Slinky the Wonder Ferret

Could also break out missile point defenses into a unique tech category and develop the tech line for ECM so that it not only confuses enemy missiles but also acts as a general defensive to hit modifier for all weapons, including direct fire, by reducing enemy sensor bonuses... Therefore making it a general defensive bonus that only affects chances to score hits. But I think the combat system is based on two ships automatically "hitting" each other and the damage is based on the relativ

Idea: To make it more attractive to put advanced sensor packages on ships within your fleet and to make sensors important in combat as well as for exploration/detection range. When opposing fleets initiate combat, generate a random number for both sides. Add in the best sensor rating of both fleets. If one fleet substantially beats the other's random sensor check, it gets a first-shot against the opponent. Just an idea for the next expansion...

Set a rally point next to the world and assign that world to send ships to it. Otherwise, you have to click "auto launch" every time you make a new ship, which is a royal PITA. The reason to auto launch is so you can make sure new ships are active, but get a prompt to move them (when you get 500 ships flying around, it's easy to "lose" them.

Just assume no engine on base design (required component), only allow 1 engine per ship (the size already scales) and limit engine speed based on the drive technology. I concur that speed is a problem, mainly a handicap to the AI. And why not allow 0-speed designs as "defense satellites"...? The Planet management screen already needs an "in orbit display" to you don't have to exit the screen to see what is in orbit. If you want to get fancy, you can add satellite tende

Easiest way to adjust it in the current code is to allow multiple construction modules per constructor. Best way (IMO) is send initial constructor to build base, then just click on the base and choose to buy modules. If it changes play balance, you can throttle the construction to one module per turn. Can do a check and adjust costs based on Logistics technology and distance from nearest friendly base (to reduce the likelihood of cheesy AI or Player "influence base" constructions around

I imagine that this has been answered elsewhere as well. I understand why engines and defenses and life support scale with ship size, but it makes no sense to me that other components such as weapons should scale. Is a 5 mw laser on a battleship really bigger than it would be on a gunboat? I still question whether or not the upward stacking and scaling of all the numbers in GC is a good thing, but as long as its working, I guess it's okay. One thing that I think would be a good

I enjoyed SE IV, and intend to eventually pick up SE V. But I *AM* holding off until the bug list gets shorter. Will be fighting NWN2 bugs in the meantime...

If the deep space resources and the entire starbase code was removed from the design, the game would still function. Think about it. It's chrome. And it's just tedious. It's also potentially unbalancing with all the stacking modifiers. Starbase implementation remains the one thing I've never liked since the original GC for OS/2.

Considering that the Dominionists are pretty much running the US and UK governments and the Federal Reserve, and that they are vehemently opposed to a "world government," I find everyone else's paranoid conspiracy theories to be unsound. The fascism thing is dead on, but the rest is pretty much fantasy...

I have the same problem when I try to launch the campaign. Didn't notice it prior to v. 1.4x, but haven't kicked it off since prior to v. 1.3x.

Whatever the kinks were, I believe I ironed them out. I could not track down what the "unnamed startup application" that triggered on reboot was (presuming its in remission or was flushed after I deactivated it). Thorough scanning of the system did not uncovered any infected files or other traces of malware. The effect on Norton was that the "integrator" was damaged and I could not open NAV directly. The next LiveUpdate I did seems to have fixed it (may have been a stealth patc

I redownloaded SDC last week after I wound up reinstalling the OS when the GG/SotS installer caused my system to slow down to a pace where things were moving in terms of microbits. So that came directly from SD. Could have been something that just coincidentally triggered at the same time. Could also just be some kind of failure in NAV. But hopefully everyone understands my cause for alarm. The fast reply from SD about the integrity of the build was reassuring. Had there been an actual

Hoping that's all it is, Ug. Whatever it was, it triggered immediately after I updated GC2. Also glad to hear that there is nothing wrong with the file on SC. The worthless opinions of trolls notwithstanding, something happened and it was in concert with the update.

Should I have expected to get a message to reboot my system after using SC to update GC to 1.31? And thanks for the useless advice, Marc. I'm really not in the mood. GamersGates downloader trashed my system a couple weeks ago and you'll excuse me if I'm a little sensitive to things like this happening immediately after using a downloader from anyone, even SD.

This was when updating from 1.3.

Hey, gang, I just updated GC II to 1.31 last night via SC. When the update finished, it told me I needed to reboot my PC. I thought that odd for a game install, but did it anyway. I was able to putz around with the new GC for a couple hours after (thanks for fixing the ship selection process). When I was finished, I hit shut down and walked away to go to bed. In the AM, it had not shut down. It hung on the shutting down screen. I hit

I downloaded the latest updates from SC just prior to playing and it says I'm up to date. I can always try uninstalling and downloading again if you think that might have been the problem. I haven't had time since I created the crash to play with it anymore, so I haven't been able to try and recreate it and I had autosave off when it happened, so I can't guarantee being able to get an accurate recreation. I'll try to follow up and see if I can a. recreate it and b. find a r

I'm not sure this will be reproducible. I hope I got the steps to create in the correct order. In case I missed a step or so, I was inspecting a large fleet and various ship classes. I clicked the [Upgrade] button on a tiny ship in the fleet and crashed to DT. The ship "might" have been a stock ship design. It is possible that I might have clicked from the Planet Shipyard window, but I think I was inside a fleet (it was about 5 AM local time). - Was deep into a gigantic game. - C

The correct question would be, "What wasn't wrong with Moo III?" As one reviewer wrote, "Your job is to press the [Turn] button." As Blackadder IV said, "It's as much fun as getting an arrow through the neck and then discovering there's a gas bill tied to it." The producer clearly spent way too much time on the barely comprehensible intro movie and way too little on making a game. There are plenty of negative reviews floating around, and most of them a

I agree with the poster. This is one aspect of the GalCiv design/gameplay that I've always thought of as less fun than dysentery.

I agree. It is much easier to get a tech victory than to research the high-end weapons, much less equip them on your navy. I think this is a legitimate game-balance issue.

Turn off caps lock and you can move via the keypad.

Strat: Moo 1, Xcom 1, Jagged Alliance 2, M.U.L.E. RPG: SW: KoToR, Baldur's Gate (series), Planescape: Torment, NWN (series), Fallout (series), Rogue. Sim/PseudoSim: Wing Commander II, IV, Jane's AH64 sim II whose name escapes me.

If the AI build 50+ speed combat transports, that would shut down the Border Defense strategy.

So, my late game fast constructors with 55 Speed may have the Space Patrol handing out tickets?