Lord_StarPilot

Reply to Ship component sizes in Bug Reports GalCiv2 Forums

A large ship *should* be able to extend its sensor range more easily than a small ship. They have more room to add in more sensor packages, and add in more processing bits to better merge their sensor inputs. That's how we build better sensors today... by adding more to the network. It could be argued that Lasers, Mass Drivers, and Missiles should all be a set size. The systems have their own power generators, and if it works for a tiny ship, it should work the same for a huge ship. T

Reply to Idle spaceport popup? in Galactic Civilizations II Stardock Forums

A report of all idle starports would be useful. Or a pop-up icon/report that a starport has just been built (similar to the notice that a ship has just been built).

Reply to Make it easier to research specific techs in Research GalCiv2 Forums

Well, if you could just click on a "Goal" tech in the tech screen, so that you'd automatically follow the research path to get that goal tech, it could save the user some Researching MM. I'd suggest adding a display line in the Research screen that showed what your "Goal" tech was (when going up one step, the currently researching tech == Goal tech), so that you could look and see for those users like me, that might forget that we had a goal tech set. I do think it would be

Reply to Balancing Defenses in GalCiv Journals Stardock Forums

What I've seen is that it is the techs researched/traded that are incorporated into the AI's ships. Not designs to beat a particular opponent. For instance, I've had several games where I went all missiles, and was in the middle of all the other civs. Not 1 of the warmongers ever bothered developing Point Defense. Can you say their ships were toast? and that's with them coming after me because I let my military rating lag so far behind them (knowing I could crank out swarms of local fighters bef

Reply to PQ Concerns in Bug Reports Stardock Forums

Cool! See? I told you researching all those "go fast" stripe technology would really help. But I'm very jealous. The RNGods haven't seen fit to bless me such. Well, one day... one day.

Reply to Why do only races that I met join United Planets? in Galactic Civilizations II Stardock Forums

Well, MoO3 did this. Only the races in contact with the New Altarians were in the Galactic Council (because the New Altarians founded it). If the Humans are the founders in GC2, it would be logically consistant for only races in contact with the Humans to be in the council. The question then becomes... are non-UPC races stuck to the UPC resolutiosn? They shouldn't be, since they aren't a part of the UPC, after all. Right now, I'd say leave it as it is. The races in contact with the Us

Reply to Terran-style dates for all races? Come on. in Galactic Civilizations II GalCiv2 Forums

Avatar Tandis, excellent point! Why don't you put all the game text into Lojban then? It would make an excellent choice. Then the Lojban community would be a natural sale, and they could localize the game to all major human languages for StarDock! For Free! Can't beat that deal! You really need to work on your sarcasm. Changing those aspects of the UI would add to your customer's immersion into the game. For most, that means they'll have more fun. Remember, fun is why your customers p

Reply to I. Hate. Micro. Management. in GalCiv Journals Stardock Forums

I hate Micro-Management as well. Indeed, Civ4's automating workers has reduced MM in that game so much, that you can now play a full game in just a few hours (if you go all peaceful) to one long night (if you toss in a few wars of elinimation). Much better. I look forward to these useful changes in GC2.

Reply to Galactic Civilizations is not Master of Orion in GalCiv Journals GalCiv2 Forums

MoO fans are, for the majority, going to love GC2. But again... GC is not MoO. It doesn't need to be MoO. It's just fine as it is. BTW, tactical combat did not make MoO a better game. Indeed, it made it a slower game. It was nice to be able to see how your ship designs affected your combat, but it quickly became boring MM as you had to battle in tactical if you wanted to get the full bang out of your spaceships. Mega-Boring.

Reply to Good, Evil, and Neutral in GalCiv Journals Stardock Forums

In GC1, Good was always penalized in the events because that was supposed to be the game balance to all the bonuses that being Good brought you in GC1. Evil was supposed to be rewarded with each event to offset the minuses you suffered for being Evil. The problem was, it didn't work. That Undersea Civ event, for example. What good did a 10% research bonus really matter if the world wasn't a big PQ world in the first place? It wouldn't amount to more then 1 or 2 points bonus

Reply to Balancing Defenses in GalCiv Journals Stardock Forums

Er... I'm playing out full games before any single 4 weaponry or medium hulls are in use. Well, the AI might have rolled off one or two such medium hull beasts at the end of my games. But it usually has those die against my starbases. And that's with me being the overall tech leader. I do split my weapon research. But from my games, what I see is that I only need 2. So I can completely neglect a third weapon branch. I find the AI does not adapt to my designs, and

Reply to Terran-style dates for all races? Come on. in Galactic Civilizations II GalCiv2 Forums

Another good idea, Proud Canadian. Very good for the immersion effect. Not important to the gameplay though, so I doubt it will make it into GC2.

