g too many opponents, so your conclusion is wrong imo. Minors don't have much of an effect because of the few planets they have. They are much more interesting as cash-cows, tech cows and trading partners imo.
ce, with additional room for combat transports. Or colony ships can attack unless the opponent built social project XXX on planet.
r instance. A simple decrease in overall relations would probably achieve the same gol better than morality change, though, but it's also easier to repair.
ar with a friend or ally, negative points for refusing to declare war on an ally's enemy.
ironman mode that you may switch on if you like).
Not only at the hardest levels. The message "you have a build-up in sector x,y" doens't appear below medium difficulty if I am correct., so the ai would not recognize some threats at lower levels.
to reload the game and keep the same event.
rs and worms on the planets) that live there, so it's evil. Point proven.
colonize the nearest stars but have them go further as your range increases.
ld set these settings to a default value (like no fog of war is default on low level), though I don't like this..
t, to him, period.
i will already have sent its ships to the planets when you were researching that tech. One or two scouts will have better payoff.
elp that much. I like the idea overall. Pattug: Much as I liked MoO, having tactical combat screens would make for a very very different game.
ye MAD. And if you read what I said, I am responding in kind. Being disrespectful to someone who was disrespectful is ok. Torturing them is worse than disrespect and is not ok.
ile gains all the tiles, so it's still planet grabbing when in fact GC1 was star grabbing (as one planet gave all those in the system).
defensive wars (easier to fight wars in your own space where you can repair ships on your near planets and send some reinforcements or retreat). Attack on the other hand would be ok to reduce, but I am not too keen on it either.
case the expansion would be slowed down a little but nothing extraordinary. On the other hand, on the hugest maps, you have to slow down expanding at some point because your economy won't follow.
s (you can't escort them at all)). (Attack+1) * Defense would be better imo. The +! is there to allow to target various transports/freighters/... by order of strength.
font>
ocide (including species, not necessarily sentient, on the destroyed planet), thus it's always evil to use it. Developping it as a preemptive weapon is meaningless if you're not ready to use it.
tech to colonize certain worlds would help.
weakness of the ai is also the way it uses transports. Some send tons of them, some don't. In particular in the late game they never send enough troops.
even more so. A detailed model with sliders is fun, but I don't think GC2 is the game for it. Galciv was simple design, it would be good not to add too much things in GC2 that would only increase micromanagement.
GalCiv2 Forums
I agree thatrequiring military intelligence would be fun. Particularly if you can lie on your own strength and make it look stronger. But then the ai could do it too...
GalCiv2 Forums
fun. Producing many ships is not fun to me as I then have to move them all around and find that tedious.