[quote who="DMF" reply="50" id="3657556"] It could be shortened for everyone. Too bad one can't make the length dependent on current relationships. [/quote] SuperDiplomat or Ally [e digicons]B)[/e]
[quote who="DMF" reply="48" id="3657413"] Are you saying that it has the same internal name as perhaps a "native" tech, and thus would mask the native tech if you traded for it? That situation already exists in (I think) the CU, were there are a couple different forms of "Space Militarization", one of which comes with an additional bonus. [/quote] Yep, this is exactly how I ment it. I don't want to create a new technology just because I want to slightly rebalance a
[quote who="DMF" reply="45" id="3657358"] Yes, you should mark it, but not with a plus or II, but with a different name. [/quote] [quote who="abelisari" reply="46" id="3657398"] Regarding you question on tech names, I agree with DMF, it's much better to find another name for those techs; putting a symbol at the end is a practical solution, but not very elegant. [/quote] But wouldn't that also suggest that if you trade for this technology you intent
1 question: I'm gonna differentiate some of the conventional tradeable technologies from one tree to another, example: The Krynns "Advanced Diplomacy" will give +20% diplomacy while the standard generic one gives only +10% (the Krynns however is going to take them longer to research and they aren't as willing to trade it away.) The question now is if I should "mark" these (specialized) techs somehow so that it may be directly visible during the techtrade that a
[quote who="DMF" reply="1938" id="3657147"] No, there was no war. Very few Transports launched, either. After the Plague, the Alt growth curve should have gone back to paralleling the Drengin - though at a lower level, but it did not. [/quote] I was rather thinking about culture-flipped worlds. Conquest usually doesn't increase pop that extreme even for the victor because he will also loose soldiers. Another explanation could be that both K
[quote who="abelisari" reply="41" id="3657048"] I always used additional engines only in cargo designs, and scouts. I considered them too space consuming to be used in military ships, even in CU. So the difference of approach in FW would not impact on my military ships speed, regarding the others I think it doesn't matter, so if this approach will make the AI to design better ships [/quote] I may at some point introduce some engines which use very little spac
[quote who="DMF" reply="1933" id="3657003"] I can't get the pic to display from Google Drive. See if you can use the URL directly.[/quote] I see nothing unusual. Both Alt and Korx lines had only very little population growth even before the Plague hit, and it did return to normal after the initial hit. However, both factions did receive additional hits, and given how fast the red line increased exactly around these moments I'd say they lost worlds to the Drengin. Bu
[quote who="DMF" reply="1927" id="3656914"] BTW, remember that you're still expecting the base Tech Tree from me. If you make changes to the released file, they will have to made again in the file I send you. [/quote] It would be helpful if you just post the filenames of which specific files you want to have locked by me until I get their new version from you. I'll then make a future changelog for these explicit files which I can work down once I get these file
[quote who="DMF" reply="1925" id="3656906"] I would like to know what problem increased build costs was supposed to solve. If there is none, than what's the point? [/quote] 2 years ago buildcosts have been decreased in order to prevent the potential danger of these infinite-buildqueues. Gaunathor reverted some (not all) back to the vanilla values - I don't know why - but I was fine with that under the presumption that we pay a close look to testgames if the pre
[quote who="abelisari" reply="38" id="3656913"] Absolutely not, as I said I find speed is well calibrated in the CU. Right now I'm playing your mod with Iconians and I have just finished the colonization races and started to build my military. My ships have a basic speed of 6, which is high, at this tech level, but still ok. I found an anomaly that gave me +1 speed, and I built the Truckers Guild. That kind of anomalies should be rare, I suppose (and hope). And regarding the Guild, I
[quote who="DMF" reply="1921" id="3656763"] Please be a little more explicit. If an asteroid mine level 2 is delivering 4 points, does building an QPP increase that or not? Do other PPs have a similar effect?[/quote] All production-enhancing buildings do work/ get calculated the exact same way, so yes on both counts of your questions. Any bonus from Asteroids will see a magnification of powerplants or racial MP/SP or SB support bonuses. However, this may not a
[quote who="DMF" reply="1918" id="3656731"] Re: The TechTree descriptions. The actual bonus effects are, thankfully, left out of most of the text, but a few - notably the ship hull branch do contain statements about 10% Hit Point bonuses. I've left them in the , though generally taken them out of the . Are you aware of any that have been changed with this release? Or others that are problematic (I'm only about 30% of the way through the file)? [/
