GalCiv3 Forums
Great.... did you design that ship above?
:)
[quote who="DARCA1213" reply="77" id="3478286"] Your logic is flawed and your "solution" is hypocritical. How can a smart guy like you believe such nonsense?[/quote] Where is the flaw in logic?
[quote who="logan0178" reply="74" id="3478264"]You are missing the point and failing to address the example I provided. Since your only avenue of expansion is starport and if starports are basically defenseless what happens when it gets destroyed by a single enemy fighter attack in the very first turns of the game and you get camped? At that point it doesn't matter how cheap starports are because every new starport you build will immediately be destroyed by a simple enemy
Cool looking ships.
[quote who="Fermin Sanchez" reply="8" id="3478072"] Did I somehow miss the star naming?[/quote] https://www.galciv3.com/nameastar Try going there.
I know this is not a ship design, but here is a particular fun ship component... it is a piston using only the rotational animations. Now we can have some fun space pistons... ;) Thought I'd show off some of the capabilities of this editor for all to see. <img src="https://
I'm using the names and equipment from the base ships and the names from the game. I started each of these designs from scratch and built them the moment I've got the tech to make these ships. They are duplicates / redesigns because the equipment choices are limited at the current stage of my game. As I play the game, I'm going to develop different ships and use these designs as things progress. I'll even add a few more other designs, but we have to start somewhere. e.
A new bomber... Bomber 2
Here is a collection of redesigned iridium small and tiny military ships...All are made with few pieces and have the same star-up gear as the originals. I'll be producing the larger ships when I get to them in game. Hope you enjoy, tell me your favorites... Bomber Cutter <img src="https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/75549875/GalCiv3/Alpha/Ships/Iridium
Yeah, I noticed that the flip features do not seem to save. But rotate 180 on one of the things does actually seem to save. I went through all my designs and had to use the rotate feature instead.
[quote who="Tolan_Grimm" reply="49" id="3477764"]My other beef is Starports. The fact that they are separate from the planet itself on a map that bears no actual relation to distance, in my mind is pretty stupid. There are all sorts of questions that beg why this choice has been made, not the least of which is no one would build a starport anywhere but in orbit, and the L5 points in a system would be too near a planet to represent on a completely different hex/square. W
[quote who="Rovert10" reply="48" id="3477759"] Quoting parrottmath, reply 47 Quoting Lucky Jack, reply 43 Quoting parrottmath, reply 30If hexes were soooo good why don't we switch our coordinate system around the world to be hex based? It is completely plausible. The coordinate system we use for our world is neither squares or hexes, and is not comparable to either. Squares and hexes are flat (2 dimensional) and will not work on a sphere.<br
My eyes are sensitive to a light background with black text. I'm one of the few people who wear sunglasses on a cloudy day because it is still too bright for me. I prefer the darker backgrounds than the lighter ones. I really don't like wearing my sunglasses when I read the computer (but I've done that many times). The size of the font doesn't bother me either. I spend quite a bit of time reading small font daily. I probably don't have a high resolution running, 14
[quote who="Lucky Jack" reply="43" id="3477721"] Quoting parrottmath, reply 30If hexes were soooo good why don't we switch our coordinate system around the world to be hex based? It is completely plausible. The coordinate system we use for our world is neither squares or hexes, and is not comparable to either. Squares and hexes are flat (2 dimensional) and will not work on a sphere.[/quote] True, but then again we are not dealing with planar geometry are we.
There is no real advantage from using hexes vs. squares. The real advantage of squares is the ability to move from 2D to 3D and keeping a similar coordinate system in place. With hexagons you would be using Hexagonal prisms. When exploring dungeons I find that squares makes neater walls than hexagons. I find it interesting that people are so animate about squares vs. hexagons. I like squares due to the way I know how to navigate in the current world and the ease at which I can
They haven't finished all the Drengin ships. Looking at the files they are missing quite a few of them.
Great stuff.
Update: Noticed it was an .xml typo. Under ShipClassDefs.xml The iridium and other battleshipD class have the typo. ... IridiumBattleshipD ... DestroyerDBlueprint Should be BattleshipDBlueprint Of course their may be more to it
GalCiv3 Forums
I'm not sure if this dialogue is hidden at the moment because you are not finished with it, but is there a way of seeing what components are on a ship flying around in space. I would like to know what these lost ships or defenders have on them. If it is possible now, then I've not found a way to view this information.
You should be able to see everything, but it looks like the Drengin are missing their larger ships.
I decided to do a redesign for all the iridium ships as I'm playing through. Here is my remake of the sniper ship... Another angle... ... <img src="https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/75549875/GalCiv3/Alpha/Ships/2014-07-04_00003.jpg" alt=
Yes, I know the game is not chess, nor starcraft. But there are similarities to both. Each are a strategy game (including Gal Civ). Starcraft gives the ability to build up troops and defenses to destroy the enemy, similar to Gal Civ. There are other overarcing similarities that I could mention, but that is not the point of the analogy. My point is that with or without star ports the point that Drengin has guns in the beginning forces the condition you mention. It is not going to be a
Looking at the start screen I see these two techs. I think of Colonization as giving me the ability to colonize and Planetary improvements the ability to improve the planet. But Colonization is a Main tech tree, and Planetary Improvements gives me the ability to colonize. Shouldn't these tech names be switched. Giving the player the idea that if I want to improve the planet or deal with planet things select this tech category. Right now when I look at the initial races I see that
The lost scout ship looks a bit off... It appears the engines are facing the wrong way.
Elemental Forums