e-stab

e-stab

Joined Member # 657705
1 Posts 17 Replies 11,720 Reputation

Quixen, the point simply is that Stardock doesn't want to include planet destruction techniques in the game. (Mainly because of balancing reasons and the AI having difficulties to cope with it.) You can dislike this decision, and the non-existing "inevitable" damage isn't logical, yes, but it stands as it is.

27 Replies 15,717 Views

Is the game harder or not with it on ? Try it and see for yourself.

11 Replies 10,420 Views

The planetary damage is considered not to have happened in case the assault is lost. It was made this way to prevent cheesy 1 man invasions to damage planets.

27 Replies 15,717 Views

Then it can get tirresome you have grown to big to play the game smooth. To many planets to handle. So you have to streamline the interfase or remove some planets. Fully agreed. A few additions like a "social production assistant" (a.k.a. planet governor) or other tweaks to make it more convenient to build up planets would be very welcome (see <a href

13 Replies 24,562 Views

For those who want to have multiple ships created the same time: take a look at MOO1. Especially at high levels when you need to fight stack of 32K ships Well, they're being built anyway, it just takes longer. In case there are too many ships, increase the maintenance costs. <img src="http://images.stardock.com/gc2/T_DL/smiles/Wink.gif" border=0 ALIGN

17 Replies 7,157 Views

An alternative with a single startport on a world with large production capacity would be to create as many ships per turn as you have the capacity for, where it would keep track of how much production capacity you have left that turn until you run out. My thoughts exactly. <img src="http://images.stardock.com/gc2/T_DL/smiles/Congrats.gif" border=0 AL

17 Replies 7,157 Views

I'd like to see military production carried over (as it is done with research already). Planets with large military output should be able to build several small ships in one turn, the current system is unrealistic in this regard.

17 Replies 7,157 Views

Thanks for the update, Cari! The "customized opponents" feature seems to be more complicate to do than I'd have thought. But I'm really looking forward to these new opponent and AI settings.

12 Replies 24,564 Views

Congratulations then! I never understood how it worked with the upper forum levels like Veteran or Diplomat. Edit: In case a German-speaking person is needed, just ask!

1,775 Replies 2,419,309 Views

My main problem with (non-resource) starbases is that they need a lot of micromanagement (a.k.a. constructors) for limited effects. Call me lazy, but that moves them down a lot on my priority list.

43 Replies 19,671 Views

I hope the time for UI suggestions isn't over now that v1.2 is available for quite some time, as I have two more to add: - make it possible to set the focus for all planets with one click (e.g. on the colony list) - make it possible to buy the first improvement in the social production queue from the colony list (with a right-click, perhaps?)

7 Replies 8,766 Views

Often enough you can get the rest of the enemy's planets when all his ships are destroyed and you have transports nearby. Saves you the trouble and the casualties to finish the job by yourself.

29 Replies 26,754 Views

Isn't the Phantom Warrior one of the cards that can be free of charge? Take your time, both your point level as the number of gratis cards will increase after won battles. The higher leagues are difficult at first, but you'll overcome them eventually.

4 Replies 14,743 Views

if your going to do a little conquering there are a lot better things to invest in than trade. That's the spirit!

43 Replies 36,285 Views

You can easily get a trade income of 3000 or so with 9 good routes. Hmm, 3000 / 9 = ~333. I don't remember to have ever been close to that amount on the average. In my opinion trade is nice on maps where your tax base isn't that large (small maps, maps with few planets in general), or when you want to improve relations to somebody (although a

43 Replies 36,285 Views