Does approval have any effect on income? I don't see it in the forumula, yet you say at a high population income decreased. Does low morale on a particular planet really hurt you if your overall approval is high?
is this part of the hated PQ bug? the one where PQ, for the purpose of pop cap and morale, isn't going up correspondingly when tiles are terraformed (unless you're playing a neutral civ)? or is that intentional? i haven't been able to find a clear answer. I don't think this is addressing this issue, but I'd really like to see something that does address this, moreso than the bulk of the other changes and fixes.
Ouch! i would hate to think how much income your going to be forced to loose when you have to turn down taxation once you start taking AI worlds! Depends how you treat those worlds (amongst many other factors, I'm sure). AI worlds usually have a starport - if you use up the production already tied up in it then remove it, that saves some bc. If you remove all unnecessary structures (usually any +moreale, +influence, OFM, defense) that
I'm interested in this too and was going to start a thread about "How do you build a money world?" I usually shoot for a decent sized PQ world with 12-19B population - whatever I can get away with without using any +morale buildings. I'll usually have 2 factory buildings and a powerplant at first, to get everything built, then eventually replace even those with stock markets. I'll have 1 farm minimum - sometimes 2 - if it won't put the population over 19B. All other tiles get stock m
Custom races get 15 points. That's 5-6 more points than a stock race. Most stock races start with better tech than is even possible with a custom race. Some stock races start with (highly valuable) abilities you can't even use with custom races. Stock races can be customized with the extra points and you can change all the graphics and such. The only thing you really get with a custom race is a few extra points to spend, and since every stock race starts with built-in bonuses that usually e
I like the Yor too. The mini bonus and extreme loyalty, with lots of other bonuses, excellent starting techs, and a nice super ability - and 10 pts to make them further powerful. *cackle*
You can build any older version of a structure, then upgrade it - so you can get incremental production out of something like a factory. You can also hit the details button to get to the planetary governor and disable automatic updates - but you can only do this on a planet by planet basis. Personally I wouldn't want to disable upgrades globally, since I wouldn't want the micromanagement hell of manually upgrading structures on my established worlds, which are the backbone of m
IMO, the whole terraforming is yet another one of the oddities of GalCiv2. Planets that have a high base PQ don't benefit that much from it, while crappy little low base PQ worlds morph into uberworlds. The kicker is that population caps are based on initial PQ - I think - max population is another odditiy. Which just means you have to either use a lot of transports to jack up your populations (another oddity) or use the worlds for something other than stock market econoboostage. The
I'd agree that the UI could be more informative. A lot of the forumulas and math for GalCiv2 are "interesting" and it's often hard to figure out what's going on. But, I'm also more of a "feel" players - I don't like reducing games like this or Civ IV to a mathematical exercise. Regardless of how the math works out, it's usually pretty obvious to me whether I'm doing the right thing and winning or losing. I would have to disagree about starbases. 4 per sector is reasonable enough bal
My fleets become unstoppable and I'm not "constantly losing ships." I do usually put *some* defense on my ships later in the game, but they have vastly more attack than defense. When you have a significant tech and production advantage, as the OP surely does, it doesn't matter what types of ships you produce - the AIs are all but fodder at that point. The OP also seemed to be playing defensively, or passively - ie, not going for domination/conquest. It's most likely a lot cheaper to
Also remember that ships with destinations set, ie those on autopilot, move at the end of your turn. So when you are cycling thru ships that aren't on autopilot, or otheriwse managing your turn to turn affairs, that you will have ships around that DO have movement available, but they won't move til you advance the turn. It gets further wierd if you don't select to waste extra movement leftover from autopilot, as the game will pause after you end your turn for each autopiloting ship tha
I find it odd too, especially when you take terraforming techs into account.
i just hope i can ignore it in DA as i do in DL! You pretty much have to "build" spies even if you don't want to use them, as you'll need them to counter/nullify spies the AIs use against you. It's not really that big a deal though.
There are several threads floating around with theories about setting up for defense. Most of these discussions resolve to HOW you defend, not so much how you design individual ships for defense duty. You might search for such threads if you're interested.
I wouldn't want anomolies appearing later in the game - the initial rush is fun, but it's enough for me! You can upgrade your flagship into a warship later, so any bonuses it gets aren't necessarily wasted. Bonuses your additional cargo hull based survey ships (if you make any) get are kind of wasted though. I've taken to building additional survey ships as early as possible too - often partially rush buying them to get them out faster, so they can pay for themselves faster an
Side note - SDC is harmless - there's no reason to not use it.
Hello all! I am a casual GalCiv2 gamer. I love the game and do think that it is one of the best turn-based strategy games ever made. I am currenlty hooked on World of Warcraft though. That friggin' game consumes most of my time. I do like to fire up a good GalCiv2 game once in a while though. Should I make the plunge for Dark Avatar? Can I purchase just Dark Avatar in the stores, or do you have to download it? I am only seeing the Gold Edition in the stores. I'd like s
I wonder why this is a game option instead of a decision to make in the ship builder screen? There are times when upgraded designs will have very small adjustments, and times when upgraded designs are significant overhauls. I'd rather have the option of "removing functional components" on-the-fly in the ship builder than have to set it as a game option. Not a huge deal, but wierd enough that I just leave that setting alone.
You're seeing normal behavior, not a bug. Many ship components scale in size depending on the size of the hull - that's what is meant by the "SizeMod" (programmer-speak) reference (it's not suggesting you're using a mod). You need a lot larger warp drive to move a huge ship than you do to move a tiny ship.
Being able to place agent to disable starbases sounds interesting. I kinda think starbases are ok as is - they aren't the focus of the game, just a part of the game, they're easy to create, and can be very helpful if used well. Increasing starbase range could be unbalancing, and allow way too much overlap. Allowing starbases to be towed somewhat decreases the strategic importance of using and placing them intelligently. The whole starbase mechanic also needs t
I would agree on a lot of the points, particularly plantet development (which if done better, would lead to an overall stronger opponent) - stuff like building research/manu/tech capitals on tiny worlds, or 2-3 of them on the same tiny world, and everything else mentioned. For some of those items, you have to remember this is AI - it's not you, it's not a human. The AI has a huge amount of things to keep track of, and coding AI to sacrifice or do other things that are serious human jud
The population of earth is around 6b. If there were 20b people on this planet we'd all be pretty unhappy about it, I'd think. There's a lot of people unhappy now! I dunno what's worse, unrealistically overpopulated worlds to get taxes multiplied by money buildings, or building world after world filled up with stock markets.
One other thing that could've happened is that the council passed the resolution restricting how many trade routes evil races can have, and you might be evil. I haven't had this happen in DA yet, but in a DL game just before DA released I got bit by this resolution even though I hadn't had to pick an alignment yet. The game apparently considered me evil since my ethical choices had been tilted in that direction, and I ended up getting shafted for trade routes.
That doesn't make much sense to me, but I guess it doesn't have to. Also doesn't make sense why essentially improving a planet via terraforming tech doesn't bump up the PQ or at least increase the PQ-based population cap. I mean, my 2nd planet in my last game was PQ4 but had 16 workable tiles after terraforming. If there's room for more structures, shouldn't there be the corresponding more room for people since the planet is now essentially just like a PQ16 world that has no terraforming pote
It'd be nice if maximum population was displayed somewhere. Showing total food production doesn't do much for you if it's way above the planet's population cap. And the wiki says you can go over the PQ pop cap by transporting people if there's food to support them. Eh?
