eviator

[quote who="Moomo" reply="9" id="3614963"] When multiple factories are selected, queuing units spreads them across the factories. However, queuing a single unit will only yield construction of a single unit, so only the first factory will build. If you queue multiple units, then they are spread across the other factories as well. [/quote] Thats sounds like it is the way it is by design.

The only time I've noticed formations failing is when 1. Units go over cliffs, or 2. a unit created using the reinforcement system is supposedly part of the army according to the selection circles, but it seems to operate independently of the army. If you can make it happen again and record video of it, I think that helps the devs.

Excellent! You hit all the major points for my thoughts about unit/group representation on the strategic map. ASADDF also had an excellent post on the empire tree that, combined with your idea, could unify the interface rather well. Right now a bunch of dots is not of much value, so most people don't use the strategic map, including the devs. I really hope they have plans for a major overhaul before release. And the sooner the better so we can give them more suggestions.

Entertaining read, good ideas, good description of some common bugs. Nice write-up!

I could say "Hey honey, I really like the way you look in the black dress." Or I could say "Hey honey, you do not look good in the blue dress." One of these is the right way to say it, and one is the wrong way. Both are honest, but one is better.

Molokoww, you have been informed many times that the game isn't even in beta yet. It's pre-beta, or alpha, or whatever, and not all features are in. A better way to say this is: "Developers would you please consider adding the ability for me to queue units at all selected factories? Currently it only queues units for the one selected." This would demonstrate that you understand that the game is still in development and that you are patiently waiting for the devs to improve the game, i

Good stuff. Having played the game many hours a lot of this stuff is natural to me and it's hard to see the perspective of someone who doesn't know much about this game and perhaps even RTSs in general. Just a tip, Stardock went overboard with reliance on mouseover in GalCiv3. Maybe it makes some sense for a TBS game, but not an RTS game. We need the critical info on the screen by default, mouseover should be "one-time" information, as in "what is this building for?", not upda

A crash can't explain how losing the seed/crashed ship loses the game. You'd actually have to contrive that the crashed ships were still in fact partially functional and that two to six different crashed ships were miraculously in similar states of partial functionality. It's more implausible than a nice shiny building popping up out of nowhere because the lore at least supports the latter thanks to the inclusion of long-distance matter manipulation. Besides, I'd rathe

Doesn't fit the lore so much, I think. I could be wrong, the whole expansion event is not too specific on that.

ASADDF, I love it man! Absolutely love it! TAG_* perhaps the reason they don't use it is because it's not very functional. ASADDF's idea is a large step to making it functional, then perhaps people will use it.

I think it's safe to say every Star Wars fan wanted the movies to be made, they just wanted them to be stories, not just fight and chase scenes. What was the most compelling part of the latest movie? That's right, and its compelling because we care about the character, not because it was a cool action scene.

Apparently this new world cares more about fast pace and complexity than character development and a logical progression of plot line. I don't give a single care in the world what happens to the new characters. The only two I care about is Chewy and Luke, the only two characters who showed any signs of having to deal with the aftermath of very bad circumstances...and neither of them spoke a word. There is a lesson to be learned in that. Unfortunately I think they are going to blow

[quote who="Ticktoc" reply="22" id="3613742"] Also forgot to say, did you see the bug with the engineer? Where its conjoined streams grew and then broke off and drifted across the landscape? It was a bug another Dev wanted a screen shot of a few weeks back. So if he hasn't seen it then there is a good example of it starting at the 18.00 mark. [/quote] LOL awesome! Didn't even notice that.

[quote who="ASADDF" reply="7" id="3613763"] I don't Think that my Ideas are that ambitious, but yes i do think that the Dev's Don't have the Time and the Budget to do that right now. [/quote] In my line of work (computers and programming) that's what too ambitious means. :D

Thanks again!

[quote who="Ticktoc" reply="19" id="3613605"] Yeah, I thought I saw one leading an army which you probably don't want. There will be times to target it and other times to target the army units. Hard to set a special default as in different situations one will be right and the other wrong. [/quote] "Leading" is a loaded word here. If it leads an army in the sense that it is up in front, probably not the best idea. But it's okay for it to be the army leader,

Accumulation of responses: ASADDF, they specifically want unlimited tech advances. Yes, I believe they are kinda vanilla, but I don't see them going away. I do, however, see them possibly adding new things to the tech tree that are NOT unlimited, and many of your ideas are superb. My expectation is that we'll have to wait a few patches after release to start seeing major updates to the tech system. Coming up with ideas now is great. TAG_Utter, while off-topic, there is

I'm sure this is, at worst, a tweak of CSV files, but it seemed to me that the capacitors acted a little bit like meat shields for the other T1 units. Sure they have higher health and shields, but without capacitors the other units are sitting ducks, which would handicap the whole army. So it would seem to me that capacitors need to be protected, not protectors. On the flip side, going against the Substrate means that enemy units should perhaps prioritize attacking the capacitors.

Fun! The mechanics are definitely different, but just have to wait until beta to see if they actually play different. The difference in artillery may be the key.

Can you tell us which PHC units and buildings have which armor level? Or is that still kinda up in the air?

[quote who="zychrias" reply="10" id="3613400"] Great video update, love to see more of those for us Founders! It's a great dynamic way to see things updated. [/quote] LOL true, but only as long as it doesn't get in the way of actual development ;P

[quote who="Sargeras77" reply="4" id="3613252"] Without much terrain that actually stops movement right through it things like strategic choke points, transports (if they are eventually added), and air units, become a little less meaningful. [/quote] This exemplifies the difficulties in game design. A huge number of vocal forum users thought the maps were too choke-pointy, and wanted more open maps. You want the opposite. I guess that means the devs need to have a wide varie

Thank you so much for posting this. I found it so satisfying I watched it twice! There is a lot new in the video that demonstrates you've been giving serious consideration to feedback given on these forums, and I greatly appreciate that. I'll leave the feedback on visuals to others, as I don't pay too much attention to that stuff. Having tweaked the unit scale, I'm curious what folks think about the current spacing of units that are in formation. - Initial logistics co

Harbinger you should check out Servo.

[quote who="Timmaigh" reply="3" id="3613085"] I really dont like the part about those newbie traps. Things like that lead to shit like optimal build orders and whatnot, in other words create situation, when eventually you got to the same series of steps at the beginning of the match, if you dont want to lose... i think all the choices presented to player at the beginning of the match should be equally meaningful and only wrong depending on the situation (what the opposing player is doing