No offense but you're beginning to sound like the "FPS PROS" where the key to success is literally abusing bugs, glitches, and design; when confronted with these accusations, their replies are disturbingly similar to yours: "Well anyone can do it, don't nerf things, make things better."

The whole "NERFING IS ALWAYS BAD OMG" standpoint is both asinine and has zero place in a game beta as well. Look at World of Warcraft. Something could be ridiculously broken, but whoever plays that class is going to freak if it gets threatened with a nerf, and respond with the 'lern 2 play' and 'omg its fine everyone should be able to do that'.

I just can't agree or even begin to stand your point of view on this on those grounds.

I'm afraid that your point seems a bit childish. You seem to be saying that 'your way of winning is not in my playbook so it must be cheating.'

The background of the Terrans, Korx and the Krynn all clearly indicate that their preferred method of domination are Diplomacy, Trade and Influence (I forget who the Technology specific race is off the top of my head.) All of these are ways that can be used to create victory without a war to the death. Three of these have recognised victory conditions, but there is no Trade specific victory condition. I and a number of others who like to build large effective empires rather than just build a killer fleet that makes everything go boom, rather like the alternate paths.

To me, in this game, a war is often an annoyance rather than the point of the game.

My real question to you is: Could you handle an AI who uses the strategies that I do?

I know that I could handle one who plays like you because that is what the AIs currently do, but can you say the same?

Scincerely,

[email protected]

The last two conditions can be modded, if the devs don't give you what you want. It will break Metaverse games, but I assume you don't play them since you're not showing medals (I don't play them either).

The easy mod is "No unique tech trading." There is a tag you can set in the .xml file to lock out *any* tech as non-tradable and can't be stolen. Right now only a few of the unique racial techs are flagged that way, but this can be adjusted to personal taste, as far as I can tell. It's a plain text file, easy to edit.

I haven't thought this through completely, let alone tried it... but I think you could force "No non-native tech trading." You could copy the default Twilight/Data/English/Techtrees folder to a safe place, and then make a copy of that folder for each race. Go in and flag off the techs that a specific race doesn't have in its native tree, for all the OTHER races' tech tree files. Then for each game you play, copy that race's modified set of .xml files to the Twilight/Data/English/Techtrees folder. Haven't tried it, but I think it should work.

It would be tedious to set this up, but you'd only have to do it once (after the game is stable and the tech trees are locked down). Then it's just a question of copying a folder into the default location before you play each different race. Ideally it would be a toggle on the game setup screen... but at least in a worst-case scenario, I think it's possible to mod what you're asking for.

"No brokering" can't be done this way, I don't think, unless I've missed something.

Uh, actually, you said that, not me.

Don't call me out on this - I'm not calling anyone a moron or accusing them of having head injuries, or otherwise insulting the hell out of them with my disagreement. I'm not bickering, and do not tell me "it takes two," because it doesn't. It just takes one guy (Uranium) being abusive to end a conversation's worth.

So, please, if you want to complain about someone being an abusive jerk in this thread, by all means call Uranium out, but don't blame me for his behavior, k?

The obvious answer to this is, yes, any human player could prevent an influence or diplo victory. Both of these victories requires all surviving civs to tacitly allow them, as they can be prevented by simply breaking alliance and declaring war. Of course, the player may not WIN the resulting war, but they can force the dominant civ to finish them militarily.



Admittedly, I have not followed these issues for the past few years, but to my knowledge NO ONE has the equivalent of a US carrier. The 5 other countries you are referring to have ships that are not even close to the capacity of an American carrier. A ship that carries a couple dozen Harriers isn't in the same league with a Nimitz class carrier. Several countries (notably France and the UK) have plans to build comparable ships, but have yet to even start construction.

The same can be said for stealth technology. No other country curently has independent stealth technology. Various NATO allies are buying into the upcoming F-35 program, but all fighters will be built in the US to maintain control over the technology. AFAIK no details comparing the F-35 to the F-22 and B-2 in terms of detectability, so it's possible we would be selling less capable technology.

Nuclear technology is the only point you have right. Once the technology was created, anyone with the necessary materials can build a bomb.

Speaking of, you never actually explained how the Altarian tech tree is so widdle and weak compared to the Drath, even though the only difference is that they lost War Profiteering, but gained like 5 unique techs.

Uranium is quickly becoming my favorite poster on these forums.



Then you know what? The fault lies on the devs for not making the races balanced. Tech trading should not be any kind of remedy for developer ineptitude.



A loaded question; if the unique tech trees seriously hinder the races that much, then they should have been balanced better.



Speaking as a guy who's played all three races on Tough or higher in the conditions you've described, (Though I haven't played the Yor since the last patch) I have no effing idea what you're talking about. I simply learned to exploit their racial advantages and try to work around their racial weaknesses. Thalans get horrible soldiering and low populations? Well, that sucks, but in that case what I need to do is build good sensor ships to keep an eye out for enemy transports and go for a lategame Terror Star tech while trying to keep the peace (While perhaps eating up a few weaker civilizations). It also sucks that it takes such a crapload of money to keep their industry going, but it's manageable with the right amount of micromanagement in my opinion.

