If you read this thread, I think you will agree that it's pretty clear there not only will be a Gal Civ III, but that they are working on it now. https://forums.galciv2.com/427738
Looking forward to the next Gal Civ.
Want to bump this. I now notice that many of the beam weapon effects (including the standard ones used by the vanilla game) are not really synced very well to the position of the starship firing or being hit by them. The effect is that beam weapons will emanate from the previous position of the starship and will strike areas before the target reaches them. Was it always like this and I'm just now noticing it or is this something that is buggy with my install?
This is an extremely old thread and I have no idea if anyone is really coming here anymore, but has anyone ever solved this puzzle? One of the things that I notice is that many of the weapons don't seem to sync well with the location of the ship, e.g., a beam weapon will fire and then it will continue to originate from the original space the ship occupied after the ship had already left the space. In other words the beam emanates from empty space. Also, many times the be
It's been years since I've been here. Surprised to see this still going.
As far as I know, this "feature" does not work exactly as advertised. I believe you will find that the minor race will not have all of the techs of the major race and/or will not trade. Worth checking out though.
[quote who="CaptainYar" reply="4" id="2082863"]What difficult level was that on? Mine was suicidal. [/quote] Masochistic. I should mention, however, that this was TA.
A couple of games ago I had a Minor actually attack and destroy the Drengin. They then had a total of four planets. By the time I made it over there they were at war with another neighboring major empire. I didn't give them any technology or ships and by all accounts they did this totally on their own.
I have a vague recollection of reading a Dev's post that stated the AI does have foreknowledge of where the habitable planets are but there is an algorithm to determine how quickly they go to colonize individual planets. Obviously, that algorithm needs some adjustment in TA with the Drengin and Yor. . .
That's one of which I've not heard.
Whoa girls-don't get your panties in a twist. It was not my intent to insult anyone or get anyone up in arms about such an "issue" as this. In fact, I was trying to be nice by stating that I would not use the word "cheat" to describe what is being discussed. That word carries negative connotations that are unnecessary. It is a modification or error at best. This is just a game with nothing of real meaning at stake after all. Some of you all with the pr
I think you all need to re-read Moosetek's post: it uses such qualifying phrases as "more likely" and "very much doubt." That said, in retrospect I would not necessarily use the word "cheating" to describe this kind of hack, but it could be applicable depending on one's point of view. By the way, I've played this game many, many times and my usual settings are on immense galaxy, "rare" planets and suns, and uncommon planets and abundant everything else.
I agree with Moosetek13.
[quote who="Tzsak" reply="14" id="2062753"] Mega events are all like this, they are powerful, unexpected, and introduce a drastic challenge. For a beginner player who hasn't played a lot of similar kind of game, they should be turned off. Even so, it is possible to deal with every Mega Event, you just have to alter your strategies and way of thinking about the game. I've only just started playing the game and tbh I think wor
Potential manifestations of that are the subject of numerous threads on this forum. Examples are the threads discussing certain AI empires not expanding, some or all of them not building improvements, illogical surrender behavior, and building the wrong improvments on bonus tiles (a problem that has long existed).
They increase population growth and give a 10% (I think that's the right percentage) economic bonus.
[quote who="kryo" reply="18" id="2047452"] Hey Kyro, since you're here, do you have any information that would answer my questions, in whole or in part? It appeared to me towards the end of last year that an update for the game beyond the latest 2.02 version was going to be released. Probably eventually. As I've said elsewhere, Brad has commented that he'll keep tweaking balance, and we have a few bug fixes in the pipe already. But it's not likely to happen for a bi
[quote who="GW Swicord" reply="12" id="2046447"]Re Mac2411's core question, I'm pretty sure we're in "wait and see" mode. I don't know of any formal Stardock policy about product life cycles, but 2.0 was a pretty amazing 'freebie' in the first place so I'm very willing to be patient about when any more fixes might come and I'm ready to accept the possibility that 2.02 is the last update for GC2. On the other hand, they really do like to play their own games, so all it might take is
[quote who="kryo" reply="6" id="2046079"] they only were the publisher for them. I wouldn't understate our role so much. We're pretty involved with Demigod especially--Cari and a number of others are busy with the CVP/NAT Reactor stuff for the Demigod multiplayer system. [/quote] Hey Kyro, since you're here, do you have any information that would answer my questions, in whole or in part?
Yeah, I've noticed that bug as well. It's very annoying when another civ just up and surrenders with no warning-those spies are just gone. Funny thing is that as you advance through the levels (low, medium, high, advanced) they will continue to report back to you as though they (and the now destroyed empire) still exist. In addition to seeing that fixed, I was also hoping to see some of the AI tweaks that have been discussed.
It appeared to me towards the end of last year that an update for the game beyond the latest 2.02 version was going to be released. Has anyone heard or does anyone know anything to confirm or contradict my impression? If my impression is believed to be correct, does anyone have any information when that new version might be released?
I believe tech costs for TOA were, in general, increased. That said, what tech tree are you playing? Has it been changed since before you noticed this effect? I ask because, for example, I believe the Arcean tech tree has relatively higher costs compared to others. This is, if I recall correctly, to play to the backstory the developers wanted which was that the Arceans were not the best of researchers.
[quote]Well the point I was thinking of was in the hopes that for GC3 they might implement the tech tree in a slightly different way to make sure the AI's actually research weapons and defenses. Or just implement a better AI researching code. Because now, in my suicidal game, the Thalans have not researched a single weapon or defense tech, and the game is 2.5 years in. I gave them laser 1 and some cheap armor piece just to help them out, but they still aren't researching anything higher, so I
Cargo hulls, which are available from the beginning of the game, only have 1 hit point. They are not intended to be used as combat ships, but instead are usually used as freighters, constructors and space miners. Tiny, small, medium, large and huge hulls are the combat platforms and have more than one hitpoint. You start the game with tiny hulls. You must research "interstellar construction" or its equivalent to get small hulls. You must research Advanced Hulls a
I choose my weapons-type by determining what the AI is using and picking the type that is not being used or is being used by the least number of the AI. Often, I find that all or the majority of the AI will pick the same weapon-type so that makes my choice rather easy. The reason I do this is that the AI will also tend to develop defenses against the most common weapon type so my choice will result in the least developed defenses. There are exceptions of course and this
