[quote who="eviator" reply="1" id="3620698"] Look two threads down... [/quote] Yeah... it's definitely not appearing anywhere on the forum, at least for me. And I still say this after getting a working link. [quote who="Moat_Man" reply="2" id="3620700"] https://forums.galciv3.com/475427/page/1/ [/quote] Thanks!
Google has failed me, and I don't see anything obvious on the forum that isn't locked away from non-founders.
I doubt I need to convince anyone that as of v1.5, the diplomacy system needs a lot of work. I've put some thought into how to make it better, though. What I've written here is a selection of what I consider to be the biggest flaws in the current diplo system, along with suggested mechanical and balance changes to address those problems. It's not a complete list of issues, nor of possible improvements, so by all means, add your own suggestions. &nb
GalCiv3 Forums
[quote who="eviator" reply="36" id="3616706"] I don't know how many of you have 6000 credits lying around in order to purchase one large ship. By the time I have that many credits I'm building huge hull ships in one to three turns. Conclusion: like most costs in this game mercenary ships are out of scale and will rarely be used because it's not economical. [/quote] It's probably worth noting that the 6,000 credit ship in the screenshot appears
GalCiv3 Forums
[quote who="Go4Celerity" reply="28" id="3616683"] My last session with GalCiv3 ended in a rage quit when a vanilla AI colony ship with stacked engines snatched up a planet in my ZOI that I was 1 turn away from colonizing. I don't stack engines or sensors and I can no longer bring myself to play the game as is. If and until it's addressed I won't be purchasing content for GalCiv3. [/quote] Why would you consider it a bad thing that the AI made a&nbs
[quote who="Icemaniaa" reply="3" id="3616496"] Oh now that's a good idea ... a single world Godlike challenge ... without using this exploit! [/quote] Alliance victory would be pretty much the same, I imagine. Ascension victories should be pretty much the same, except you'd have less buying power to get the crystals you couldn't claim directly. I bet tech would be doable, especially if using the Ancient trait to get ridiculous research bonuses from relic h
GalCiv3 Forums
Sounds like I do things a bit differently than you (godlike, typically medium or large maps. Alliances victories off, since they're too easy). I prefer to start out with heavy research for a few turns to get Interstellar Travel ASAP, rushbuying some early planetary improvements. I think I've decided it's better to wait for colony ships with hyperdrives plus, since the extra movement will save more time in the end. Then, I rushbuy a couple of those while focusing on social producti
[quote who="Coggy" reply="5" id="3616373"] They really need to work on this logic. The AI is all to quick to declare war. There are usually other civs just as close and often weaker, but they all decide to declare war on only me! And no matter how large my map, I always seem to be set close to those darn ugly Krynn. They and the Terrans always want to quickly declare war on me. Even when I trade with them to keep them pacified. And I'm constantly building warships b
This is a little trick I came up with after one of my capital ships got trapped when several neutral AIs randomly decided to permanently park their ships next to mine. The concept is extremely simple: station a ring of non-military ships around a shipyard, and then the ships inside can't get out unless the owner declares war and breaks the blockade. Unsurprisingly, the AI doesn't know to build a new shipyard in order to counter this ploy. If you block all the race's shipyards, you
The AI isn't really trying to win, but rather to simulate a civilization. Chances are, they liked the Thalans better than you. It's also possible someone else bribed them to declare on you, and in that case, they wouldn't really care that they couldn't reach you. All that said, yeah, distance to the target should be a factor when conquest is the goal. This seems like another case where it shows that game really wasn't designed to be played on the largest maps.
