Lightzy

where have you been? its the same problem with EVERYTHING in galciv. EVERYTHING is just a smaller/better version of the last thing. farms, weapons, armor, factories, soldiering bonus.. there's nothing special or unique about anything and it makes the entire game dull and drab.. Everything ammounts to a small or big bonus to this stat or that stat, rather than giving unique gameplay functionality to open up new strategies. stu

I prefer flat out 4max per sector, race nonwithstanding. If the AI bugger out-starbased you, you'll just have to take it or destroy his starbase to make room It would also help the AI, I think, if the 4 places for starbases in the sector would be set in advance when generating the map. also, no big hurt to gameplay there. I always hated seeing starbases all cramped up together

Alastair Reynolds "Revelation Space" books especially Chasm City

Mainly I'd prefer a defensive structure to a starport because it means I won't have to constantly upgrade and build new defensive ships to keep up with tech and enemies (consider you have 20+ planets. this process can take up more hours than anyone would like) and that I'd usually have up-to-date defense on my planets rather than have some planet I forgot about with a couple of ships from the start of the game get taken over with mass drivers and destroyed completely. and t

because not every planet should have a starport. often planets don't have the manufacturing base to build ships in anything resembling alacrity, and definitely not in late game when this problem is at its worst

because not every planet should have a starport. often planets don't have the manufacturing base to build ships in anything resembling alacrity, and definitely not in late game when this problem is at its worst

You can build ships with no engines but you'll still have to have them upgraded/scuttled as tech advances, and consider that not all planets have a starport or anywhere near the kind of industry necessary to build a defensive fleet, so you have to create them in other planets, then send them everywhere around your empire.. now if you have 5 planets, its an annoying bother. if you have 50, well, thats why I don't play on big galaxies.. Orbital fleet manager does squat in terms of reduc

You can build ships with no engines but you'll still have to have them upgraded/scuttled as tech advances, and consider that not all planets have a starport or anywhere near the kind of industry necessary to build a defensive fleet, so you have to create them in other planets, then send them everywhere around your empire.. now if you have 5 planets, its an annoying bother. if you have 50, well, thats why I don't play on big galaxies.. Orbital fleet manager does squat in terms of reduc

Then call the building a 'planetary fighter base'. by all means. GAMEPLAY is the important part. But for the sake of argument, satellite defense would be much more effective, requiring little maintenance and able to preform evasive manouvres with acceleration as high as its thrusters would be capable of, since there's no human aboard to be pulped and mashed by sudden high acceleration.

The problem with some people here is that they go for ridiculous 'rock logic' and 'not moo2' arguments while the ppl who see the point are the ones who understand the benefit to gameplay dynamic (ie not having to bother incessently with creating/sending/moving/replacing/upgrading planetary fleets everywhere, and constantly. As for the fun factor, I suppose that's just a basic disagreement. I don't agree that its fun to be winning, but having to retake planets all the time because I ne

1) I'm not sure whats so fun about being permanently agitated about the possibility that a tiny fleet could sneak around yours and conquer a starsystem. 2) Of course it would change the dynamic of the game! Instead of having to create fleets and land them on planets and upgrade them all the time and build new ones as tech grows and TONS AND TONS OF MICROMANAGEMENT THATS A PAIN IN THE ARSE (especially on big maps), you'd build one building (or two or three)

Remember moo2s planetary batteries? missile silos? orbital platforms? Wasn't it fun and relaxing not to have to worry about having a big fleet around every star because you'd know you were relatively well protected against small assaults? wasn't it infinitely better than building bothering to build a few ships (or bring ships to starportless planets and knowing that unless you have a good ammount of them there, and a fleet manager, even the sorriest little fleet could take that p

its easy to mod all those things in. making colony modules hella expensive, making colony upkeep fees insanely high, etc. There might even be a hook to tie colony upkeep to technology, I dunno, but the problem it getting the AI to figure it out. with the expensive module it'll just spend eternity building colony ships when it should be focusing on science and social production. with high upkeep fees it might starve itself to death

benjamin, that's more or less how it works in civ4, like I said before-- if more planets = insane upkeep fees, then colonizing more straight away would put you in a bad position at first but if you survive you might be stronger much later on, but if you don't overexpand you can use 100% spending and focus on tech or military or whatever you want What I liked especially in civ4 is that if you over-expanded, your economy will simply grind to a complete halt and you'd die. you

benjamin, that's more or less how it works in civ4, like I said before-- if more planets = insane upkeep fees, then colonizing more straight away would put you in a bad position at first but if you survive you might be stronger much later on, but if you don't overexpand you can use 100% spending and focus on tech or military or whatever you want

Something the game Alpha Centauri did that was kind of nice was an "accelerated start". You pick that option, and everybody starts with empires that are similar in power and have about 50-100 turns of development. It was a way to skip the mad expansion rush and get on with the empire management and warfare. It also ensured that everyone had similar power at first (no one A

Lastly.. i wonder if stardock is tired of people suggesting them to do something from MoO or Civ.. especially over and over. I think that when a huge ammount of your fanbase keeps pestering you with one very specific request, you don't 'get tired'. instead, you get the point. EDIT: BTW, I reckon its more of a moo2 ripoff

Switched to windowed mode. now whenever I open the game clicking on the options (new game, load, etc) does nothing. so I can't switch it back. so no more galciv2.

Heh, thats another thing indeed. The name of this thread is 'tactical combat IN EXPANSION'. What indeed do you want in an expansion? an extra race? more ship graphics? new campagin is a given. Personally I want things that actually add to the value of the game and make me want to play it more. not little embellishments. That means things like interesting tactical combat and multiplayer support. You keep saying 'well that can't happen because of the way

K, there are so many ridiculous things said in this thread I can't remember them all so I'll just address the ones that itched me worst: * No emperors on the battlefield? well maybe no.. except for say, alexander, atilla, ghengis, the persian emperor alexander fought (missplaced his name), and just a few of the ones made famous in western culture. *an emperor wouldn't go down and command an army / it makes no sense - Back to alexander, atilla, etc etc. And i

ah there we go. you have to click it and dl the rest of the libraries. talk about non-streamlined.. the whole stardock central thing is a bit of a mess. I didn't even suspect I wasn't preloading the whole thing until I decided just out of curiosity to check the size of the DL, and even then I couldn't tell if its right or not without checking here and seeing some reference to tutorials and movies and such which made me check it out again. I hope the gam

dano and the rest, I see that you simply didn't understand anything in these games Ever played moo2 multiplayer? or RTW for that matter? I have a feeling that if we played head to head I would completely destroy you. thats where you see best the value of tactics, but here I think we can expect a very strong AI, so. In moo2 the missile/beam/fighter craft/etc issue was also way way more interesting than this freakin borin