galacticdoom

Well as far as freighters go, most seem to send them to other civ's only to get on better relations with those civ's... since it adds a + to your relations for trading. You can make a decent amount of money with freighters though, by trading with a local minor. Find a minor that is closeby to your homeworld, and have all your freighters go there from your homeworld (your homeworld has to make them, so that way all frieghters are on the same route). Then you can spam economy starbases

I posted this somewhere else, but I believe (or it seems to be) that your relations with a particular civ have alot of bearing on whether they 'may' surrender to you. Going to war with a civ apparently does not impact your relations to much of a degree. So if you have 'close relations' to a weak civ, then go and destroy their whole military and take a few planets, chances are they will probably surrender to you, even if you are tyranny of evil [e digicons]}:)[/e] and they are saints of

[quote]Surrenders have to be something random. [/quote] They do seem random. Many times after I start a war with a civ, sometimes they surrender to me, saying 'You defeated us, here is all of our planets! Cya!', other times they say 'We hate you! We giving our civ to so-and-so'. It almost seems as, if you have great relations with that civ, going to war with them doesn't 'Lower' how they think of you, so if you kick their galactic butt across the galaxy, they will surrender to you. Th

Not only did trade overall get nurfed, the Korx starting abilities got decimated in ToA. In Dark Avatar, they actually up'd them a bit from DL. Dark Avatar Economics : +15 Trade : +50 Trade Routes : +3

[quote]I received 6453BC last game because i was moving through the Iconian territory and was on my way to cruh the dregin who was both at war with me and the iconians and was right next to the iconians.[/quote] Hey I finally for a first time received an amount similar to that. Something around 9000BC. I was quite shocked to say the least! [e digicons]o_O[/e] The Drath gave it to me, they were pretty weak, but at mid-game they had 350,000BC in their coffers, so it was nothing to them.

Well, apparently Stardock is aware of this issue, and it sounds as if they attempted to fix it. This was back in April 2008 by the way. Some of problems with it must have just been overlooked. By Frogboy found in forum thread https://forums.galciv2.com/308553 : [quote]I found some serious logic issues with the AI planetary improvements that would lead AI players to not build up planets at all. Serious issue. Tonight I'm wo

[quote]I don't even see the Korx being a bad choice.[/quote] I think the Korx are viewed this way due to the fact that their main ability relies on trading, and since trading is nerfed to an extreme in the game, it is almost worthless other than to improve relations with other civ's by sending a freighter there. Granted the most BC I've been able to make per turn trhough trading is 5000/turn, but there was a very high cost to get there, required over 30 or so economic trade starbases

[quote]I was going to suggest that, but then it occurred to me that it would make defense even more useless than it currently is[/quote] Simply place 9 Ion guns on every planet, and never ever put a ship in orbit ever again.[e digicons]:P[/e]

[quote]BTW I'm thinking along the lines of Star Wars Empire At War. There could (not should, could) be a social project in the game that would be sortof like an Ion Cannon.[/quote] That's a great idea. Build an Ion Cannon and be able to upgrade it's firepower as the game goes on, to keep up as ships gets stronger. Granted, it could be laser based, or missle based. Mass drivers would be the least feasible idea, since generating that much power to propel matter through an atmostphere (a

I've rarely ever play Yor, but as Sole mentioned, the AI doesn't have a clue how to do any of that stuff. Either way, with all things the same, and if you had 2 players of exact same play styles and abilities going at it, the Yor do not stand on near even ground in most scenarios. Having good farms and morale gives them the ability to make there territories and worlds a bit harder to invade, other than that, they aren't capable of reaping in the BC that most other civ's can. Is

[quote]star fleet explores and expands the federation where as the military defends the federation[/quote] As far as Star Trek episodes go, Star Fleet seems to be the space military and the exploration fleet. After all, when the borg cube attacked Earth, it was every Star Fleet craft that was there to defend Earth. They have never really made a distinction between the two as far as I know. I would assume that the Federation military would include

The only way they could make something like that work, is if they either did away with eyes of the universe (so you don't know where every ship in the universe is on the minimap), or massively scaled it down (which they should do anyways).. to make it difficult to keep tabs on the vast area of space your empire occupies... and if you did attempt to keep tabs on all your areas, it would be something that would cost economically. That way, only ships that are actually 'spotted' could be