[quote who="Chibiabos" reply="6" id="3615983"] Quoting iangoth, reply 2 I think it's pretty clear/logical. Your stuff is all on the left, so the stuff you give up goes in the left box. That's not to say the interface is perfect. The ship design menus need the most work, IMO. There needs to be some way to sort and f
I think it's pretty clear/logical. Your stuff is all on the left, so the stuff you give up goes in the left box. That's not to say the interface is perfect. The ship design menus need the most work, IMO. There needs to be some way to sort and filter all the designs. I'd really appreciate an "upgrade design" button, where you update the components, then it's automatically named and saved as a successor to the previous design, which is now hidden from view. Then, next time you p
I've been looking at the XMLs a little bit myself, and if I understand it right, it seems that there's a minimum of 3 crystals, no matter what the map size or relic frequency, so the worst tiny map should be better for ascension than either of the two games I mentioned. It looks like there's no hard limit on the number of crystals. I think there may be some potential in the very large maps, because the point requirement increases by a flat 1000 per map size, which (past small or m
I bet you could force it to be better than tech with garbage planet settings. Your research ability scales with the number and quality of your planets, of course, but you don't need that much production to pump out a few constructors. Turning off tech trading would slow down the tech victory quite a bit, as well. To try to make this all a little more concrete, does anyone know the maximum possible ascension crystals on each map size?
This is something I've been wondering about lately, since I've played two games in a row now where I set out from the beginning to get an Ascension victory with settings I thought were favorable to that victory condition (medium map, godlike difficulty, abundant crystals, normal tech speed). Both maps generated 5 crystals, and as far as I can tell, at most you get 5 points per turn from one crystal. That means, even if you were gifted all the techs and necessary starbases on turn 1, i
I can't find any really detailed info on the subject, but it looks like small ships are relatively efficient in terms of capacity per point of logistics, only being beaten out by huge ships. Hyperion Logistics or some other logistics bonus could allow you to field massive fleets of small/tiny ships, where medium+ ships wouldn't be affected as dramatically. And of course, there's always those situations where you just have 2-3 points of space left in your fleet. I also susp
It's worth noting that it's harder to get the economy going on the bigger maps because the tourism function works differently. As a test, I started a game on a tiny map with 2 opponents and got 80bc due to tourism on turn 1. On a gigantic map, with the same race and number of opponents, I got just 4bc. You can take some solace in the fact that the low tourism hurts the AI, too. If you don't mind using slightly exploitative tactics, you can keep your economy
Athletes get paid to play because people will pay to watch. It's not a matter of what's "fair," it's what's profitable. E-Sports can be commercially viable (like Korean Starcraft, as Aegix mentioned), but the games need a very large and dedicated following, and they need staying power, because it's not worth the effort to spend several years building up a league only to watch it die as the fanbase moves on to some shiny new game. The major spectator sports like baseball an
I was playing the Korx, but I decided to pay to be Good for diplomatic reasons. Early in the game, I decided I wanted an alliance victory, which probably meant I'd have to wipe out the two evil races and maybe one or two of the neutrals. I already bought these races down to three to four worlds each, so using terror stars to blow them up was actually fairly practical. Then I thought, "Why do things halfway?" so I built terror stars in my allies' space, too. Blew up all nine opponents,
Well, I downloaded a hex editor and successfully edited the save file. Got it on the first try, actually, so it only took like 30 minutes to figure out. For posterity's sake, here's what I did: in a hex editor, ctrl-f "Xeno Influence Module." Here's a portion of the data from just before the text: 00 00 00 00 8F 01 00 00 15 00 00 00 58 65 6E 6F 20 49 6E 66 6C 75 65 6E 63 65 20 4D 6F 64 75 6C 65 10 00 00 00 54 68 61 6C 61 6E 20 49 6E 66 6C 75 65 6E 63 65 41 00 00 00
Well, the game's not totally shot. I should still win, anyway. Would've been nice if there was a relatively easy, fix, though. Thanks for the help!
Thanks for the response. You don't by any chance know how to edit the save file directly, do you?
Yesterday I started a game as the Thalans and decided to go Good, in part to do some culture flipping with the 100% influence starbase module they get off xeno influence. Needless to say, I was pretty frustrated when halfway through the game I figured out that the xeno influence module erroneously requires the insurrection coordinator module, which the Thalans don't get. It didn't take too long to find and eliminate the offending line in the xml file, but I still can't build the x
GalCiv2 Forums