@centaurianmudpig: From what I remember the money is now getting "on hold" before it's actually channeled to the Claimant. That said, I received an update today, that the claims were already withdrawn.
Just wanted to jump in to let you know that 1. Ashes of the Singularity isn't the only game affected. Received Claims for GalCiv3 2. As of 7.9.2016 new claims are still risen.
If the HP between different tries didn't even change slightly, I guess something like HitChance isn't calculated with pseudo-random factors but procedurally. This means that there might be chances like 70%, but the seed the randomizer uses is constant upon reload. So what you might want to check out is if something changes if you change the seed. We don't know what the seed is. But for example it might be the turn you are on. So even if you always get the same result upon
The Wiki, which is also checked by the Devs afaik, states: [quote]Combat Viewer Players can choose to autoresolve battle directly from the main map, or watch it play out in the combat viewer. This has no effect on the outcome of battle; the combat viewer does not allow players to control their fleets -- though it may give better insight into why a fleet is performing poorly or doing well in battle.[/quote] http://galciv3.gamepedia.com/Ship_combat#Combat_Viewer</s
[quote] I also fail to see what the battle log has anything to do with it... its not like you see what happens in the log before it happens... or I might be wrong in that?[/quote] You actually do. First the hit is listed, then the shot is fired visually. I reported that as something they could improve maybe a week ago. ^^
Hrm, while I don't know it for a fact, I am extremely sure, that the battle-viewer is indeed just a representation of the results which are caltulated beforehand. You basically have the log, which you can see after the fight, or during the fight, but it's always there. However you could actually easily test it out in multiplayer. Because if the one player attacks the other, and then one player choses quick battle, and the other ist able to check the battleviewer, the b
@RavenX: They actually planned to give you the choice to define how your ships should act in the fight. Like this ship is aggressive, and this one should stay back. It didn't make it for release, but will come either in a DLC or expansion.
There is a guy in the steam forums who experienced the same. He was able to fix it more or less. Check this thread: http://steamcommunity.com/app/226860/discussions/1/620713633846838329/#c620713633853808068 <a class="hoverunderline commentthread_author_link " href="http://steamcommunity.com/profiles/76561198006596341" data-miniprofile=
The Battleviewer doesnt need to be interactive but be more informative instead. Would be a start to actually see all ships on one screen. And have hitpoint bars on them. Imho as of now the combat in Endless Space felt better than the one in GalCiv 3. That said, I disliked it, but the thing is that you knew how the mechanics worked and you knew what you were doing. So maybe they should somehow do a better job in vizualize what actually matters in combat. E.g. in Endless
Yeah, imho GalCiv 3 has the best solution out of all games. It lets you do everything at all time. Just the execution of your movements can only be done during your turn. So it has the speed of a civ, without making it challenge who loads and clicks faster.
I started to do so, doing a little Tricks video on it: [video]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PY5i6CurT88[/video]
[quote who="charon2112" reply="7" id="3550490"] Quoting RKade8583, reply 6 I'd also like some input on this. There's got to be an average for each galaxy. Like 8-12 for medium or something. I'm wondering if he meant to say 12 and 128 was a typo. [/quote]
I am for diminishing returns one way or another. That way sensor technology doesn't lose it's meaning (with 15 max you would have 15 right at the start). In addition it should make everyone happy (except those who scream "freedom!" for the sake of it). It supports early game exploration, doesn't make scouts obsolete, and it supports late game or huge galaxies when big sensor ranges are necessary. In addition it still gives you the choice to build a cargo ship full with sen
I don't think that stardock spent real attention to effective use of your ships. Right now you cannot even see the hitpoints of individual ships in a fleet. So what I am doing after a fight is separating every single ship from the fleet to see if it is hit in order to regenerate it savely, which again takes ages. But it's just a waste to send a ship with 10/100 hp into it's death. But I also agree that there should be more effective ways to heal your ships.
Guess the New Yorker was right. ;) "Scientists: Earth Endangered by New Strain of Fact-Resistant Humans" I will also leave the discussion at that point. Guess that arguing for an anti-gun-law with a Hillbilly must feel like what we did.
[quote who="Franco fx" reply="137" id="3548656"] LOL, Brad says on livestream there will be no nerfing of sensors. He builds them himself all the time. [/quote] Yep, and at the same time, he didn't use it on the stream. Otherwise he would have found these amazing planets on turn 2 instead of 8. Not sure if he ever used it in that way. Paul also reacted in one of the last streams before as if he never considered the possibility to stuff cargo ships wit
Now just a hypothetical question: Would you like it if current missiles did 100 times the damage they currently do? And if no, why not?
@ MrStarTrek This uncovering of all nearby star systems already grants you an advantage of at least a dozen of turns to your enemies, probably even more. Especially if you couple it with strategies like this: http://steamcommunity.com//sharedfiles/filedetails/?id=438892333
It's not about what others do. It is about two other things: Multiplayer and ambition. What I mean with ambition is, that I want to utilize the options I have, I want to become a good player. You could also compare that to a minmaxer mentality of RPGs. Player want to get the maximum out of their characters - within the rules of the game. Thing is right now, that, if you do not use Sensor ships, you are a shitty player. You will never be able to compete with a player who ut
But the game itself is balanced around having no sensor stacking. If there is an issue with revealing insane maps without those that is a problem which would need to be handled separately.
I understand that point. But I think that the game should have some consistency. I mean you are extremely handicapping yourself compared to a player who uses his possibilities, if you don't buy a 24 Sensor Range Ship on turn one. Which makes scouting, which should play a part in the game (after all it's 4x and not 3x and you start with something called a scout) obsolete. In addition sensor ranges of stations and similar do not make any sense as long as it is that way
Standard 24 Tile Range Sensor Ships still available on turn 1 with latest update. :( Starting to doubt they will change it before release...
Yep, this thread helped a lot. Notes made. ^^ @Devs: please add in the Tooltips ;)
So they just mentioned in the stream that there will most probably not be a hardcap but a diminishing return. They do not want to limit players much,however there shouldn't be one single thing which is the "right" thing to do.
Just wanted to drop in and vote for implementing a hard cap of either sensor range, amount of sensor modules on one ship or a diminishing returns which is probably harder to explain in game rules (unless its something like each additional sensor adds 1 less than the previous one) Imho sensor stacking breaks the game. In MP you will be forced to build a sesnor ship right away to not be in disadvantage. It makes scouts and station sensors obsolete. It removes the fun of one of the best
Stardock Forums
GalCiv3 Forums