ScrivenerOfLight

Reply to the ai, though at war with me, voted for my council proposal in GalCiv III Support GalCiv3 Forums

I've had this happen, too. Also, I've had the leading faction, also the current UP Chair, vote to repeal the UP Headquarters--from itself... which made absolutely no sense. I know Paul and Brad (in particular) are looking for dumb AI behavior to fix. I think this qualifies. [e digicons];)[/e]

Reply to CRUSADE DIARY 2: The Civilization Builder in GalCiv III Dev Journals GalCiv3 Forums

I really like what I see, overall. Will this output a single faction file similar to what is already output? If so, could you not make an option to save as a folder with all the XML for ease of modding? I guess my main concern is related to what still is not in the editor... For example, I have a mod that uses a custom tech tree and several custom improvements made available through that tech tree. If I were to load this into the editor, I'm fairly certain it would

Reply to Galactic Civilizations: Ship Designer in GalCiv III Dev Journals GalCiv3 Forums

[quote who="Gauntlet03" reply="18" id="3666403"] instead of adding features, it would be better... [/quote] I agree with this--and this overall premise. I would actually prefer not to see any added features, at least not until the handful of features at issue work as intended and are better optimized.

Reply to How's the ai at fleeting up in 2.0? in Galactic Civilizations III GalCiv3 Forums

[quote who="Icemaniaa" reply="5" id="3666219"] AI ships are very slow compared to competent human player designs [/quote] In my last game, the AI were running some ships of 20+ moves--which I'd consider fairly good for their tech levels (I think they only had Warp). Not all of their ships were outfitted that way, and those that were, they seemed to be using to take out undefended or poorly defended targets. [quote who="Ascaloth" reply="6" id="3666229"] I&#39

AI & Planetary Improvements in Galactic Civilizations III GalCiv3 Forums

First, much thanks to the dev team for delivering such an awesome game with consistent improvements to AI that makes the single-player experience challenging and rewarding! I say all of the following knowing that the Crusade expansion may change many of the planetary improvement dynamics. But under the assumption that there will still be adjacency and that there will still be bonus tiles, I think it would be helpful to revisit the AI behavior as it relates to bonus tile usage

Reply to How's the ai at fleeting up in 2.0? in Galactic Civilizations III GalCiv3 Forums

I saw that picture earlier and was quite surprised. I don't think I've ever seen the AI play quite like that... though they used to be worse about fleeting. Generally, the AI are good at fleeting up now. Sometimes, big fleets aren't necessary, and I noticed in a recent 2.0 game that fleets were being used to attack larger, higher priority targets while single ships and occasional pairs were sent to dispatch asteroid mines and unprotected assets. I was pleasantly su

Reply to Galactic Civilizations: Ship Designer in GalCiv III Dev Journals GalCiv3 Forums

I have to say I LOVE the designer. I spend a lot of time in it, and really enjoy working with it. But I agree, there are some finicky things about it. In fact, I got on the forum specifically to post about the designer, and I saw this thread. How fortuitous! As much as I love the designer, I would greatly appreciate if the dev team could apply a little polish to it. General Pants and El_Borrak, good list. About 5) Parts resizing from the editor to the gam

Reply to Let's talk about small I mean tall empires. in GalCiv III Future Ideas GalCiv3 Forums

I've enjoyed reading through these ideas. Nonlinear population growth makes sense, and I think it would go a long way to improving the tall vs. wide dynamic. [quote who="SilasOfBorg" reply="30" id="3665277"] * make planets, as well as starbases, require Administration (wait! don't shoot! arrghhh!! not the spleen again!!) [/quote] I don't think this is a bad idea, given some other changes. If this were implemented, the base admini

Reply to DEV DIARY GalCiv III v2.0 preview in GalCiv III Dev Journals GalCiv3 Forums

These sound like great improvements! Question: in your look at diplomacy, were the various broken treaties and options fixed? Doing so would go a long way to making diplomacy a fun part of the game. [quote who="lyssailcor" reply="7" id="3663605"] when not at war we can do nothing but build ships and constructors at our shipyards [/quote] One thing I'd like to see implemented is a means to repair and upgrade existing ships using shipyards rather than cash.

Reply to GalCiv III v1.9 Changelog in GalCiv III Dev Journals GalCiv3 Forums

[quote]Add ESC to close Ship Designer and Diplomacy screens. [/quote] So I recently, and quite accidentally, found out that the enter key closes the ship designer--without warning and without asking if you'd really like to cancel without saving. Resulted in no small bit of frustration having to redo what I had done... Since esc key was added, my assumption is that either the enter key isn't intended to close the ship designer or it was originally and is now obsole

Reply to GalCiv III v1.9 continued updates in GalCiv III Dev Journals GalCiv3 Forums

Thanks Draginol, pshaw, and other devs! Looking forward to testing out the changes!

Reply to GalCiv III v1.9 Changelog in GalCiv III Dev Journals GalCiv3 Forums

Thanks for the update, pshaw--looking forward to giving this a try this afternoon. I suspect I'll have to start a new galaxy for the changes to take effect?

