We're failing to communicate somewhere. If you want to argue the value of wonders (I find they're useful, but I don't build them on my home world or my best planets, I've got lots of PQ11-14 planets for that, usually), but I was responding specifically to So... the plan is that you will most of the time need to demolish something so that you can put in a wonder?
Frogboy: Actually, Mass Drivers IV may be a shorter path to 4 attack on a small hull. I really hope the game becomes stable enough soon that I can explore the tech tree, my own meanderings through it have obviously missed a few things. CrispyMouse: True, the enemy has the choice of engaging. Doesn't affect the topic at hand, however. Second, speed isn't the advantage you think it is. The ability to ALTER your velocity/vector is a big advantage because you can determine
Would it be possible on the Military Govenor window to have a count of how many colonies are producing each type of ship? Also, could we get rid of ship designs in the left half of the window that noone is making, since we can't change that anyway? Bonus points if we get both
Supreme Shogun: This isn't a D&D game where you declare your alignment and then you're rewarded for following your alignment. Your choices on those events are what defines you as good/evil. Making events where good is rewarded and evil is punished would seriously break that. As I said above, the benefit of evil is the bonus you get for making the event choice that gives the bonus. So, if you give a choice where the reward is for the "good" choice, evil will choose it, as it has no
The problem is that evil, for purposes of this game, is a mattter of always going for the best benefit, as opposed to good, who will pass on a benefit if it is opposed to their belief system. In other words, in the scope of this game, if an event came up where the benefit was attached to the "good" choice, evil would have no reason not to pick it, since they base their choices on the benefit. Good would also have no reason not to pick it, since it fits with their belief system.
I spent a lot of time this weekend playing around with this issue, and have a few game-balance and game-play issues and suggestions to make. First, the econ improvement chain is totally broken. As near as I can tell, "Market Center" -> "Adv. Market Canter" is the only upgrade that works. Adv. Market Centers do not upgrade to anything later in the chain, nor do Trade Centers or Banks. These latter two aren't much of an issue because of ite
The second release Friday night went a very long way towards making GC2 a very enjoyable game. In fact, I had one game that easily rates in my top 5 games of GC1/MOO2/MOO3, and I've played hundreds of each (except MOO3, only dozens of games there) I posted a few ideas I had for improving the experience in a seperate thread, as I want to focus on what is already there in this thread. The stability is greatly improved, to the point
A word of warning, be aware that any ideas/suggestions/preferences I have are going to be biased by my love of gigantic galaxies and the fact that I haven't played with GC2 rally points yet. Several ideas I've not seen discussed here follow. First idea, I'd like a way to go straight from the dropdown icon on the right to launching, without going through the starport screen first. I definitely think that right and left click should stay as
Out of curiosity, I was wondering if this was something that only I see, or if it's common. I've got a good gaming rig (1.5GB Ram, AMD64 3400+, 6800GT video), but when I start GC2, either directly or through stardock central, the game just sits there at about 5MB used and 0% CPU usage for a minute, sometimes three. Eventually the game starts, I'm just curious what's going on. I think it might be the internet test or some license check.
