[quote]It seems like i missed that Research isnt updated until next turn, with social and military you can change the focus and instantly you can see how many days less (or more) it'll take.[/quote] I assmue you are talking about the research screen. If you click around between screens a bit, the research screen will update to the correct expenditures and turns to research project completion.
[quote]Thanks to stardock's silly pseudo update the game is totally unplayable. I can only set up the game and after choosing options for races to play against as soon as I click on the "next" button to start the game it always crashes now. Next time just put a screensaver or a stupid text file on the servers for us to download to test it. I'm not the only one having this problem stardock. Check your new and "improved" beta and bug forum posts.[/quote] Wait until tomorrow, and go read a
[quote]Are you sure one Ship was not build at the Innovation Complex planet (usually your Home World) and the other one was? Base Speed for all Ship is 3, Racial Bonus +1, Innovation Complex +1 if build by that Planet: So you get 5. If the ship was not build by Earth then it would only have 4 which is correct. [/quote] I bet that is what happenned. I'll check into it and get back if the Innovation Complex doesn't explain what's going on. Thanks.
Playing the Terrans (+10 speed) on a new game with this beta, I researched sensors and then designed a new ship that replaced the regular sensors on my scouts with survey sensors. Then I upgraded some existing scouts to the new design. The ships kept the same speed that they had before the upgrade (5, which was correct). However, when I later built another of the same design of ship with survey sensors from scratch, it had a speed of 4. For some reason the new ships didn't get the (+10 speed rac
[quote]Hi, Ive read this guide a few times and Im starting to get the hang of things. on problem i keep running into is debt. How fast should i be colonizing? How do i deal with that 12 maitnence cost for every new planet?? Just seems by early-mid game im always swamed with debt with every planet -20 to -30 income, how do i get around this. more specificly in the campaign where you cant build freighters to get trade income?? [/quote] I would post these sorts of questions in the stra
It would be impossible to do much research with an all-economic approach. Would your approach be to buy an emerging tech from another race then trade it back to all the other races for cash? That would be a lot of work and still very expensive.
Good test. You are much more patience than me. No wonder I've never come close to +1000 bc's per turn. That strategy would be pretty hard to implement in a competitive game. I don't expect you to sink any more time into your simulation, but what proportion of trade revenue do you estimate you received due to the economic starbases? It looks like a lot.
Consider that at some point in the game if you are "evil", the modules are free and you can just spam constructors until your bases are maxed out. And for the record I did achieve a solid 1000 extra per turn thanks to trade with 8 medium trade routes going out and a few starbases in the busy points. So it CAN easily help your economy but in times of war, of course, it will become risky at best to rely on it. At the very least you could use the peace time bonus to raise
How so? Beacuse of the cost of constuctors? Yes, combined with the low amount of extra revenue. You only get extra revenue when the freighters are in the influence radius of the the base, and on those turns you don't get very much extra at all. I'm not saying they are completely useless, but I don't think it is worth enough to change the decision of where you should put economic starbases.
Yes. However, I've become convinced (schooled by others here) that it takes a long time to recoup your investment with trade income enhancing modules, so it is a marginal at best strategy.
It may be annoying, but it's not very complicated. You can also start the game (DALaunch.exe), then click on the update game button on the splash screen menu. That will take you to Stardock Central and check for updates. Don't wait for a whole new version to come out; you can get incremental updates too. However, don't expect to download a patch; your game gets updated directly. Cheers.
Why are pirates pirates? They just AAAARRRRRR!
Tsed, who makes long posts when inebriated. Another excellent post, we definately need people who make long posts while inebriated. Otherwise there would be just boring, short posts made by sober people.
Keeping morale at 100% is a good early game strategy even if you're not a Superbreeder. With Superbreeders it is a must.
In Galciv1 you basically built the same batch of improvements in the same order on every planet. The sliders were how you could influence your social/military/research balance on a galactic level. In Galciv2 we got the ability to place buildings on planet squares. This let us choose our sliders (through the factory/lab decision) on a planetary level rather than a galactic level. The Galciv1 slider controls were left in Galciv2. When you have both, especially in their current fo
now I read this thread and wonder if I can even play it anymore... That's a bit harsh. If you think a 100% factory/lab strategy is an exploit, don't do it. Set your sliders to 1/3 each (or 25%-25%-50%) and just leave them there. You will accomplish close to what you are asking for. The only thing you won't have is individual control over spending in each sector because you currently only have one spending slider.
There is definately a negative correlation between map size and anomoly density. The number of anomolies seems about constant, regardless of map size. That makes sense because you only want a certain number of morale boosts, etc. in a game or the game balance would be disrupted. I'm not so sure about map size and bonus tiles, but it seems like that is a negative correlation there as well. It might have something to do with the density of colonizable planets too. I also think th
I'm with you Itzok. Fun is more important than winning on the highest difficulty level. Having said that, I do think that there is a problem with game balance if you need to ignore important elements of the game design (labs or factories, a lot of the bonus tiles) to get an optimal strategy. How about nerfing the sliders so that if you set a slider above a certain percentage it results in a increasing marginal penalty. This could be used to balance on the game so that a 100% in labs or
Twice, in two different games, I have set up a trade route. The next turn (I'm pretty sure, it might have been the same turn) the freighter showed up to be moved with it's full movement points. I tabbed to the next ship and continued on with no problems (the freighter was not autoselected again).
I think factories only is a clearly superior approach, because you can turn factories off. Also, I think that it would be very difficult to keep up in the early game with the AI players with a no factories startegy, especially on the higher difficulty levels. I played a few games using the all-factory approach. However, for my game enjoyment purposes I've gone back to a balanced approach. Maybe it's the micromanager or roleplayer in me, but there is something about those unused bonus re
Some sort of galaxy-wide fundamentalist movement (or dark age) where everyone has to adopt a new, really inefficient form of government for a set period of time. In conjunction you could freeze or limit the sliders. A event that causes the elimination of all resource bases and/or resources and/or mines and/or asteroid belts. Some sort of technology levelling event where all races end up with the same thing. You could do the same thing with ships.
This thread is truly fascinating! I'm going to throw one in here, with regards to 'buildings' of course. Why not eliminate sliders altogether and make the build the 'true value'. Let me explain... Have a few different levels of factories, as we do now of course, but make the production value what it is, peri
Wow! A company that doesn't do a cost benefit analysis before every patch. My company's IT department could learn a thing or two from you.
I'll let George Gervin reply to the rest, whoever he is. George Gervin was a very famous NBA player. His nickname was the Iceman because he was so calm and deadly in critical game situations. I can't talk with you anymore. It's too frustrating and not good for my blood pressure. Squares..... sensors.... parsecs.... gravity.... labs ...... rules... unintuitve.... does not listen..... does not understand..... does not have anything to do with thr
Actuarian:I think there should be some sort of relatively small, but escalating marginal penalty for setting a slider higher than 50%, similar to the relationship between tax rate and morale penalty. George Gervin:If you really want to add another unintuitive rule. Actually, I was thinking of the law of diminishing returns. The more resources you pour into something the lower the marginal efficiency. By why ask why when you c
