And of course now we won't hear another peep from him about this....Almost seems like a waste of a perfectly good rant.

You guys really need to get on the ball and add some better things to the expansion. I told you guys I wanted a Civ3 PTW type Expansion.

This quote says it all really.
S1Genocide:s opinion is much more important than ours. That's why he is upset.

Heck, even I can make a PTW-type expansion for you, that's not tough. I just need a cardboard box and a pooper scooper!

Personally, I'll take DA instead.


-Cauldyth

Cauldyth

Ye! Ye! AI uber alles!

What was in Civ3 PTW? Multiplayer Modes: Includes Turn-Based and Simultaneous game types and appearing for the first time in a Civilization game, a Turn-less mode. Provides full TCP-IP/LAN, Hotseat and Play be Email support. Multiplayer games: Face off against the best Civilization players worldwide with fast-paced multiplayer games like Elimination, Domination, Regicide and Capture the Flag. Eight new Civilizations featuring new Leaders including: Genghis Khan Temujin, King Hannibal, Queen Isabella and King Brennus, and all new units will challenge your diplomatic and combat skills. Enhanced Scenario Editor, including new unit and tile sets lets players construct a Scenario from any time period. Players can strengthen their empire with: * new map features like outposts, airfields and radar towers * new guerilla and medieval infantry units * new wonders and city improvements like the stock market or the Internet Updated interface improvements like auto bombard, rally points, stacked movement and a streamlined espionage interface allow for more efficient management. New Governments *Fascism *Communism *Democratic Socialism *Constitional Monarchy

So in other words if you don't care about multi-player then PTW was barely even a mod...?

kblore... you missed my point. WHo is s1genocide... that frogboy makes a unique post addressing his concerns?? do you get it? how is he different then any of us.... we paid same as him, but only negative posts get addressed??? I am confused here.

Hmmmm... maybe he raised some points that frogboy thought were worth addressing? Since the GalCiv2 team have been consistently responsive to their customers wishes with respect how the game should evolve, that seems reasonable. He wants to know how other people feel about this issue?

It is an expansion, and from the sound of it, a darn good one.

It is just not the expansion Mr. Complaint Dept. wanted, and seems to expect.

I haven't prepaid, but I'll be post-paying for sure.

And, Frogboy, in my last 2 games I have not seen the type of tile usage I was complaining about. Maybe it was just a fluke.

In my opinion, an expansion (vs a patch) is when a good game gains additional features. I have no problem at all spending more money on a game that has demonstrated it is good or has the potential to be good. Dark Avatar does add two things: spies & asteroid belts (I couldn't care less about the other things). Is this worth paying for? Well, I wasn't even considering it until I read that if Dark Avatar sales are good then the next expansion will add multiplayer.

As good as GalCiv2 is... unless it gains multiplayer then it will only be a temporary amusement for me.

Honestly games should be triple their price ($100+) but since 99% of what is released is crap, that isn't going to work in the market. So I'm happy to pay $30 or $40 and then if the game is good buy the expansions and sequels.

GalCiv2 is good. So if $25 for Dark Avatar plus another $50 for multiplayer will bring GalCiv2 Multiplayer then I'm happy to pay for it.

kblore... you missed my point. WHo is s1genocide... that frogboy makes a unique post addressing his concerns?? do you get it? how is he different then any of us.... we paid same as him, but only negative posts get addressed??? I am confused here.

I was the guy (and part of the mod team) who took the time to fix Master of Orion 3 in alls its "horrible" glory. (its not that bad fully modded and ASM Coding repaired but still.)

Happy now?

And, Frogboy, in my last 2 games I have not seen the type of tile usage I was complaining about. Maybe it was just a fluke.

I think I found the cause over the weekend to the dumb AI fluke. I'm pretty sure the final 1.3 solves that (and the crashing problem, we spent yesterday tracking that down as well).

And, Frogboy, in my last 2 games I have not seen the type of tile usage I was complaining about. Maybe it was just a fluke. I think I found the cause over the weekend to the dumb AI fluke. I'm pretty sure the final 1.3 solves that (and the crashing problem, we spent yesterday tracking that down as well).

I also hope that the AI starts using the worlds that they build the capitols on and stop building more than one on a planet. If the race has only one or a few planets (in the case of the minor races or the major race has bad luck in the initial colony rush), I'd understand because thier choices are limited as far as building those capitols.

I don't know why, but it doesn't seem to use the economy capital world properly, although I'm not sure if I'm just seeing the effect of war by looking at it later on.

Thanks for the update.   

kblore... you missed my point. WHo is s1genocide... that frogboy makes a unique post addressing his concerns?? do you get it? how is he different then any of us.... we paid same as him, but only negative posts get addressed??? I am confused here. I was the guy (and part of the mod team) who took the time to fix Master of Orion 3 in alls its "horrible" glory. (its not that bad fully modded and ASM Coding repaired but still.) Happy now?

ah cool. Nice to meet ya (although not having played the MOO series).

