DarkMadMax

Fixes for diplomacy please. - Rework values so AI doesnt trade low pop planets and doesnt go to war for peanuts .At same time make it easier to trade planets and ships for OTHER planets and ships. As it stands AI wont trade high pop planet for my whole empire and surrender on top of it, while he will happily trade pq 26 world with low pop for a couple of good techs and declare war on anyone for half of it (BTW I play on suicidal so all that problems are not remedied by higher level o

[quote]I'm not sure what difficulty you play on, but on Obscene, it isn't that easy to make trades for things like that. Usually their research is so ahead of mine is some areas, it limits what I can trade to them. Also, to stay ahead militarily, I rarely have a lot of cash on hand until perhaps mid game, so it's difficult to trade large sums of dough for techs/planets or to make war. With some races it's easier (drath, terrans), but usually it's fairly expensive.[/quote] I play on suci

Seriously it just ruins the game for me now. You can win hardest level of difficulty with the most stacked odds by just doing trades and building 2 galactic projects (translators and bazaar). I don't understand why AI trades their planets for a few techs- planets should be traded for planets only or huge amounts of fleet, techs and money. As of now you can get PQ 20 planet for a few techs just because it is underpopulated. In ToA the overall disaster is also exacerba

All facts was my favourite strat in DA (I play on suicidal btw). In ToA I think it will not work because of huge penalties. Diplomacy whoring on the other hand is much more effective. I just won first game on obscene and completely dominating 2nd one on suicidal playing as yor and doing old school 33% split but relying on diplomacy.you can trade for other races techs which give you a lot more boosts.

[quote]$1,000/turn is nothing to dismiss, but many strong players have a per-turn surplus of $100,000 by mid-game. Some players have incomes that go much higher. I'm not particularly good at getting such revenue (largely since I never play maps larger than large and rarely over medium), but even in a 5 player small[/quote] Well that is exactly the problem 1000bc on a small to large map is way too unbalanced. It equals about 5-10 good eco world for end game. Especially small maps -

It is wierd but I never experienced colonies flipping . - I Think they have to be discontent in order to do that.

[quote]If you don't want to re-use ship designs from previous games, just turn off the option for saving your ship designs to the hard drive. The whole point of that option is so you can re-use them in future games. Turn it off and your problem won't continue to propogate.[/quote] You guys completely miss the point .I DO want resue the ships. Problem is a) designs on reuse are broken and bugged (they have "phantom components" - which show, but dont take any space) <br

[quote]put a number behind the name of the ship to indicate a new model.[/quote] You end up with say " fighter 1-2-4-5-6-7-8" and so on for every hull type. Then the next game you go the other tech tree and have to start all over - with upgrade bug and persistent,un deletable designs you end up with dozens of obsolete and uselesss designs which only annoy you.

[quote]Now see, I *am* a person that likes it when the AI can beat me, especially if it's not cheating. One of the reasons I enjoy games like GalCiv 2, Shogun Total War, & Medieval Total War is because the computer actually has a chance of defeating me. Maybe my views are in the minority, but I love strategy games where I actually have a chance of losing to the AI -- I find a genuine challenge to be a lot more fun than games where I know I'm probably going to win.[/quote] Yeah

[quote]I just asked Brad about this and he's going to change them to super projects.[/quote] Wont this lead though to potentially overpowered situation if you capture another planet with those already built? Like it is the case now with Hyperion line buildings?

