SephIock

Theres another word for defending: Losing. If you're at war, ideally you'll be the one banging on his doorstep, and not vice versa.

Personally I've never had to use starbases in that manner. Maybe its cuz I prefer not to play against a cheating AI?

The difficulty where the AI is using all of it's mental faculties, but isn't cheating. And as far as the game being so customizable: what I'm asking is, will tweaking the anomaly setting affect the appearance of Galactic Resources?

Personally I would rather that tiles be rendered red or orange (indicating that you need to use soil enhancement on those tiles before they are usable) as a result of damaging planetary invasion tactics- that would deal with the (rather implausible, imho) issue of NEVER being able to repair your planet, no matter how highly you have advanced... not even if you are one step away from achieving godhood via technological victory. It would ALSO

If nothing else, it will be educational to watch their slow, inevitable slide into capitalistic gluttony . And until then, patches all 'round!

Its the key to winning every game if you get the appropriate Galactic Resources. You can achieve such incredible economic dominance that if anyone does declare war on you, you can simply shift to military production, crank out the most advanced ships you possibly can, then sue for peace. The combination of your newly created army and your diplomatic advantage = peace. GG.

I'm already playing the beta.

On the minimap, galactic resources fall under the category of "anomalies". Does lowering the frequency of anomaly appearance in the pregame screen lower the frequency of resources as well? I tried this, but it didn't seem to. The reason I want there to be fewer resources is that I find all my games ending when I start buying enemy resource starbases, at which point I go from "powerful" to "unstoppable". Basically I start o

Me. I'd also like a greater variety of events, or an editor to add in my own (trying to learn how to add in my own right now, atm).

I can only pray that this lasts, and that this company won't slowly morph into EA .

Hell yes, MP!

I guess in theory if the planet in question were about to be conquered, you could permanently deny the AI the resource bonus by building a capital (which cannot be deconstructed, if I recall correctly) on top of the bonus. Otherwise, no .

On a slightly more realistic note, how about simply making the ships keep their distance from one another? With the big, slow ships it looks like they're playing bumpercars.

Obviously he doesn't need a troubleshooter, he needs a priest. Or a virus scanner.

If by "periodically" you mean "almost never" then yeah, thats true . "This is a strategic level game - leaders generally don't know what their spooks are doing -plausable deniabily and all - they eventually get the data, but only when the spooks are successful." If thats your reasoning how about making it so that you occasionally get false in

ACH DU LIEBER!

I was vaguely aroused by the subject line. Anyways, I've always preferred clusters of stars because it makes for more defined empires.

Just become a tech whore- er I mean BROKER. Tech BROKER.

We'll be good. *thoroughly chastened*

They keep the programmers chained to their desks

Don't embassies boost income from tourism?

The sad thing is, there appears to be no option (that the AI will recognize and be grateful for) to do that. I guess they really want those ships.

Uhm, what happens if you trade for a freighter and then send that freighter to an alien planet? What if you send it to a planet of the same race that gave you the freighter?

Not.

Arceans are neutral .