The multiplayer thing is a kind of dead horse around here, or maybe more like a comatose (not quite dead) horse, so some people around here are a little touchy about it since people keep asking is there multiplayer in GC2

Still, a few more goverment options would be cool since the democratic thing doesn't really fit for the evil races.

and everybody agrees that the diplomacy needs to be beefed up, but we don't know any details yet.

The AARs (after action reports) people seem to love and now anyone can participate to a degree with the Epic generator creating unique stories of their games.

Dark Avatar will make creating game stories easier and I hope more people will post them. I have a collection of 35 and counting. If anyone knows of one not in my list let me know and I'll add it.
A Collection of Game Play Examples

At the risk of sounding like a broken record (guess that dates me   ), I was one who asked about having both DA and GC2 loaded simutaneously, and Kyro replied mentioning the folder conflicts.

Please realign the save folders so that both games can be loaded without swearing at each other (or otherwise interfering   ). In particular, when the betas come out, (yes, I'm preordered) I would like to be able to either test the new or play the existing without having to go through the gyrations of unloading/reloading the game files (or renaming folders) and keeping copies of the savegame folders on the side to swap in and out. (I know from past experience the more steps I have to go through the more likely I am to mess up somewhere along the line.....    )

It's probably a bit much to ask for DA, but the "home run" solution for me would be the ability to locate or name the folders where/what I want (in the config section) so that I could have them conform with how I save/organize the rest of my files.

Other than that, I am looking forward to getting ahold of DA - I do have one gameplay question, though - Are the techs allowing colonization of previously uninhabitable planets converting the planets so that everyone can use them, or is the tech so that only the players with the tech can use them?

I was the guy (and part of the mod team) who took the time to fix Master of Orion 3 in alls its "horrible" glory. (its not that bad fully modded and ASM Coding repaired but still.) Happy now?

Oh goody! We have an EXPERT!

Go do it yourself then.

First of all... I've already preordered so this is coming from someone who's cash you have locked in.

To everyone else, this is a $30 expansion, not a $20 expansion so it seems like we should be getting 3/5 of the content of a new game, no?

Units: The new units that were added in the expansions of the other games mentioned added new levels of strategy and gameplay. Broodwars was a good example of that with the one or two new units completely changing the gameplay. I don't see any new units or anything equivalent to that (ie new weapons/armor/modules that add different strategies to the game) other than some cosmetic additions. Whoopty do. That'd be like Civ3 stating that an expansion feature was that you can have your commandos with red berets instead of green. (unless there are new ship parts that are to be included that I haven't seen listed yet, of course).

Governments: Yes, they have 1-2-3-4 types where 4 is the best, but you have to remember that you chose a political party too, which in theory determines the type of gov't that you employ. IE. in Civ terms, you're a member of the communist party and you're locked into the communist gov't. If your civ becomes democratic, YOU are still communist therefore you have penalties unless you can get your support high enough. I had some misgivings about the GalCiv political system till I wrapped my head around this, now it makes sense and gives you more of a sense of roleplaying an actual leader (vs civ where, really, youre a god and you live for thousands of years).

In the end, these games boil down to 3 main aspects of gameplay... ship to ship combat and conquering planets. Everything else, espionage, custom enemies, asteroid fields, planet environments etc are just extras that set the game apart from other similar games or affect a small portion of the overall game arc (ie colonizing modifies a relatively short phase of the game) but the 2 core elements are still the most important.

Now, the environmental stuff makes the colonizing phase much more significant, but in the end its a rather passive process. Get the tech, build a colony ship, done. KEEPING the colony falls back to one of the 2 core gameplay elements.

Unfortunately, I don't really see any changes/improvements/upgrades to the core gameplay. No new strategies in ship design/combat (using subspace blaster instead of the other previous beam weapon doesn't really count) and no new strategies for capturing/destroying etc planets. IE cloaked ships + cloak detector with sensors IV, improved cloak as a racial ability, planet destruction, bombardment, mind control... heck what about a way to use saboteurs to slowly whittle down non enemy starbases etc? I'd be nice to actually be able to destroy those annoying allied mining bases in your area and stuff.

PS: yes, I know the AI is very important, perhaps the most important, but its also subtle and probably only noticable to those that have mastered the highest difficulty settings.

PPS: I played PTW and I've played/play Civ4 multiplayer, and yes it takes a long time but its GREAT if you have a friend that you regularly play these games with and can spend a couple an hour or two a day with voice chat on. I don't think I've actually played a single player game of Civ4 yet. I think multiplayer could work with this, but I also don't think its worth pouring a ton of effort into as a jury-rigged system. Once you introduce multiplayer, you have to start REALLY balancing all the preliminary stuff like racial abilities etc.

Welp, that went on WAY longer than I anticipated...

The problem I have with 1genocide, is that his post makes it clear that DA is not an expansion unless HE says it is an expansion, and he doesn't say it is an expansion unless it has what HE wants. 4 evil govt's? 4 evil political parties? I don't care a thing about that, but unless it is included, DA is not an expansion, according to him. Since nothing matters but what HE wants, I suggest that he writh a game himself.

