ansury

[quote]"Tough" difficulty is a fair game. Above that the AI gets advantages. I don't know about you, but "tough" is more than sufficient to kick my ass. This game has some of the best AI I've ever seen in a computer game.[/quote] The AI isn't too bad, other than a few stupid strategic things here and there. But stuff like... leaving all their ships orbiting planets 'defensively' when they could be gathering into fleets to counterattack and destroy my fleets, is kinda dumb. I hadn't a tr

I've seen them plenty of times. I know they screwed up alot of stuff in TOA, but not this one. ^_^ Do some ctrl-N's or alt-N's or whatever the shortcut is.

PQ should be *gasp* yet another slider, or there should be a way for you to set the range (and average) that PQ can span for habitable planets. (But then, we might not have a game anymore, but just a "collection of options" (or something) as someone from Stardock allegedly put it.)

Yeah the editors do suck. I don't care about that one, but the map editor is no better. They are poor excuses for commercial game editors. I'd expect these kinds of editors if the devs had created them never intended to release them, but eventually caved into pressure from gamers who were willing to take anything they could get. Not something released as part of an expansion, and arguably the most important feature of the expansion. And the UP... ugh. That thing is in such need of an up

Well whatever, I was just trolling at that point. lol Don't know why anyone would be obsessed over such a minor part of the game though. Personally I'd rather have had more moddability built into the game (AI or diplomacy scripting?), and an accurate/useful map editor instead of the piece of junk that shipped with the expansion. It's practically useless! Especially with that "missing planet textures" bug some of us are seeing.

Depends on the difficulty level. At some point the AI players are cheating (economy bonuses and such), so I'm not I'd give them that much credit. Depends on the level you were playing.

lol I've just been trolling for awhile now actually. I don't hate agents *that* much... hehehe. Once they fix it it'll be fine I'm sure. Of course the basic argument (that I was fine with just the sliders) still stands. lols..

Okay I give up, I was just trolling you guys. lol If I really thought MOO was THAT much better why would I be here? hehehe Probably the only things MOO2 had over GC2 was tactical combat, and fewer bugs. And I kinda liked the ship design screens a little better in some ways, but the memory is fuzzy. But I am genuinely pissed that the old invasion screens are gone, among other things. The expansions have been a huge disappointment IMO. I might even go back to the origina

lol! So I guess I didn't use agents properly, when I was assaulted by agents from every race out there, non stop. Actually, I would prefer to not use them at all, but of course this is impossible now. To defend against espionage with the old sliders all we needed was another simple counter esp slider to reduce the enemy's intel level, along with a natural time-based intelligence decay rate. Implemented in one day, problem fixed. Abstraction is needed. This is a SPACE CONQUEST game, not

Oh I can totally see why they didn't implement very complex ground invasion battles, that's not the issue. The issue is messing with something that worked fine, and not improving it, but making it worse. Without even giving people the option of retaining the old, even though it doesn't affect gameplay. Bleh. The only game like this that I know of that implemented ground battles, (wait was it Imperium Galactica or Pax Imperia? whatever.. Imperium I think..) Ah let's just say they were a

Well maybe it's true that it's just a cosmetic addition, but yeah, that IS enough to warrant adding it. (in Galciv III) So.... yeah, since carriers are just a cosmetic improvement that doesn't effect gameplay, I also feel that Galciv 3 should NOT include other things that don't effect the gameplay significantly. Like: 1) Graphics (Who needs em? Text based maps, hell yeah! X can be a starbase, O can be a planet, and little period dots can be ships! Wow I could be the artist!)<br

[quote]The old invasion screen was the worst of any 4X game I can remember.[/quote] But you'd be out of your mind if you thought the new version was an "improvement", as it was supposed to be in the expansion. lol "Yeah, that feature could use some improvements." "Yup. I just wish people would stop complaining about it, because it's not worth putting alot of effort into improving." "I know - let's just remove it entirely!" "Der.. okies!" <br/

Just bring back the old animations, or.... OPEN THE WHOLE THING UP FOR MODDERS TO IMPROVE! :p Ok that might be more work than it's worth. So just let us switch back to the old style. It's already implemented, for crying out loud... pull it out of CVS/SVN and let's see it as an option.

Oh thank God! Yes yes yes! hehe

Ugh. Unique tech trees. Not such a great design decision, probably. Not much added to the game (replayability? hardly.. more techs to learn?), but created serious issues to resolve and design around. There's a reason that it "had never been done before" - it's really friggin risky. I guess they pulled it off, but barely. Hell I still don't know how tech trading works now, so it's usually disabled. There's something to be said about not making things TOO different. It makes game

LOL! That's funny. Maybe they felt humiliated by the thought of having to resort to using another race's technology, and their egos managed to convince them that THEIR "sling shot and tin foil" technology was, indeed, superior!

[quote]I think someone seriously needs to up their screen resolution. ^_^[/quote] Still a bug.

Letting orbiting ships fight in fleets (groups the size of fleets max, not more) is a workable solution that I don't see any problem with. The orbital fleet manager is stupid anyway. BUT I don't think it'd be useless if they used fleets to defend their worlds. At the very least it'll weaken your attack ships because of a need for more speed, and prevent all of their ships from being wiped out too easily. But assuming they have at least a few fleets, they'll probably at least get to infl

[quote]"Full 3D battles in space are too difficult and confusing to deal with" that must be why Sins is such a success?Really, you should try it before you shoot it down.Like I was saying, keep the strategic game the same, but make the BATTLES like SINS battles, with our custom ships doing th SINS-type fighting. Simple. Turn-based battles stink.[/quote] Well I never claimed Homeworld and Sins weren't successes. They're different--and for someone who likes clunky three dimensional int

Heh I was about to say he shouldn't have to, until I noticed "intel integrated". Gah! That's beyond crappy. I'm surprised it can run any modern 3D game without puking all over your motherboard.

Thanks for filling in that gap in the documentation. (And bugged game interface label I guess... another "hard to notice" one that testers missed?)

IF (big if) the AI is specificially not grouping these ships simply to "slow down a fleet" like that, I guess that could be a tactic. Kinda doubt it's that smart though. I've seen a large number of ships just get picked off one by one before. Had they grouped up into fleets and attacked my SINGLE fleet all at once, they would have at least taken a large ship out or caused some severe damage. And with the large number of movement points my fleet had... it only delayed me a turn anyway.

Well that would be a totally different game, isn't Sins full 3D like Homeworld? Full 3D battles in space are too difficult and confusing to deal with, it's not like Total War where you're 3D on a 2D surface. Humans don't think very well in 3D, especially when presented with 3D info on a 2D monitor, and also moving the camera around becomes an issue. Sins isn't turn based AFAIK either, bleh. That's effectively a totally different genre, and requires a very different set of developer skills. <

I don't care about your defense of stupid agent strategies. Blah blah blah, agents suck. I'm bitter towards anyone defending crap features that don't deserve to be defended. Now they have to spend time "fixing" this broken feature, instead of fixing all of the other problems and new "issues". And the terrible broken cost formula for training new agents is not a valid excuse for justifying it's disproportionate effects. I never said you thought it was perfect, so I don't know why you're

Can't find what this stupid slider does anywhere. (in the options under game) So, is there a way to see the rest of what this option says, or are we supposed to know based on an incomplete sentence? heh Can't find it in the pdf manual, I've looked.