e-stab

Actually, the AI do pick extra abilities which is impossible for a player to do because then they will lose a lot of inherent bonuses which the AI most surely don't lose. Yes, that's exactly the point: There's a difference between the AI and the player which shouldn't be there. If it was there on purpose, I

Come on, Aquiantus, you're not complaining that suicidal is too hard, right? It is meant to be too hard! Try picking morale and, most important, pop growth bonuses to start with, it makes a big difference in the colony race (although the col race IS an unholy thing on large, suicidal maps <img src="http://images.stardock.com/gc2/T_DL/smiles/Gasp.gif" border=

Yes you can. How that? You can NOT choose more than +20% as a racial ability, it simply is the maximum (as of 1.1-Beta-2A). Together with +20% from the populists that makes +40%. These people have a point: If the AI is allowed to choose a combination of abilities the player can't choose, then tha

So for 1.1, the game turn will be squared so that it has a much more significant impact. *snip* Each turn your population is taken, then multiplied by the difficulty level to the 1.1 power. That amount is then divided by the game turn. The final result is taken to the square root. Hmm, am I missing something or did you simply fo

1.1Beta-2 is practically unplayable for me with its incessant but erratic crashes. Hmm, Beta-1 was crashing a lot for me, Beta-2 runs smoothly.

For those who don't know it yet: Someone has pwned the Metaverse! Link I hope Stardock will react soon and adapt the scoring in general, it doesn't feel right to get a lot of points by dragging out the end of the game.

Your experiment shows the most blatant problem with the Metaverse: You can get a lot of points just for pressing the end turn button.

Does anyone know if moons and rings are actually providing their corresponding bonuses? I haven't seen it. Yes, they do. You can see the numbers in the planet "details".

What things don't you like about it? Since it was written internally, I can pass on your suggestions to others. Other than the often sloooooow response times which you're probably aware of, I second the comments about the visual structure. Additionally, the watch list (although it works for me) should be more precise about when the last posting was

I'll relieve damoose for today and say: Goooooooooood morning Diplomats!

Wonder if the game is more balanced on larger maps. As i say i have not seen these major problems. I like to play on maps with size "large" or above. The AI has more time to do things and to react, which is a good thing usually.

Yeah, the Beta is pretty good regarding the pop growth changes and other things. The pop growth abilities could be a bit too powerful though (even in Beta-2).

I agree that it should be known (at least when you have decent espionage on them - just like peace treaties).

Yes, this is indeed the biggest problem here. Because the +range bonuses from each level of the tech are given to all ships even if they have no support modules. So when you research a new level of lifesupport all your old ships can suddenly go further away from home than before. I havent done any indepth analysis of the effects

Is this editable in the XML files now? Yes, look for "LifeSupport" in GC2Types.xml. But I'm not sure, perhaps the problem aren't the modules themselves, but the range +x% modifiers (given by techs etc.). Depending on when and how they're applied to ship range, they might be a major factor. It wou

Okay, I did the test and you're right: There seems to be a 75-80% increase of tech costs between tiny and gigantic galaxies. I compared the research time for xeno engineering, using a custom race without research bonus or starting techs in a tiny and a gigantic galaxy (with everything set to occasional). I don't think this is enough though - if you compare the number of habitable planets in both cases. The best way might be to base tech

I think that ship ranges still are too generous in the game (playing 1.1-Beta2A) - you put one range module (or even none at all) in your ships and are fine for most if not all purposes. This is especially true on the smaller maps, but true enough on the larger ones which I play usually. Researching the later range modules isn't that important either because usually you don't really need them. What I'd like to see is a modest range reduction

I'd happy if there was a tweak to the hard sensor cap as well. Right now it is a bit silly if you throw in a ship with some sensors, the Eyes of the Universe wonder and an eventual racial ability (or party bonus): The values don't add up in any way because of the artificial limit. Makes sensors a thing to care even less about as the AI never beats you to the EotU wonder.

??? Not sure to understand correctly this sentence: the tech cost depends on the size of the galaxy. They aren't the same in a tiny galaxy or in a gigantic one. Are you sure? I was under the impression that they are.

That's an interesting suggestion and I'd like to hear what other thigns: Attack and defense Assist only do the assisting if you have that particular type of weapon. I.e. Iit won't add missiles to a sihp that doesn't have missile. It won't add shields to a ship that doesn't have shields. <br/

Looks good!

So what I've done is make the starbase militaration techs cost more to get to. The first one is still relativley cheap to get to, it's defensive in nature and we still want people to be able to use them to give their home units an edge (or even offensive units an edge). But the subsequent ones cost on par with what the higher le

Gah, everything the AI does NOT suddenly surrender to anyone is a good thing in my opinion.

Nope, doesn't work.

Can we also have the number of races randomised please? Already in IIRC.