Oh goody! We have an EXPERT! Go do it yourself then.

And I will! I can't work on any of the coding though that would break Stardocks EUALA. Until they stop support. I love the flaming comments by the fanboys here there as ravenous as the Master of Orion community.

And multiplayer is already in the coding just a few bugs to work around like what happens when 4 ships attack the same spot? But yes may the bashing of myself and my ideas sontinue.

There SHOULD be 4 evil goverments. Russia was NOT a democratic country for more than 70+ years you know...  



Monc34

In the end, these games boil down to 3 main aspects of gameplay... ship to ship combat and conquering planets. Everything else, espionage, custom enemies, asteroid fields, planet environments etc are just extras that set the game apart from other similar games or affect a small portion of the overall game arc

Keep in mind that many of us don't necessarily agree with this. To me, the non-combat aspects of the game are as important and as interesting as the combat aspects. I enjoy winning games by non-combative means as much as I do by combative ones (often because the combative ones bog down as you get closer to victory). If I were to play a game of GalCiv2 where my military's only purpose was to flex its muscles and warn off potential aggressors, that'd be just fine with me.

There's another 4X game out there right now that focuses almost exclusively on the combat aspect, and generalizes all the other aspects a great deal. I don't consider all the non-combat stuff in GalCiv2 to be just extras, meant to set it apart from games like that. To me, they're core aspects of the game, and greatly affect how I play it.


-Cauldyth

S1Genocide-

So, now you qualify your statements.

Let me throw a small rant your way. I can see where you are coming from and I respect it. Civ3 was almost a disaster. All the patches and expansions only made it slighter better. Moo3... well that almost brought tears to my eyes. On one hand it took alot of what I loved from the past (starcontrol, ascendancy, pax imperia etc) and integrated it into a game.. but they half assed everything and the game was a buggy bastard (crashes/lock ups/insane AI behavior, astronomical cheating). Moo3 turned me away from computer gaming altogether. I do not blame anyone for it, but with the leaps and bounds in technology, I just couldn't afford to keep up (quality of games was terrible). So I had to get a Playstation and be glad with what they had to offer.

Then GalCiv2 ads appeared in the back of a computer magazines (buried somewhere amongst many others ads) and I started to follow it. Right before the game came out, I purchased my first, non work related, gaming p.c. What does all of this have to do with your post? well, I am not a modder, I am a gamer. I have as many concerns about the quality of the product as you and everyone else, and when I see posts beating up the crew that is making this game happen, I get a little mad. I do not want them to abandon the project because of the frustration that they might feel.

On the other hand, now that I have seen where you are coming from, I can understand your frustration as well. One thing I would suggest to you, if your modding skills are all that you say they are, I am sure you can talk to frogboy/draginol and see about getting hired. Your type of passion and the skills you posses would be alot more useful if you could apply them directly to the game and not spend them frustrating the programmers of the series.

That's all.


-N

p.s. I have a small question.. I shall repeat again.... the one thing that drives me nuts is when the AI builds influence starbases in the middle of my territory far away from everything, and what I want to know is the AI trying to overtly force a war with me? (at this point we are usually allied).

Keep in mind that many of us don't necessarily agree with this. To me, the non-combat aspects of the game are as important and as interesting as the combat aspects. I enjoy winning games by non-combative means as much as I do by combative ones (often because the combative ones bog down as you get closer to victory). If I were to play a game of GalCiv2 where my military's only purpose was to flex its muscles and warn off potential aggressors, that'd be just fine with me.

You're correct, I should have been more clear. When I talk about a core gameplay element, I'm referring to something where if it were missing, the game wouldn't really be reasonably playable by 90% of the population.

For example, if you remove ship to ship combat, would this still be a playable game? Technically, maybe, but it'd just be fleets of constructors building influence bases and trade routes and there would be 10 people playing it who really love influence building.

Ditto with colony capture.. there would be no real point to the game after the first colony rush.

BUT... if you remove influence flipping, or remove governments, or remove the technological victory, the game is still viable but a lot of the DEPTH is gone. Therefore, although important, those aren't core gameplay elements.

p.s. I have a small question.. I shall repeat again.... the one thing that drives me nuts is when the AI builds influence starbases in the middle of my territory far away from everything, and what I want to know is the AI trying to overtly force a war with me? (at this point we are usually allied).

They're just trying to share some of those rockin iYor tunes with you uncool Terrans... its like McDonalds in Moscow!

For example, if you remove ship to ship combat, would this still be a playable game? Technically, maybe, but it'd just be fleets of constructors building influence bases and trade routes and there would be 10 people playing it who really love influence building.

Well, I'm not so sure. SimCity was very popular, and SimGalacticEmpire might be too! Seriously though, there are many of us who get off on building.

Another example might be Society. It sounds like combat will be a VERY small part of that game.


-Cauldyth