Def Zep

Def Zep

Joined Member # 633495
0 Posts 0 Replies 60 Reputation

Perhaps Brad could make this AI advantage a player-selectable radio-button (with, perhaps, a small VP penalty for turning it off). I myself like giving the AI's this knowledge/ ability (i.e., Stellar Cartography) at the start; it makes the game very challenging at the higher difficulty levels. I prefer it to the Civ3 approach (on Deity level) of making the AI's research costs so much lower than the player's that it is far better to do no research at all (but simply buy the techs from th

14 Replies 688 Views

ZaH: Please give us your views on this excellent strategy. I have been using it to great success in my 1.02.049 game. Is it still practical under 1.03? Thx! ~SDC~

10 Replies 609 Views

#13 Agreed, Huz. In my second game, I am open to extortion by the two AI empires I have encountered. I have even been forced to cede a border system to keep the peace with the Drengin, who exceed my military by ~2x - 2.5x. I believe the problem is, I elected to pursue the military path vs. the comm path after my engine research was completed, so my diplomacy skill is relatively lacking. Gravity Accelerators are also the one trade good I really miss, too! I am so use to

26 Replies 1,935 Views

#10 Actually ZaH, my apologies...YOUR original post did mention the parameters under which you observed these costs. I meant the post Liquid998 wrote (#3), which I responded to. Doh! ;) ~SDC~

14 Replies 472 Views

#6 ZaH: As stated, my "break-points" occured at different costs than those you observed. My question was whether this might be due to a difference between the size of maps being played (your original post did not state the parameters under which your costs were valid). However, I too have now concluded the espionage costs are "fixed" across all map sizes, and the variation(s) I experienced are due to my having continued a 1.01 saved-game under 1.02.049. As Brad has now noted r

14 Replies 472 Views

#1 Librarian: As Hor said, simple move the colony ship to any inhabitable planet (even one already settled, such as its origin system). Once there, you can "re-land" the colonists using the planet sidebar (F2). Mouse-over the planet you want, and the cursor will change to a colony vessel; click and you will add its people back to your Pop. ~SDC~

17 Replies 862 Views

Players should be aware that upgrading to v. 1.03 of GalCiv will produce anomalies in any previous version's saved games. Should you intend to post a saved game currently in progress to the Metaverse, it is advisable to complete it first, before upgrading. This is noted in Brad's thread "1.03: Notice on saved games", but I can now confirm it. (Also, no offense or dup-posting intended; it is just that thread itself spun off into a discussion of SDC which is irrelevant t

5 Replies 249 Views

#3 Liquid998, The cost points appear to "scale up" relative to the size of Map. In one of my current Huge galaxy games, the "Low" threshold was set at 900gc's (v.1.02.049 of GalCiv). Can one of the BT's confirm? ~SDC~

14 Replies 472 Views

#8 Brad, Thanks for the explanation. The Arceans have never been a world power in the games I have played. The Yor and Drengin are usually the major challenges. I guess that's not the point, thhough. If their attorneys are anything like ours, it's not who wins or loses (the clients), it's who gets paid (the lawyers)! ;) ~SDC~

27 Replies 981 Views

The only Minors I don't trade with are the I-League. Any goodwill you engender with them is lost when you have to declare war should one of your own major systems get destabilized and elect to join them. Furthermore, every AI Empire is continuously at war with them, so even if you are their friend, you end up just losing out on some expansion possibilities. ~SDC~

3 Replies 257 Views

One thing I do, is use the Minors extensively as trading partners for my freighter runs. That way, I am not contributing to the economy of a potential enemy. Usually, I find diplomatic relations are more dependent on military strength (parity/superiority) and alignment than trade. ~SDC~

3 Replies 257 Views

Vlad, In any military operation, there will be attrition. As Nicholas said, you only lose the TR if all it's troops are eliminated. Think of it like an APC or BMP - if the squad has to fight from its mount and gets captured/eliminated, the carrier's probably going to, too. Also, on larger maps, the TR "burnoff" can actually be a blessing in disguise. At the later stages, it is not uncommon to build Combat TR's to off-lift excess population. Your maintenance costs climb quickly

2 Replies 202 Views

I build 1xBattleAxe per inhabited planet in each of my border systems to start, moving them as I expand. I change to BattleHammers once those are available. Eventually, I replace them with Dreadnoughts, Avatars & Overlords. I also maintain 2-3 Fleets: 2 for offensive operations against enemy Empires, and 1 as a reserve/counter-attack force should an initially neutral AI declare war or an alliance trigger. I supplement my border worlds with AMM's, and generally try to (eventuall

8 Replies 421 Views

#9 Jubala, An option you can set using the link you found is, "number of days threads are shown". The default is fairly low; I reset mine to 15 (2 weeks)... ~SDC~

12 Replies 435 Views

#13 Excellent analysis, Huz. I had reached the same conclusions, though on much less empirical grounds. #17 I agree with Hab. For such an expensive tech discovery, BC's are disappointing. They are viable combat vessels only with the support of HP bonuses from shipyards, the War Party, etc. Stand-alone, they are too easily lost to maintain an offensive. Should their stats be improved to increase HP's (and perhaps speed & range to clearly distinguish them from BH's & FF's), they would be

33 Replies 1,532 Views

Kevin, I think this is a good idea. It would be interesting to see the Arceans move off of "neutral", for example. However, I do not know if the AI's get the same chance for random events as the player. Also, it could lead to all the AI's tending towards the mean, i.e., "50". Perhaps one of the BT's could elucidate on how practical this could be. ~SDC~

4 Replies 205 Views

Alverin, I have encountered the same thing, and have concluded it is due to the rounding algorithym used by the program. It appears the Domestic screen calculates overall beaker production empire-wide (fractions and all, added together), then truncates the net sum. But when research progress itself is calculated, it's done planet-by-planet, with fractions being dropped at that level. Consequently, you can wind up 4 or 5 beakers short. What I do, is drop my Science spending unti

6 Replies 369 Views

Atommannj, I encountered the same problem under 1.01, and had to start a new game. However, since upgrading to 1.02, it has disappeared, so I believe Brad has fixed it. You may want to restart and see if that solves things. The only CTD I am now encountering, is when I eliminate an AI empire and attempt to access its diplomacy or stats screens (to verify that I have taken all its planets or reduced its economy to zero). Should I wait a turn, though, the program will correctly c

1 Replies 162 Views