ascension starbase modules

You can only have one starbase (and module) per crystal. I believe there are crystals 5 per map. If you put a starbase on a second crystal then it would read different, but I'm not sure exactly what cuz I have never gone for more that one.

Aye, this is by design to keep the starbases completely vulnerable to attack and to keep crystal collection speed down.  Just think if they had the same mining modules as a resource, the Korx would have an edge on this victory condition.

I believe I've seen someone around here talk about a map with 6 crystals. I recently finished an ascension game on an Immense map and it had only 5 crystals.

I thought of it as about halfway as boring as I find the latter stages of trying for a war win (I've never finished one of those b/c I like the big maps and don't enjoy endless transport twiddling).

I think the ascension win might be more fun if the computer players would at least try to stop you even if it was essentially hopeless. I guess I should give them credit for not going suicidal in that context given how they are still capable of throwing away lots of ships against an effectively invincible starbase. My guard fleets boosted by fairly complete military starbases were pretty scary.

The last 100 turns of the 500 turn game were little more than keeping my score plumped via normal colony development and fleet production. A fancy win video wouldn't really make much difference to me, and since I belatedly learned that ascension wins count as war wins for the AltMeta, I doubt I'll be doing another one.

But, what's the module?  I can create the starbase, but I can't add the one module.  Is it something I need to research or is this just a quirk in the UI when you examine an ascension starbase?

Thanks.

This is the answer, it's a quirk.

As for how anti-climatic it is...At least you know how many turns are left in the game and as GW said...the larger the map, the quicker the game is via ascension.  You are garonteed at least 4 years of game to win, but if you jump on it really early, that'll all it ends up being.

Thanks.  That was driving me insane.

I didn't say that (or at least I didn't mean to). I believe that larger maps would lead to slower ascension wins because you need to develop the range and supply lines to reach all the crystals. I've also seen nothing to indicate that larger maps=more crystals.

My game took 500 turns both because I avoided taking a crystal until I was a mid-ranked military power and because 2 of the five were a *long* way from my core systems.

My bad, sorry.  I think I took it that the steady stream of crystal points made the game go faster than the tedious transport runs for a military win.

When you put it that way, we sort of agree I guess.

What do you think about the AltMeta putting ascension wins in the All/Military ladders and not Civil?

Well, some dev said it has the same multiplier as a mil win (2.5) so, I can understand the altmeta doing that.

It does take some military might to pull it off since if you have more than 1 crystal you got a "--" to relations w/ all races involved.  So with people more likely to beat on you, you'll need a stronger military to hold them off.  With that strong military for that many years, it may just be the equivlant to winning by military might.

I thought I saw it described somewher as sort of "mini-war win" with a 1.5, not a 2.5. Kryo?

They talked nasty at me, but I think I had at least twice the mil rating of the 2nd-ranked empire when I took the last 3 crystals. I kept the margin growing and no one so much as farted in our general direction. But, yes, I'm pretty sure I had my highest military score ever b/c this was the first game where I ever built military starbase arrays. I had an array of 3-4 at each crystal and 3-5 fat fleets in the AoE at each crystal.

To try getting back to cube3's OP, I have to say I see the reason for no modules on a crystal, but I still wonder if maybe one or two special "mining" modules linked to, say, the first giant steps on the tech win tree might not make the end-game of an ascension win a bit less tedious.

Well, the looming navy you had held them off, in that they didn't dare to attack you.  Passive-agressive defense.  With a military like that, you could have won a conquest victory, thus I think why it was given the 2.5.

TA Beta6b chagelog has this to say:

That was the last I saw of a victory weight.  Sadly, I just did an ascension game and forgot to take note on the base score and final score...

I was wondering what the point of ascencion victory really was.  If it is 2.5x, same as military, then it makes sense.

Basically it saves you from the tedium of conquering them or waiting for surrender, and gives you the full points.

Personally I'd always wanted a modified diplo win that was like this, where they basically surrendered early.  The reality is, once you own 90% of the resources on the map, the AIs can't win, and should just kneel down. 

That's where the Influence win comes into play.  If you own 75% of the galaxy and are war-free for 10 weeks after that fact, you win.

But the scoring system holds you in contempt for not being willing to go for complete genocide. Here's another plea to have the scoring system for GC3 (and NotMoM?) be neutral about victory types.

p.s. Curse you Metaverse Council people--I still sometimes wish I'd never paid any attention to scores, much less gotten a modest taste for medals...

I don't know about ascension wins but as a matter of fact, range is kind of "borked" in galciv2 since, right off the bat you can reach half the galaxy when said galaxy is immense, only difficulty in that kind of size is finding them all, range is really a non-issue unless you mod the game somehow ...

I never realized the war bit. Does that include minors? That is, if the Snathi declared war on me with 1 turn to go would the victory be stuffed?

I've never tested that w/ a Minor, but I would beleive a war is a war, even if they are a minor race.