Oh, and I just thought of one more addition, just to make things more complicated. Specifying the priority/urgency of the request. 1) drop everything, do it now. 2) put it at the end of the normal work queue 3) put it at the end of the idle work queue. Where the normal work queue would contain anything not added via this mechanism, or anything added with normal priority, and the idle work queue is
Have to disagree with less micro-management, Frogboy, especially early in the game. In GC1, my first act was to create two governors (one is for normal colonies, one was for larger colonies that would produce the bulk of my military ships), and as I colonized a planet, assign it to one of the two govenors. As I got new improvements, I'd assign them to one or both govenors, and the only time I intervened with a planet controlled by a govenor was for morale issues. On the other hand, every time
I certainly agree that it seems less realistic taken literally. However, this would be a fundamental change in the game. Of course, there are other fundamental changes going on, so that hardly makes it unlikely. The question is, what would this change bring to the game? Better immersion, probably. The need to arm just about everything, especially starbases, definitely. I'm not sure what it implies, but I'm actually a little surprized that none of the de
Actually, I thought of something like that when I was saying "Think of a weapon useless for attacking." Imagine if you will, a "drive configuration" that rather than providing propulsion, gives you the ability to damage other ships. The downsides of this are: 1) easily detected from beyond the distance the makeshift weapon is effective at, and 2) takes enough time to configure that if anyone was in range that didn't want to fight, they could run outside the
Interesting idea. The higher our espionage level, the sooner (on average) we find out that race X has completed tech Y, to the point of getting estimates of when they WILL finish it at the highest espionage levels. The description of the highest level does say that we know as much about their government as they do. Then the real question is, when we open a trade window, do we see what they have, or what we think they have? Something to think about. <img s
Impression I got is that we won't be designing our own starbases. I liked doing it in Moo3, but in Moo3 starbases were just big, immobile ships, they couldn't do anything that a starship couldn't. The same isn't true for GC1, and probably not GC2. I'm not sure I can see add-a-constructor SB expansion co-existing with design and upgrade SB expansion. I think the real problem is that CG is extending civ-like offensive/defensive attributes to a situation th
Actually, ProudCanadian, no, in GC1, the defender always uses its defensive value to roll (I'm not sure of the attacker, but I believe it always uses its attack value as well). Otherwise, you'd never take damage attacking starbases or constructors, and the game I've got going on right now, the Yor are loosing tons of corvettes while attacking my starbases and constructors. Changing it so that ships without an attack value would be free kills would have profound ef
Ii was pretty sure that something like that happened, I've been programming since the TRS-80 model I days. Any time I see a number near +/- 2B or +4B, I instintively think 32 bit int (or unsigned, in the +4B case). I just don't get how it could overflow adding up zeros, which is why I brought this up. This will definitely take someone that knows the code, as opposed to an educated guess. Even if I added up the maintenance costs shown on the design page (w
I've got mixed feelings on the idea. I personally feel that it's taking things too literally, though I'm not entirely opposed to seeing something like this. When attacked, a ships attack value doesn't enter into the equation, even when counterattacking. So to me, the defense isn't about how well the ship can shrug off an attack, it's how well it fights a defensive battle. After all, why should a ship with a 60 defense and 1 attack be so much more dangerous to att
Oh, agreed, I'm not worried so much as curious.
This weekend as I was beating on 0.21, I noticed something that was rather visually disruptive and in an area that I'm not expecting to get a total overhaul soon (which is why I'm not commenting on the tech screen). If you colonize a decent sized planet, then queue up something to be built in most of the zones, then remember that you need a starport asap, place the starport, then use the up button to move it earlier in the queue, the queue scrolls to the top
Life got rather busy for me, and I finally got around to pounding hard on the 0.21 beta this weekend. It's possible that it's only my imagination, or that since there was more to test, the games were lasting longer, but while I had been able to finish games at the end of Beta 1, I never came close in the latest version of the code. I was seeing CDTs after a few (several?) hundred turns and save files that wouldn't load. Are other people seeing this as well? Unfor
My girlfirend and I enjoyed playing Moo2 together. We never got past the first game of Moo3 precicely because of the realtime tactical combat. And I've played HW, if you can handle it's space combat without pausing, you're in no position to comment on how well the common player can handle real time combat. Not a knock, rather a sign of respect.
When it happens, it's good. Yeah, a monday release would have been a nice birthday present (I don't actually expect them to roll out a beta on sunday), and today would be nice since I expect Horizons to be down all day ("largest update ever"? I hope that's not counting the server merge, that took several days), but I haven't got the hang of combat in Robin Hood, so I've got stuff to keep me entertained.
I do not need another adiction. I do not need another adiction. (covering ears) LALALALA!!!! I CAN'T HEAR YOU! Who am I kidding?
Actually, miniballs get replaced by other weapons with better names not far up the tree.
