EleventhStar

EleventhStar

Joined Member # 5960428
11 Posts 133 Replies 8,720 Reputation

[quote who="HardWere" reply="10" id="3564453"] The issue with E3 is the richest corps drown out many interesting middle-sized projects. [/quote] That's fine, there are plenty of other shows for small companies to shine.

19 Replies 58,288 Views

Do you want to compare galciv AI to other game AI at launch, or as it is after years of patches? Things i remember from other games AI: -endless space (before expansion): 50 weak fleets on the enemy planet that you had to kill 1 at a time before you could siege. -Galciv2 twilight: All ships moving towards a single target at a time, huge lines of single file fleets :D and messages like "we know you are gonna attack but but we were set to beginner so

6 Replies 8,119 Views

I would absolutely LOVE something along these lines eventually. I think there should be more to conflict then peace or total war. There should be lesser military sanctions/blockades, cold war, etc. options like: -blocking trade routes. -be able to attack enemy ships that come within your "borders" or withing 5 hexes of your planets and stations or whatever. But not outside that area. great for "self defence"

55 Replies 362,506 Views

[quote who="Reianor3" reply="5" id="3562448"] Also, let the third faction that failed to negotiate have a choice to back out. Why should it be "Can we talk about this? No? THEN WAR!!!!" when it can be "Can we talk about this? No? Ok, we're out of here, don't mind us, continue your galactic conquest Mr. Conqueror, we'll just quietly move out of your way, have a nice day." [/quote] Both of these options are accounted for. Both faction 1 and 3 have a opti

12 Replies 16,316 Views

[quote who="Tohron" reply="1" id="3562298"] Sounds like an interesting idea, however the AI for the third party would have to be able to seriously weigh the threat of war with you vs. the advantages of receiving the surrender. [/quote] Luckily the AI can already do most of that. And if that isn't feasible, it can be replaced with for example a diplomatic penalty "-1: You stole our kill" or something, there is lot's of choice for what a consequence coul

12 Replies 16,316 Views

[quote who="The Sisko" reply="5" id="3562321"] Quoting EleventhStar, reply 1 Big mistake, impossible to live up to the hype. [e digicons]:P[/e] Really? All it needs to do is not be as terrible as MoO3, which isn't asking much to begin with. [/quote] It w

29 Replies 120,630 Views

Not entirely sure if this is the correct place to post this, and it might be a bit armchair game designer, but i have this idea that i think might be pretty nice. The goal: Make you feel like you have some control over surrendering AI, regardless of whether you actually have control. The "problem": The surrender mechanic is pretty cool and nice, I very much like it. However, I am sure everybody has

12 Replies 16,316 Views

Think i'm gonna stop following this after comments like these: -games are only fun if you can break them, once broken game is worthless. -game is not fun when you have 80 worlds at any point during the game, but i refuse to play with map settings that prevent this, because that is not "epic". -despite the fact that i have won the game according to myself, i better keep up micromanaging every turn making each turn take 10-20 minutes even

112 Replies 513,851 Views

Ofcourse you can use it. Taking this logic to it's extreme, you can also play 1v1 on a insane map, and then complain you can get 800 colonies. You choose to play this way, not the game or the devs. If you consider adding more AI for a given map area limiting yourself, no amount of AI improvements is gonna help. You will always be able to set up a map where this scenario occurs.

112 Replies 513,851 Views

[quote who="marigoldran" reply="53" id="3560895"] Should I continue this? [/quote] People asked for you to finish a game, so you should probably do that. [quote] The game is very poorly balanced, man. [/quote] Nobody said it was, we just said you shouldn't brag about beating godlike untill you actually do it. Though your attempt is kinda lessened

112 Replies 513,851 Views

1) its not possible to expand to fast if all the worlds are colonized before you get to 20-30 colonies, therefore it solves the problem of expanding to fast. 2) You can make the LEP scale however you want, it's currently linear which is meh. If tuned correctly the LEP does this: -small empires have high happiness and get more production/growth/etc to keep up -large empires have medium/low happiness early/mid game because they expand fas

112 Replies 513,851 Views