[quote]Do they? I thought they got aged out[/quote] Stardock recently revised the metaverse so that even if a game does reach zero value, it will still count towards your "battle" total as regards to the admiralty and game count bars and medals.
I just downloaded the Saint Event Pack and put the pcx files in the gfx folder and the unique event files in data folder. I used the GalCivWriter event editor to scan through the files to see if everything is OK. Unfortunately it appears that two pcx files are missing (Ancestor.pcx and event_gtcolonyday01.pcx). The readme claims that these two files are standard but I don't have these files. Since I have never removed any files knowingly from the gfx folder (I have only added pcx files from the
As I understood it, the jolly roger icon is intended to remind you that you failed the first cultural resist roll and that if you fail a second time, no matter when during the game, your planet "flips".
Wow! I just tried this out in AP 1.50. You can actually boost your population by repeatedly launching and landing in one turn. Talk about a cheesy loophole! ;)
[quote]I am using much smaller and shorter brides.[/quote] I guess he likes his wives petite! LOL
Update: For some reason, the Improved Mining only built after I changed size from 0 to +1. I went back and tried building some of the other size 0 modules and they build fine. So size seems to matter only for this one particular module. Strange, must be glitch in programming or something. With so many possible modules that can be built on one starbase, there might be a rare conflict created from certain combo of modules. :notsure: Oh well the mod works great other than thi
Update: For some reason, the Improved Mining only built after I changed size from 0 to +1. I went back and tried building some of the other size 0 modules and they build fine. So size seems to matter only for this one particular module. Strange, must be glitch in programming or something. With so many possible modules that can be built on one starbase, there might be a rare conflict created from certain combo of modules. :notsure: Oh well the mod works great other than thi
[quote]On the beta I managed to get the starbases working by changing the SB identifier number.They were from 0-29 which clashed with the standard Galciv SB identifiers (0-57 I think). This made the new SB improvements unusable.Once I changed them to 59+ (or 58+ cant remember)I had no problems. I did this using a word processor[/quote] I already had the numbers sequential since I checked using the sort by ID# function in GalCivWriter. As I said, a simple fix of the size from +0 to +1 fi
A few of the SB modules in the Omega Pack are non-functional but I think found the cause. I believe the module size needs to be at least +1 for non-Terror Star modules. Apparently size +0 is reserved for Terror Star construction. Otherwise everything works smoothly so far. Good job Icho! :)
The ships, techs, and improvements work great. Some of the starbase modules need to be fixed. The ID #s are sequential (0-55 for GalCiv/AP base, and 56-Bookend for yours) but the module Improved Mining still does not build. The only thing I could see is that you had it sized at +0 while all of the normal SB modules have +1 size or higher except for the Terror Star modules which are +0. I changed the value to size +1 for Improved Mining using GalCivWriter and it built correctly. Apparently all n
#2 by Diplomat Arturus Magi - 4/11/2004 4:14:14 AM Political parties are limited to 18, and have to be sequential. If there are any gaps, things break. Starbase Mods: the limit is defined by the module number of the BOOKEND module, and once again again they have to be sequential in order. Gaps make the later moduless unbuildable. There is no known absolute maximum. Improvements: no known limit, but after a certain point the array will start to overwrite other data. T
I was hoping that you didn't cheat. But is now quite obvious by your own words that you cheated, by game file editting in-game, to avoid the anomolous score trigger. I'm even more sorry that you can't see this fact for yourself. :(
Stardock Forums
[quote]...because Stardock would have full control over the game[/quote] Now THAT is great news! :) Sign me up! :D
Stardock Forums
[quote]If we did a MOM2 it would be in conjunction with Atari who currently owns the rights[/quote] As much as I trust Stardock to produce a quality game, I have this bad feeling that Atari will somehow screw things up. Atari's rep in gaming circles right now is severely tarnished. I'm crossing my fingers that your way of doings will influence Atari and not the other way around.
[quote]This is an issue between Renegade and Stardock and Lothmorg and Stardock and we should all butt out and let them get to the bottom of it[/quote] Well said!
Stardock Forums
[quote]correct me if I'm wrong (and well could be) [/quote] its was MOM not MOO
I just finished a game using the small balanced custom map provided with AP 1.50. It submitted to Metaverse OK but it doesn't show up in player record any different from a randomly generated map. Is the player record supposed to indicate in the space listed as "map...", the map type? Or is this aspect of the metaverse not active yet?
Stardock Forums
[quote]Perhaps have more planes of existance instead of the two[/quote] Good idea!
Now that Altarian Prophecy has gone gold, I thought it would be a good time to list mine and your favorite mods from the library. My list: Ship mods: Advanced Transports and Freighters-better speed, capacity, etc for later in games Death Glider-high price earlier ship for the militaristic Mini-colony Ship-perfect for colonizing PQ13 and PQ14 planets Monstrous Mod V2.0-adds a little spice to games by allowing one to build your own space sharks mid to late ga
[quote]There are always fluctuations from game to game[/quote] The two biggest ones I can think of is the location of initial minors and the various anomalies since they are randomly placed
Thank you for your diligence in the audit.
Stardock Forums
Everyone please see Frogboy's new thread. He has covered all relevant points.
Stardock Forums
[quote]I think we all need to stand back a minute and wait for the official announcement from Stardock before we even comment further on this subject. Too many people saying either way could damage the reputation of the two people in question and cause them to leave the forums. Something I think we all don’t want! Please respect their integrity and refrain from further comment on this matter. Hopefully we will hear from Stardock soon and this will rectify the situation once and for all![/quote]<
Did you register AP after installing SDC?
Stardock Forums
[quote]Some people are messing with games they've submitted already and resubmitting them as new games[/quote] :SURPRISED: Wow!! I didn't think this was much of a possibility. This is very disturbing if true! :(
You're about to visit an external site:
Sign up here to get the latest news, updates, and special offers delivered directly to your inbox.