Could the ship designer be fixed a little bit? : 1) When you upgrade a design and save it with same name it still somehow remembers old components whenever you edit this design again. -Graphics is screwed up sometimes too (shows non existing components from old design) .I cant save it everytime with new name - I don't like too many different names since I forget which one is which and they clutter the design and build menu. Which leads to next problem : 2) When you delete th

[quote]Mainly because no matter how much "protection" they add pirates will eventually do what they do best and put the games out for free. So if they know the pirates are going to win why go through the trouble of putting in protection? It doesn't make good business sense at all. There spending money and losing money from the consumer for something that doesn't work at all.[/quote] Yeah I never understood that either. 95% of games get cracked and released same day as official one

[quote]I hate necro-ing a thread, but the last few messages on here really sparked me... I love the concept of X3: Reunion, with or without the mods, but as denyasis says, the UI is horrible. I had to stop playing it altogether because it's an excercise in frustration, irritation, anger, and tedium trying to use their UI. Worst UI design I'd ever seen in a game, or anywhere for that matter... And as I said, it's a total shame because it's a great game in concept.[/quote] Wow -same

Simple ability to give ship waypoints imho would be simpler to implement, more versatile and hence better. I get annoyed by constant need to micro my scouts and radar ships on every turn - just because I cant give a path different from straight line

[quote]Well, Brad was right. I checked each of the test games and – low and behold – all the AIs that didn’t expand were set to Fool. The others were Gifted, which is appropriate for Painful. [/quote] How do you check that?

There is a very nice mod for Rome Total War, called End of Days, it is fantasy falovred and with very nice atmosphere. It is not really true "TBS", but I frankly havent seen a game up to par to old MoM(and I played both dominions and AoW).

Good article. There can be many cases when AI could be almost as good as good human players. OR even better - in regards to his chances to win game (simplest examples would be FPS shooters - since advanced scriptable bots in Quake they could be much better than any human player). But thing is not always fun to play such AI- he plays to win and players loses. Players dont like that, especially when they play single player .In fact the skill difference on the other hand is what

Well keeping a large defending force on each planet is waste of resource imho, my long standing opinion was that in galciv this is simply dumb - you can never "defend" a planet against dedicated strike star fleet .Good human player never does that and instead has a defence fleet (which can cover more than one planet and withstand such a force) Now no defence at all seems a little overboard though - maybe they trying to finally fix AI so it defends with fleets but it isnt quite working

Well maybe they are not "bugs" but the ships design name issue is very annoying .I like to name my designs the same regardless of race I am playing. Now that in TA each race is actually different I plan to play more than one race , before I just used one base race and it wasnt such a big deal, but now imho it is just very annoying. fixing it should take little time imho.

So I noticed in TA beta two things - ship designs with same name but for differenet culture overwrite each other. Which is no good at all. Also if you customize any race it ges stuck this way even when AI plays it (problem being I dont want see my logo and color scheme on another player in same game) .

AI waging wars is most of the time pretty pathetic sight. - Not enough agression , starting too slow. Let me intercept their transports at impunity .have their insanely powerfull fleets sitting in space doing nothing .

And an avid player will deploy a large ship with most engines and single gun. AI will build ships with only engines. A player will deploy some tiny disposable ships in vicinity of the front. AI will not move troop transports close. Like you see it's not so easy to counter the opponent that can adapt. Well some sanity checks on "min guns" would solve this <img src="http://images.stardock.com/gc2/T_DL/smiles/Smile.gif" border=0 align="a

to get an alliance with any evil empire, I think you have to be much stronger militarily wise. Then they will give you an alliance. I got an alliance on suicidal(so I had HUUUGE diplomacy penalties) with Korath playing as Yor. I had practically no military (ranked last) and Korath were the strongest. So I do not believe this is the case.- Granted I had every possible dip tech researched and every diplo project built but nevertheless it was possible. <b

I think the biggest problem now is just the lack of speed in the AI. I personally don't understand how the AI designs such crappy ships. AI came some way since original DL where he was designing ships with 2 and 3 speed in an end game (basically engine-less junk). Now days he does decent individual ships design (7 and even 9 and occasional 11 speed).Problem is he has also to be mindful to what and how he puts them in fleets because hi

You've discovered that all AI's, even GalCiv2, have their limitations. A good commander tries to learn the weaknesses of his/her enemy and expoit it. You have done this in your situation. The AI, being simply a set of programmed instructions for the computer player, is unable to learn and adjust to your tactics in this case. It's possible the AI programmers for this game might come up with a new counter for your strategy, but even if they do, you'll likely find a