FortyTwo

What's the date on your screens.str and english.str files in your Dark Avatar directory? Both Screens.str and English.str are dated 9/13/2007.

Many thanks for the ongoing updates! Now, to the questions. I'm getting the same "String not found" message; I've tried an uninstall/reinstall with no luck. Also, while I really like the idea of paying off loans early, I don't see the strategic advantage of it. Correct me if I'm viewing this wrong, but the payoff cost appeared to be equal to the weekly payment times the term of the loan. Shouldn't the player get the advantage of paying off the principal now, thereby avoiding fu

Cari, however the HARDWAREVP trick works, it's absolutely amazing. I'm running beta 4, and now get an average of ~40 fps. This is up from ~4 with beta 4 before HARDWAREVP, and significantly faster than DA 1.5. For example, under 1.5 I would have been lucky to get 10 fps with one or two starbases on screen. Now I get this: So 15.4 fps may not seem much, but for someone with a computer like mine (i.e., with

Ephafn, that's similar to what I'm seeing. One ship on screen gives playable (but nevertheless low) frame rates, but as soon as a second shows up, I drop back down to 4-5 fps.

I'm a bit relieved to hear that I'm not the only one with an old-timey video card that's experiencing slowdown issues. GC2's ability to run well on low-end systems is what made me look into it in the first place, so with beta 4 I was afraid that Stardock had (paradoxically) made one performance improvement too far for my sad old system. Hopefully we can get a correction for beta 5. Having played around with my slowed-down game a bit more, I noticed that slowdown only happens when ships

Very strange. My game is significantly slower now that I've installed beta 4. Given how old my video card is (Mobility Radeon 9000 64mb) it wasn't all that fast before, but now I'm getting For the time being, is it possible to revert back to beta 3? Does

If you're in bent hyperspace, then you're "warp-travelling", but you can never exceed the speed of light. Correct. Part of the problem here is that the use of the word "parsec" to describe an individual tile on the map is a misnomer. In-game, each parsec isn't 3.26 light years - one tile represents greater non-hyperspace distances when further fr

Very difficult to only choose three, especially given all the great ideas being tossed around here. 1. Hybrid spying system, with DL-style "passive" spying and DA-style "active" spying. 2. A revised invasion system that separates civilians from military. Planets would be occupied and not simply wiped clean of their former occupants (unless the player wanted to kill everyone). The I'm still uncomfortable being aligned "good" while I slaughter billions during invasions. <b

Well, that would make a bit more sense. The dialog would also make a bit more sense, presuming events occurred in the proper order: 1) S.P. declare war on the Altarians; they tell me this, but have no plans on attacking me. 2) After this occurs, I automatically go to war with the S.P. This (partially) explains the odd "We are losing this war" message, as I was already at war with the S.P. by the time I spoke with them. Still, the dialog is a bit odd, and the order of event

I recently had an event in DA that may be a bug. If it wasn't, I'm still pretty confused. I (the Drath) had been watching relations between two of my allies, the Altarians and the Slug People (a custom civ), slowly deteriorate over the course of a number of turns. At the beginning of a turn I received a message from the Slug People: "As your ally, we shall come to your aid against the ruthless Altarian Resistance." Clicking the "Speak To" button, I was informed by the Slug People

Also remember, the parsecs are the space traveled in bent hyperspace. The actual distances between planets could be hundreds of lightyears. All a telescope might tell you is that those silly backwards humans have finally developed advanced technologies like agriculture.

I'm also not sure I could pull of as much butt-kissing with the DA timeouts on diplo "moments." I haven't found this to be a hindrance. From what I've seen, DA alliances require less in the way of butt-kissing than DL ever did. In DL I could throw money and techs at a civ and never get beyond "friendly"; as many have noted elsewhere, when a civ d

In my last few games of DA I've noticed that other civs are much more willing to ally with me than in DL 1.4x. I've found that developing an alliance doesn't take tremendous effort - I simply maintain trade and treaties, trade techs, build a moderately sized defensive fleet, and most importantly don't act aggressively against my neighbors. On net, I'm pretty pleased with this. I was rarely able to develop alliances in DL. Now that I can, it much improves the role playing element of the

One question; Can't we just have an option to disable spying altogether and be done with all this trouble! Bah! As a computer gamer, I demand that the aforementioned trouble continue until I get my way! Seriously, I can't see anything wro

For those of you concerned about a so called 'friendly' civ, (no such thing in my opinion), place your agent where it will do the least damage; a research center, for example. This is usually what I do when I need information on friends. I would disagree, though, about there never being "friendly" civs. I'm generally not militarily aggr

I'd have less of a problem with disabling farms if the population loss didn't happen instantaneously. According to the manual, population changes aren't new people being born, they're new citizens joining your civ (disregard, for a moment, something like "Super Breeder"). As such, disabling a farm could be starving or poisoning people to death, or citizens could simply be leaving the planet for a less meager life elsewhere. I don't have a problem with this logical leap, as long as it take

Interesting idea, farkas. To further your idea: perhaps planetary improvements could become partially visible as your increase through the spying levels. At very low spying you might only see one or two buildings; at very high you'd see everything. At any level you'd be able to see that a space was occupied, but you'd be unable to place a spy on it without additional spying. In any case, even without the idea suggested above, I'm hoping that at some point we get a old/new hybrid system

Right there with you, sam0t. I was also hoping to see some makeover of the current invasion system. Perhaps in a DA update...

It's impossible to keep ALL the empires liking you. It's interesting to hear someone say that, because my last few games have all been diplomatic victories. Even the civs that were wiped out by my allies had mostly good relations with me.

Another options would be for the AI to use his own resources to determine the validity of the players claim and call him on it. That's exactly what I'd like to see the AI do. Conversely, as Drakonfire suggested, the AI should lie to the player, forcing us to do the gumshoe work and figure out if they're telling the truth. I, for one, had always a

Well you kinda can ask for money, just ask it in diplomacy screen and give nothing to the opposite party. Side question: does making a one-sided (and possibly threatening) request actually affect the other civ's relations with you? In other words, if I start demanding planets from a civ and they simply refuse, does the ai remember that I'm being

I'd actually put a reorganized enemy tech tree pretty high on the improvements I'd like to see in a DA update. Ideally it would be a collapsible/expandable tree that, in its collapsed form, displayed the highest level tech a civ had in each branch. Individual techs would be color-coded to indicate whether the player also had them.

Apologies for the thread necromancy, but I was about to post my concerns about the same issue. Is there any way I can select the mining facility itself without forcing the space miner to move?

I've already submitted this as a bug, but for me it's a recurring problem. I'm posting it here to see if anyone else is having similar issues: After selecting multiple ships and pressing the create fleet button, two issues occur: * While the ships do appear to form a fleet, they do not immediately appear to have become a fleet in the display at the bottom of the screen. Only after I click twice on the fleet itself does the display show them as a fleet. * The ships de-select (th

With the beta test period (apparently) coming to a close soon, does anyone know whether we will see another build of the beta before DA is released?