*que complaints about exclusive (Day One) DLC over on the Steam forums* *drinks their delicious tears of rage* [e digicons]}:)[/e] === What's that? Sorry, some dude who takes far too many mavelovent traits took over my computer for a second. Don't know how he got there, frankly. :p Anyway, thanks for the bouns free DLC. It is absolutely most appreciated by this player who can't desgin ships in the slightest
[quote who="androshalforc" reply="2" id="3547746"] something broke rally points and they were working fine on the weekend [/quote] Hmmm. I just tested one on a brand new game and it worked. Did you load an old save by any chance?
[quote who="androshalforc" reply="80" id="3547678"]did they fix the prerequisites as well i noticed it was in but they had the pre-req listed as life support which the yor dont get [/quote] Yes, they did. It now requires one of the Logistical Optimization specializations (Advanced Logistics/Operational Range/Sustainable Shipyards). Support Field Mastery is an Age of War tech (as standard for most factions) while Exploration Extension is an Age of Ascension tech (d
Looks like it. ;)
[quote who="jnpoint" reply="29" id="3547585"] I'm almost sad. It has been fun to follow the Development, and now it is almost over. [/quote] "Over"? Did you say [b]"OVER"[/b]? Nothing is over until we say it is! Was it over when EA nuked Van Buren? HELL NO! (EA?? [e digicons] (Forget it, he's rolling)
GalCiv3 Forums
[quote who="Theeannon" reply="5" id="3547466"] Why is that so complicated (hover over empty (?!) space???) and not just displayed somewhere? Nobody new will be able to find that. [/quote] How do you think I found it in the first place? :) It was a new feature as of Beta 6 and it was indeed found by happenstance. But how to find the info will probably be put in what ever manual comes out and/or the brand new wiki that's been created.
It seems to be much rarer than it was before, but I got my first instance of it under .97 earlier today. It seem to me that it only appears when I've been running the game a long time, which suggests some sort of corruption error. I wonder if there is anything interesting in the debug.err file when this occurs. I think I'll take a peek at it the next time it happens to me (if it does).
GalCiv3 Forums
I'm asking because now that pirates (both regular and anomaly) have beam weapons, it appears that anomaly pirates will chew up the initial survey ship for dinner. 25 hps per ship and having to fighting through three of them can leave the survey ship something of a sitting duck. IIRC, when the initial survey ship was given attack and defense, pirates attacked with mass driver weapons, so it made sense for the survey ship to have armor. But now they can be taking enormous
It's not in the notes, but the Yor Tech Tree now has the starbase area of effect extension techs! WhooHoo! [e digicons]B)[/e]
Well, you see, when you're upbeat and positive about things, Happy Gas just makes you feel five times better than you were. But when you have to wait in line 10 hours to get it because supplies are low, man, that's the worst. And when you get it, you find it's just stale, flat, and down right disgusting because all the good stuff's already been used. Nothing worse than flat, tepid, Happy Gas, I tells ya. No wonder it actually increases unhappiness!&nb
[quote]Fixed an issue where the Approval Relic wasn't showing its bonuses [/quote] *checks* [b]HOORAY!!!![/b] [e digicons]B)[/e] It's getting the 10% bonus per module! Happy day! :D I can now delete my extra small mod I've been running with for the last week or so, :)
[quote who="JorgenCAB" reply="30" id="3547204"]When it comes to influence I actually think you might hit some other victory conditions before the influence one on an insane map. When you have like a few hundred planets you should be able to get a research victory condition sooner than an influence one. I guess the game need some balance approaches on the bigger maps. [/quote] Of course, the other victory conditions can always be turned off. :) As for the conquest bit I
[quote who="kestlstw" reply="28" id="3547194"] Personally I plan on modding out the LEP and will probably set Patriotic to be +3 goods and services modifier, something that will be nice but not too powerful. [/quote] In case I (or others) ever decide to fiddle with it myself, which XML contains the LEP?
