It would be nice if DGM had a direct link to this forum. (And also nice if the chat worked).
DaveO
I implemented my own version of the Excalibur but my memory of the OS/2 version is pretty dim so the only things I really remember are that it was cheap to maintain, fast and deadly. Anyone still have the OS/2 game running who can give me the exact cost, hit-points, attack, defence, maintenance, etc.
Yes, this game was started in 1Z too. The only oddball thing is that I have cleaned up the ships so the all use the Tech _ID spec and have ranges. And I've added my Excalibur (using the Dreadnought MDL file).
Is there some way now to have an alliance? Where is the button for this?
The most common error in debug.err looks like this: Could not find animation titled Icon24Trans in model 0Decoration (PlayAnimation) Where 0Decoration can be 0Decoration through 4Decoration. The other one I see often is: Error playing bink movie for research win And occasional complaints that there are no autosave files in the current directory. Plus a couple of startup messages that seem to refer to missing stuff in either the trade or tech depts:<b
1. The social governor screen is still not scrolling. I work around it by having one governor for early improvements and another for later. 2. The military governor screen is scrolling correctly but it would be nice to be able to select "nothing" in the upper screen and have the planets not now producing any military hardware all assigned to produce the latest improved spaceship (or whatever). 3. What the heck is a .MDL file and what uti
As impressive as the list is, I can't see it in DGM.....
Yep....it's gone for me too. :sniff!:
I agree. And the logic can be fairly simple. Issue an ultimatim. They party you issue it to MUST offer peace to the other party in the war. The results of the offer can then be reported to you so you can decide who to jump on... LOL
I'm sure I would have had no trouble in my last game putting together a nice smooth Alliance. Everyone was trading heavily and nobody seemed to want a war at all. :)
My exit problem is also happening when I go the menu and try to start a new game.
As long as there is another build (or two) before beta 2, I,d say go ahead and put in the bases and delay it....
OK....a couple of comments here. I'm not getting approvals over 50% in the current beta with an empire (Star Federation gov.) that runs ENTIRELY on trade. I do not tax! All planets have built all possible improvements and my navy is 100% Excalibur class and pretty much invincible (I implemented the ship myself using the Dreadnought pics for it). I do have Star Hawks posted in every quadrant so as to get at the anomalies quickly (except my Survey ship is in one of the quadrants).
Bugz: Every time I exit the game I get the following VC++ debug error: Damage: after Normal block #34780 at 0x0b71a080 Also, the estimate to completion time in the research screen is a bit over two times the actual amount it takes in turns (assuming one turn per game month). I lose 2 and occasionally 3 off the number of months to go with every turn. Peeves: With the Harmony Generator gone from the improvement list, it's impossible to get approval up over
I make a LOT of money late in the game by selling my trade goods around. In fact, the current game I'm playing has got so much trade in it that there are no wars. Not only that, I can, if I want, lower taxation to nothing and still do OK. But I did implement a version of the Excalibur, as best I could remember it from the OS/2 game. If I recall correctly, it embodies the best replication tech to make a cheap (to maintain, not to buy), fast, powerful warship so you end up with a much more pra
I'm not having any problem (that I'm aware of) with the planets list. But the social projects list is a mess and the military governor screen doesn't scroll and is gibbled, with the same ships listed twice in the lower pane.
one word: COOOL!
Well, I must agree that the AI is important in GalCiv. It is the AI's abilities and behaviour that made the game work in the first place. And what I look for in an AI is something that will pretty well pass the Turing test with respect to the game. Right now, we are seeing some rocky places in the AI code, though, where they seem to have abilities that are denied human players. They have to be made to go through the same hoops as the human player or the game quickly becomes frustrating.
To put it bluntly, my Social Projects lists are all screwed up. The pictures and the info with them are wrong and the governor seems to be in the habit of scheduling projects not on the list! (One of a kind things usually that have already been built).
The current poll is an apples and oranges thing. I think the AI's need to be as human-like as possible. That does not necessarily mean they have to be super-intelligent, though. Just human-like. And I think multi-player would be a nice addition to the game. So the long and short of it is, I vote BOTH!
The subject says it all. My C drive took the big dive into the bit-bucket. I managed to keep all the files in Drengin.net, but had to reinstall the game manager to get it is show in the start menu. Now loader.exe wants me to register again, but, alas, the email with the serial number was on the now-deceased C drive.
Yes, this is something I've noticed, too. The AI's seem to KNOW where the good planets are. I have seen them drive right up to one with a fast colony ship just 20 or so turns into the game when I have my own extra points set 5 on speed and 5 on tech. I was actually WATCHING the damn thing and there is no way they surveyed it! Their survey ship was 2 quadrants away surveying something else!
What are the proper parameters for the Excalibur? I can remember that the OS/2 program had it as a fast, powerful and cheap replacement for the Avatar and I'm just impatient and would like to implement it myself, using one of the other ship's .mdl files. And while we're at it, what is a .mdl file and what program can convert them from other file formats?
Unfortunately, in my Win2K system MCPServer self-terminates due to errors. Of course this prevents Smartexception from working at all.
Shouldn't "foundary" be "foundry?"