I think that an ideal balence of complexity for combat is a system where you can pre-determine the basic behaviors that your side uses, then the rest is left up to the computer. In any event, I think we need to focus on aspects of the game other than combat, as they are sorely in need of some enhancement.
Crap. Looks like this Condarf fellow beat me to it. Oh well, there goes my fortune and glory... Perhaps if some new art comes out, we can split it between the two of us?
I got bored over spring break, so I deciphered the language on the downloadable pictures. No-one else seems to have done this yet, so I thought I'd post my "findings". So far, I've only gotten through some of the "creatures" pictures, but it provieds a few hints as to the game, so here they are: ARACHNIDS: The captions read, starting at the top and going clockwise: woodspider, death spider, great spider. The smaller brown writing reads: All but the hearti
[quote]DSep, about you religion branch, you should include Athiesm.[/quote] Uhhh.... It's already in there. But now that you have brought it up ,what do the religions do, anyway?
Just got this one off of the Elemental forums: In the ship designer, instead of having the weapon and engine modules look like weapons and engines, but with the engine trail/beam/projectile coming from the center of the ship; have the weapon and engine models be extras, and have the weapon/engine itself be nothing more than an invisible point from which the FX would eminate.
Wouldn't hurt. Besides, " Globular Cluster Civilizations " probably wouldn't sell very well.[e digicons]:thumbsdown:[/e]
I would like to see stellar cartography be an improvement as opposed to a tech, as catalogueing(sp?) planets is more grunt work than cutting-edge technological research.
[quote]we certainly haven't come anywhere close to counting up the Earth-like planets in our galaxy,[/quote] True, but the technology exists to do it in a small group of stars, and as I saind earlier, the maps in GC2 are more like globular clusters than galaxies. From a tactical standpoint the maps work reasonably well. From an astronomical standpoint... they don't.
[quote]I even ran a tracert test and their server delayed on 25+ successive time-outs trying to open "Documents that contain no Data" from I-Mod site(s) -- any, even the wiki.[/quote] Your error message says that "documents contain no data"? That's odd... mine is a google poput that says the link "appears broken".
Wow. I can see that you haven't been as... conservative with your design as I have. I just took the GC2 tree, made it bigger, and tacked on a few extra features that may not be implemented due to technical reasons. This , on the other hand, looks entirely original. I wonder how it plays... In any case, what is "I-Mod Techviewer"? The site is still down for me, so I can't check myself.
Although I realise that it is important from the strategic side, the idea of fog-of-war hiding planets is quite rediculous. Here we are, hundreds of years behing Hyperdrive, and we already have telescopes capable of detecting Earth-like planets in other star systems! Granted, the data is hundreds of years out of date, but unless they get hit by something large and heavy, or have sentients with nukes and bad tempers, planets don't change that much in 100 years. I know that if we could
Although I am not familiar with the ultimate edition, it should go something like this: Go into your "My Programs" or "Program Files" folder (I think it's program files for Vista but am to lazy to go downstairs & check. It's wherever the data for all of your programs is stored) and open the "stardock games" folder. Go into whatever one has the files for GC2 (If you have no other Stardock games it will be the only folder) and look for the icon that starts the game. Note that this i
I tried that. It's too pixelated...
[quote]How about being able to research more than one tech. But at a cost. The number of turns to research a tech is for that tech alone. If you want to research two double, three triple, or something along those lines.[/quote] Actually, there is a slight problem with multi-tech system: if you research tech A, that takes 2 turns, and tech B, which takes 4 turns, and you research them one @ a time, you get tech A and its abilities in 2 turns; then 4 turns later (6 in total) you ge
Oooh! Since I am working on a tech tree myself, I will be watching this closely! It would be nice if you could get a larger picture... At the current resolution, I cannot read the names[e digicons]:'([/e] . Lemme guess: the tech victory is some sort of mutant, space-age Manhattan Project?
Check the Library. There are several races available for download there. Also, there are several mods at I-Mod productions ( www.i-mod-productions.com ) provided that you do not live in Ohio or some parts of Canada, as there are problems for people connecting from these locations...
Alwasy on the lookout for new mods (primerilty b/c I am working on a few myself!). I'd be willing to try it if it was "published".
[quote]I'd like to see there be more to planetary invasion than just throwing transports at it. Strategic control of ground forces, seizing a planet district by district, or even building a colony in an undeveloped region and coexisting, if your into all that peaceful coexistence stuff.[/quote] I understand Zyx had something like this a few pages back: https://forums.galciv2.com/328231/page/17/#replies
[quote]Unification - Better than the current diplo win, I guess. Harder, anyway.[/quote] Yes, basically what I am trying to do here is boost diplo from a simple distraction, like esbionage, to a full-formed victory strategy. That is why I made the others so powerful.
True, which brings up another point: information bartering. You should be able to trade esbionage data, both with the race that you are getting the data on, and others that have it. Over all, I cannot say enough times that esbionage MUST be expanded from the mindless, fairly irrelevent system it is now.
[quote]But don't you dare limit my civ-level spying.[/quote] Would it help if you had that information available upon request? It seems like a reasonable thing for two allies to agree on, and would basically moot civ-level spying...
[quote]If this is a suggestion, I don't disagree with it.[/quote] I have to agree with you there. While we're on the topic of Alliances, I would like to suggest a "degree" system for alliances: Non-Agression Pact: Planets don't culture-flip to the other guy, neither can spy on the other, get a diplo "+", overwhelming influence/warmonger "-"s don't hurt relations w/ them, untrustworthy doesn't hurt q
[quote]Nope. Any diplomatic calls are submitted to the per/#/turns/caprule[/quote] Are you SURE?.... I distincly remember talking to the same AI twice in two turns... in TOTA . Haven't really played DA since I got Twilight, so it may be just a matter of version, but... Also, I think a middle ground where you don't have tobuild an entire ship, but it still takes time could work. If memory serves, Spore used something similar...
[quote]you can only speak to the AIs once per 8 turns (4 if you're super diplomat), which I've heard there is a loophole in but have never managed to find it[/quote] I think it is that you can only actually make any deal with the AI once every 8 turns. If memory serves, you can speak with them any time you want, but the timer starts after you trade something. Also, from a purely tactical point of view, who says you would need ships to carry resources? The effect could be inst
Sounds good.
GalCiv2 Forums
Elemental Forums