It looks like it is the same level of problems I experienced before, which is still playable. For instance, some letters out of the loading screen "tip" paragraph is missing. The minimap is not too usable, either. :) It's OK, like I said in my first post. If ya'll are able to solve it (or someone in the community), then bonus! (I'm running the game in Full Screen 1920x1200 as is my VMWare session.)
doktorstick
I reinstalled my VMWare Tools, which caused a restart of the VM. It's working, now, but I don't know which of the two actions caused it. :) Thanks. I'll report back if other issues popup.
Howdy. I played the demo version of GalCiv2: Gold Edition(?) (mostly) with success under Windows XP2 under VMWare Fusion 1.1.1 in MacOS X 10.5.2 (intel). I say mostly because every once in a while, a character in text would be missing. And the mini-map would not work very well. The purchased the Ultimate set based on this playability. Unfortunately, now the game has no text. I don't know which buttons do what. Please advise. Thanks. /ds <
You misunderstand. Note I said: "Click on another single ship not in the same square [as the fleet]." To reiterate, I'm not ordering a unit in the group to move, but rather an ungrouped ship in another part of the galaxy. /ds
This bug has existed since near 1.0. I create a stacked group. Click on another single ship not on the same square. Set it for auto-pilot. The stacked group takes the auto-pilot orders. My recollection is that this happens sometimes after moving a stacked group and then selecting a standalone ship and try to set it for auto-pilot. /ds
This bug has existed since 1.0. Put a caret (^) in the name of a system and the display on the galaxy view looks like "Ice Ball^[lots of space]2". /ds
This bug has existed since 1.0. Put a caret (^) in the name of a system and the display on the galaxy view looks like "Ice Ball^[lots of space]2". /ds
This bug has existed since near 1.0. I create a stacked group. Click on another single ship not on the same square. Set it for auto-pilot. The stacked group takes the auto-pilot orders. My recollection is that this happens sometimes after moving a stacked group and then selecting a standalone ship and try to set it for auto-pilot. /ds
It kinda hurts the early expansion since the AI knows where everything is... and now you have to pay several bc in maintenance to scout the galaxy for habitable planets (moreso on big ol' honkin' maps). /ds
CariElf: Nope. I also tried "toggling" their orders by going under the "i" screen for the ship. Recent experience involves stacked ships on a starbase (just this night). /ds
I have problems getting ships out of sentry/guard/wait. I have to send them on auto-pilot to break the mode. This is with .057. /ds
"It don't have any bonuses, with the exception that it knows locations of yellow stars." From my understanding, this is an incorrect statement. The AI "notices" everything that happens in the galaxy. It doesn't necessarily interpret it as a problem, but it has full knowledge. As the levels increase, the chance that it takes action on what it notices increases, too. /ds
Vanir: Actually, I wasn't referring to Alliances.
Perhaps a UP resolution, or maybe just the default in the game, but suing for peace needs to be more meaningful. It is entirely annoying to sue for (or be sued for) peace to have it broken on the next turn. What's the point of that? It essentially removes an entire aspect of the game--peace treaties and negotiations. The most obvious way to make it meaningful is have a 24 month (or however long) period where you cannot break the peace you sued (they sued) for. It can only be broken
Here's one I think should be fairly easy to implement and the AI should be able to deal with (and heck, even have a personality/predisposition toward it). It has been said that custom ships can wreak havoc on the AI. Too many options for them to worry about. Well, my proposal is thus: Ship classes have a number of "points" to be allocated between attack and defense. A ships in the same class have the same number of hit points. As an entirely hypothetical example, you get th
Edit, Quote, and Stardock Posted Here Icon on Top-View
I hope people take Frogboy up on his offer. I, too, have been in games where it was hopeless for my oponents IF I maintained my current strategy. Now, if for some reason I changed my strategy, it could unravel (like getting tired of sending out the endless barrage of constructors to build those cultural palaces). The AI shouldn't "hope" that a random event occurs and changes the landscape of play. Otherwise, it might just hang on to the end. /ds
* Min/max difficulty setting when randomizing games (e.g., user selects "only choose race intelligence from 'intelligent' to 'genius'). * New military project--jump point. Allows ships to jump between two jump points on the map. Either implemented as instaneous jump, or super-accelerated movement (x2, x3) but you can't change course once entering the jump point. * New military project--extensible ship. Uses constructors to add military modules to it; can carry troops. <b
As I was finishing my last game I had a similar nagging thought. I haven't gotten to your point, yet, though I see it on the horizon. /ds
Do ships repair faster if on a starbase or in orbit? /ds
Slick marketing move... There's so much hype right now that you can pay to be a alpha/beta tester. :) /ds
JavaScout, you are such a pimp! :)
1. Events. Perhaps there is an event that that gives techs. 2. You. More likely you had Battle Armor and other prereqs, traded a technology higher in the tree (the one Battle Armor eventually led to, for example). Since they have this tech, it is traded around, and satisfies the prereqs for higher level techs. /ds
Under Domestic Policy | Stats | Social it tells you your alignment.