Wouldn't it be simpler to just remove planet trading altogether? I mean, who in their right mind would give away a whole planet? 

I might be able to "remove" the planet trade screen from the Trade Window. That means players will have no access to it but the AI can still demand planets as tribute.

Here's an experimental version if the Trade window. The planet trade list's been moved out of screen and the tech list uses the additional space dynamically.

Link: https://www.dropbox.com/s/cd3fuo8acdozgjr/TradeWnd.dxpack?dl=0

Simply place this file in the \Community Update\Screens\ folder. Presto, no more planet trading.

In peace time the blocking of selling planets with citizens on it makes good sense (or else the price raised tremendously).  Surrendering planets as part of a war reparations agreement should probably still be allowed though.

Hmmm... Well I suppose I could restore the players ability to trade with planets.

Here's another experimental version of the trade window. 

Link: https://www.dropbox.com/s/n8w3236ewhsn8du/TradeWnd_NoAIPlanetTrade.dxpack?dl=0

In this version the player side's of the screen displays planets but the AI's side doesn't. This means you can offer planets in trade or peace offerings but you can't trade them back or buy them.

Applausi!!!   

I'll check it. For me it's a very good solution, and it also has a nice side effect: I always hated to get the complete list of my opponents planets available on the diplomacy screen.

Thanks

Glad you like it.

Same here

Guys I've had just one person respond to my latest alteration of the Trade window. Some more feed back would be appreciated.

I like the first version, it makes techtrading more easy. Also, you can't see now how many planets the AIs have (its kinda a measurement to see how well you are doing in the colony rush in comparison to the AIs) that's mystifying the game a bit.

I'm actually all for planet trading to be blocked entirely.  If uninhabited planets were tradeable that would be realistic but not when the planets are habitated.

I hate seeing the list of all opponenet planets as well.  I only brought up the war reparations so all angles had been considered.

Who in their right mind gives away planets?...not anyone trying to win...the millions of people on the planet certainly object!...the only circumstance that it even makes sense would be in a forced situation such as to end a war).    I'd be all for abolishing planet trading altogether for realistic AND game balance reasons.

If planet trading is left intact perhaps the price could be raised by a HUGE amount.  Even one barely habitable low population world should cost very dearly.  A high value fully populated world should be beyond reach.  Real appraisal of value is based on how much the alternative costs would be, such as how much it would cost in time, tech, and resources to take a world by force.  These alternative costs would never be cheap in GalCiv so why would a planet ever sell for a few beads?

The only time planet trading would "make sense" is if you were trading one of your far-flung enclave colonies for one of theirs inside your territory. However, I'm pretty sure the AI can't recognize this situation.

Any other situation where planets can be traded, demanded, or even gifted are ripe for abuse.

So, given the choice:

a. No planet trading. Period.

b. Only the player can offer planets in trade

So.

1 vote for a.
3 option b.

would it be possible to add a race selection button to the tech tree so you can see what techs the ai players have based on what you know so far from the tech report screen?

We can't. Such a chance will have to be done by Stardock.

Another for b.   I think it's brilliant.

b

Everyone.

Thanks for the feedback. Option B it is. 

Link: https://www.dropbox.com/s/2lsqlq8mnn17zl0/Community%20Update%20V6.0.2.zip?dl=0

This version allows a player to trade planet but AI planets are no longer available.

I've updated the manual as well.

Thanks!

I already installed the experimental version of the trade window you posted few days ago, should I upgrade anyway?

No need. The only new bit is the trade window.

I'm not entirely sure my opinion is welcome but regardless I'll still give my input

as far as I know it was quite usual to give(sell/buy/trade/exchange) away territory through history, marriage for example was such a condition where territory would change hands.... (of course not for peasants :p)

In my humble opinion you guyz are being influenced by the general fact that nowadays in our  western civilizations/ideology, we don't sell people & territory anymore.

That's true whismerhill but not on a planetary scale.  GC also doesn't have marriage contracts.  I'm sure the Drengin would have no problem giving away people except that they intend to own everyone and everything themselves!

The larger issue for GC is purely related to game balance.  The AI will trade itself out of the game if allowed to.

About the planetary scale, does it really matter ?

if we were still a feudal society and if intergalactic, it wouldn't be far fetched to sell & buy planets as a whole (perhaps not EARTH and the like though)

imho, this problem about AI selling himself off is of 2 scales :

- 1 the AI that is 10x inferior to you : no issue here, if he's that far below you could probably win all other kinds of victories

- 2 the AI that is at your level, barely inferior or superior : here it's an issue

imho what would need to be done is :

A - weight down monetary propositions according to AI economy & treasury & needs : that is if the AI earns 1000bc a turn, then your offer of 2000bc is just 2 turns of income, not that incredible anymore (if the AI already has 20000bc surplus in treasury then it should again give less value to your offer) (if the AI is at war and will probably need to buy dozens of warships then your money is more welcome(military rating comparison)). EDIT: Also selling a planet which is just beginning could make sense if the AI is struggling economically or if the planet is in danger of being invaded/turned, otherwise not so much.

B - weight down any property propositions according to AI state & number of objects in galaxy : same as above but for planets, giving a planet when AI has only 1, is awesome for him, but doesn't increase his chances when another player has 100 planets under his control...

I know it probably can't be done through modding and that's unfortunate.

still such drastic options should be left optional in my humble opinion. that said I'm not even using that patch so who cares about my opinion

I'm afraid changes to how AI perceives a planet are not possible  through modding. It could be done by changes to scripts, or rewriting the AI. Not that any of us can/is allowed to do it tho.

Changing planet value based on safety, profitability, number of planets in the galaxy and all other possibilities... that's some serious math involved and a lot of room for mistakes. Maybe that's why people in Stardock set planetary income as main affix by which to determine planetary value by the AI. It's just very complicated to do with all possible variables, especially considering this is an old game and development finished some time ago. 

Personally I almost exclusively play races with penalties to diplomacy (Yor, Korath, Thalan), so it is not an issue for me. I don't think planet trading should be disabled if its just one of many other exploits. If you pick Terran, Diplomacy bonuses, some Diplomacy tech and start to buy all freshly colonized planets, well, it's an exploit like any other, you just abuse AI and it is no different then picking for example Drengin, Small/Medium map, 10-12 civs and declaring war on someone every turn. If you rig the game, don't expect a challenge even on Masochistic or Suicidal. But most people don't play it this way (or rather I hope they don't).

But... if a Terran can buy planets for less then 600-800 bc without massive diplomacy bonuses, and is able to afford it, there is a problem.  

I haven't played GC for some time and I won't test it myself as I'm busy working on a mod for another game, but I trust people who worked and work on Community Update, so if they say planet trading is broken, then it must be broken and should be disabled, as rewriting it is possibly not worth the effort.

Is it worth designing ships with defences, or is it still the optimal strat to max the attack? I recall an average roll up was made for a defence score from 0 to Dmax. The score would then be deducted from the average attack roll. The problem obviously is that it is only a matter of time for a low defence roll to result in damage getting through. Slowly round by round the HP are exhausted and the ship is lost.

What improvements does the CU mod make, if any, to the area of ship/starbase combat?

Defenses got doubled, and thus became worthwhile. You can get an easy + early high MMR with defense-types of ships (leaving them into orbit).

For combat, I'd recommend designing balanced ships with a small attitude towards attack. It depends a bit on the timeframe, early on defenses are more worthwhile (fleets are smaller).