[quote who="shiva7663" reply="10" id="2061900"]Has anyone mentioned Habitation modules for starbases yet? [/quote] A Space Motel 6? "Dammit Honey, our Tiny-hull got robbed again! That's why I keep telling you we need to go to that Millennium Plaza in the next parsec over!"
[quote]I, personally, do not want GC3 to be like Sins.[/quote] I doubt they will do it. I can't remember which article it was, but they said that although military conquest takes up a large portion of the game, the game still remains a civilization empire building game, so they will not go to 'deep' into the military aspect of it. It's likely that GC3 will (im guessing here) be somewhat similar to 2, but with the addition of optional tactical battles, and likely nothing else (other th
[quote]A Base Ship is a Starship/Starbase Hybrid[/quote] Ah, similar to a Mothership, which would be capable of limited production of it's own, perhaps able to create only tiny hulled spacecraft.
[quote]I like you idea. byt what about Time Ships, Patrol Vessels, Base Ships or Carriers?[/quote] Well I guess similar to the Coast Guard for Patrol, you could throw a ship in there like that, although you would probably most likely use fighters, corvettes or frigates (and whatever else) for peace-time patrols. Time Ships would be unlikely for Stardock to do since there is not much of a good way to incorporate time-travel into a turn-based game. Base Ships? not sure what those are. S
[quote]Instead of just fighters and capital ships, add a new class: frigates.[/quote] That was the whole point I was trying to get across some pages back.... but figured they might as well through the whole navy in there and do the same thing, each ship has bonuses and penalties. You can select No Class if you wish when designing a ship. This would introduce actual tactics into the game, which I think Stardock DOES NOT want to do, from various interviews/articles I've read. Quite Utte
[quote]New varieties (sp?) of extreme planets: ice worlds, lava worlds, ect.[/quote] Colonize a Gas Giant, now that would not be a fun place to live.
[quote]they should also add hangers onto those starbases.[/quote] Apparently, and I did not know this, but read it in the ToA manual, that placing a damaged ship on top of a Starbase apparently increases it's repair rate the same as having a ship in orbit. Anyone else ever seen this? I'll have to test it to see if it holds true. [quote]orbital shopping mall (helps spread your influence at discout prices, LOL)[/quote] I can see the Stardock Marketing Dept on this one al
[quote]With this system, a fleet of fighters would be equal to a capital ship of simelar tech, and cost about the same What good is that? If that's the case, if one is not at least situationally better than the other, then clearly you don't need one of these. And since the capital ship cost the person who researched it tech points, you basically screwed over the person who bothered to research new hulls.[/quote] Larger hulls would have to have a significant larger amount of
[quote]How does an Epic game differ from a normal one?[/quote] Epic is a normal game, I just call it that sometimes.
There was a conversation about it over in this thread I had with Tolmekian (on page 2): https://forums.galciv2.com/333777/page/2 but here was the jist of it: [quote]Me ->Question? when you play, do you also set all the AI personalities to Generic during game setup? I have found that by doing this, all civ's tend to expand much much better, and I am in my current Suicidal game, to see if it fixes the bug with the Torians and Iconians not buildi
[quote]Instead of either extreme (Hull size is unimportant/ hull size kills all), I for one think that it would be a good idea to have a battle system that factors in attack, defense, and HP equally.[/quote] So your saying... Hull size would just allow one to add more modules onto it? and hitpoints would be uneffected by hull-size. Whereas you would gain increasing amounts of hitpoints for all ships through research. So all ships would essentially have the same amount of hitpoints?</p
They should add the good ole cheap sensor drones that they had in GC1. Make em cheap and send em out so you can monitor your borders and areas of potential concern. They could also add some a warp inhibitor platform (would not have a large range though) so that you could surround certain planets or areas to bring invasion fleets to a dead stop to enable you to bring your own fleets around in time. Only problem with those would be enemy fleets would just fly around them, unless you are able to
[quote]Strangely, your current view screen must (or should) display the general region (zooming helps, since it's widening the viewable area ON screen) near these battles for it to popup the usual sequences...[/quote] I just read the pdf file of the manual for further explanation on all the options, and so, unlike how Civ3 would show every single unit's movements and battles (as long as they were not in a fogged area), GC2 apparently does not do that, and only shows the battle if the
[quote who="Scoutdog" reply="17" id="2060258"] Actually, this makes me think more of WW1... It would be sort of cool to see minors ally with majors a la Serbia and Russia. 'course, it would probably nerf the game strategy, but still... [/quote] That would be interesting, to setup a scenario, Galactic War 1.. or something, with minors in the mix allied. Of course I guess it would be the same as an epic game.
