explained this some time ago, in his DA combat system thread. It wasn't exactly news. Luck being an ability, well, imagining an entire race being "lucky" is kinda silly. Too many abilities in the game. I understand that it gives extra flexibility to the races, but it feels so artificial, with all the ways you have to pump them (racial, party, research,...).
GalCiv2 Forums