I'm didn't think you could be such a took, precursor, but you've opened my eyes. I'm 'hated' but some pathetic fanboys, such as yourself. And you have stil lost this argument, otherwise you would be able to debate the content of this thread. Alas, you are retarded.
Actually, pre. You're still an idiot. Which of my criteria was I breaking. I was not the one who made this thread irrationally personal. And besides, unlike your snide insinuations, you've provided all the proof I need to call you out.
onowak. I just have on thing to say to that.........i like you.
No, you've just whine like a little girl when some note that your suggestions suck, you don't know what you are talking about, etc. And when a developer notes how bad your suggestions are, you go about condeming the game based on some utterly childish and unreasonable expectations aren't validated. Then, when you realize you are loosing the argument, you try to shift the focus away from those embarrassing comments and recase yourself as the good guy who was simply trying to speak trut
Actually precursor. I never doubted that the observations of A.I. weakness were valid, but those were never the issue. Stop trying to set up strawmen. You do have a dubious sense of entitlement. Otherwise you wouldn't have raised you own expectations of how well the A.I. should be doing and then label the game as 'in beta', despite the fact that it already performs better than every similar game on the market, atleast at initial release.
Uh, vimes. Have you read any of the replys. The OP didn't know what he is talking about. You don't know what you are talking about. It wasn't that he wasn't sugarcoating it, it is that he was plainly ignorant in his insinuations that some problems could be easily fixed and that the A.I. was unchallenging for anyone. No one was questioning that the A.I. has faults. What they were questioning were his dumb suggestions and general ignorance.
Uh. it's not that you have issues. It's not that you find the A.I. easy, the game not challenging or fun... It's that you constantly insinuate that either the developers don't know what they are doing or that the game is an abject failure because it doesn't live up to your literally impossible standards for AIs in complex strategy games. You could have posted your negative views of the game and that would have been fine. But you have constantly gone beyond that with ignoran
Precursor, I think you need to think before you reply to the above, because it looks to be on the money.
Uh...you can customize them ingame before the setup..you know, like every game you play...
No, the point of the game is not to be 'tough' or to satisfy powergamers. Rather, it is to satisfy as many gamers as possible within the genre market its going for. That's a big difference, and should be easy to understand.
Uh..i would say it was entirely the hookers. And I doubt very seriously that powergamers have that much influence over the buying habits of many, especially when you are talking about the type who tend to hang out on message boards. The broader 'hardcore', i.e. reviewers on gaming sites, tend to mark a good A.I. by its ability to appear intelligent at first glance, and give a challenge to most players in its semi-hardcore readership. That is what is more likely to drive sales. How do
I don't buy into the assumption that most 4x strategy games fall off in popularity because of a lack of challenge from the AI. In fact, I doubt seriously that most ever beat the highest difficulty settings. Even strategy gamers run the gamut from casual to fanatic. Most are likely on the former end of that spectrum; they get bored of a game's mechanics and yes, look, moreso than from a lack of challenge. So, in other words, developers put minimal effort into AI, because AI brings litt
I'm glad a developer has finally come out and taken and (polite) swipe at the half-assed, ignorant condescending 'suggestions' that many posters typically lob at the forum. So, let me give some poster here some basic example of good and bad feedback, and especially the AI: "The AI does not handle starbases well; this is why." - Good "The AI doesn't hand starbases well: THIS SHOULD HAVE BEEN FIXED!! IT'S SO EASY!!! YOU DEVELOPERS SHOULD KNOW YOU HAVE A LOT OF WORK TO DO
GalCiv2 Forums
I'm currently using a pretty decent laptop (512 Megs of ram, 1.5 Pentium M), but I worry about the 3d stuff. I don't know if a 32Mg ATI will cut it. So what has been the experience on game performance so far in beta?
I'm currently hooked on Disciples 2 (Gold). Fun little game. Not the deepest game you can find, but the strategy elements have longer legs than you might guess after first studying its simple mechanics.
Does anyone have any more specific advise on this scenario. Base construction was obvious..it was alluded to in the mission briefing. The problem is, atleast on challenging, that the Torians already seem to have constructers on the way at the very beginning of the game, presumably through rush build. They seem to start off with enough funds to also 'surge' with the military units after going for the constructer rush. So any suggestions as to my build order from someone who has beaten th
Just fishing for some workable strategies. I'm playing it on 'Challenging' and I'm having trouble with the cultural route. The Torians have obscene population growth and seem capable of researching and fielding a fleet simultaneously, not to mention grabbing up on the little cultural sites. I usually do the colony rush first, followed by a military buildup to prevent them from immediatly declaring war, but that hasn't worked. So what am I doing wrong?
My bad. I didn't know that I was one patch iteration off. I've updated and it appears to be gone.
I've hit the midpoint of a game (Large Map) and I keep getting this one crash bug on this one specific turn. I can't really tell whats causing it, but windows reports and error and asks if I would like to send them a report. If this is a game bug, where should I send the saved game file?
There seems to be two schools here. One emphasizing gameplay and the other simulation. I'm firmly in the former category. I would ask that new mechanics not be introduced in a vain attempt to simulate grandscale fine politics and the like (some of the cultural stuff suggested here sounds especially bad, no offense intended), especially if it adds too much randomality to the game, versus genuine strategy. If new mechanics help the gameplay while also pumping up the versimilitud
Hey all, I'm new to the game, but i noticed something odd. In one alien controlled sector, I have 5 times the influence as the alien itself, no surprise because i was going for a cultural victory. Now this has been going on for several turns, but the star system as yet to secede. Is this the result of the bug, or is there some technology that would allow them influence immunity? If the latter, are there any strategies that anyone cares to suggest for making the darn thing rebel?
Stardock Forums