Ubercat

Anyone?.... anyone? This sounds like just what I needed, but as sarnac said, the links are bad.

Hi all. I've played this game off and on for a couple years now. I just haven't been consistent enough to advance past the senior newb rank. Currently I'm playing TA up to the latest patch. I'm playing a game now where one of the minor races stole all the tech of a major civ and wants to trade it to me for one or more worlds. When my turn started, I went to the trade screen with this minor civ and noticed that he had a ton of techs; certainly enough to indicate a technology theft. I h

As Stravo said, could someone please point the way to Impulse for those of us who have no idea what it is?

[quote]Is there a title for it yet? I'd like to track it via gamespot etc too. I am sooo looking forward to this. The last great turn based Fantasy games I played were Age of Wonders, Lords of Magic, Warlords III, oh so many years ago.[/quote] Have you tried Dominions 3? It's the best turn based fantasy war game I've ever seen. http://www.shrapnelcommunity.com/threads/postlist.php?Cat=&Board=dom3

[quote]Then, all of this is BIG mis-understanding on my part (thus, i must excuse myself for mis-reading the initial info), as i couldn't get the underlined section above from anywhere in the OP nor into further comments written by either me or anybody else![/quote] I hope you can understand my former belief that you were being deliberately obtuse as nowhere in any post did I make any suggestion that cheating was involved. Indeed, the following selections show just the opposite. <b

[quote]I'm not exactly sure where all this 'cheating' accusation stuff is coming from. The only thing I can suggest is that either the original poster has failed to communicate properly.. or more likely, several people in this thread have failed to read thoroughly. Allow me to re-state the original poster's case. The minimap contains the information on the location of stars and planets (if you have stellar cartography), however, it is a small element on the screen, zooming is a

[quote]Neither do i.[/quote] Does this mean that you're sticking with the cheating references?

[quote]My whole argument about this is more of the sensors_range (even if abstracted to the perception levels) type that are expressed and increased by technologies obtained. The basic 'reasoning' behind a FOG concept is just that, a smoke screen that hides elements from the player. Light up the playfield with exact locations of planets (not talking Mini-Map & cartography, here... btw) and stars and you might as well take out the whole Fog overlay itself and be done with it.[/quote] Thi

[quote]Frankly Ubercat I'm disinclined to continue this discussion as you are becoming argumentative and aggressive with your posts. Making derogatory speculations about how I play the game when I'm trying to help you out is not terribly polite in my opinion.Well it's not surprising when your so called "help" is frankly no help at all.KK[/quote] [quote]Well it's not surprising when your so called "help" is frankly no help at all.[/quote] Indeed. I've stated twice that I can't a

You lost me. 1-2 clicks per [I]game[/I]? That doesn't sound like work to me either, but what are you referring to, exactly? I'm talking about 1-2 clicks [I]turn after turn[/I] in order to zoom in, followed by close scrutinization to see where the planets are, guesstimate what tile to send your ship, which will reveal all the planets without spending unnecessary movement points, which can then be spent heading to the next star. And then zoom back out again of course in order to see the big pictur

That's a nice monitor you have. We can't all afford such a large one. I have a 17" LCD, myself. I am aware that the minimap has zoom levels and I use them. Sharing the minimap info with the main map might render the mimimaps closest zoom level practically unnecessary. More saved work. Was there some other advanced minimap technique that you had in mind? Again, I'm not understanding your reservations. It just sounds like you want to work extra hard. Personally, I'd rather spend the extr

[quote]The way ive always understood it the mini map was never intended to show more than the the star and the number of planets .carthography only gives you the sun and how many planets orbit that sun!! You have to physically explore that system to find out the type and quality of those planets.I personelly prefer it that way this is a 4x game and explore is an integral part of this type of game.[/quote] Yet stellar cartography tells you the actual, [I]exact [/I]location of the stars

[quote]edit: wow. This forum doesn't do nested quotes very well. There doesn't appear to be a preview button either. Unless I'm missing something.Try highlighting the text of the post you want to quote first.[/quote] [quote]Try highlighting the text of the post you want to quote first.[/quote] testing

[quote]I'm reminded of this everytime I see a purple star and start throwing money at getting a colony ship there first even if I have not confirmed the quality of the planets in orbit. I know there will be at least one extra juicy planet.I was referencing my earlier post about how purple stars almost always have a class 20+Therefore anything that indicates the presence of a purple star indicates (almost certainly) the presence of a very high quality planet.[/quote] Then the main map wo

I looked in the journals section and couldn't find a thread with a May 18th post by Brad that mentioned the manual. I'll just take your word that it will be updated. I'm liking TA so far. I just have some learnin' to do.

I'll check it out. Thanks!

I just tried to read the TA PDF manual and it doesn't appear to reflect beyond DA. The title says Twilight of the Arnor, but it appears to be identical to the DA book.

I'm not sure what you mean by needing the extra challenge. Are you saying that you [I]like [/I]having to squint and study the minimap to figure out where to go? My suggestion essentially turns the main map into a bigger minimap which is easier to see.[B][/B] You aren't being given any FOW info that isn't already on the minimap. You can just analyze it faster and easier, giving you more time to focus on the many other things which the game requires. The minimap itself isn't made redundan

Installed net2.0 and then the galactopedia and all seems to be working fine. Thanks!

It might be worthwhile to update the readme. It doesn't appear to have been changed since the original release. It says that .net framework 2.0 is required, but Microsoft has gone beyond that now. Nevertheless, I'm nervous about D/L'ing the latest version in case the Galactopedia really needs the older version. Can someone clarify for those of us who aren't too tech savvy?

I suggested this way back when GalCiv2 was fairly new. I believe I had some positive feedback as well. It's surprising that a lot more people don't appear to've had the same idea and campaigned for it. What was my suggestion? It's simple, really, and excellent. The mini map in the lower right hand corner shows you where the stars are located, and the planets, after you have necessary tech. The main map should show the same info. We all check the mini map to determine where to explore. We

After researching Stellar Cartography, I always find myself fiddling with the minimap to determine the most efficient directions for exploration. Ie. Where are the largest concentrations of planets? There is no reason that the minimap info could not be present on the main map, and would save players a lot of fiddling. If a star and it's planets are still under fog of war, then just replace them with an appropriately sized/colored '?'. Or any suitable symbol. When the players ship gets close, voi