[quote who="Bamdorf" reply="3" id="3516758"] My understanding is that ship roles will be assigned automatically by the program, so that one cannot assign an inappropriate role to a ship in hopes of some tactical advantage. (Based on a recent dev stream.) The principal problem for the player will be deciding how many of each type is a good mix. [/quote] I remember Paul mentioning that on a stream, but it doesn't se
Some thoughts: Ships are currently targeting defensive ships before they target what those ships are protecting. Maybe this should be reversed so interceptors are targeting the support ships and the guardians are trying to wipe them out before they can destroy the support. This seems more interesting to me than the interceptors having to eliminate the guardians before moving on to what should be their primary target. Starbases are currently at the bottom of everyone’s ta
Summary: Assault: These ships will take out your opponents’ damage dealers first. They go after Capital ships and their Escorts, then other Assaults and Interceptors before moving on to Support and their Guardians. Interceptor: These ships will race to the back lines to take out Support and their Guardians First, then move on to taking out the largest threats. Capital and E
With the battle viewer coming soon, we will all be thinking more about combat. With that in mind I'd thought I'd take a look at the ship roles* so we could all better understand what we are doing when we build our fleets. *This information comes from the BattleBehaviorDefs.xml for Beta 3 and may be different in Beta 4 Attack Ships Assault Position: Front Maneuver:</em
GalCiv3 Forums
The good thing about the lack of tactical interaction in combat is that it will add another major layer of strategy. They've mentioned this a couple of times, but fleet composition and ship roles will be very important. Because of this I hope they raise the logistics levels to allow for more interesting fleet compositions earlier in the game.
It looks very good at this early point. The one thing I think it could really use, and Paul mentioned this, is to have the ships arranged in a more 3 dimensional way.
In the GalCiv universe, political boundaries do not extend past planets. No one owns or controls space. This can admittedly be frustrating, but there are UP resolutions that can make your influence border more enforceable.
[quote who="admiralWillyWilber" reply="6" id="3516183"] playing the faction how you should [/quote] This phrase belongs nowhere near this game.
[quote who="admiralWillyWilber" reply="5" id="3516463"] I hope this time around they eliminate planet trading from the ai. [/quote] I think the solution should be to make sure the AI correctly values planets rather than eliminating it entirely. Another solution that can be interesting is that planets can only be traded in a deal that ends a war. The ages have been controversial since they were implemented. I personally like them and think that it is po
[quote who="admiralWillyWilber" reply="21" id="3516150"] I'm not talking about resources, but I'm talking about building one of the three non resource star base, and all I could findis bonuses for trade not base economic bonuses to planets. [/quote] They are there if you research them, though if I remember correctly they have a weird thing where you have to build a tier of the morale modules before you can build the next tier of economic modules. <img src="ht
I like this is idea, but for for dlc or expansion rather than the base game for a few reasons: 1) You will be able to achieve this in effect through custom factions. 2) It would require many more art assets which it seems from comments on the stream are a major bottleneck for Stardock. 3) Currently factions are defined by traits, bonuses, and tech trees. I'm not sure that any of these make a ton of sense to attribute to a leader. The racial bonuses make the most se
[quote who="admiralWillyWilber" reply="19" id="3516008"] and the economic star bases didn't have an economic bonus [/quote] I am confused about this statement as economic bases give a base production boost as well as having economy and trade modules. And that is all granting that manufacturing, research, and morale bonuses aren't economic bonuses, which I don't agree with.
From what has been said on streams, they will definitely have a role, but what that role will be is still under discussion.
[quote who="Soronarr" reply="32" id="3516087"] Pray tell, where am I being angry or hostile? [/quote] When someone disagrees with you you accuse them of being a "fan boy," instead of actually addressing their arguments. Also, you just asked me to define constructive feedback, which I did. The problems with your feedback are much more #2 then #1 or #3.
GalCiv3 Forums
[e digicons]:no:[/e] [e digicons]:no:[/e] [e digicons]:no:[/e]
GalCiv3 Forums
Hopefully at some point the AI will be able to tell the difference between civilian and military ships/starbases. Freighters, colony ships, constructors, scout ships, and economy amining starbases should at least cause less of diplomatic issue than armed ships and starbases.
GalCiv3 Forums
I really disagree with OP here and I think it would make long range much too easy to achieve. That being said I think a support treaty that allowed you to use another races planets/starbases to determine range and/or doing the same with alliances would be interesting.
[quote who="Soronarr" reply="21" id="3515924"] Apparently, anything that isn't praise, or isn't a a bug report, isn't proper feedback [/quote] Wow you are angry and make a lot of assumptions. [quote who="Soronarr" reply="21" id="3515924"] So define constructive feedback then. [/quote] 1. Not hostile. 2. Informed about the state of game including what features are planned but not in yet. 3. Explaining clearly why you don&#
GalCiv3 Forums
I really like the idea of planets have a few attributes; i.e. temperature, O2 levels, and H2O levels and each race has different ideal zones so the same planets are different classes for different races. Terra-forming could then move these attributes closer to your ideal range so as you make a planet more hospitable for yourself it becomes less hospitable for others. I guess this would cause problems when planets are conquered or flipped though.
[quote who="ElanaAhova" reply="12" id="3515251"] Fallout 4 is 'rumored' to becoming out the last quarter of 1015, or first quarter of 1016. So, 'hopefully' you haven't missed it yet. [/quote] This thread made me do a little research and it looks like there is no release date for Fallout 4, and in fact there are some rumors that it has been put on the back burner because Bethesda wants to push out Elder Scrolls 6 first.
I like this idea. Anything they can do to help people with large empires keep track of what planet is where and doing what I support.
[quote who="Soronarr" reply="11" id="3515764"] Are you honestly accusing me of not wanting to give honest feedback [/quote] I never accused you of not being honest, just not being constructive.
Soronarr, I think over all you just want this to be a different game then it is. This is an updated, expanded, and improved version of GCII. Also your post seems to be made in complete ignorance of state of the game and how incomplete it still is. [quote]The races play the same. [/quote] Only one of the traits, which are the t
Paul, you stated in the stream on 1/9 that you didn't like how Assembly was working for the Yor and were looking at changing it. As someone who loves the mechanic I am curious, what don't you like about it? Is it just a matter of balance and getting the numbers right, or are you planning to change the mechanic wholesale? On a somewhat unrelated note, I'm not sure why so many people have a problem with approval and the Yor. If they are sentient I don't see why they coul
GalCiv3 Forums
Can we get any word on the major characteristics of the final 2 factions or the traits planned for the current ones?