col80

I'm playing with the 1.1patch, so the following may simply be a result of the Beta status of the patch. I also only recently started incorporating military starbases into my strategy so have no point of comparison pre-beta. I build a military starbase and add the basic starship assist defence bonus (1/1/1) and yet all my ships within it's radius still have no defence. Offensive modules built on the starbase affect ships as I expected, so I'm

If one pops up in someone;s area of influence, it should affect relations if you go and pinch it. There is a UP resolution to only allow anomaly exploration in your own sphere of influence. Of course, given that anomalies are long gone by the time the UP meets up, this is currently of no importance w

I can't believe Olaf Stapleton hasn't been mentioned yet - either 'Starmaker' or 'Last and first men' are seriously mind-blowing reads. There are no 'characters' per se in his novels, just accounts of the birth and death of the entire universe and the history of cosmic intelligence. Epic.

I guess if the original poster elaborated on exactly what he thought made civIV radically different from civIII then it might be clearer what he thought was missing in Galciv2. CivIV offers certain features not found in civIII - religion, social engineering, great people etc. but is by and large the same game with the same game dynamics and prettier graphics. Galciv2 has certain new features, ship building springs to mind, but is closer to the origina

As has been mentioned the borders are not really 'borders' but cultural influence zones, so by default there would be no reason why anyone should be forbidden from entering them. That said, anything which cranks up the strategic options is always welcome. Perhaps there could be a UP vote on formally recognising cultural borders as sovereign territory, or an addition to diplomacy - to mutually stay out of each others cultural sphere of influe

Two birds it is then. Cheers.

I think it would be enormous fun seeing how far you could push another civ before they declared war. I seem to remember the whole run of Star Trek TNG having the Federation and Romulans constantly knocking off each others ships and probes without ever declaring war.

Are you playing the 1.1 beta? Prior to this I've only got 'We know what you're doing' when I am transparantly mounting an offensive. With the Beta it seems to crop up even when I'm not 'doing' anything. Perhaps something that needs tweeking.

What I would like to see, although it should hardly be at the top of the developers to-do list, is some visual indication of what invasion tactic you are using when the fighting starts e.g. there is a green smoky tinge to the screen if you're using gas attacks, or the odd meteorite raining down if you've used mass drivers. Nothing fancy really, but it all adds to the immersive experience.

Thanks for the responses. Military strength is obviously much more important than I thought, I have tended to put off building up my ships until I've finished colonising and starbase construction. Unless I'm imagining it the AI is much more savvy in 1.1, so I guess I need to refine my strategy. 'We know what you're doing' is used a lot more now (perhaps too much?), previously I've only got that when I was making aggresive overtures. Am I rig

I have always found *when* a losing empire surrenders to be about right - when momentum is well and truly with the attacker, but before worlds start falling like dominoes. In Alpha Centauri, although the AI would surrender before being annihalated, you still had to beat it back to it's last few cities, which could still be tedious. What could use some improvement, as has been stated, is measures taken by the AI before this critical point is reached. I

Yep, this would be a lot of fun. It already gives me a kick to see my enemies bitterly admit surrender to my imperial might, how much more satisfying to actually watch the pitiful ruins of their once great civilization pay tribute to their new overlords for the rest of the game. Oh, yeah . . .

Okay, I'm repeatedly having my ass handed to me in the new Beta. The Torians have colonised half the galaxy while I'm still building my first constructors, the Yor invaded en masse with speed 5 invasion fleets, and the Arceans surreptitiously built the mother of all military starbases right by my capital so now all their ships have 6 beam 6 gun 6 laser vs my 2 attack weenies. All of this is fantastic. Not only does it promise months if not y

they can't build planes that can't fly right Those damn Ruskies!

Firstly, for the record I like this game - when the pros and cons are weighed I think it comes down somewhere between good and excelllent (although I do find the races a bit flat and samey). The main point I want to make though is directed at those who criticise attempts to compare Galciv2 with other games (typically Moo2) under the belief that such criticism arises from a desire to somehow mould Galciv2 into their own version of what Moo3 s

'Soul' is of course a vague term which covers a multitude of different concepts (whether in people or video games). For me at any rate a large part of this is how 'sucked into' the world portrayed you become - not in terms of gameplay mechanics, which I think Galciv2 does very well, but in terms of emotional involvement. There is often an assumption that video games cannot provide this, which of course is false - I have just finished S

i wish people would stop using moo2 to this game, they are not the same game and this is not a moo2 product. In this case I think the parallel is justified. Not every point of comparison with Moo2 is arbitrary. The intro gives the impression that the Dreadlords will show up at some point, and in fact they do, just not in sandbox mode. It

Buyer regret? No, not at all, even though I do have some issues with the game. The bottom line is that I've paid for something I fully expect to be enjoying 12 months down the road, and optimistic that at least some of the bugs/missing features currently niggling me will be ironed out. That represents a much sounder purchase than 99% of the other things I've bought in my life.

I must admit I am floundering a little when it comes to ground combat. I simply have no idea where all the various numbers used are coming from and what effect they are having. For instance how is advantage calculated exactly? I know some of the factors used by reading the manual but very little concrete data. Does soldiering +10 give you 10 more advantage, 10% more? How does bravery come into the mix? If the enemies advantage is 0 does this mean gas warfare has no effect (as it reduc

GC2 really isn't about exploration. Possibly only of semantic interest, but can it then technically be considered a 4x game at all?

It would be nice if the ai civs were more pro-active in proposing trades - they certainly seem to be keen enough to trade amongst themselves. Also, I have never had another race propose a trade in anything other than technologies. Surely the Korx would be after my money, or peaceful races under attack would want my killer ships?

For me, it is essential for maintaining the illusion of 'reality' within my role of intergalactic leader, for space to be as 'space-like' as possible. This means lots and lots of uninhabitable space, dead-end planets, and the occasional gem in amongst them. Yes, class 0 planets are a waste of space which is how I like them as it stops the galaxy from appearing teeming with life and possibility. I much prefer a sense of cold bleak emptiness in the void - it appeals to my inner existentialist.

I like the vocal stuff - gives a nice classic star trek vibe to the experience.

This has developed into an interesting thread, remarkably (touch wood) free from name-calling considering the sensitive nature of the topic. Anyway, my two cents: The typical analogy drawn between illegally copying software and stealing, say, a loaf of bread is disingenious. If I take a loaf of bread, someone is one loaf of bread short. If I copy a piece of software, no-one has 'lost' anything, I have simply gained something. The assumption is that what has been lost is my

Given that this thread is now pretty big, it would be interesting to read an actual response from the developers on this. Just a 'No, we don't like the idea of Heroes' or 'We may consider it in an expansion'. Personally I think they would add a great deal of 'colour' and 'flavour' (this is a GOOD thing btw), and I'm not sure where this fixation on micromanagement is coming from. If you have a hero who adds 5 to ships weapons for instance, how is the decision on where to put him any more com