Frankly, learn to play. I haven't had anywhere near the difficulty that you've insinuated these races have (Except with the Yor last patch; they fucking sucked). They may well need buffs, but allowing the abuse of tech trading to ensure races with inferior tech trees can con some other race into trading away their superior techs is not the answer. If you do that, then you take away their uniqueness and their intended racial weaknesses and strengths.

Honsby,

this game is a Beta and balancing is likely to continue right up until final release as refining this is on of the tasks normally undertaken iteratively during a Beta.

It's not ineptitude at all it's just that most balancing takes place in the Beta phase of a game. If it's still very unbalance at final release then your criticism might have some merit.

Also by the nature of giving races unique tech. trees with strength and weaknesses some races are going to have techs that can imbalance the game in the hands of other races. Fortuantley if you look at the test editor screen it's easy to tweak what is tradable, stealable and how likley the AI is to trade something.

Also the release has been delayed to improve the way the AI plays with the new more unique races and technologies. Be patient.

I see your grasp of the main game screen rivals your knowledge of history and current affairs.

My last game was Thalans, Obscene difficultly, tech trading off, won it. I never play less then Maso and have played the other two races fine as well although I forget the exact game setups.

The thing about TA is you change the way you play depending on the race and other factors. or if I need to translate that into language you understand:

ZOMG L2P Newb, wathca got tardasion???!? CHANGE THE WAY YOU PLAY ACCORDING TO YOUR GAME SETUP, zomg, win whoring!

India and Pakistan have joined the nuclear club. A few years ago Pakistan was considered a 3rd world country. North Korea has joined the nuclear club. It seems even poor countries can get in on the act.

F-22s will almost certainly be sold within the next 5 years. The Joint Strike Fighter is almost as capable as the F-22, and was devloped to be sold to our NATO allies. The Russians have a plane as manueverable as the F-22 (the Su-30MK) but not quite as fast, as the F-22 is the first plane able to achieve super-sonic speeds without using afterburners. (it's cruising speed is mach 1.2)

AIM-120s were designed under a shared technology treaty with NATO. We might not be selling the missiles themselves, but all of our NATO allies have access to the technology. (most recent release is the AIM-120C)

China's space program is doing quite well, as is it's ICBM program. Do you know why? BECAUSE THE GUY IN CHARGE OF CHINA'S SPACE AND MISSILE PROGRAMS IS THE SAME GUY WHO HELPED BUILD JPL. We deported him because we erroneously accused him of being a communist during the McCarthy era. (Qian Xuesen, named person of the year by Aviation Week and Space Technology.)

As for Supercarriers, I couldn't find a concrete definition to determine how many other countries have them. It's clear that at least the Russians do.

So, tell me again about other countries not having access to our tech?

You say that in EVERY post. You read others saying that when no one has said anything remotely like that.

You've even said that I said that, when the truth is that I went out of my way to acknowledge the validity of playing the game differently than how I play it.

Maybe the problem is you don't comprehend what you write?....I dunno

Oh, and since you mention Warcraft, are you sure you want to reference a game where the majority of the player base is less than 14?

Or at least have the maturity of someone under 14. Don't knock someone for their age, knock someone for how they act. I work with someone in their 40s and they will have a tantrum if "their" spot in the parking lot is taken (we don't have designated spots). They actually parked perpendicular to me, parking me in, all because I parked in "their spot". /eyeroll

There are always people who can't act in a rational, adult way. Unfortunate...

The countries that have supercarriers are: The United States, Russia, China (bought from the Russians, may still be under construction), France, and Great Brittian (I might be wrong about them, but I think that thewy still have one, and if they don't currently, they used to.) Scincerely, [email protected]

Guys, sharing tech between two countries is quite different than between species. For one, some techs might be dependent on the other species' physiology (Altarian Magic), or perhaps mental pattern (Iconian Precursor-proximity-ishnes), or even cultural system (Krynniac Conversion). Secondly, they might not be able to even imagine trading away their race's secrets. Thirdly, guys, we can't even imagine interspecies trading: like planetary invasion. Therefore, it's useless to compare to 2008 happenings.

To be honest, most of these kind of techs already are not able to be traded. Krynniac Conversion and Efficiency Studies 2 are probably oversights than deliberate "techs that can be traded". None of the other techs in the tech groups/series they belong to can be traded. That's the job for the "WillingnessToTrade" property of the techs in question, not whole-stop disabling of their trading. (BTW, I have a feeling that the "WillingnessToTrade" property of techs you are giving in exchange for their techs/money/whatever might be having an effect of making those techs more/less valuable too) Not having Flying Cars didn't stop people from imagining what a future (that has yet to come, despite their predictions) with them would be like. We can certainly imagine what these situations might be like, but that, obviously, doesn't make our imaginations on the matters right. But that doesn't stop us from guessing what it might be like.

We have three. However they are quite old now and two much larger carriers are on order. They still won't be as large as the US carriers but in the UK we have a much larger diplomacy rating, so we don't need quite as large a military rating.

