SilentAlfa

[quote who="CrusaderScott" reply="9" id="2052128"]I probably will. I enjoyed WiC as a *beautiful* RTS beer-and-pretzels wargame. Unfortunately, I think the bitter division that occured between the casual players and the so-called "expert" players killed that game. Hopefully, the expansion will give the game a fresh start. [/quote] Definitely, the whole pro mentality was what really killed the game. Sad fact was though that aside from infantry players, the pros d

Shallow? Fundamental design errors? Horrible online community? I've been playing since it came out and I haven't noticed any of these things :/.

i dunno what mine is edit: cool i have a high score

The Drath. They're actually exterminated in mission one.

[URL=http://img365.imageshack.us/my.php?image=tnrzg8.jpg] [/URL] It had long been proposed by science fiction writers that Earth would eventually be peacefully united. But it would not be so. By 2168, the United States of America had militarily conquered the majority of planet Earth. The planet was renamed New Terra by the insane President Michael J. Bush III (whose great-great-grandfather was none other than Geor

Korath. I simply don't want to deal with long wars, so I commit genocide in every war.

[Hull type]-[Generation][Subgeneration] [Name relating to purpose] For a fourth generation fighter, a name might be "F-4 Enfield," and for a second-generation sensor cargo barge which has been updated because of miniaturization, it might be "C-2a Sky Eye".

Exactly, it's like turnbased homeworld.

- More diplomacy--an or option, as in, "give me 100bc or I declare war." Also, telling players to move ships out of your territory etc,. - War coordination with multiple allies and between computers -- "invade planet X, attack starbase 52." It'd be really interesting to see computer coordinating attacks, or to coordinate attacks with computers. - More advanced military tactics by the computer, and military tactics depending on race. I'd like to see the Altarian Resistanc

Naw, I don't think you get it. See, it's like a giant tactical battle, that's why the map has to be much larger. So you have more room to maneuver. Ships can always use their tactical maneuvers out in space--on the normal map. There are no seperate battles, it's all handled on the same map.

Say, I have an idea that'll merge tactics and strategy. It'll involve some suspense of disbelieve, but too bad. Alright, firstly, the game maps will be made quite a bit larger, with much more distance between planets and stars and other solar systems. Then, it's essentially permanent tactical combat. Each ship can always shoot, essentially, or pull off whatever special moves you want. That way, you can always reinforce battles, always do hit-and-runs and more complex tactical maneuvers,

I usually make fully offensive fighters and give defenses only to my capital ships.

I name my planets after things that have something in general to do with their purpose. My manufacturing planets are named after cities famed for manufacturing or space travel, such as Detroit or Houston. My tech planets are named for scientists, and my other planets are all named after nations.

I think a lot of you are confusing terrorists and insurgents. Insurgents attack military targets; terrorists attack indiscriminately.

I usually pick the enemy that's being the biggest jerk. That is, ones that are extorting stuff from other races or trying to do so from me. Usually, I launch a very fast assault force which includes spore ships. I beeline for their planets and destroy the defenses, then quickly use the sporeships. Sometimes, if I plan it right, I can take out an entire race in one turn.

I think video games aren't anti-social and aren't addictive. I play a new game every week--and the ones I stick with are leisurely so I can play them over a couple day at a half-hour a day such as GalCiv, or are multiplayer, such as Starcraft. Multiplayer games are the opposite of anti-social--they're quite social. If you're on the internet a lot, you're probably going to be a lot less gullable than someone who doesn't use the internet, and besides, you can talk to other people on the internet.

I think the majority of the ideas in the first post rather overcomplicate the game. My idea is hopefully pretty simple--instead of ground battles determined by numbers, perhaps ground battles would have you advance army divisions from tile to tile on the planets? To enhance the strategy ahead of just numbers, attacking from the side or rear could be more effective.

Try Space Civilizations at spaceciv.com. It's a true 4X MMOG.

Let's have a real-time strategy game with spaceships that kill eachother. Next, let's make this game involve elements such as stealth, terrain in the form of asteroids and hiding behind planets and planetary rings, and three-dimensional warfare. Then, let's make three-dimensional warfare matter. If you attack someone out of an asteroids belt from above them, their probably going to be hurtin' burgers. Next up? Space ships that feel "real". No ST:TNG ships that magically bank at 45 degree angles

Yar, I'm one of those try-before-you-buy people. My experience with two Stardock titles so far, though, leaves me no doubt that GalCiv II will be exactly what I wanted. Plus, tech support doesen't suck either. I had problems on Stellar Frontiers, and they got fixed in a bare hour because of speedy e-mail tech help. But, I need to know if GC2 will even work on my computer. My computer acts very oddly, even though it never has serious/active s

Think Tanks. Think Tanks are NOT, mind you, mobile assault vehicles with brains, but like todays think tanks. They stand by you and offer -valuable- advice. Think Tanks will be optional, and if you decide to use them, they will suggest to you where you should move your ships, what you should research, build, etc,. If done correctly, think tanks could be VERY helpful, as in the game Korsun Pocket where your advisor pointed out possibilities you didnt think of, or they could be like th