A bit off topic, but just wanted to throw this in: To be honest, I hope they balance the game a bit better... I'm not sure how much playtesting was done near the end development stages of GC2, but I'm sure they would have no trouble finding playtesters to give feedback of a GC3. Balance issues will always exist, and being that they went with completely different tech trees and abilities for all different races in ToA, created a game balance nightmare. I'm sure that using GC2 a

For example, to give an example of how unbalanced the civ's are... I currently play with all civ's set to 'GENERIC' personality. Why? Because there are bugs that destroy certain civ's ability to play the game correctly. Evil civ's personalities make them not expand. Iconian and Torian personalities make them not build social improvements. Plus a host of other more minor things. With them all set to Generic, in every game still... Terrans, Torians and Korath will expand like made crazy

And like was said earlier, about in late game being able to have fleets 'transport' to where-ever they want within a certain radius instanteously... that's actually not a bad idea. The range would have to be somewhat short though, and if they allowed this with a new engine (folding space to the point to allow literal 'jumps') then this would be similar to something such as units being dropped behind enemy lines in WW2. Then you would have to actually defend planets to avoid surprise a

[quote]Sitting there in orbit as a defensive posture IS doing nothing.[/quote] Well the fact is, that while the player may not need planets full of ships to protect them, the AI does. I tend to leave a ship in orbit at every planet (usually a small hull) just in case, or if I need it to go blow something up nearby. If I have a planet that is very close to someone else's planets, I will have many more units just orbiting and doing nothing. But all players play different

The game is incredibly unbalanced between different civ's.. but that is more due to the fact that several large bugs still exist in ToA are will probably be fixed down the line when Stardock gets around to it (although it will probably be months if not longer before they do it.. since they said most all dev's are working on Elemental).

Well, if they leave out the combined fleet combat tactic, what other ways could they get it off the 1-dimensional huge hull kills all tactic? (they could balance things a bit, but huge hull fleets would still basically kill-all)

[quote]single multiple-battleship fleet in a position to intercept the incoming invasion is better.[/quote] But what I'm getting at, is that Battleships (designed to destroy other large hulls), would do very very well, against some destroyers or cruisers coming in. The Battleships though would not fare well against large fleets of small vessels. Thus the best thing to have would be Battleships along with support craft (a Cruiser, a Destroyer, a Frigate, and several small craft

Well, this would be up to what values Stardock would assign such vessels. But it would be similar to how Civ4 e.g. only gave units 1 value (which I can't believe they did! what a NO-NO) but assigned units to have certain strengths. Above example would signify that Battleships are designed to destroy other large hulled ships. This is what Battleships have been designed to do (the best) ever since they came into existence. Their weak point was that they were exremely vulnerable to certa

[quote] I'm a pre-planner, and I hate micromanaging, so I micromanage like crazy in hopes of avoiding micromanaging later. Which doesn't work...[/quote] Hahahahaha lol.. that had me cracking up laughing Same with trade, I used to make trade routes that would go as far as possible, and then on some turns I would suddenly be bringing in nothing, other turns I would have a heap of BC coming in... and I couldn't stand the drastic changes due to my freighters being at different spo

[quote]And I'd also like to point out that the guy who's being defensive, unless he's also using influence attacks, isn't growing. The offensive player can take other people's territory. That means that he's getting bigger.[/quote] The whole problem of this 'one ship is good for everything' would be solved by making certain ships do things better than others can do. Take a Battleship for instance, it is a slow, un-maneuverable, hulking ship that is designed to take out other larg

[quote]Whatever the new influence system is, it should not be something that you can attack. So military should be utterly useless against it. You should not have to have a large military to use influence as a weapon (as you do in GC2, whichi is what makes it a bad system), nor should you need a large military to prevent influence attacks.[/quote] In GC2, military is useless to cause influence, as well as to defend against influence attacks (planet or asteroid mine flipping), at least

[quote]The fact is, for lore reasons, most races have no business trading semi-unique technologies. [/quote] I agree, any tech that is unique to that civ should be untradable, because in the end everyone pretty much has everything, it to an extent, takes the 'uniqueness' out of the civs. [quote]Torians are supposed to be poor researchers, hence their weak +Research% bonuses.[/quote] Don't the Torians have a line of tech's that give them +% research abilities? I often t

I often try to stay at bringing in no more than 5000BC a turn, which is enough to upgrade older ships... when it surpasses this, I will build more labs and factories. The tricky thing is when a economic event happens, and money starts flowing in like mad crazy... I can never remember or keep track of what it used to be at, so when the event ends, I always find myself in horrible debt suddenly, and building econ buildings like mad crazy.