Hey there! There will be a keypad, and you'll be able to make your own parts by combining existing ones and saving that as a full part. You won't be able to "saw" parts in half though as far as I know :( Your english is decent too! Just a few words wrong here and there.
ParagonRenegade
[quote who="perigrine23" reply="31" id="3473749"] Because you should be able to be good at anything if you devote your whole civ to it. If you want to sacrifice the other aspects of your civ to pump out ideology, well then you should be able to be good at ideology.[/quote] You'll be able to max out the tree with just events on the larger maps, easily. The ideologies as-is also directly contradict each other, so adopting all of them leads
[quote who="perigrine23" reply="28" id="3473478"] 2) If you focus your civ on pumping out ideology you should be able to climb all the trees.[/quote] Why? What makes you think this is a good thing?
I wouldn't mind something like this in, say, Distant Worlds, but it wouldn't fit here for a multitude of reasons. I have to disagree.
They better have Bespin Platforms, Kashyyyk Docks and Rhen Var Harbor, or I will unleash havoc on my undergarments.
[quote who="perigrine23" reply="23" id="3473129"] Have you actually tried climbing up multiple trees? Because I did and it became impractical fast. The game mechanic is balanced as it is. There is no real advantage in pursuing multiple trees. It becomes cost-prohibitive fast and you won't be able to reach the higher tiers without spending all your production building and destroying improvements that grant ideology on completion.[/quote] On current maps. </
[quote who="Jarac" reply="16" id="3472719"] I like the idea. One thing I will say though, is that at a certain point if you pursue Malice more than Benevolence and vice versa, it should lock you out of the other tree. After all they are complete opposites. It wouldn't make sense if you tried to pursue both Benevolence and Malice, because I think that would destabilize the hell out of a nation in real life (would be an interesting thing to see). I think both of the extremes can work
One thing I intesely dislike is the fog of war, it needs a visual overhaul. I know, small, piddly little thing, but you see so much of it, it needs to look passable.
!!!! I'm on the verge of using my ass as a musical instrument, I'm so excited! Better be good! And show planets this time!
[quote who="Gaunathor" reply="12" id="3472437"] And I'm not a fan of hard caps: "I'm going to build a huge trade network. My bank account will grow bigger and bigger, and I'll buy planets left and right. And there is nothing anyone can do to prevent it, because nobody will dare to declare war on me, for fear of ruining their economy. Mwuahahaha! What, I can only have 12 trade routes? Damn, foiled again!" Seriously, what was up with that? Trade was already one of th
[quote who="Gaunathor" reply="8" id="3472323"] 1. We are currently in alpha. The amount of Ideology-points we can get at the moment is probably much higher than what it will be in the final game, just so we can test everything.[/quote] I'll reserve judgement until the game is released, I try to make few assumptions, aside from my current "assume the worst" [quote]2. There will be more picks per tier.[/quote] I understand. I act
[quote who="Gaunathor" reply="6" id="3472273"] Edit: Yep, it was in the third one. First question answered, no less. Based on what Paul Boyer said, it doesn't sound like that big of an issue (or even that easily doable). At least, once everything they have planned is implemented.[/quote] When a game dev says "It shouldn't be an issue" when it comes to 'exploits', expect it to become an issue. :3
[quote who="OsirisDawn" reply="4" id="3472207"] While i like the gamist idea of that and the effort you put into it, i wonder why you would want to hardcode that. If you want to RP your empire go for it, but dont restrain those, that dont want to RP or otherwise specialize. "This is bad because it means that those that specialize, or otherwise RP their civilizations will be put at an extreme disadvantage for not pursuing all three branches. Specialization should be rewarded,
Yo dawgs. It just suddenly came to me in a flash of inspiration; the alignment trees need to be limited in a way. Look at my mock-up of how they are currently; (I'm a professional artist as you can see) As it stands, you can select whatever you want from the trees so long as you have the requisite amount of points from random events and
Sounds hilariously OP. Would need to be heavily limited in some way.
We're currently limited to the small maps because of the way ships are rendered. Bigger maps should be out in a month or so, possibly with the next large update this month. :) Are you the same guy from Steam I was arguing with over where you bought it? lol. Sorry for being an asshole earlier.
I'm a sadist with these special events; I love them, and more are always better.
[quote who="Lucky Jack" reply="11" id="3471114"] Quoting ParagonRenegade, reply 10Play a game on suicidal, that's the best tutorial there is. PR, how can you be so cruel. Better to start at an easier level that isn't so sadistically hard for someone new to the mechanics.[/quote] Losing is the world's best motivator :3 Honestly, Suicidal isn't that hard, you just need to maximize your production. Lower difficulties, even for lower players
[quote who="Rik811" reply="9" id="3471111"] WOW! And I'm not even talking about GC III. (I promise to stay on message in the future). My WOW is about GC II that I just got, and more specifically about the TUTORIALS! I am a great believer in good tutorials for games, and the set with GC II is very impressive. Now, on subject, I know that "tutorials" are something for late beta testing, I would just make the point to make the GC III tutorials at least equ
You didn't talk about planets at all :( Ah well, a week to go
[quote who="WarfishExile" reply="21" id="3470905"] What would be really cool is if there was some steam workshop stuff where people could share ships, civ's, content, game models, etc. Like someone could make that for the game, and then it would be a workshop thing.[/quote] They'll have full workshop support by release :3
Quite the DARCAstic thread we have here. I'm fine with big robots as ground forces, so long as they are given a handwave and a semi-plausible explanation. For instance, in Mass Effect, Reapers (huge metal space Cthulhus the size of small mountains) can land on planets because they can project an intense mass-reduction field, making them nearly weightless/much lighter when exposed to gravity, where they would otherwise fall apart/mangle the ground. I'm fine with the abo
[quote who="WarfishExile" reply="6" id="3470631"] I only became a Founder recently, so I wouldn't know.[/quote] You'll soon discover how little taste we have, and how much DARCA spams. You have to see it to believe it.
[quote who="WarfishExile" reply="2" id="3470611"] I mean some of it is cool, but most of it seems wierd considering the fact that you are supposed to be ruling an interstellar empire. I'm not saying get rid of it, I'm just saying that now that the game looks and feels more intense, that the humor will have to match.[/quote] This isn't Warhammer 40K, the game isn't all bleakness and endless war. Without the humor, it'd end up like Endless Space
[quote who="Habarca" reply="3" id="3470602"] Thank you for the quick replies; it's what I suspected. But a post from March was complaining about FPS in what I gathered was a large fleet action (?) on a i7. (Heck I haven't even found a way to check FPS yet- sure it's there but I don't see the point yet. Game plays smooth on my Xeon from '07)[/quote] We had/have a bunch of optimization problems, being an alpha and all, which could/can make even general gameplay