Yellow Sign

Yellow Sign

Joined Member # 660087
0 Posts 5 Replies 199 Reputation

I don't agree with that, Papa. If you design a non-abstract game - wether it's a roleplaying-game or a strategy-game - you have to decide how much you value the three parameters: - realism - fairness/balance - playability This factors contradict each other to a certain degree: A game which is as realistic as possible will become so complex that it is not very playable (at least for people who are not in to hardcore simulations), and it's probably not balanced

57 Replies 1,844 Views

Oh, btw, CM - I don't know how much it's worth with the current scoring-chaos, but we're in the Top10, that means we got our own nice little spot on the Galactic Map. :CONGRAT:

20 Replies 1,108 Views

some random observations: Arceans: Can be quite painful, best in handling starbases. Altarians: Second painful, hardest trading-partner - the usually aren't willing to give you a fair deal. Torians: The most pacifistic ones (which doesn't mean much). Invading their planets is nice 'cause they usually have nearly every enhancement available. Drengin: Most agressive, but if they don't get a good start, they are no trouble. Interesting enough,

7 Replies 241 Views

In general, the Federalists are allways a good pick. They give you +20% on economics. More money=more you can spend wherever you need, so you are not bound to a special strategy, it always helps. (Choosing the War Party, for example, gives you a bonus that only makes sense when you play agressivve.) And when you're not used yet to optimize you economy, it might make this part of the game less critical. [Message Edited]

14 Replies 507 Views

May be a bit offtopic,but here's another thing I like about Stardock Central: When installing galciv from CD - you need admin rights on the computer. Every time you download and install a new patch - admin login required. But I'm playing on a computer at the office ('cause it's faster then my old computer at home) on which I don't have admin rights. So first I had to ran to our overworked admin everytime a new patch was released and do the "Please, I have an important

76 Replies 18,634 Views

Sorry to say that, kender, but there will definitly be no multiplayer mode ever in galciv. It is everything else but a 'small suggestion', it's more like 'rewrite the entire game'... Anyway, there are rumors that stardock is planing to make galciv2 some day, so there is hope. :)

87 Replies 20,197 Views

Oh, that's a very good and very simple idea! *transforms himself into the Manga-version of a Torian and looks at CariElf with bigbig eyes* pleeeeeaaaaaase... can we....? [Message Edited]

14 Replies 480 Views

Hm, I think the best solution is to drop the whole idea of a scoring algorithm. Instead, frogboy has to look at every submitted game and rate it. He can judge much better than any algorithm if the player did good or bad or if he used cheesy tactics, and the amount of time he would waste wouldn't be much higher than it is already anyway. LOL ;p :notsure:

86 Replies 2,280 Views

1. When one AI (or more likley, the player) reaches the point where he controls >50% of the overall influence, he can decide every UP issue alone. (If he doesn't sell influence to the others, and being that powerful, he should have no reason for that.) You could argue that this is somewhat realistic - if one member becomes so powerful, he can do what he wants. But I think it would be far more interesting (and realistic on another level) if the UP had a law wh

1 Replies 132 Views