Wasn't the UI made with one of Stardock's apps? "Object Desktop?" I thought I read somewhere that it was potentially customizable with OD.
Yeah, it bothers me that the AI can say "Your starbase in this location is a threat, and we will respond accordingly," but we can't pick a unit of theirs and say "We see this as a threat. Get rid of it." I would love to have the option to request that the AI trash starbases, as opposed to handing them over. For some reason, I can occasionally put my entire empire up for sale and still not be able to buy one not-maxed-out starbase.
Whenever I play the first mission in the DL campaign, the Altarians start building several influence starbases around my planets. I don't see major races do it so much elsewhere, though.
Yes, a good solid helping of that.
Yes, I've noticed influence starbase spamming in Dark Avatar and Twilight games fairly frequently. I once had six minor race-built influence starbases around my homeworld, which ultimately led to said race's conquest.
True that. User mods made it much better. But I mean, you have games like MoO3 that completely fail expectations, and you have games like Oblivion, which are good right out of the box (but with flaws), and both are improved greatly by user mods. This is a good thing. I think that Uranium-235's being obnoxiously harsh (obnoxious because of his insistence on using "retarded" as an insult) about how the game didn't meet his expectations. I certainly don't think he was obligated to
Also, I'm not even arguing against expanding the list of techs that can't be traded. I've argued in favor of making stuff like weather control and biosphere modulators untradeable. I do not believe that every single racial tech is so unique that it needs to be untradeable, but I do think that each race has some techs that define it enough that they should not be traded. And I certainly am not arguing against adding further start up options like "no trading of racial techs at all". <
[quote] 1) Thanks for supporting my point. So instead of fixing problems with the tech trees, you'd rather keep this lameo everyone-blends-together-by-midgame crap we have now?[/quote] That's a false dilemma. I've been arguing to fix the tech trees. [quote]2) Altarian tech tree is the Drath tech tree. So... yeah, they're fine.[/quote] No, it's not. It's based on it. [quote]Because having tech trading completely off eliminates a vital part of the game. Wher
[quote] Here's some points: 1) The Altarians have the Drath tech tree. There's absolutely no reason they should have problems. I've yet to have issues with them.[/quote] The Altarians do not have the Drath tree. They have a modified Drath tree. [quote]2) A LOT of people play with tech trading off to curb the massive AI 'cheating' so they're not getting ANYTHING, not even the economic bonuses of selling things, even 'worthless' techs like Universal Translator.[/quot
[quote] Besides, if you want to play in a galaxy with 15 decent plants...(9 of them being other races homeworlds, leaving only 6 free to colonize) an immense map might be a bit TOO big for that. (it might even be too big if you meant 15 decent planets per side (which is not what you said) which would be about 165 planets) [/quote] 10 homeworlds, plus up to 8 minor races, plus a handful of unclaimed worlds that will probably not be close to you.
The idea of paladins was that they were virtuous holy warriors. Inquisitors would've been clerics. They're also, again, not by default sanctimonious. Playing them that was is a matter of choice, not requirement. As far as I know, slaughtering heretics for being heretics isn't really considered a lawful good action in D&D. It's considered lawful evil.
Weird! I remember the description reading differently, but I played them under 3d.
Ha, wait until you go to war with them and they start swamping you with spores.
[quote]Of course, like every other "evil" empire, the majority of citizens didn't think of themselves as "evil".[/quote] You know what? That doesn't matter. I know quite a few people who are blind to their own faults. Just because people believed they were justified and thought they were doing good doesn't mean they were justified and doing good. It just means they were engaged in heavy denial and revisionist history. The statement that "[they] didn't think of themselves as evil" is jus
[quote] No, it's not a horrible idea, given how many people play with zero tech trading *COMPLETELY*.[/quote] First, that's because tech trading is an [i]optional setting[/i]. Second, people primarily have experience playing that way in DL and DA, and we're still testing TA. People have already said that playing with tech trading off for some races makes them increasingly ineffective. [quote]If you're dying because Altarians need a morale tech, you did something seriou
It's reflected in bonuses to espionage, I believe. And espionage bonuses you can spend more money to train spies faster. It doesn't actually give you access to a new kind of spy.
[quote]i'm usually evil and so are most people because evil is better by nature. [/quote] Okay, I'm laying down the gauntlet [i]right here[/i]. Explain how "evil is better by nature."
They've built about six warships in my current game, prior to my campaign of extermination against them. They're putting up no resistance, though.
You should send the save game and debug.err file (zipped up) to [email protected] , along with instructions on how to reproduce the crash.
[quote]The problem with that idea is that the AI damn-near gives away techs for free every 8 turns anyway. A "coalition" where they shared unique techs wouldn't be any different from anyone else, really. I still insist that the best idea is that if the tech isn't somewhere on your tech tree, you don't get to have it. No way, no how. [/quote] This continues to be a horrible idea - if you play Altarian, you may need better morale buildings. If you're Thalan, you may need all kind
It starts boosting the race's abilities until they become godlike. If you don't wipe them out early, they will become unstoppable.
[quote]Hi! Gentlebeings, many of you arguing here don't even have an account on metaverse. Since you're not playing for scores (hence compete with evil scoremongers), why do you care about balance anyway? Just play as you want. BR, Iztok [/quote] Well, I do have a game posted on the metaverse, but since I've been playing nothing but Twilight, I haven't posted any beyond that - and that one is at a lower difficulty than I normally play anyw
I was once massing my forces near Yor space to annihilate them utterly, and got the Vegans *and* the Dread Lords within a few turns of each other. The only space I hadn't explored that had a star was right behind my fleet, too...within two turns' movement. The AI did not want me exterminating the AI races, I guess. Shortly thereafter, it had the Arceans touch the Telenanth and ally with everyone but me.
Another beta's scheduled next week, I hear. I don't know how many more beyond that, though. I do hope we get some tech tree tweaking by the final beta patch, though.
[quote]I wish I could say I made that pic, and sometimes that I'd thought to use a nickname when I started posting here, Psilon Mobster maybe. I am indeed hung up on the Thalans b/c their base bonuses go nicely with my tendency to make faux-Psilons out of everything I play in a galctic 4X game. Knowledge is power, as they say... [/quote] Yeah, I first saw the pic in the Grey Godfather AAR on the MoO3 forum. It still continues to amuse.
