Tharios

Reply to Wishlist in GalCiv III Founders GalCiv3 Forums

[quote who="General Joab" reply="99" id="3430728"]Wormholes- Yes limit the number of them. Why? They are a paradigm shift in maneuver and ultimately shrink the map dramatically. If we force ships to have a module to traverse the wormholes, then enemies not as technologically advanced in wormhole technologies will be unable to take advantage of the added maneuver and will suffer an extreme disadvantage. The ease with which a defensive fleet may be outmaneuvered with strategically-placed wormho

Reply to Wishlist in GalCiv III Founders GalCiv3 Forums

[quote who="WIllythemailboy" reply="103" id="3430794"]Good joke. I admit I laughed out loud. No one would be pushing for tactical combat of any sort if it didn't change the strategic elements of the game. Generally, that change is to slant all combat in the game to the advantage of the human player over the AI. Tactical combat, at least in most games, allows the player to consistently beat an AI opponent with substantially inferior forces. That allows the player to st

Reply to Thinking of cancelling my pre-order in GalCiv III Founders GalCiv3 Forums

Love the digital media all you want. It's gonna get wiped out...20 years, tops.

Reply to Thinking of cancelling my pre-order in GalCiv III Founders GalCiv3 Forums

The OP is still correct, to an extent. Also, his claim of intending to download a pirated copy from the internet was not "in lieu of" a lack of internet connection. The statement was made with the intent that a lack of internet connection is what bothers him in a download-only game, and that he'd rather pirate it in such a case while he does have a connection. Perhaps still a bit silly, but hardly contradictory. To which I say, I wouldn't talk about that so

Reply to Wishlist in GalCiv III Founders GalCiv3 Forums

[quote who="WIllythemailboy" reply="93" id="3430546"]Ahh, the old "just make it optional" argument. No one has ever used that before. It's a really silly argument to make, for more than one reason. I suggest you read the tactical combat topic to discover why. Not enough to matter. The RTS crowd is used to games that last 20 minutes, not 20 hours.[/quote] So I looked in the thread you mentioned. And once again, the only supposed reasoning is, "I don't like it, tac

Reply to Wishlist in GalCiv III Founders GalCiv3 Forums

[quote who="00zau" reply="91" id="3430533"]Call it "two games in one" that'll sell better. I think having two options allows for a broader audience for the game; there'd be all-victory-conditions, tactics off games for the Civ-type crowd, and tactics on, non-war victory off slugfests for the SoaSE/Starcraft/AoE crowd. Basically, they'd hopefully be able to bring in some of the RTS crowd.[/quote] You mention all those games...and all it does is make me miss Homeworld. &nbsp

Reply to Wishlist in GalCiv III Founders GalCiv3 Forums

[quote who="admiralWillyWilber" reply="89" id="3430529"] In a big world there should be enough people who like it either way that this should not be a problem.[/quote] I disagree, but that's not relevant. Functional or not, I'd bet a good amount of money it won't even be an option. There will simply be no tactical combat in the game, unfortunately.

Reply to Wishlist in GalCiv III Founders GalCiv3 Forums

[quote who="00zau" reply="87" id="3430526"]Not if it was a game option. When you start a game, you'd set "tactical combat on/off;" people who like/are good at tactical combat would play games where tactical is on, people who don't like/aren't good at it would play games with it off. Basically, combat would always auto-resolve with tactical = off.[/quote] Ah...so segregation of players, basically.

Reply to Wishlist in GalCiv III Founders GalCiv3 Forums

[quote who="00zau" reply="83" id="3430521"]I mean, they could make it optional. Or make the combat turn based, a la pokemon. Just something quick and dirty, but more involved than just watching them club it out. Heck, even something like setting a fleet stance that gives bonuses and penalties; that'd be more of a strategic decision, too.[/quote] You might get certain fleet "stances" or the like. The devs have said they want to incorporate roles into ships of the fleets, so t

Reply to Wishlist in GalCiv III Founders GalCiv3 Forums

[quote who="00zau" reply="81" id="3430441"] I'm mostly just hoping for a better combat system. I would like ship defense to actually matter. More offbeat support options like the warp bubbles and atlas modules would be nice as well. Making fleet combat and ground combat more interactive would be nice as well. At best, a fleet engagement could be like a RTS minigame. Imagine a battle being played out like a large-scale fleet clash in SoaSE.[/quote] Never happen. &nbsp

Reply to Wishlist in GalCiv III Founders GalCiv3 Forums

2) Every system has its flaws. Though I'll admit to an almost violent bias against capitalism, currently. But ultimately, two things matter most to me in this game...first, a great wealth of open-ended strategic options, applicable to a multitude of victory options, all in fun ways...and second, that each race is truly distinct from each of the rest, and not simply a different arrangement of stats, and is not limited to favor certain types of victories ov

Reply to Wishlist in GalCiv III Founders GalCiv3 Forums

[quote who="Tridus" reply="67" id="3430060"]This is completely wrong. Blocking off our solar system in any meaningful way with mines requires so many mines that the mass would be greater than that of everything in our solar system right now. It's so absurd that it'd be hilarious if people didn't keep trying to pretend that it makes sense. Protecting it with a fleet requires engines and sensors good enough to see someone coming. If you're going for Earth and I'm

Reply to Wishlist in GalCiv III Founders GalCiv3 Forums

Also... 12) Covert Ops techs. Cannot be equipped on hulls larger than medium, nor on cargo hulls. Terrans may equip them on large hulls as well, and Krynn may equip them on cargo hulls. Reflecting the Terrans' abundance of power to use technology on scales others cannot, as well as the Krynn's criminal syndicate underpinnings. - Covert hyperdrives. Capable of jumping through inhibitor zones as long as the total rating is high

Reply to The evolution of the Drengin in GalCiv III Dev Journals GalCiv3 Forums

I...shall crush the Drengin.

