Lucky_Jack

I would say that music is very important to a games overall feel Definintly. The main background music in MOO2 tends to put me to sleep.

We will also be ending the open beta until Fall shortly after Beta 2's release This is an unusual departure from Stardock's normal procedures. Did something we did precipitate this? Glad to hear about the new building. I remember what your quarters looked like in 2002 and it seemed rather closed in. The exte

I've "been there" on a visit, and I don't know how more relaxed it could get. These guys and gals really do love the work they do. Slow down when the "cat's away"? Not a chance.

Just a thought on the FOW, there is really a big difference between 1) what you can see at a particular point in time, 2) what you remember being at a particular spot and 3) what other races are willing to tell you about what they have. If we are in peaceful communications with another race, shouldn't you expect to exchange data freely (or somewhat freely) about what planets you own and what star bases you have constructed (maybe not of ships or terror stars)? And on

I would hope 512 MB would be enough. Different problem. Sorry. Now, how do I delete this post???

It may be too big for my dial up connection. Are you in a location like mine? My DSL connection is cheaper now than my old dial up was. 'Course, I had two phone lines to support the dial-up without interfering with other phone calls, but it still comes out cheaper now than one line and a dial-up ISP.

There have been a lot of colonization crashes reported on the Beta 1 level, some related to drivers, some related to GC2 code. The GC2 code fixes have been promised in Beta 2. The crashes also seem to be related to the method of sending colony ships to colonize a planet. I have found that I can avoid the current set of colonization crashes related to GC2 code by sending colony ships to a tile next to a planet (on autopilot), then moving the ship onto the pl

Also, can we get a button to buy the rest of an unfinished colony structure? I think you discovered a bug. When you select an available buildable tile you get a list of projects that can be built on that tile. With that list two buttons show up, "buy" and "build". I suspect the buy button gets unhid at the wrong time,

FrogBoy used to talk about Imperium Galactica. IMO, MOO2 is good but old, and MOO3 is not worth the spit it takes to say its name.

Vicious. What about defenses against such a weapon?

Don't sweat the names in beta 1. In the beta for GC1 there were many names for many things that were just "place holders" that were rather "cheesy".. Stardock dressed GC1 up for release. Stardock has already said that the emphasis for Beta 1 is the code, not the names of things.

I have the idea the weapons we see in Beta 1 are simply conceptual, to prove out the concept of different weapon types and matching defenses - to see if they can make the multi-type weapon vs multi-type defense code work. Once they are satisfied with that, I suspect we will see some changes in weapon names and characteristic sizes, potencies, cost/bang, etc. This is all a typical approach for Stardock - Work the bugs out of the basics, then dress it up.

"Judge me by my size, do you?" Yoda from Star Wars "The Empire strikes back".

I just checked with CariElf on Stardock's chat facility for GalCiv. She says that we will see pre-assigned default names for the first solar system of each and every race re-introduced in a later beta.

I for one would not want to try to come up with names for 300+ planets. So I like the idea that solar systems have default names and the planet names have the roman numeral name extensions. BTW, did you notice that the default names for the planets of the first terran solar system are "Earth", "Venus", "Mars", etc.? OOPPPSSS. That was in GC1. So why is the name of the first solar system for Terrans randomly generated in GC2? Not that it matters, I'm just cu

At this point I think I am going to withdraw my objections to what I have seen in this thread as inconsistant and conflicting concepts. My objections were from a fear that, if such conflicting concepts were made part of the game, it would stretch the credibility of the game and detract from the game's enjoyability. I am sure Stardock will not permit that to happen. I am not a debator. I do not enjoy debate for its own sake. I can not take a stand that is co

How much of the keyboard interface of GC2 are you using now? (Or on GC1?). The number pad allows you to move your ships, the tab key lets you find your next unmoved ship, the "a" key sets a survey ship on auto servey, the "g" key sets a ship in "guard" status, the "s" key puts a ship in "sentry" status, and much more (and this is just when in the main view). And this is just the beta 1 level. In the GC1 beta extensive accelerator keys were added in one of th

get around normal physics Star Pilot, I assume when you say "get around normal physics" that you are just using a metaphore for the ever changing knowledge base we have for physics. That is, it is not "getting around" physical rules that will enable FTL, but learning more about the the rules we already have some knowl

Star Pilot, you present some interesting arguements about interstellar travel. First you call it folding of space, then you talk about spheres and tunnels. Just what is your idea of FTL travel?

Guess what. That same request was made in the beta of GC/OS2. I believe it came very close to happening before it shipped.

Actually, I think the cultural defection is more metaphoric. It is the cultures and ideas that they switch to, hence, it is the other race's economy and culture that gains, until the loosing race's economy and culture dwindle to nothing.

This post is strictly IMHO. I am not a Stardock employee. In looking at the reviews pointed to by this forum I have to wonder how detailed our control of battles will be. With only three types of weapons and three types of defense mentioned in the reviews it looks like adding something like carriers and fighters would require a considerable design change. Also, it sounds like battles would have to be micromanaged, and may become beyond the AIs abil

Has anyone mentioned yet that fighters are a reusable resource while missles are one shot weapons? Or that fighters can be loaded with many different weapons; guns, missles, torpedos, ...? And that missles shot from capital ships need more range than those loosed from fighters? No, fighters are not invincible (regardless of what fighter jocks think today), but they have some very distinct advantages (and weaknesses) in battle. For some good example

Most of the windows generated by GC1 (such as the events window, the GNN news, and others) could be closed just by hitting the ESC key.

For a neat web site about hyperspace theory, take a look at http://www.deoxy.org/hs_phys.htm But be careful about using the link directly from here. This forum doesn't seem to construct the link correctly.