Ugleb

[quote]Before I get flamed to a crisp, allow me to state that I am a major fan of stardock, GalCiv 2, Sins, and their anti-drm approach.However, it seems that nobody around here has ever heard of a little program called "Steam" that has already -changed- the industry toward digital distribution, and has made great strides for indy developers getting their games out.As for Demigod, any strategy game that focuses on team-play over one-on-one only detracts from strategy. The real merit of a cunning

[quote] Also, wasn't the galaxy map in MoO3 in 3D as well? Of course, you could only travel from star to star, but still. I found it pretty easy to use.[/quote] I Moo3 you ordered ships to move from star A to star B. Nothing ever happened in the middle as far as I remember as you couldn't intercept fleets, only fight at the star system that was their destination. Even if you didn't use the star lanes to move and cut across deep space there was no interception. So the 3D map was

I do think that machines are holding their own better than they used to. My current rig, which admittedly I'm looking to retire in the next few months is 18 months old in its newest parts, I carried over the HD (a mighty 60gb) from the previous incarnation along with the RAM. It runs everything that doesn't require shader model 3.0 rather well on decent settings. My reason for replacing this machine is that 60gb is getting too tight with games increasingly asking for 7gb+ installs and

There is an argument that says Stardock releases games with loads of bugs and therefore you, as a consumer, are forced to buy a legitimate copy in order to get your game working. I really hate that argument. Not because GC2 was released bug free (it wasn't) but because it is so unfair. Can anyone think of any game released by any company on the PC in the last five years which has not been patched? And if you can think of one, does that mean there

Slow it down with some pre-reqs (even just make them basic stuff that is generally researched anyway) to buy time for the AI to put up a minimal defence.

Tbh, in hindsight I think Stardock shot themselves in the foot using the word 'streamlined'. Most people took that to mean a functional re-design rather than the facelift which was intended. It was meant to look better/be easier to read, it is. I think that the OP tech tree would substantially alter the way the game works, and tbh I'm not sure it would open up strategies rather than lead to an optimal path. I reckon most of the time players would ramp through the lower branches quick

Well, it is a little broken, but it'd be easy to fix. Civs that you "flip" worlds from should hold it against you. No one else should regard it as an act of aggression, but the civ that lost the world certainly should. If culture flipping worlds could build up as negative diplomacy points (as seen in the race relations summaries) then it would represent Civs becoming increasingly more paranoid towards you to the point of doing something about it.

The problem with beta testing mega events is that they are random. The frequency is randomised, when they occur is random and also which event you get israndom. So it's difficult to consistently test events at various stages in the game as you have to wait for it to come up. Continued feedback and more play is the answer, I imagine the first update will have a crack at better balancing mega events. Now more people have the game and are playing Stardock can get a better idea of what i

Obviously the intent of this event is that it has a period of effect before every race neutralises it so you don't really want all races to react equally. Could the decision to research the cure be randomised so that there is a chance that each AI will drop everything to develop the cure as soon as it starts, a chance that they will begin researching once the current tech is completed and a growing chance that it will be researched next after each completed tech. Say it inc

I say we cheer at the success of Stardock's policy then lynch the pirate. Yarrharr!

I want to buy Vista. I want to give Microsoft my money and have a legal, modern O/S. I want DX10. The new EVE-Online client is calling to me. Hellgate London looks to be a great game. If DX10 delivers on half the hype I'll be happy. I want better security. I think the performance index might help me to avoid buying a game that wants pixelbumprendershader v3.3 when my graphics card only has v3.05. I want to stop using 'dubious' copies of windows. I don't

I find the AI tends to value the colonisation techs quite highly, they won't give them out for nothing so either you cough up something they want or you research them yourself sooner or later. Having said that, the AI might be prioritising getting the full set a little too highly at the moment.

Highly corrosive germs? Cool. So how can the planet have population after that? Wait, I know, the sewer system! People live underground, hence the smaller pop and the growth rate literally going down the drain You see? The logic is iron clad! <img src="http://images.stardock.com/gc2/T_DL/smiles/Tongue.gif" border=0 ALIGN="absmiddle

There are events that give a soldiering bonus, opportunities to get some cash, I think theres some that effect morale and research bonuses, lots of things really. What you are probably seeing discussed at the moment are the mega events which are a new feature in DA. Huge Pirate invasions, Dread Lord incursions, galactic plagues, Precursor drones going active and attacking everything, all generally apocalyptic stuff to totally shake up the balance of power in a game.

These should only be employed on "habitable" planets, "domed" colonies should not be affected. Obviously the spores are also highly corrosive when in contact with metal or transparent building materials and melt through the domes.

Not the dreaded 'no turn' bug....the evil that never quite dies... This thing keeps coming back in the betas, I'm starting to think its a small demon living on Dratha...

I like the waiting periods, it reduces the opportunity for cheesy trading turn by turn and should make diplomatic wins more challenging. You often don't have wars to fight going this route so I think making the diplomacy a little harder doesn't hurt. From a realism point of view, how often do real world nations hold major summits? There is a huge amount of preparyions behind these things so this makes sense to me.

That farm trick definitely needs looking at. I think it would work better if the population died off over time rather than all dropping dead instantly.

I, probably controversially, think that DL has gone pretty much as far as it can short of major changes - which is what expansions like DA are for. I don't see much in the way of further developments going into DL now apart from things that are done for DA and can be exported back to a DL update, limited AI tweaks, bug fixes and driver support basically. Maybe the odd graphics tweak, that happened for GC1 after AP came out IIRC. I see the hardcore fan base moving on to DA once its rel

The first half of this thread was actually quite good. Oh well. Reply #30Why would the races get rid of stargates just because humans gave everybody hyperdrive? If I recall the GCII story rightly, the gates were disassembled for economic reasons.... Also the Stargates are actually slower than travel by hyperdrive so they pre

This might really be something more akin to a privateer, which is a privately owned warship sanctioned by a government to prey upon enemy ships. These have the possibility of deniability. I think this would be a cool feature to add to the game, you could sponsor “privateers” to harass a potential enemy but not be required to declare all out war because they’re private citi

But I feel that disabling a farm building with spy should not immidiately kill all the extra population enabled by farm building. Instead it should give negative pop growth instead That sounds spot on to me. It's definitely something that needs looking at.

It sounds to me like the problem here is this event happening when there are very worlds on the map as the impact becomes so much greater. Could the effect be altered to take a percentage number of worlds up to a maximum of 2 worlds per race? 5 races with verage of 5 worlds each under current system would leave each race with 3 and the JK with 10 (2 from each world). If instead it was up to 20% of each races worlds for a max of 2 each, then each race would have 4 and the JK would have

Constructor micromanagement is also one of this games greatest achiles heels, but I have not seen any comments about it from developers. I cross my fingers that they get some (as you said) automation to this aspect of the game. Do you know that if you place a rally point on a starbase you can order newly built cobstructors to go to it automatica

Ever sell a house? It's a lot like that. You WANT your neighbors who sell their houses to get as much money as possible because that sets up how much you are likely to make selling yours. If other houses do poorly on the market, it affects you. I suppose that a lot of the time the industry works that way, but there are certainly exceptions. For example, Galciv