BTW, I'm actually testing an Insane Map game with the current rule set with the sole tweak being to Approval Relics (made it so I was receiving the 10% boost per module as described in the tooltip). Most of my planets are currently just under 9b population. At the moment, and with the techs and starbase modules I have, I reckon I can get 82 planets or so in my empire before I start taking a hit on morale (I intentionally bee lined to get as much boost to my morale as possibl
[quote who="JorgenCAB" reply="25" id="3547177"]Both of those victory conditions should still possible. Conquest are certainly possible and influence will require some serious effort into approval to pull off.[/quote] On a map with 1500 planets? OK, on influence, you won't have to flip all of them. But Conquest? Unless one goes on a serious Destroy Colony spree, [b]OR[/b] one is Malevolent (the aforementioned trait), I think it remains to be seen. More imp
[quote who="JorgenCAB" reply="23" id="3547152"] To be honest I'm actually fine with the notion that having a large number of planets on bigger maps will get very hard after a while. If we might get to have 100-200 planets but more is impossible I'm fine with that. I see no reason why populating half or more of an insane map should be needed. [/quote] *cough* Conquest victory. *cough* Influence victory. *cough* --
GalCiv3 Forums
[quote who="Derek Paxton" reply="1" id="3547164"] That isn't a visual bug, just a large orange nebula in the background map that is making it look like that (if you spin the camera around you will see the nebulas edges). It is really big and really orange so I understand your comment, but it is working as designed. [/quote] I suspected it might be that, as I saw the background image change occasionally. Now that I move the camera around, I see tha
Simple enough question. :) To expand, the rest of the tech tree was opened up recently, so there might be some unresolved issues to be found, especially in the later sections of the tech tree where there might not have been enough testing. One of them might be the tech Superior Recreation which grants the starbase module Zero G Arena which grants +5 to Morale. It takes two construction modules to make (which is expected for some of the "capstone" modules). However, I n
GalCiv3 Forums
First off, this is a [b]random bug[/b] that is cleared by reloading, so sending in a save file and a ticket on it might not be very helpful. But, if directed, I can send one in anyway when it happens. Ever since the graphics were tweaked a while back, I can get a very bright orangey swirl in the background with a very washed out foreground. This is very hard on the eyes, and, subjectively, pretty ugly. A reload or two will usually clear it, though sometimes I have to
GalCiv3 Forums
I've seen a couple of other people mention this, and with the Gold Master coming, I thought I should highlight this as well. The Nebula is supposed to give a percentage chance to go in the wrong direction when traveling through it. For a while now (since Beta 5?), this doesn't seem to be happening. It [b]does[/b] cut down on the sensor visibility, as expected. But one can move in any ol' direction whilst in the cloud without getting lost. EDIT: &nbs
One of the issues here is I think there is a bug in the precouser relic system where it is supposed to top out at +5 instead of the current +9. It has been a long time since I've been able to get a game to the point where it matters (starting over and over again has its disadvantages), but I seem to recall being able to build the +4 resource extraction module and the +5 one at the same time. I strongly suspect the +5 is supposed to require the +4 as a prerequisite and override it like almost a
GalCiv3 Forums
[quote who="JorgenCAB" reply="14" id="3546891"]There is always the projects and money that can refocus worlds or help them develop. I don't see how the individual focus of planets really is necessary. [/quote] It's mostly necessary for solo worlds tiles and tiles away from anything else that you still want to sponsor a shipyard with. Say I have a planet in the middle of nowhere that only has five or seven usable tiles before tile improvements come in (and even then,
GalCiv3 Forums
[quote who="JorgenCAB" reply="12" id="3546881"]Again... remove the individual planetary focusing wheels and keep the projects is my solution to it. [/quote] Please no. A thousand times no. Not with the way economy works in GC III. Each planet is dependent on its own resources for building things instead of tapping into the empire wide resource/tax base. This means it can be [u]critical[/u] to make sure some planets are more focused on production than, say, research. &
GalCiv3 Forums
As of the last update to Beta 6, all planetary projects are now percentage based, OK. No real philosophical problem there, I suppose. Except. Except in the case where one is running a "pure" speciality planet. Then one is hosed if one runs a research or economic project. For instance, on planets that will be my main supplier to shipyards, I often will run 50:50:0 manufacturing to research to net income. On shipyard supplying planets that are r
The other point to consider here is, unless one restricts ships to "one combat per turn" (and [u]THAT[/u] would send [b]FAR MORE[/b] people howling), it's a kinda useless mechanic. Oh, my pirate opponent managed to get away. No bother, I'll just kill him with the five moves I have remaining. Unless one attacks on their last movement point, it just becomes a tedious "move sink" to deal with people who survive a battle. Not saying that it can't be loo