Don't bother wasting valuable research on that research path in the early game. Trade for it as and when you have spare trade credits. It is more expensive though since it is ship tech.
Most definitely. That's how you went to Evil from Neutral in the first place (through choosing Evil deeds).
I also would like to suggest that the Phoenix be disabled till cloaking is implemented. The AIs builds lots of them and despite its increased HPs, it is still only comparable to a mid-era ship. Having the AIs waste resources building these at capital ship era weakens them. Maybe I could just remove the Phoenix ship from my game directory. That shouldn't be illegal I hope.
Hmm, not too sure about powering up AMMs further. In seems that in most games, I take out a significant number of enemy ships with AMMs while losing none/minimal to the AI. The AI currently does not use it near as effectively as we do.
Culture computation was recently tweaked to take into account distance of culture starbase from your systems so as to weaken culture bombing which previously was quite easy. What I found useful was to colonise class 13-14 systems in the enemy sectors and rush build influence improvements to project my culture. You should have decent influence at this stage else they will flip rather quickly.
Starting position presents a tremendous advantage to the human player and I wholeheartedly support the decision to give the AIs big bonuses at the higher difficulty levels just to give a good challenge to gamers. For my high scoring Incredible game that got deleted, I managed to colonise 102 colonies through an excellent start, poorly placed AIs and speed+2. Probably anyone could have won that game with their eyes closed and I did so in 20 years through some deft diplomatic maneuvering.
From the manual : When a transport intersects a defenseless star system, the invasion screen will be displayed. This screen displays the advantages of both sides. The attacker automatically gets a significant advantage since transports don’t just come with ground troops but an entire air armada and thousands of ground support craft. But other factors do come into play such as the technology difference between the civilizations, general soldier abilities on both sides and what planetary
You are not the first to say this Interstellar. Perhaps you would interested to dig into several old threads (under fleet combat) discussing this issue in greater depth. Not that I would like to beat the old horse and revive this topic again but IMO there needs to be a fine balance between realism and gameplay (ie. majorly realistic games could be majorly unfun :) )
I have been using obsolete ships such as starfighters & corvettes (i guess u could use scouts if you like)to ring-fence newly discovered resources. It is to me a message to AIs that I have laid claim to this resource. What makes this and other ringfencing tactics cheesy at this moment is the AIs inability to respond appropriately to this.
Yes, it is definite that there is a repair bonus for orbiting ships. It would be nice if someone could tell us the exact bonus though.
I like that tool too but I hope someone could update the ship stats in the Simulator based on the latest patch (eg. Starfighters). 7 (pre-1.03A.054) fighters in a 1000 simulations could defeat 1 defender based on sequential attacks made by each fighter. They would simply wear it down over the 7 attacks (doing roughly 3 damage to a 20 hp defender for each attack). There isn't fleet combat per say where they attack simultaneously. Stacking just relieves you of the effort to click on the d
Good job with the win. It is one heck of a ride at that setting especially with the new game balances. Noticed you are still empire-less. Wanna join Imperium Galactica and other like-minded players with Masochistic streaks? ;)
Thanks for the info, Cari. Will not panic when I see them next time.
That's not cheesy, Pontius, that's evil.... :) The AIs "exploit" the minors much better than we do. They are always bankrupt or dead way too soon.
It would be great if the devastion of the invasion tactic could be moderated by the extent/power of the assault. So near-empty transports would have do minimal or no collateral damage. Or disable certain powerful invasion tactics if you do not have a min pop on your transport (say half full).
Regarding AMMs, I had some fun using several dozens against AI capital ships in my recent game. There is a degree of randomness to all combat including AMMs. I have seen AMMs bounce off capitals, ie no damage (v rare) and also seen them take out Avatars with one shot but most occassions it would take a couple of AMMs to down a major capital ship depending on the military bonuses. Currently I do feel that AMMs are overpowered in the hands of humans as we know how to time our attacks to t
Yes, I saw another thread where CariElf acknowledged the cheesiness of this tactic and that it would be fixed subsequently.
The Yor donated their flagship and a defender to me to help my war against the Dregs in the era of Overlords. Big thanks to them. For some reason, the ships were invisible so I quickly disbanded them just in case they screwed up my game.
Stardock Forums
I can see a potential unbalancing aspect of the "aliens abandon world and transcend proposal". Being humans as we are, it would not take much effort (or espionage) to track when aliens are going to transcend and park colony ships next to the soon to be abandoned systems and get all those juicy systems for ourselves. Then it should be a cakewalk. Don't think the AIs would be able to duplicate this "sneak colonise" tactic. The staged colony ships shouldn't trigger the buildup alarm so this tactic
Except for population (2nd), popularity (2nd) and influence (4th), I was last in all other categories. Torians and Arceans reached Final Frontier before me. Personally, I do not mind being deemed to have lost that game once they research Final Frontier. However, I would like it if the scoring would reflect the efforts put into the game despite the loss.
WARNING - LONG POST Completed my Maso Gigantic 1.035 game that I mentioned earlier. Some stats as follows as reference for those interested in the new scoring system. Tech Victory, 6214 points, 1 trillion pop, 20 game years. AAR- Had a reasonably good start with about 50+ systems colonised. Tried to stave off wars but was unsucessful. I was still building starfighters and corvettes while they finished researching battleship tech. First war started with Dre
Cataleptic, the game was won on 2198. 20 years victory, that could be the reason for the obscene score. Brad, I've have ended the that game again and the current scoring mechanism scored the game at 4916 instead of 30k, is it alright if I resubmit that game since the original game score was deleted? That wouldn't help my overall scoring but I like to keep a record of my games.
Thanks for your responses, Solitair. The question for me is whether I can win any more Maso gigantic games at the rate the difficulty level is being cranked up :) Trying hard on my current game but fighting the Drengins, Torians and Arceans on three fronts is no fun.
I certainly agree that the old scoring gives scores that are too diverse, with scores in the hundreds, thousands and tens of thousands. Glad that it is going to be tweaked to discourage milking. But if it is not too much to ask, if there is nothing "illegal" about my game, how about giving that game back to me with the score moderated with the new scoring methodology. I'm going to have a problem if the developers are going to be suspicious about Maso Gigantic games. I'm fond o
For my 30k+ game, I have explained how I did it in this thread http://www.galciv.com/forum.asp?BID=GF&id=50245 It is definitely doable if you get a great start which I did for that game and the AIs start poorly. Still remembered I managed to colonise 102 planets before starting any wars. Managed to crush the Dregs who were leading by quite a bit by getting all other AIs to fight it at the same time. After conquering them, I was overwhelming superior in terms of military compared to othe