SorrowKnight

SorrowKnight

Joined Member # 5762853
5 Posts 16 Replies 246 Reputation

Well... I`m really sorry about this, may be, very stupid question, but... please explain me how to post created content in Steam Workshop?

1 Replies 24,865 Views

I`ve played in GC3 185 hours whith about 20 hours of multiplayer, and... there are some triubles whith trading: 1. In diplomacy there is variant to buy almost all(!) planets and\or starbases from any other faction for almost nothing. So anyone could dramatically expand his territory whithout any difficulties. I think that planets should not be tradeable, or at last they shoud be MUCH MORE expencive (about 1000 times to present situation). Starbases also should not be tradeable, except

0 Replies 11,769 Views

[quote who="peteincary2" reply="3" id="3561090"] https://forums.galciv3.com/466354/page/1/#3556337 [/quote] There are only about 1.02 and nothing about 1.03.

6 Replies 19,322 Views

And about ideas... I just got one more: In GC2 there was feature, that starbases can become rough to their owners (like planets), when they comes into other faction`s ZOC. But for unknown reasons in GC3 starbase is inalienable property even if its built deep in neighbor territory. I think its wrong.

212 Replies 861,445 Views

[quote who="TurielD" reply="184" id="3559017"] That may differ per faction based on ideology personality too though. Are you seeing it all over? [/quote] Yep. In my experience onle Iconians and Kriin builds starbases whith normal activity, all others... welll... all others left plenty of resources whithout any attention.

212 Replies 861,445 Views

[quote]AI places less emphasis on capturing resources (fewer constructors running around) [/quote] Well... I tried 1.02 patch, and... AI almost not interested in capturing resources even if he have a lots of it in ZOC. Previously AI was extremely active in gathering resources, now it`s same extremely passive at that aspect.

212 Replies 861,445 Views

Well. My point of view on planet specialistion is next: I. Industrial world: Conditions for spec: Hexes whith manufacturing bonus, trade resorces whith manufacturing bonuses, apsent of any bonus hex, no hex\TR whith other bonuses Improvements: 1 approval building (from ideology), factories and other manufacturing improvements, shipyard (if in that sector aren`t any). II. Profit world: Conditions for spec: more then one hex whith economocal bonus,

10 Replies 165,830 Views

[quote who="RaumWaechter" reply="123" id="3556934"] 1) "AI is now allowed to rush more than once across its empire" - does this mean the AI gets free movements? This mean (I think) that AI nou allowed to rush building projects more than once. 2) And I noticed that one of my custom races was changed. It had tactical repair 2 and that changed to strategical repair 2. Tactical repair was maybe too powerful, but I loved it. Strategical repair is n

212 Replies 861,445 Views

[quote who="Icrushthee" reply="107" id="3556647"] Interesting, so the fighters would be mainly used to remove your opponents shields, point defense and armor? You know, I think that both types of fighters should be in the game, bombers as they are now (well, kind of; small hulls x 2 per component) and fighters (tiny hulls x 5 or whatever per component). [/quote] Well... I thought about two types of fighers, but Fighters as thet are even in role of "bombers" will be overpower

212 Replies 861,445 Views

[quote who="TurielD" reply="60" id="3556441"] This would have the added benefit of giving more of a role to rapid-fire ballistics; firing a wave of huge missiles at tiny fighters results in quite a bit of overkill, with long reload times. Fighter-killers with ballistics would be able to take out more fighters with their quicker reload speed. That is, unless the battle AI fleet targeting is clever enough to split up its fire to kill stuff 'just enough'

212 Replies 861,445 Views

[quote]Carrier modules reduced from 3 units to 2 units [/quote] I think... Carrier rebalance shoud go another way. May be it shoul have much more fighters (about 10-15 per module), but(!!) that fighters should be a tiny size, whith maximum 2/1/1 attack and 1/1/0 defence or something about this. So we`ll have Carriers, that send into battle masses of small, fragile and weak in single use fighters, that have only one task- fight enemy fleet before it come into main ships weap

212 Replies 861,445 Views

Well... I actually don`t know about ai equipping players custon designs... There are big brunch of precreated ships, that are equipped already, but ai can`t do anything whith ships of your design.

10 Replies 13,374 Views

[quote who="MadzaiSA" reply="4" id="3556193"] Low approval also makes your planets more vulnerable to culture flip. if your planet under culture flip (surrounded by other faction influence zone), its approval will be dropped to 0 very fast even if it was 100, so there almost no defence from cultural flip, exept deology threats About defense. It depends. Fighting off pirates could be much easier with sufficient shields. If

14 Replies 39,900 Views

defence modules as they are... almost useless, because of weapon modules lower weight, that mean that your defence will ALWAYS be lower, than enemies attak, but alsow your attak will be about 0, so your heavy armored "tank" ship will be destroyed by heavy armed analog. Approval improvements are very good, but(!), there is no need in build many of them (1, maximum 2 per planet), and all that doing low Approval is... lowering planet pros\

14 Replies 39,900 Views