To me, this whole Demigod thing is just more Stardock Shinanigans. It's more of the same poor testing and control. They pushed out yet another game early, and now are in fire fight mode. Once again they'll battle the big problems, and probably never get around to balancing the game, and polishing it. Then we'll hear about how many wonderfull updates stardock put out to support the game. Bogus.
I get that Neilo, but a week is a long time to let a server be down. Stardock seems to be a 9 women for a month makes a baby sort of company. Right now they probably do have everyone fighting the current fire. It also seems they bite off more than they can chew. If only they'd learn to pace things and do them right. For all the bragging Brad does for how much money he made off GCII, I would think he could afford someone to fix the freaking metavers
Here we are after a full week, and still no meta. Awesome support stardock.
Shame, I just got a new PC and went through all the pain of reinstalling only to find no meta. This may take the cake for stardock. How freaking hard is it to have a server support the start and end of a freaking game? My lord. The thing is it isn't hard. They just don't care anymore. (and haven't for about a year at least)
I'd go with perl because day to day it always usefull. However, I'm not sure how easy it would be to pick up first. (and not to mention learning bad habits) I personally think anyone in engineering should learn perl early. It's just that useful. (almost any job you're on a pc > 50% of the time actually...)
The only thing close to doing what you want is trade. You could try uping the techs for trade, such that trade is x10 better. Trade as it is now is worthless for larger civs, and even at 10x would still be. (because all the nerfing, and hardcoded limits) However, small civs I would think would do better. But I can't imagine it making nearly the impact you're looking for.
For me, turning off planetary lights pretty much stopped OOM errors. The other standard advice is to turn down planetary textures, and to turn off enhanced rendering for ships. (or something like that, look in the forums) Other than that try playing smaller maps.
I've always suspected that the AI knowing where planets were was a bug. IE, brad intended them to have to scout, but in reality they know anyway. (The AI does scout, but as others have pointed out via experiment, the AI does make beelines to good planets without having to scout them) As far as AI cheating the colonization phase really isn't important in and of itself. It's the fact that it does so poorly unless you crank the knobs the real issue. (Again, what w
It's cheesy. The AI not cheating was ALWAYs a key part of why GC was/is good. The reality is the difficulty knobs have become a crutch for the weak AI. Rather than dealing with an AI logic issue, we're told to jump the difficulty level. The biggest problem with the difficulty level solution, is that the AI spams ships out later in the game. It fixes the early game, but then makes the later game annoying. Me personally, I wish they'd have stopped adding
It's probably buggy or just not all that well tested, and hence they didn't brag about it. It's a shame because it looks absolutely amazing. I'd put this ahead of having an mp3 player baked in, which they did say they didn't since it was a problem on gc1.
I've seen this randomly through the entire development of GC2. The iconian's are basically a wasted race, on larger maps they never develop correctly. (everyone knows this, and I think it's gone from a bug to a feature in most people's minds) I think the crux of the problem, is that the AI does not make any periodic checks on it's planets. Hence if it takes over planets or misses the fact that it finished building, it never wakes up to redevelop it's planets. (o
[quote]Only if you rush buy over it.[/quote] Wow, i didn't know that. So what you're saying is skipping entire buildings is absolutely best. IE, don't stop at banks, or invention center just push on. I had always thought it was best to push on, but I didn't realize how much better. That almost seems like a bug if it's true.
Something else is that the attacker always gets a small bonus, (afaik) which i think finds it's way into the advantage number.
The biggest problem with GC2 in this respect, is that attrition simply doesn't exist anymore once you get too powerfull. IE, build a ship with 2-3x the defense of the opponents attack, hit auto attack, and that ship can single handedly destroy thier entire navy. There should be some limiting factor to make this not work. A logistics limit, the unit is tired, the attacker gets lucky, whatever. You shouldn't be able to ever go on a careless rampage.
DIY, perl.
Use firefox, and turn off java script. For me that's cut down on 99% of the bugs.
Back to the op, it's a silly question. The reason the AI doesn't use it's ships, is that it's not intelligent, nor programmed to utilize it's ships effectively. It's a strong believer in cannon fodder...
So what game is that pic from? That's not the way TS work now, so is that just an artist impression?
I too hate RTS games, and I find your analogy profoundly true. Their fun to a point, but then the weakness of the unit AIs forces the clickfest to go faster and faster. (or you have to use the units that just do well, such as ranged units, or units that regenerate, ect) Basically you're battling frustration in that you can't get them to do what you want... Me personally, I wish RTS games would allow for much more customization of the unit AIs. I know not
The fleet defense project sounds good, but it really won't help the AI. Most of my games I rather them have OFM's so that I can wipe them out in 1 attack as opposed to 6-10. As it is now, at least not having an ofm meant their cannon fodder ships were at least somewhat effective in slowing me down... The real problem as someone above said, is that the AI still builds hords of crappy ships, and leaves them orbit. What is the purpose of crappy ships? The AI sho
The real problem is that the AI relies entirely on these defenses, and players know they suck. That means the AI squanders it's time and energy, which is really the key to winning the game. (using your time and resouces effectively) In TA, it isn't as bad because of the slower weapons techs, but it's still there. To me the slower techs have just flattened out the game, and made it harder for the player since we don't get the AIs bonuses. According to the devs the
No it's not Anti aliasing. I had thought it was off, but it's not. The only setting right now that seems to matter is turning off lights on the dark side of planets. However, I suspect OOM may depend slightly on what the AIs are doing. In my current game they pretty much rolled over, so there are not as many ships.
They're worthless piles of shiny crap. For all the trouble they must have gone through to add them back into the game, they are so nerfed it's pathetic. Let's see: You have to research them, which is very very expensive and time consuming. You have to build them. (no big getting 6 or so constructors) You then have to wait 10 freaking turns to do anything? This is what bugged the $$$$ out of me. Then you blow up the system.
Thanks, for that CariElf. Since my post, I've tried various settings, because I didn't want to knock down the resolution. What I've found is that I can play at the high resolution, so long as I turn anti alaising down. I think I have it off right now actually. It doesn't seem to impact video quality at all either. Is anti aliasing a memory hog, and does it really do anything?
[quote]Were you seeing ships with defense and no weapons in fleets or just parked around planets?[/quote] Parked in orbit, all defense, no offense. In this second game I took about 3/4 of thier planets before they built a single ship with a weapon. It seemed they were stuck in "constructor" mode. They had hordes of them and would try to repeatedly rebuild a starbase while my battleships just used them for target practice. What's reall