Reply to Wishlist in GalCiv III Founders GalCiv3 Forums

[quote who="Gaunathor" reply="59" id="3429976"]In the previous games, one tile represented one adjusted parsec. The hexes in GalCiv 3 will probably do the same. "A true parsec is 3.26 light years. An adjusted parsec varies from 1.9 x 10^6 (million) miles to 1.9 x 10^14 miles depending on how much mass is in the area.[/quote] I realize this, though I didn't know the exact scale. My point, was that no matter how you slice it, it will either be completely wrong

A Note to Stardock. in Galactic Civilizations III GalCiv3 Forums

I want to start off by saying that I'm thrilled that Gal Civ is finally getting a third installment. I enjoyed Gal Civ II immensely, and still would if it were possible. The purpose behind this post is three-fold. First, to (rather pointlessly, I suppose) inform you that at the earliest financial feasibility, I will be preordering as a founder, hopefully within the month of January. The second is to express how deeply heartened and grateful I am about the regardi

Reply to Wishlist in GalCiv III Founders GalCiv3 Forums

1) I can agree in principle. WIllythemailboy pointed out that supposedly the constructor spam and such will be reduced, but he neglected to give any indication of how, or cite the article where it was seen. In any case, reusable ships that have to be "reloaded" for each use of each appropriate module, would seem to be the best course. 2) This too I can agree with in principle, but not all economic systems are created equal. There are

Reply to easyMod in Modding GalCiv2 Forums

I think I'm willing to give it a shot. I'm only a novice modder myself (if that) so I imagine this tool is just the thing to be tested by someone like me.

Reply to Moons became dwarf planets........ in Sins Rebellion Sins Forums

Ok...so... 1) Where do you people even FIND finished mods of ANY game? I've never seen one, not for any game ever, not once, anywhere. Or is it we have different definitions of "finished"? 2) It would be nice if there were a little more uniqueness and variety among planet types, but it's strictly a minor issue. As long as the game functions correctly, plays well, and is generally pleasing to view and enjoyable to use...then all's well.

Reply to To everybody who claims that comp stomps are for losers. in Sins Rebellion Sins Forums

Point of note...Blizzard has a great business model, but they make rotten games. So, not really a good example for comparison to anything worthwhile, really. That said, the reason multiplayer is so popular nowadays is because AIs are so poor that they can't hope to beat the average twitch gamer who got their strategy from a number-cruncher. Eventually, there will come a time when no human could hope to beat an AI at any game. Appealing to twitch gamers and g

Reply to I MAY HAVE DISCOVERED WHAT'S CHASING THE VASARI in Sins Rebellion Sins Forums

[quote who="SithLordAJ" reply="160" id="3155948"] Quoting Tharios, reply 157So I feel compelled to point out...you can't have a unique race chasing the Vasari. It's simply not possible. a race of cake that eats you. I accept apologies in the form of checks or cash.[/quote] Yay...you know how to take one sentence completely out of context and refute it with nonsense. I'm happy for you. But, I think instead I'll assume

Reply to I MAY HAVE DISCOVERED WHAT'S CHASING THE VASARI in Sins Rebellion Sins Forums

So I feel compelled to point out...you can't have a unique race chasing the Vasari. It's simply not possible. Whatever they come up with will have already been done somewhere else in some form of media, in multiple variations in the past. Originality is no longer an option in anything. Might have been a few decades ago, and could've been for centuries to come if it weren't for our culturally bankrupt society's self-destructively insatiable hunger for "new

Reply to Vasari faction Mystery... in Single Player Sins Forums

Time may not exist as a dimension or force. Turns out that it's actually completely irrelevant and ignoring it solves all kinds of problems in all physical models of the universe. Unfortunately, it does create a few of its own, but it appears those problems are easier to deal with than the others created by the idea that time is a dimension or force. Just sayin.

Reply to Proposed Realism Additions in Beta Feedback Sins Forums

I always find it amusing how people seem to think that slapping "sci-fi" on something means that in addition to making up currently nonexistent technologies, you also get to ignore everything we already do know about how things work. And that any attempt to consolidate the two makes all possibly resultant stories or games "unfun". If there were any more incorrect nonsense uttered by a living being, it would've had to come from a politician. It's ok to "black box" s

Reply to Rebellion Beta 2c (0.90) Change Log in Change Logs Sins Forums

There is one thing I'd like to mention about the Advent's Discord battleship. Its behavior with regard to Psionic Scream and Fracture is way off. It prioritizes PS over Frac at all times. That means unless one babysits all Discords in battle, players lose out on a big chunk of what PS does. The AI behavior needs to be changed so that PS won't be used unless nearby enemies are still under the effect of Fracture. As for the TEC starbase, it