Just like a guerilla
Kyrandiel
Would it really destroy the game? It would change the game a lot, but remember that Master of Orion 2 used planetary bombardment as valid part of the game, both as part of a ground invasion and on it's own to destroy infrastructure.
Isn't there also an event with a single advanced ship in orbit. You choose what to do with the ship, strip it for parts if evil. I don't think he's talking about the pirate lair event.
Double post. Sorry.
The reason you need at least one point in defense is purely a game balance issue as I understand it. It's designed to prevent the player from using "empty" ships in large quantities fighting purely based on bonuses.
Just move a single constructor to an empty space and select construct from the interface at the bottom of the screen.
The original reason for the surrendering was to make the endgame was less frustrating. No more "I've already won this war but I still have to spend 50 turns going through the motions to actually WIN win." That's why the AI surrender decision makes no sense from their perspective, it's a decision to make the game more fun. If people are getting irritated by it, it would be nice to have the option to turn it off. I know I'd welcome the option.
Any chance of an answer?
So it doesn't actually have anything to do with ship combat then. Good to know. A shame though, it'd be great vs Dreadlords as it's described in the manual.
What does courage do? The manual says it gives a bonus to your ships when you're fighting a superior opponent. The game says it's a ground combat bonus. Does anyone know what it actually does?
This is a good way to fight Dreadlords. You can't survive being hit anyway so why bother with HP. Just put a ton of guns onto a cargo hull and hope to fire first. What determines who fires first in battle? Is it the attacker? Is it the faster ship? If it's speed, you need good engines too.
The rules say that in order to win a cultural victory you have to have 75% of the galactic culture for 10 turns and you can't be at war. So why doesn't the AI immediately attack you if you have 75% culture? It wouldn't be fun but that's what I'd do in it's position. Does the AI ever try to win without destroying everyone?
It's the way the numbers on the economy screen work. You get a fraction of your maximum production based on manufacturing capacity x the number on the slider. So 50% capacity x 40% labs gets you 20% of what your labs should be able to do. Some people like having the decision between labs and factories. Some people want to be able to put in all the money and get all the results. Why isn't there an option to choose one or the other in the menu
One thing though, if you're playing as a good civilization then the opposite strategy is better.
First up is the easy question. Let's suppose I'm an evil emperor out to subjugate the galaxy with fear and torment. My colony ship just landed on a planet with a moral "dilemna". (I mentioned the evil part, right?) Not to ruin the specifics, at the low, low price of lifelong agony for billions of people over untold generations I now have a planet with 10 labs and a +50% bonus to research. Does anyone actually know what that means? Does that
Hello again. I'm glad this idea has gotten so much positive feedback from you. Also, I notice Frogboy has written in the Journals section of this website that the floodgates have been opened. And here I am writing a 1250 word essay on a possible change. I also see a breakdown of the people that normally voice their opinion about game design. I really hope I don't fit into the fourth category. I don't think that the way
I think the way in which you manage the economy in GalCiv 2 could be done better. I don't want to change the rules or make the game more complex and I can understand that, for example, the civilization capital on the home planet generates 24 technology points (24TP) and that I need to spend 24 billion credits (24BC) per turn to get those points. The problem is that there's no way to do that and run the empire at the same time. Let me expla