Yes, I know. That is why they are good examples. Willingness to trade doesn't take into account inability to be willing to trade, and I did say: Alright, let me correct myself: We can't even accurately predict how interspecies trading would work, in other words we can't compare it to international trading. What I'm saying is that, like planetary invasions being too massive to compare to a simple international invasion, comparing interplanetary, inter-SPECIES, trading to 2008 trading is futile. EDIT: Also, how different are flying cars from normal ones? Yes, it may not be totally accurate, and yes, they are relatively quite different, but they are not anywhere near as different as two sentient species' culture could be.

Oh my GOD shut up about comparing real life tech trading to ingame tech trading. Guess what people? REAL LIFE ISN'T SUPPOSED TO BE BALANCED OR ENCOURAGE TECHNOLOGICAL DIFFERENCES BETWEEN RACES. THIS GAME IS.

Seriously. Everyone. Stop farking caring or talking about real life tech trading. It has no bearing on this game. Stardock clearly desired to make races more unique in ToA. Understand? That's all you need to know. Now all we have to ask ourselves is "what achieves that end while maintaining balance?"



Yes, thank you for stating the blatantly obvious. Tech trading still needs to be changed.

Chill. We can have a side discussion without hindering your discussion of tech trading. Just ignore the posts that don't concern you.



You seem to be mistaken in your definition. Russia, France, Great Britain, India, Italy, and Brazil all have carriers. Those carriers are half the size of an American carrier, and carry a third as many planes. The planes they do carry are mainly harrier-type vertical landing jets, and maybe a ski-jump launch system. None of them can support the type of aircraft carried by an American supercarrier. A flat deck does not make a supercarrier.

The new class of ships planned as a joint British/French project may qualify as supercarriers, but they are still planned to be smaller than American carriers, and carry fewer planes.

Sigh....some people believe anything they are told.

CVN-68 USS Nimitz Admiral Kuznetsov
Length 332.85 meters 300 meters
Beam 40.84 meters 38 meters
Flight Deck Width 76.8 meters 73 meters
Draft Not Specified 11 meters

Clearly the Russian carrier is half the size of the Nimitz. Never mind that the difference in their dimensions are negligible.

Displacement 88,000 metric tons full load 67,000 metric tons full load

The Nimitz weighs more. Probably because of the larger flight load and reinforcement for the steam catapults. (which by the way, are not better than ski jump launch. Only different. Ski jump is safer, and less strain on the aircraft. Catapults allow heavier aircraft to take off)

Speed 30+ Knots 32 knots

The Admiral Kuznetsov is not nuclear powered. Her lighter weight allows her to keep up in speed.

Aircraft 85 (breakdown indeterminant) 12 Su-33 (approx equivalent F-14)
5 Su-25UTG/UBP (ground support)
4 KA-27LD32 (recon helicopter
18 KA-27PLO (sub-chaser copter)
2 KA-27S (search and rescue)
Less aircraf, but her role is different than the Nimitz. As is obvious from her armament. But 41 is closer to half of 85 than it is to 1/3 of it, as was claimed.
Oh, and before you say anything about planes versus copters, some part of those 85 aircraft on a nimitz class are copters. 17 years ago, I went through chemotherapy with a guy who was a copter pilot on the Teddy Roosevelt.

Armament. 2 Sea Sparrow launchers 8 30mm AA cannon
(Later carriers of the class 8 30mm gatling/SAM systems
carry 3) each capable of 12 P-700 Granit SSM
launching 8 missiles at a 18 3K95 Kinzhai SAM
time. (capable of 192 missile
3 20mm AA cannon (4 on salvos, 1 missle per
later models) launcher every 3 seconds
8 missiles on each
launcher)
2 RBU 12000 UDAV-1 each
capable of launching
60 rockets

So what she lacks in fighter power she makes up for in missiles/rockets.

Gah...that came out terrible. It didn't hold my spacing....

CVN-68 USS Nimitz
Length: 332.85 meters
Beam: 40.84 meters
Flight Deck Width: 76.8 meters
Draft: Not Specified
Displacement: 88,000 metric tons full load
Speed: 30+ Knots 32 knots
Aircraft: 85 (breakdown indeterminant)
Armament. 2 Sea Sparrow launchers 8 30mm AA cannon(Later carriers of the classcarry 3)
3 20mm AA cannon (4 on later models)



Admiral Kuznetsov
Length:300 meters
Beam:38 meters
Flight Deck Width:73 meters
Draft:11 meters
Displacement:67,000 metric tons full load
Speed:32 knots
Aircraft:12 Su-33 (approx equivalent F-14)
5 Su-25UTG/UBP (ground support)
4 KA-27LD32 (recon helicopter
18 KA-27PLO (sub-chaser copter)
2 KA-27S (search and rescue)
Armament:8 30mm AA cannon
8 30mm gatling/SAM systems
12 P-700 Granit SSM each capable of launching 8 missiles at a time.
18 3K95 Kinzhai SAM (capable of 192 missile salvos, 1 missle per launcher every 3 seconds 8 missiles on each launcher)
2 RBU 12000 UDAV-1 each capable of launching 60 rockets

There. That's a little better