[quote]Yes. I currently set all the broken AIs to generic (11) - broken AIs being 7 (Drengin, Korath, and Yor) and 10 (Torian and Iconian). AIPs 11 and 8 seem to work just fine. Terran, Drath, Krynn, and Thalan use 8, while Altarian, Korx, and Arcean use 11. All the civs seem to be doing just fine. In fact, the Drengin are on fire in my suicidal game. I've got them at war with the other 5 AIs and they're dominating.[/quote] When you change a civ to 'Generic' do you or anyone know exac
Another thing to do, when you have alot of BC, to get techs or anything else (including economic and research treaties)... is to place down 999 influence points, then put down what you want from the AI (a tech or something), if they won't trade it for IP's only, then hit your BC's to see if you have enough BC to get them to trade it. Even if it takes 8000-9000 BC, after the trade, you can then retrade your Influence points for all the BC you just gave them, thus not really losing anyt
Ok, here's a screenshot of my interface options: I have everythiing set according to how you said.. i did change Battle Length to Normal (just to test) and then it did move camera to show ships attacking MY units... but still did not move camera to show other AI ships attacking other AI ships.
[quote]the event happened about 4 years ago and they easily have the smallest territory.[/quote] so if the random telenath event gives 1% to most stats as Sole mentioned, that means the Yor should have by now over 200% mentioned in most of their abiliteis! Hey, in your game check to see under the Yor abilities if they have alot of abilites that are that high, Because with their normal bonuses they should probably have some sky high ones hitting close to 400% by now. (sorry, my post is
[quote]I would think this is the one that is stopping you from viewing the battle sequence [/quote] I see my own battles, but like in Civ3 or 4, in between turns you see other AI opponents battling it out, that's what it never shows (or it does but extrememly rarely). I think I have all those things checked/unchecked how you said. battle length is on Full... I'll have to go see though to make sure. But if I understand right... when you guys hit the "next turn button", within p
[quote]I see them fairly often-at least one or two PQ1s in as low as a medium all-abundant, and I've seen upwards of 15 of them in some games.[/quote] Ohhh, ok... PQ1's and 2's are not habitable though, I still do not recall seeing any, maybe I just haven't paid attention. The lowest habitable planet is PQ 4 (or maybe 3?).
[quote]Maybe have a type of hull (I want 3 to go beyond just Tiny/Small/Medium/Large/Huge) that cannot orbit a planet after it is launched: a sort of "deep space only" limit.[/quote] Have a whole load of hull sizes, such as below, in this order: Tiny/Small/Medium/Large/Huge/Massive/Behemoth/Gargantuan/Leviathan/Monstrous/Whopping/Mammoth/Elephantine Then we would start hearing complaints like "It doesn't make any sense! They need to balance the game so Tiny ships
[quote]I had a great idea based on starbases in orbit.[/quote] You know, when I first started playing GC2, I actually thought there was a way to make starbases in orbit, from the text of some of the tech's, such as orbital replicators... then I finally figured out I had to build about 10 constructors to make the dang thing. [quote]There should still be a cap on how many ships you can have in orbit around a planet. But if you were to build an orbital starbase (economic, influen
[quote who="Scoutdog" reply="23" id="2059495"]On a more serious note, I would like to see a revamp of the requirements system to allow different types of requirement. i.e. some starship components would require improvements, some techs would require resorces, some starbase modules would require a special type of constuctor, and so on. Don't just have techs unlock improvements, ships, and modules, and have techs all be researchable without any requirements. [/quote] I've seen
[quote]But having some Snathi in congress would probabaly be something of an improvement![/quote] Haha.. hoarding their proverbial nuts.
[quote]From PQ 1 to 10[/quote] Are there PQ 1's and 2's in normal games? I've never EVER seen a PQ1 or PQ2 planet.. EVER. In any of my games.