[quote who="abelisari" reply="35" id="3656725"] I'm not sure I understand your question, are you asking which should be the maximum achievable speed, excluding improvements? [/quote] On your gigantic maps, did you feel your fleets should be able to move around more quickly - even after research into propulsion is finished, or not? Speed has a great impact on how swiftly a map can be developed - ultimately conquered, and there sometimes is this loss of excitement once you
Just to be clear, the speed-bonus of the Truckers Guild isn't racial, but planetary ie. like an Arcean Navigation Center. I don't see that much danger in being too powerful for a colony rush, because once all systems surrounding the Guild have been colonized, you're most likely better off releasing new colony ships from those systems to cut down travel, not using the Guild planet. It may be powerful for Tiny/Small maps but somewhat irrelevant on Large/Huge etc maps. The di
[quote who="abelisari" reply="29" id="3656519"] Something like an increased asteroid mining output (if possible) [/quote] not possible. what you can do with asteroids is very very limited. believe me I've used a full day to find out what could be done with those (my original intention was to give each race different asteroid mining stations) but the game won't allow me [quote who="abelisari" reply="29" id="3656519"]or decreasing the time needed to develop ast
Marines got disabled. There were too many almost-similar invasion techniques. The NoEvilTrade02-UP-proposal currently sets 4 options: -5 routes -3 routes -1 route -0 (= No Change/ Unlimited Routes) The AI logic will vote on the higher number if good; which automatically means evil will vote low as possible, and neutral in between. In other words, Good tries to limit evilroutes to 5, while evil seeks no limitation but neutr
There is no invasion technique called "Stellar Marines". There is a technology called so but it will bring the Core Detonation-technique. So what exactly are you refereing to? The inconsistencies throughout the game regarding descriptions etc are sometimes so bizaar and contradictory that it's best to simply ignore it. According to some of the infors given in UPIssues or XenoEthics, it actually should be Good that is best on trade. And it's downright unbalanced that a
[quote who="abelisari" reply="27" id="3656383"] I would go for the second. The short desc under the improvement name is useful only to very new players and only for a very limited time, then it becomes useless. And, as you said, for improvements that do many things it could be misleading. [/quote] I've decided to do both - just finished it - because then one is still able to figure out the buildcosts of an improvement if that is already built - and was either a 1PP or SP
Apparently the following taglines from Events.xml don't seem to be working: n n n which is tragic because then alot of Type-1 events are currently broken. Even moreso tragic because it's not possible to give the good-option a positive value (of whatever kind) so the population-bonus could have acted as a compensation f
DMF, I've integrated your version of the Precursor-history into CU 6.1.3 and also dropped the accent in the Ion Beams-desc.
This Colonization-event doesn't work: Doomsday Defender Our researchers have discovered that [PLANETNAME] has a unique magnetic field that can be used to our advantage. Through the use of reconfigured power generation stations, it should be possible to make a localized energy field capable of enhancing planetary defenses within a large radius around each station. The reconfigurati
[quote who="abelisari" reply="23" id="3656324"] I was playing your mod and rushed for starport technology: surprise, custom offices are turning into starports and my expenses are skyrocketing [e digicons]:grin:[/e] I have to restart. [/quote] Disable the auto-upgrade feature every time you colonize a new planet should help blocking these nuissances. [quote who="abelisari" reply="24" id="3656325"] Ok, never mind. Starting a new game, a tile in
[quote who="abelisari" reply="22" id="3656271"] Hi, I'm wondering if you could add a feature to your mod: show the cost in resources of the improvements, instead of showing the weeks needed for building them. It would make things easier during the development of the first few colonies, when it is important to optimize things. I'm not talking about the building queue, there it's fine to show the building time, I'm talking about the small window where you can see
The bug doesn't appear in debug.err. I agree this version isn't finished but you should first find a way to host files so I can access your work and integrate them into the whole update. Next, just post your mind what you think what's still out of proportion and I'll have a look into it [e digicons]:thumbsup:[/e]
https://forums.galciv2.com/forum/274
