I have a better suggestion.... Rather than go the route of just a base increase in speed.... early game speed and life support should make things a struggle.. add engine research technologies... Hyperdrive>Ion Drive>Impulse Drive>Warp Drive>Slip Stream Drive> Hyper Warp Drive> Stellar Folder etc.. it they adjusted the cost down slightly this would give us more control o
Hello Gehennas... good to see you out of the molten core... I think if you read through the forums... almost all of your issues have been touched on my the Devs.... UI and AI improvments due out in 1.4 and 1.5 should help a lot with some of your comments. also... the first few games are major learning curve games. I'd suggest playing through the campaign or some smaller maps, as the changes between GCII and
Honestly, I disagree... On the larger maps spending the money to research ship speed is essential. and having things be massively far apart makes the player plan more. If the ships could easily move across the map in one turn that would really mess with defensive lines and what not...
your formula totally removes morale from the main thing it should impact.... while sex is a distraction from stress and low "contentment" it is also at least in real earth science proven that unhappy people have lower fertility... lower sperm counts and higher chances of miscarriage.... Personally I think there should be higher bonus pop growth tied to "happy" and really severe pop loss to low morale (suicides etc) Again
in GCII it made sense to focus on one weapon tree and max out that weapon tree. In GCIII because of the tech ages and costs... as well as the way shipyards and starbases work, it is often advantageous to have all three types of weapons... I think the game designers need to work on the focus's so that one TYPE of weapon is stronger, but then also change how those weapons are used... as noted... Missles.. big bad long range ship kille
hmmm that's an interesting thought. Either way, thrusters need some documentation so we know if they are worth the space on a ship. from what I've seen, they are not.
Tried that... but with the loony combat system... unless I made the exact same fleet and made them fight each other... I'd not really be able to see WHY the ships are attacking ship A not Ship B I do know that it does increase miss chance... but how much? if each level of thruster increased the miss chance by x% then I could honestly see a reason for them... depending on how great the chance is... <
So... I've built several different ships with multiple different roles just to test things out and see if I could see results first hand. As far as I can tell... thrusters really don't matter... at all. I know they are supposed to affect miss chance and how quickly ships can move into range... But in practice, it does not seem to do much. Does anyone actively use Thrusters?
They just need an algorithm that targets ships based on ease of kill vs threat to me. whichever is bigger is the ship that is attacked. The class roles are good. Add a carrier role and limit support only to ships with no weapons and the roles work as they tell the ship how to behave in combat... rush in or stay back etc... But as far as targeting goes the game should look at kill/be killed by ratios. if I have a ship with 50 b
Rather than remove it, they should have just re-added the color shading... First level teraformalble spots are shaded light blue 2nd level = teal 3rd level = green 4th level = yellow 5th level orange max level = red the Altarians should have been given a few things like the biosphere manipulator that would terriform any three or four adjacent tiles... any tiles.. this would prob
GalCiv3 Forums
WOOT
[quote who="naselus" reply="13" id="3589402"] Quoting Frogboy, reply 12 But I do not like the command economy style we have now where our citizens are treated like robots working at the command of the supreme dictator. Simple solution to that. Rename 'Production' to 'Tax Inco
And THIS! THIS!!! is why I love Stardock.. Thank you for directly replying in this thread Brad. It means a lot. I've not had a lot of chance to play as much as I'd like to have in the past few months... and I am not following the forums as closely as I did during Beta... so I am sorry if my rant was a bit harsh... I just... find myself flustered by seeing what co
GCII was balanced by economy/money production... Large planets with massive factories were possible, but they were crazy expensive to build. I think the adjacency bonuses were not factored in very well when they decided what each level of improvement would cost to build/maintain. System wide I think maintenance and upkeep costs should be higher... Moral needs to be made much more important... so that
oh... and before anyone accuses me of not really playing the game or not understanding the universe... I joined this forum in 2002... I've played every version of GC including the Os2 version.. GCIII has a lot of promise... but right now it just does not live up to the promise at all.
Honestly the pure min maxing that the game currently favors is flustering... and it removes any engagement with the game... I'm not a space Emperor leading a civilization... I am a guy playing a computer game... Why? cause Knowing how the game works I make counter-intuitive choices to maximize the efficiency of the game... there is nothing about the game that actually feels like your choices are affecting an empire or a nation...
1 Alterians did not get it. 2. People chose greed and waited to terriform until they got it so they could maximize terriforming. this was never the intent and it created a "race for X tech" that the devs didn't like.
GalCiv3 Forums
While this is well and true, it was not nearly so broken in earlier versions of the game... it was crazy expensive to build planets with pure focuses. I really think they need to make there be something that makes the pure min-max functionally bad for the player. Events that punish a player for doing it for example... X planet with 15 factories just imploded due to over mining... it is now a lvl 4 planet with no
GalCiv3 Forums
GCIII is a min-maxxer's paradise. This is both frustrating and easily gameable. The game becomes more about gaming the game than actually ruling an empire. Examples are easy to spot and everyone basically posts on aspects of this. From having escort ships that have nothing but defense with a fleet of ships with nothing but weapons.. to planets that focus on only manufacturing, or only research. There NEEDS to be some sort of bal
GalCiv3 Forums
I prefer to run an unmodded game. I agree diminishing returns for high population are really not needed.... provided that the "it is too crowded' hit to happiness from GCII were implemented and the moral hits were improved. The biggest issue I have is that with extra large maps it is nearly impossible to keep my population happy with the current large empire penalty. yet even with a lot of my planets at 0% content... my pr
GalCiv3 Forums
It seems to me that the game is balanced for smaller maps. This balance breaks down fairly quickly on the larger maps and does not scale at all into the insane or super large maps. First things first. 1 pop = 1 production. This should be true only for the Capitol planets or with Civ Unique or Galaxy unique improvements. Or perhaps something that can be purchased as a racial tr
it should be more harsh.... up to revolt level -100% production/research and possibly as much as a -10% population loss rate. Granted to do this they would have to make the large empire penalty actually work right...
I really hope they get moral to do something soon.... In GCII having low moral would slow down your population growth... and even lead to population loss. Why this is not in GC3 is beyond me. People are focusing on min-maxing and gaming the game so much that reading these forums is turning into a killjoy.
A lot of this would be fixed with prioritization of targets..... Gratuitous Space Battles is a good example of something I could see them building into GC... the tactical design on the strategic level. There should be a fleet control page that opens up when you double click on a ship. This will function similarly to the planet control page... and allow the player to assign additional rolls, range commands, and targets.<
[quote who="Meglobob" reply="8" id="3549704"] Well personally, my only issue with GC3 is its still a MASSIVE resource hog. Which, given its a TBS game it doesn't need to be. I was around day 1 of GC2 and that was exactly the same a MASSIVE resource hog but with patches became very streamlined and took less and less resources up to run.</sp