[quote]I find being good easier...but i think im in the minority there. [/quote] Just curious ... how do you find it easier? I have played "good" mostly, but consider it a challenge, like playing at a higher difficulty level. I've been playing neutral and evil in the TA beta (since there is no good race in the mix yet), and have actually been a bit shocked by the level of advantages I'm getting as "evil," both pre-and post ethics tech. With the others, I wish that the alignments were ba
Shamgar
Anyway, you should be able to delete, obsolete, upgrade ships to your heart's desire during the game! I'm sure the promised fix will be delivered soon ... and I'll be able to complete the half-finished games I have saved.
Actually, the present system is tragically realistic. People have very short memories when it comes to elections. An "October surprise" in the form of a quick tax break would probably bring a landslide election in most countries. Sad but true.
I had high hopes that the game would become playable again with TA. I have a pretty large collection now of DA save-games that cannot be finished because they crash on attempted re-load (every game attempted since 1.8). Now, unfortunately, I have to add my first TA game to the pile. I played a few hours into the game last night, and was very impressed with the improvements. Then, on the attempt today to load that game: CTD! This is getting discouraging. Here's the debug.err file. <
Smart Exception does not seem to be working at all for me. An attempt to generate an exception file gives a "location not available" error message, and a search turns up no .cra files anywhere on my system. I have a boatload of half-played games now, that crash upon attempts to load them. The game is not [U]unplayable [/U](it plays fine!), but it is [U]unfinishable [/U]for me. I had some good games going, too ...
Yes, I tried a reboot. It made no difference. I save periodically every game I am playing, so I had four different 'save files' for the same 1.80a game. All CTD when attempting to load it.
Well, I got the 1.80a upgrade and there are more planets as desired (thank you!) However, there is a CTD in any attempt to load a saved game. I have four save files, and each one crashes at the same time ... just at the end of the loading sequence when you hear the soft "bump" sound. I tried rebooting windows, no difference. I tried starting a new game (no problem) and going from *there* to the "Load/Save" menu ... same thing. I then tried to load a save game from beta 4 - it crashed almost imme
Yes, I have to agree, the lack of good planets really took away from the game. It was not that way in the betas, including beta 4. I tried one game on 1.8 and thought maybe it was just a quirk that one time, then I saw this thread and realized it wasn't just me. I'm downloading 1.80a now and we'll see how it works. It appears that good ol' Stardock has fixed it before I could even comment on it here! I'm off now to give it a try ...
No, I think it is fine the way it is, not an exploit. As your empire grows, it makes perfect sense that there could/should be multiple "capitals," sort of like the Roman Empire with both Rome and Byzantium, or the U.S. with multiple manufacturing or technology "centers." In GalCiv, the planet you have conquered has built the infrastructure to give the bonus, and you are simply taking them over and integrating them into your empire.
So the out of memory error will finally be addressed in 1.7? I certainly hope so. My frustration point reached its limit last week when my well-advanced game would not go more than a turn or two, and I just got so tired of reloading and replaying the same turns over and over again. (Yes, I have the latest NVidia drivers, latest Vista patches, 2 Gig RAM, etc.) I'm afraid I'm simply going to have to quit playing the game for now, and will look forward to 1.7 and a return to GalCiv 2.
I just upgraded to the lastes NVIDIA drivers and also applied the hotfix from Microsoft as advised here, hopeing that would end my problems. I think I got two turns before I got the "Out of Memory error" and CTD on my save game attempt. Very disappointing. I have had this problem since playing the last beta, and I certainly hope there is some kind of a fix coming soon.
It depends on the difficulty level I am playing. If I'm trying a higher level than normal, and the starting position looks to be impossibly difficult, I'll hit CTL-N.
I usually play through to the end, usually for a conquest victory, but it can become tedious. It would be more "realistic," and less tedious, if enemy civilizations surrendered sooner than they now do. As it is now, they tend to stubbornly keep going long after their military is devastated and the outcome has long been obvious. Perhaps another interesting development would be the "collapse" of a civilization that is doomed to lose, with the various planets going every which way to different civi
I'm surprised at the comment that "Evil is not stronger." Perhaps I've missed some of the threads, but most of what I have read here is a consensus that playing "Good" is equivalent to playing one level of difficulty higher. The only debate I have seen is whether Neutral or Evil is better. I've played all three, and playing evil does seem easier to me. I just figured, as some have mentioned above, that the designers meant it to be that way. Personally, I think the "philosophy" behind this game m
All of the OP's ideas would be nice improvements to tidy things up a bit. Good suggestions.
Another tactic I use against spore ships, for when they *do* get through and capture one of my planets: I have what I call "commando" ships ready nearby to recapture. These are cheap invasion ships (smallest hull and invasion module, no propulsion). After the spore attack, the Korath population is extremely low, making for an easy recapture. I also console myself with the fact that this often means getting a tech from the Korath, too. You can also do this right after the Korath spore-c
A lot of throught and work went into your post. Thank you, there are some great suggestions there. Any number of them added would make a great game even better. That's been the great thing about GalCiv ... it has continued to improve with changes such as you are suggesting.
I agree completely with the OP on this. I am a Christian preacher myself, and certainly consider it important to speak about these important issues, but I come here to read and talk about GalCiv. It would be sort of like me standing up and preaching in a restaurant when everyone else is trying to enjoy their meals and conversation. It's not the right time and place. I would point out to those who complain about "the religious nuts" that probably half of what we are complaining about is
I have the latest version of DA, 2 Gig of RAM, and I still hold my breath whenever I save a game (which I like to do often). It does not give me the "out of memory error" as often as before the latest fix, but it still happens. Usually, it does not crash the game (though it does delete the save file, if I'm saving over a previous save), so I am able to go back and save the game after waiting for the PC to do whatever it needs to do for a couple of minutes until the game "comes back." I also woul
I like the idea of permanent wormholes. That would be especially great in games with the larger maps, and it would add a strategic element to the game (posting fleets on the entrance to control it?) It may be difficult, however, to get the AI to understand and use them. If that's the case, then I guess it would be an unfair advantage to the human player to include them in the game.
I'm with everyone else so far. Never building 'em for myself, build over them when I capture an enemy planet. Think about it, on a class 10 planet, it takes up 10% of the world's capacity! Same with the counter espionage thing - that building tile is too precious to use for something like that.
Another thought ... do not get discouraged if the other races are "ahead" of you in the early stages of the game. I find that always to be the case with my games (been playing on "painful" in DA lately). It is the long-term strategy that wins the game. I adjust my strategy as the game develops. I may need to make "friends" with #1 for a while (maybe make him a major trade partner so he won't want to attack me), and gobble up the other "weaker" neighbors to catch up to him. Or, for a while
Sorry. No affence, but have you seen all the shows about global warming. Its gotta be true. Right. It's been on TV, so it must be true. Five years from now this "man is causing global warming" nonsense will be universally laughed at as the joke it is (like the Y2K bug that was going to bring civilization to a crashing halt). The problem is, the wackos that are promoting this will not learn any humility, but will move right on the the next
I like the Drudge Report, which always has a lot of links to various news sources (mostly US and UK, it seems), and updates frequently. Besides the "real news," he tends to have a some "pop culture" stuff that does not interest me (about TV shows, celebrities, etc.) but you can just ignore those headlines (or read them if that's your cup of tea).
Very interesting thread. Thanks, OP, for your efforts, and for sharing your findings ... and to the others for their contributions. Personally, I often find the early game "balancing act" the most enjoyable part of the game.