Reply to GalCiv III v1.9 Changelog in GalCiv III Dev Journals GalCiv3 Forums

[quote who="Frogboy" reply="30" id="3659694"] The answer is that we have to heavily buff influence starbases and other culture features. Previously, it was pretty effortless to cover the galaxy in your color. [/quote] 100% agree--and that is what I was driving at in my post. I think an influence victory shouldn't be a given but something to work toward. @zuPloed - thanks for the info. I was aware of most of that, but the setup *felt* different this time aro

Reply to GalCiv III v1.9 Changelog in GalCiv III Dev Journals GalCiv3 Forums

Frogboy, great patch, overall! I immediately noticed the shorter load times and turn times. Lots of great changes. Below are some constructive criticisms. Influence victory obsolete--but creates an opportunity: As others have mentioned, I feel that an influence victory is no longer realistic without significant starbase spamming. Played a couple hundred turns on a new game last night and my ZOC around my home planet is minimal (granted, I wasn't focused on influence--and perhaps t

Reply to What's new in Galactic Civilizations III 1.7 in GalCiv III Dev Journals GalCiv3 Forums

Awesome patch--look forward to spending some time with it! One thought I have as you consider finessing the ship list groups: perhaps instead of making obsolete designs disappear from a game, you could put them into a group of obsolete designs. Then, in the event you accidentally make a design obsolete, or in the event you want to use a design you made obsolete, you still have access. This would keep these designs from cluttering the ship list but render the act of making a design obs

Reply to [1.5] Feedback and bugs in GalCiv III Support GalCiv3 Forums

I had a little time to check into causes/specifics regarding my above post: 1) It seems that for whatever reason, if the MinableNebulaRate is set to 25 or higher in the MapSetupDefs.xml document, no Elerium will be generated. 2) If the "Count" attribute under the MinableBlackholeChance attribute is set to zero under the "None" group in MapSetupDefs.xml, Antimatter will no longer be generated when the "none" frequency is selected for resources. Another note: there is no

Reply to [1.5] Feedback and bugs in GalCiv III Support GalCiv3 Forums

Some map generation bugs or issues: 1) Elerium does not generate when resource abundance set to "rare" or "uncommon." Not sure if this has been mentioned elsewhere recently, but it seems that there is still a problem with Elerium generation. IIRC, this has been a known issue at least since release... it would be nice to see this fixed. (Some background for #1: I often play on insane maps, and the number of Durantium is obnoxious if resource abundance is set too high, but

Reply to Galactic Civilizations III - Patch 1.03 in GalCiv III Support GalCiv3 Forums

Rewrite of the turn state machine to fix numerous stuck turn issues Is this what is behind the turn no longer being interrupted by idle ships? If so, I'm not sure I like that side-effect. I've put a few hours into this opt-in, and the net result of this is more micro (self inflicted because I don't want my survey ship to only use a small portion of its move, for example--but more important with techs gained from anomalies). I have noticed turns certain

Reply to Love for Frogboy in Galactic Civilizations III GalCiv3 Forums

I agree, great post Seilore. I've enjoyed this journey from Alpha (though you might not know it since I changed my user name and finally uploaded a picture)--and I've enjoyed seeing how our comments have been taken into consideration. Seeing the development process has been a real joy, and knowing that the future of the game is in such good hands ensures loads of fun going forward. I just wish I had an extra 5 or 6 or 10 hours each day to give to the game. Thanks for t

Reply to Post 1.02 Manufacturing and Research Buildings... in Galactic Civilizations III GalCiv3 Forums

So. I have to renege on my initial comment. After reading the posts here and working more carefully with the numbers (primarily to balance a mod)... I think the adjacency is working well for manufacturing improvements . I haven't had time to work through the other improvements yet, but I will. If I did the math right, once you reach the final improvement level (Industrial Sector (IS) & Quantum Power Plant (QPP)) it i

Reply to Post 1.02 Manufacturing and Research Buildings... in Galactic Civilizations III GalCiv3 Forums

I don't know that the OP is saying they are lame... [quote]The Capitals have a big enough bonus to make them worth while, though their expense (particularly early on) makes investing in them really hard (they're 4X the cost of the Tier 2 building). [/quote] I think the capitals are generally worth it, but they are a bit expensive early on.

Reply to 1.02 opt in, abundant stars. So where are the stars? in GalCiv III Support GalCiv3 Forums

Up late, Frogboy--thanks for the update tonight. Wish I had more time to play it. You guys rock!

Reply to Post 1.02 Manufacturing and Research Buildings... in Galactic Civilizations III GalCiv3 Forums

Good post. [quote]More radically, I think a solution would be to change the +5%/level adjacency bonus for EVERYTHING to be +10%/level. Frankly, I'd prefer this, so it gives a much bigger incentive to do adjacent buildings. Right now, it's a trivial bonus until you managed to get 3 or 4 in a tight cluster. [/quote] I agree with this line of thought. The adjacency bonus is a perk when it works out, but it isn't so strategic you just have to have adjacen

Reply to Diplomacy Exploit in GalCiv III Support GalCiv3 Forums

I was going to post this same issue. All you have to do is put everything that they can trade on the table, set up the necessary credits per turn in exchange... accept the trade, declare war... And you win. This isn't an issue in single player since I just don't do it. A suggestion for a partial fix is that the credits per turn be capped in some way by actual max income (i.e., if 100% economy produces 500 credits per turn, that is the most you can offer in trade) and that the

Reply to [MOD] Planetary Sensors in GalCiv III Modding GalCiv3 Forums

So I tried playing with adding range to a planet and haven't quite figured that out (I'm not sure it is possible)... the only range I see is StarbaseRange, and I applied it to a planet through an improvement, but it didn't do anything. Also, ZOC effects seem to not be working correctly right now. The only place such effects are currently used are in the ideology tree, but the traits with these effects seem to be doing nothing. I posted a bug report <a href="https://fo