You can have planets you don't have tech for flip to you too, and it works the same way - they'll be at 0% production. You probably still pay maint on buildings that are doing nothing for you too.
I've definitely generated starts with bonus tiles on my starting planet (talking DA, of course - and no mods). In my current game (medium map) I have an influence bonus tile on my starting planet, and bonus tiles on several other planets. I'm not seeing any noticable difference in bonus tile distribution compared to DL.
In DA the a lot of the stock races have wicked setups AND you get so many extra points that you can fine tune them to be very customized. You might get a few extra points using a completely custom race but you're not likely to match the oomph of a stock race. I'm not saying this is a bad thing, but I'm not sure that I'd go with a pure custom race when customizing a stock race is way more bang for the point-buck. If you usually play pure custom races and haven't checked
Lots of spiffy changes, I can't wait to get this expansion. Bad design decision imo, currently there was little point in having smaller ships. Now they will be completely pointless which will make the combat even more one dimensional. Wouldnt it make more sense to encourage people to build smaller ships so there will be a mix of ships at mid-late game? Err, not really - why encourage players to drift to any particular style or design s
Upgrading ships saves you tons of $$$ over the legnth of the game. Turn 1 buy a blank cargo hull for ~450. Turn 2 upgrade to a colony for ~150 (numbers are not percise but close). Compare that to buying a colony outright for ~950. Sure it takes 2 extra turns but you will see the benefit immediately. Definite cheese and it has nothing to do with w
Sounds like a great idea to me. I'd add a 'willpower' type of attribute that dictates how stubborn an AI is in regards to surrendering or caving in to tribute demands. For ex, a very stubborn AI might not give tribute or surrender even when facing certain doom, while a wuss-like AI might give tribute even to inferior foes just to keep the peace.
I wish other companies would wake up and take a similar stance on CD requirements and protection. It'd be nice if they did distribution similarly too (the option to buy the game retail AND be able to register to download the full version is the best - I pre-ordered the game on CD and I've yet to crack the seal since I just install via SDC at my leisure (had a HD die recently then built a whole new machine so I've been reinstalling everything repeatedly). The losers who pirate and obt
I'd say that in essence reloading is cheating. At the very least it's cheesy. You won't get better at minimizing or eliminating the making of mistakes if you let yourself play sloppy. If you reload anytime something doesn't go your way you will hardly ever lose. You don't necessarly have to play a perfect game and recovering from less than optimal decisions is part of strategizing. It's your game and you can play any way you want, but obviously if you
I tend to visit GameSpy, GameSpot, IGN, CivFanatics, GalCiv2, some forums, etc to get my gaming information. I never did care for computer gaming magazines, even before the online sites really got going. Online resources are free (for the most part), more up-to-date, and you can get almost every file (demo/patch/trailer/movie) for free easily enough too. So paying $X for an out-of-date magazine with an overpriced and out-of-date demo DVD doesn't make a lot of sense to me.
An updated MoM or MoM2 would be cool. It's interesting to me that a lot of the gaming industry these days consists of copying successful games, yet there are so very few Diablo II clones (that don't suck) and many incredible games from systems/OSes past have never been redone for current OSes and hardware. The type of game I'd most like to see Stardock (or a company with similar production and quality values, which is rare) do would be a squad-level tactical game like XCom/
RPG is probably my favorite genre and I grew up playing PnP D&D...yet the NWN stuff usually puts me to sleep. I'm not sure what it is. Part of it is that I prefer to control a full party for a D&D CRPG - like in Baldur's Gate or IWD. You might want to check out the Titan Quest demo (releases end of june) if you want a little RPG fix. It's probably a bit more like Diablo II but it has more quests making it somewhat like NWN (which is really an action/rpg itself). Anyways - it's pre
Keep up the good work, it's much appreciated!
The AI can be good but it's not a human...an even a human would be suspicious of lots of ships near a world even if the human could GUESS (something that's hard to make AI do) that you're building up for your current war and not a surprise attack. Part of the problem is that "surprise attacks" are commonly used by players to the AI has to err on the side of caution and think that any troop buildups near them are coming their way.
It seems to me that any given AI/minor should only do so many trades per X number of turns (maybe 4, whatever), because anytime a player is trying to do a large number of trades like this they're always up to no good - either tecd whoring or manipulating before invading. I'm not sure I'd call this an exploit although since the AIs most like do not do this to each other it could fall into the exploit category. It's not the most wholesome strategy and it's situational. In games like G
Seems like it would better simulate simultaneous combat. In addition, as it is, attacking has a significant advantage and it's also advantageous to design high firepower ships with minimal defenses to maximize that advantage.
You have a sphere of infuence that looks like a border, but you don't really have territory. It's not your sector. Uninhabited planets within your sphere of influence aren't yours until you colonize them. The easiest solution is to colonize the planets you want before someone else does. I have mixed feelings about the way this is implimented as I'm a huge fan of the cultural borders of Civ IV or the border system in Rise of Nations. However, it seems rather odd that you'
I think a 'pedia is a nice thing to have, however, in Civ IV I almost never use the civlopedia, because that game has very rich tooltips and all the interfaces relay all the information you need. As long as the game presents all the information you need there's minimal need of looking stuff up. GC2 does this pretty well too.
- Make sure you're not using the cargo hull as your "battleship." You have to research bigger military hulls. - Use fleets (groups of ships) to gain a huge combined attack rating and combat the enemy fleets. Read the manual or check out the buttons when you have several ships in the same "space." - When you design your ships it's usually best to only put ONE weapon type on a ship and lots of them. If you put on any defense at all only put on the defense appropriate for t
There is, indeed, no love for the single player gamer these days. Thanks for being the exception. Agreed. In my vast gaming history I've played countless hours of DnD, risk, and tons of board games. In the distant past I had a regular group of friends to do that kind of thing with. O
I like the ad because it shows real game graphics but if you weren't familiar with the game I'm not sure that it'd be obvious that you were looking at in-game graphics. I tend to dislike promos, ads, and game movies (even intro movies) that have nothing to do with actual gameplay. I like GC2 for strategy and tactics more than anything, but a lot of people really love the ship design thing and it seems like it'd be wise to blatantly mention
I think it's awesome that GC2 is successful. Not only because it's a great game and because Stardock rocks and they deserve success, but because it means there will be lots of patches to tweak the game to be even better and to add new stuff to make it even better. Most importantly, however, is that it also shows that smaller dev teams with smaller budgets can produce high quality games with broad appeal and can compete with the larger compa
Everything in 1.1 looks like it'll rock and I'm excited about all of it, but no matter how cool ship design is enhancements to the ship design feature are at the bottom of my list. I'm far more concerned with things that affect the AI and gameplay, like AI improvements/changes, starbase changes, other changes to gameplay like economic changes and logistics changes, and the ability to randomize opponents at launch (simple but highly desired). <br/
I want my minute back. I speed read but the OP was so incoherent and confusing that I had to reread some portions in an attempt to make sense of it all (so I wasted 30 extra seconds or so...arg). In the end, I've concluded that this thread is pointless and poorly written.
I'm more into capital ships and prefer medium hulls and up. I don't want to have to build tons of fighters. I'm all for balance but I don't want fleets of tinys/small ships to have an advantage over mediums and up. A medium ships is obviously going to be more powerful than a similar tech small or tiny, and IMO, 3 mediums should obliterate 5 tiny/small of similar tech.
I bought this game not knowing anything at all about it, never having played any other game in the series, for the sole reason that there is no copy protection on the game You seriously bought the game knowing nothing about it, having no interest in it, and only because it had no copy protection.
