Would it be possible to play the game after you've won? - Conquest victory Note much changes; you're alone - Diplomatic Not much changes; can you hold alliance? - Quest victory Give a buff to reflect your new found power - Spell of making victory Give a buff for the shards that you now control and a nerf to all other factions?
It seems that changing 5.0000 from 4 does the trick. Edit: 6.0000 does not work at all. Looks like 5 is the upper limit. [quote who="Primal_Savage" reply="581" id="3441447"] Reduced 78%Original 500 x 563[/quote] Meow.
Thanks for the modding help. Will give it a shot. +Karma Yeah I was hoping for something like that: Aiming for something where one faction would, as a bonus, get one additional trait.
Does anybody know if there's a way to make units be able to have more than 3 abilities in the design stage? I tried looking in the ElementalDefs - nothing. All I could find is that the accessories was limited to 4 by default: 4 But nothing about abilities. Is it hardcoded?
I would like to see a more potent than usual "huge" or whatever the top hull size is hull at the end of the game.
I'd recommend at some point submitting this to Stardock for them to look at and maybe making this officially patched.
[quote who="Rudy_102" reply="32" id="3441242"] I hope it won't have Disciples 3 syndrome.[/quote] What's that syndrome? I've never played that game. Either way, until we see the game, its going to be very hard to make any judgements on it. These trailers are obviously to build hype. So far some not so successful games have done that too - like Rome 2 and SOTS 2. We need to see the final game before making a
GalCiv3 Forums
[quote who="satoru1" reply="9" id="3441277"] Look I love Alpha Centauri. It's an awesome game But dear god that games NEEDS STREAMLINING. The UI is mind numbing and too much click micro. "Streamline" != "making the game stupid" It's about making each choice a meaningful chioce, instead of giving you 100 stupid choicses that have no clear consequence. Having more junk to do, doesn't make the game more 'complex' it just makes it 'co
Building rotation and building placement have been buggy for quite some time now.
[quote who="Frogboy" reply="56" id="3438792"] Here's a screenshot from in-game. It's a Yor ship built by one of the guys on the team. Reduced 72%Original 697 x 608 We're still relatively early with our lighting and effects but as you can see, the unit is self shadowing and the light bonces off the materials. BTW, this is with no anti-aliasing.[/quote] During the subsequent expansions, will
That would be universal. I was looking for something that would affect 1 faction. I tried putting this on the sovereign: Resource <Attribute>
GalCiv3 Forums
It would seem that there is now an "I really don't want tactical combat crowd". But yeah, I support tactical battles as well. [quote who="Fate" reply="42" id="3440133"] It's a testament to how much we all love this franchise that we keep having animated discussions about this, but perhaps if the mods could pin this post with Brads response in it and kill off all other posts like this we could avoid this cycle of community fracturing fun!
Heroes would be a cool idea - it would certainly add some flair to the game.
Fighters and carriers implies some sort of tactical combat, which the game currently does not have (although I wish it did). Otherwise, what advantage would fighters convey?
What is it like? I've been playing on a 2560x1440 monitor and sometimes, things are small, like the windows and the minimap.
Is there any way to get the first city that you start with to be level 2? Or subsequent cities? And to automatically trigger the fortress/town/conclave script?
[quote who="Ryat" reply="9" id="3441047"] Admirals will be required to build fleets. *backs out of room quickly*[/quote] Yep - don't want to repeat the SOTS 2 disaster. Admirals should be optional and grant bonuses ... if present at all.
Totally off topic, but do you see something like this ever happening for GC3? I know it's way too soon to ask? Other thoughts: - Right now Torian seems to be a very consistently powerful force. More powerful than I'd like, but not at the boundary of "OP".
GalCiv3 Forums
[quote who="Voqar" reply="29" id="3440826"] Actually my biggest fear with GC3 is the MOO3 syndrome. [/quote] I'm not overly worried about that. Look at the screenshots, the types of discussions going on here. It's not going to re-invent everything. It's mostly an incremental update and newer graphics. Only real concern is that the game is stable on launch and Elemental's tragedy is not repea
GalCiv3 Forums
With the exception of sleepyx732 , I don't think anybody has suggested dumbing down the game. Most suggestions here have been for new things, like tactical combat, expanding on existing things, or making certain things more user-friendly, like the tech tree, and starbases.
Other options may include a favored gravity. Essentially, larger planets would have: - More space, but better suited for higher gravity aliens - Bonus for soldiering against lower gravity types maybe In return, there could be tradeoffs, like the random number generator making fewer ideal planets for higher gravity races.
[quote who="Gaunathor" reply="2" id="3436716"] Fleets can now dock at a starbase, much like they can garrison friendly planets. Nice! That should make it much easier to defend them. Although, I'm still hoping, that starbases will be able to put up more of a fight this time around. They were rather easy to destroy in GalCiv 2.[/quote] What starbases need to do is to 1. Scale with technology, especially against late game f
GalCiv3 Forums
[quote who="Tridus" reply="19" id="3440409"] It'd also be a valuable lesson - next time, don't buy something based on expectations that are in your head, rather than what they're actually building. That's a recipe for disappointment. (I do kind of like how we have people complaining that this game isn't enough like Master of Orion due to the tactical combat situation, and now there's someone complaining that it's too much like Master of Orion.
The Drengin need some redeemable qualities. I think that they're well, too stereotypical evil so to speak.
[quote who="mogthew" reply="394" id="3431159"] I think I'm late in replying to this but anyway. You evidently don't know anything about programming, I do, and I've done AI programming before. Just because you don't understand it doesn't mean it can't be done, don't be so arrogant. The AI can be made competent with time and it is not a valid reason for it not to be included. If you'd like a more in depth discus
Elemental Forums
Sins Forums