Reply to Word On The Street - remove numeric ages in Galactic Civilizations II Stardock Forums

I agree with Proud Canadian. Changing the age from a number to a label would be more appropriate, especially for the non-human races.

Reply to The end of the beta draws near.. in Galactic Civilizations II Stardock Forums

I like the fleet battles. Can't wait to see the improvements though! Although I do have a complaint about what happens when the AI attacks your star bases. Why can't I watch it blow up their fleets?

Reply to PQ Concerns in Bug Reports Stardock Forums

Well, I've yet to see a world over 17 in my games. But I'm playing on the lean side of things, so that is probably why. And my point is that as soon as you get that new tile, you put the most useful item into it. There is only 6 or so actually useful tile fillers that are not factory/lab/bank/embassy (industry/research/money/culture). Most wonders are now useless. Remove all but those ~6 useful items from the game, and I bet 99% of all GC2 beta testers wouldn't miss them! Indeed, thei

Reply to Rethink Wormholes in Ideas Stardock Forums

If there is the option to turn them off, that would allow both the pro- and anti- permanent wormhole preferences to be happy. A lot of work on SD, but such is the lot of software developers. I'll think a cheery thought for them this New Years. Such hard working people that give us such an enjoyable game!

Reply to Balancing Defenses in GalCiv Journals Stardock Forums

The math may say split your defense, but the research time and space requirements say to not to. The space requirements for a defense are horrible. You wouldn't be able to build a 2/2/2 defense ship until you are pretty high up in each defense tree. If you are lucky, you can build a dual defense ship. Is that truly better then single defense ship? The single defense ship will be able to more easily fit in twice the defense rating, right? So the economics of ship building and research favors spec

Reply to Rethink Wormholes in Ideas Stardock Forums

I still say permanent worm holes suck. That's been my opinion prior to GC1, and I haven't read anything here to persuade me they'd add to the fun of GC2.

Reply to PQ Concerns in Bug Reports GalCiv2 Forums

Sorry... got a completely blank screen back when I posted the above reply. So I hit refresh, and created a DP by accident.

Reply to PQ Concerns in Bug Reports Stardock Forums

No, Star Pilot, They said that that's the way it is now with GC2. The goal is that you'd fill up your initial tiles with the basic infrastructure stuff when you first colonize that planet. The governor would auto-terraform while you're off researching, then, when you come back, you'd have new usable tiles that you could plop your wonders down on without having to tear down

Reply to Good, Evil, and Neutral in GalCiv Journals Stardock Forums

Sorry. I wasn't taking a shot at you. I was just trying to point out that by your own statements, you agree that Good is the optimal strategic choice except when you play as a total raving Vandal horde. You should try playing Good while doing that. It's much easier a game then playing Evil in GC1. I think ideally, that Evil and Good should both be equally valid choices as a strategic manner. That certainly wasn't the case in GC1.

Reply to A Few Questions / Points of Criticism in Galactic Civilizations II GalCiv2 Forums

Yea, that's a b ug. [computer voice] Syntax error [/computer voice] (Sorry, couldn't resist. )

Reply to PQ Concerns in Bug Reports Stardock Forums

So... the plan is that you will most of the time need to demolish something so that you can put in a wonder? You use those extra tiles with useful stuff. Most of the wonders from GC1 just aren't that useful when you can only build a couple of things total in medium and smaller maps. Maybe we should be able to build wonders on useless tiles instead?

Reply to Good, Evil, and Neutral in GalCiv Journals Stardock Forums

Supreme Shogun, in GC!, that bonus would have been (typically): 1) -5% production 2) -1% production 3) +7% production Heck, most of the PQ events didn't yeild a bonus over +1 most of the time. As you can see, even Popup Target agrees that Evil got seriously screwed in GC1. You'll note he states that Good was always better for the moderate military to the peaceful empire builder. Which is 80% of the play types/styles of GC. <img src="smiles/Wink.gif" border=0

Reply to Good, Evil, and Neutral in GalCiv Journals Stardock Forums

Supreme Shogun, Evil does not get a trade bonus for trading with Evil. They do, however, gain $1 for every turn a mini-freighter is passing through their influence. I presume that's from piracy or protection money. I do wonder if that wouldn't make some routes unprofitable. I've also asked in the past, for GC1, that some evil events would have immediate bad benefits for the Evil choice. Sometimes, being evil hurts right now, not later. But I've also asked that Evil get made as viable