Uranium - 235

[quote]I was saying that its not unbalanced in the first place. [/quote] Pray tell why?

Limiting PLANETS or SIZE? Because I want a map so big that Life Support technologies are actually USEFUL. There's no reason for me to ever research past Level 2 life support, really. More planets doesn't do much for me, because I hate having too many planets. They can go hand-in-hand, sure, but I'm just wondering if the size is not going to change in lieu of cramming more planets in. IMO having more than 15 'decent' planets begins to ruin the game.

[quote]My vote would go for two new checkboxes in addition to the "no tech trading" checkbox which should keep most people happy (although I am sure endless debates will arise re metaverse game standards): (a) No Unique Technology Trading[/quote] [quote] 1) Some techs should be marked "untradable". Mostly techs that doesn't make any sense to trade, more than techs that could be "exploited" in another's hands. 2) Techs shouldn't be tradable by anyone but th

[quote] Aye, removing the ability to get techs that aren't in your tree would really hurt some races. The Alterian & Thalans (as Phaedyme has noticed) also lack the standard-issue Xeno Ethics sub-techs. Without the ability to buy the techs of Good vs Evil or such those two races couldn't get the MCC for example.[/quote] This is by design. I'm willing to bet that ALL races are getting unique ethic techs. And the MCC is horribly imbalanced. AND, besides, they DO get their own ethica

[quote] If you can list specific techs that should be made untradeable, it'd make it easier for the devs to take care of it. [/quote] All of them tbh. :D If you really want me to make a list of what I think should and should not reasonably be made untradeable, I can get on that.

The Thalan should have a "Hive Colony" building that gives them +Food and +Morale. Tadah.

[quote] Balancing of the game deals with Human verses AI, or even one race verses another. I think the races are pretty well balanced. To say that good is harder and that makes the game unbalanced is wrong. You have he choice in the game, i mean thats like saying the game is unbalanced because missles are better than mass drivers. Its just a different choice.[/quote] That's fool's logic right there. Dungeons and Dragons is a "single player" game too, but it

[quote]Master Spies inherently bring in technology every turn without cost. Moreover, they are equivalent to multiple normal spies. They are represented in the interface by multiple agents in the UI. The practical result is that our research on this world is increased significantly and our espionage ability is increased by 25 points. [/quote]

Because asteroid bases are independently owned.

[quote]Also, the idea that paladins are stuck up prigs is just poor roleplay or prejudiced players, not the default way to play the class. [/quote] He probably meant sanctimonious. Which, yeah, since the idea of Paladins were inquisitors like Torquemada... that's a pretty fair assessment. The problem at least was that in D&D, they WERE justified, as it as never really an issue. Slaughtering a town of heretics might be justifiable as good, but is still an intrinsical

[quote]So you're arguing that the first draft of the tech trees that we got are perfect and unassailable?[/quote] Well, two things. 1) Thanks for supporting my point. So instead of fixing problems with the tech trees, you'd rather keep this lameo everyone-blends-together-by-midgame crap we have now? 2) Altarian tech tree is the Drath tech tree. So... yeah, they're fine. [quote]Seriously, if it bothers you this much that you can trade racial techs, you can play

[quote] almost no one uses anything but minisoldiers, tidal disruption, and propaganda Not true... it depends totally on the situation. If you're a rockin' totally pwnin' empire attacking an entrenched enemy, and you already have 15+ planets, why would you want anything under class 10? I would MD--mass driver-- it. (Hehheh, Doctor Device.... I wish....) Maybe you

[quote] This continues to be a horrible idea - if you play Altarian, you may need better morale buildings. If you're Thalan, you may need all kinds of techs to boost your ability to get up and running. [/quote] No, it's not a horrible idea, given how many people play with zero tech trading *COMPLETELY*. If you're dying because Altarians need a morale tech, you did something seriously wrong. If you're doing that badly, raze some farms, learn how to play,

[quote] If you are good then you do not have sin weighing on your soul. That IS the reward/bonus. [/quote] I was wondering how long it'd be before someone was going to post that crap.

I've yet to play Thalans, but I've noticed every game against them, they have a military 2x bigger than anyone else, at any given time.

Eh. Anything on "immense" with planets set to 'Common' or higher ends up being really lame tbh. To me, the game just gets stagnant when you get the top weapon techs, which is why the current uberfast "very slow" tech setting annoys me so much. Personally I think most games should end before you get the 'uberweapons'.

Hang on, I'm trying to learn how to hack forums.

[quote] You guys are probably right. There seems to be a general lack of rounding in favor of truncation in GalCiv. Like taking a 10% planet quality bonus and having PQ9 planets remain PQ9 planets. So I've got my ship with a laser that has no attack value. She's a cute little ship though which I may be able to distract the enemy with. And then there's my transport that has no weapons but an attack value in each category. Cool! <a href="http://img237.ima

[quote] Hi! 4) No emoticon missed. There's nearly 7 billion idiots on this planet, I don't think we'll miss one. Good luck with such an attitude on this forum. Not many of us will miss it. Iztok [/quote] I'm shaking in my boots just imagining what someone with your kind of power could do. Please don't pound out a frustratingly polite request to the moderator you don't actually know, starting w

Speaking of, someone tell me what the hell that "Will become godlike" event actually does.

[quote] Hi! Gentlebeings, many of you arguing here don't even have an account on metaverse. Since you're not playing for scores (hence compete with evil scoremongers), why do you care about balance anyway? Just play as you want. BR, Iztok [/quote] 1) Because the metaverse is retarded and 99% of GalCiv2 players don't give two flying shits about it. 2) Are you one of those whiner crybabies w

___________________________________________________________________________ "Hedgehog" Terran Troop Transport ___________________________________________________________________________ <a href="http://img247.imageshack.us/my.php?image=

Terrible example. For one, the concept of Nazi Germany using slaves is a new one to me. Secondly, they had technology unlike that seen anywhere else. Between Germany and Italy (okay, screw Italy), they took out most of Europe. Technically, Germany shouldn't have lost. If you want to talk Evil vs. Good, the European Theater was the "Empire Strikes Back" of karmic wars. Secondly, Mao wasn't a "failure". It's easy to put him in a negative light, but he reshaped China, and he's sti

The problem with that idea is that the AI damn-near gives away techs for free every 8 turns anyway. A "coalition" where they shared unique techs wouldn't be any different from anyone else, really. I still insist that the best idea is that if the tech isn't somewhere on your tech tree, you don't get to have it. No way, no how.

It seems relevant to mention that it APPEARS that the Evil / Good "techs" are going away for race-specific ones. That said: - I agree you shouldn't be able to change your alignment when you research "Xeno Ethics". If you're evil, you're evil. Dumping cash into space doesn't make you a good person. - Either change moral choices to benefit everyone, as per this thread has mentioned, or simply make the 'good choice' techs dramatically more powerful. You take short-term lo