The bribe thing sounds great, it'll make diplomacy a real option. Does 1.04 change the calculation of military strength (ie do the defense values contribute now)? It wasn't listed in the upgrade description.
Stardock Forums
Okay, from what I've read its possible to stay out of war without having any military; still everyone seems to agree its much harder. That still doesn't sound particularly balanced, and I have to wonder if its possible on all maps or just under certain starting conditions. So far I've never used the ctrl-N feature, and I've managed to win with the AI on intelligent on all the games. But going for tech and cultural wins I've always ended up in wars... My experience is that if your
Stardock Forums
The only way I've seen to win without a large military is to have a large-plus map where you are far from the others, and the AI is occupied with fighting with itself. For me the problem with predictable wins is the lack of replayability. If a given sequence always wins it becomes fairly boring; not being sure if you are going to lose still becomes tedious if its a question of initial placement rather than your choice of strategy. And yes, most other games have the same problem (che
Stardock Forums
I agree for the most part LifeWish, but I like the idea of going for a Game Theory victory in a game ;). This is a standalone game, so I'd say an option that "would change play dramatically" is a good thing, in that it is an addition that allows a wider range of strategies, giving more depth to the game. The military option would still be there; those who like to play it solely that way would not be affected.
Stardock Forums
I agree that playing against strong humans would also require a strong military, but this is a limitation of the game. Take a look at the real world; there are alot (say 150 out of 190 UN nations) of little countries who exist in peace despite having a military that would rate as about 3 compared to the US, and not much higher compared to their neighbors. Alot of these countries are a stones throw from a much larger more powerful country but don't seem to be paying a huge tribute to keep their
Stardock Forums
I agree with the original post; there seems to be one way to win the game if you're playing at large-plus map sizes. I don't care about the metaverse, like most casual users I've never used it. But I do care that my games are starting to look disturbingly similar (and I've only had time to play eight games). The ctrl-N issue won't change that at all; what will change it is some way of doing diplomacy so you can pay for peace if you choose to do a non-military option. The current sys
For me this is by far the weakest part of Galciv. While I can understand how the payments for leasing technology would continue during a war (read "Trading With the Enemy" for a WW2 example), I just can't picture someone continuing to pay tribute for peace after the person who is accepting the tribute has declared war. The person is in effect freely funding the ships that are killing their people; it just doesn't make sense. And in terms of game mechanics it is very exploitable. Get
You know, the "give me 10 bc a month or I'll invade you" type, where payment stops if the asker declares war, or the payer decides that they are now strong enough to stop paying. This is a pretty common diplomatic feature used by everyone from schoolyard bullies up to empires, and it seems strange that it isn't possible in galciv. :(
"I think if you've gotten yourself into a position where they're demanding tribute that will bankrupt you, you're already in big trouble. You're too weak, and they know it." Or playing defensively, as HP and defensive values don't go into the military rating. I run into this all the time; I'll have 100 bc, a couple of fully developed starbases and loads of battlehammers playing for a tech or cultural win. The AI will start asking me for 700 or so bc, I'll refuse, they'll wreck their f
Whatever you come up with, I think it would be a good idea if the costs were in the data files so casual players like myself could edit them out if necessary. For instance, the 1.7 exponential would make it very hard to play defensively against a big empire; this is probably fine for folks who want a really hard challenge, but not so good for those of us who have a limited amount of playing time and are looking for a break from work/family stresses. Throwing out a game because you get a bad st
Ah, glad to hear they're still there. Guess I'll mod in the PQ changes into the late game (even tho I hadn't noticed them before, I think they're a good idea).
Stardock Forums
Another vote for gameplay. Actually I'd never noticed the late terraforming, but I think they're a great idea. I suspect most users are like me in that they never post to the metaverse; its a game to relax with after work rather than a competition. So, what happens wrt patching if I add those effects back into the files? Do I have to re-add them everytime I patch galciv? They look kind of nice. :notsure:
Stardock Forums
Hm, rally points over proposed UP resolutions? Different tastes I guess, I'd prefer the UP resolutions. But then I play for cultural or tech victories.
Hold it...they removed terraforming and the terraformer? When? This is definitely a very bad thing. >:(
Its the only part of the game that feels like work rather than a game, and in the end its 90% of what you do.
A good evil reply. :d
Well, arguably starting a war because someone won't give you a donation involves killing. :notsure:
I guess the definition of "good" is relative all right; good societies find different ways of rationalizing conquest. Its a good point tho, and I'll keep it in mind. But I guess it would still be more interesting if alignment made more of a difference; say trade between races of the same alignment was worth more etc. It would add still more options to a game which is a good game because it gives the player alot of options. Why not add more and make a good thing better? :D
Stardock Forums
The problem with the attack only calculation is that it makes turtling even easier. I've gotten alot of planets from cultural conquest simply because the AI insisted on throwing huge resources at my strong defenses. Their economies tanked and the planets slowly rebelled. A human player would look at the situation and say, okay, he's turtling, I'll attack other races until I have a huge lead in the number of planets, and then I'll just out research and culture him.
Hm, I guess I'll play my next game at the next higher AI level (not sure what's above intelligent, haven't tried it yet). I'm wondering about the fear; you'd think losing 30 to 40 dreadlords attacking defensive positions without killing more than a couple of the enemies ship would be enough that the AI would think the war is pointless. Okay, they do ask for peace, but once they have peace they seem to immediately forget what happened and base their actions on the military number rather than th
I think the bonus is in the attack and defense values. The HP description is wrong.
Okay, I guess that confirms what I've seen. I'm not sure that its a good game design in that it makes one variable (the alignment) more or less worthless. Since playing good involves taking penalties at the time of the decision, and gives no diplomatic advantages later on it would seem that the best strategy would be to be evil. Personally I play defensively (war party and I always get the Tri trade good) with loads of HP, never bothering to get much in the way of offensive power. Fo
I've been playing good alignment, and so I find it strange that the Alterians are always declaring war on me (usually they ask for donations for peace which I ignore). This hasn't been a problem, in that they end up wasting loads of ships on my heavily defended sectors, but I find it strange that a good alignment race would attack another good alignment race. In the game I'm currently playing (1.03A at intelligent) I'm once again good alignment and trying to peacefully go for a t
Well, the game is kind of biased against defense in any case, as a quick comparison of the number of modulues that give attack bonuses versus the number giving defense bonuses will show. Battlehammer was the last useful defense ship, and now the HP are down so its more or less been pulled out of the game. Its not a big deal for someone like me who's not posting games to the metaverse, its easy enough to adjust the ships. I'm curious tho' why the designers have taken such a pro-offense stand..
I'm told its possible to play around with the file to adjust HP. I'd kind of like to see the battle hammer being a pure defensive ship, give it back its 90 HP but lower its attack rating to 1. After that minor adjustment I'm looking forward to playing with shipyards :D.