Meanwhile the Terran player, with superior diplomacy, has got a good deal on miniurisation tech from someone else, the Altarian lpayer has researched it himself, and everyone else is sending warships straight at you after your disasterous attempt at diplomacy ended with you calling their mothers walruses.

rofl!

I Have played with Yor and I msut say, I don't think they are that great. I think I prefer custom. yes they get whiped out on their own beacue of diplo snafus. I'm tired of all the races treating me like crap and getting less than 1/2 the moneyf or selling any tech

I've spent a large amount of time reading all these threads, and I agree with the group saying that the Yor are FINE as they are. So what if they have better minuturisation? this is the fun of the game. Every race has different abilities, different AI. Thats the good bit, learning to deal, and evolivng strategies to cope. I'm playing a gigantic galaxy with rare planets (habitable and regular) right now, and I have only 2 planets. The Yor's miniturisation comes in useful for them here, as its VERY hard to create big fleets. So to cope, I use the fact that everyobdy hates them to my advantage, and set 7 races on them. You evolve strategies to beat foes, and my custom race has about 20+ miniturisation aswell. To compensate, I'm using 9 ability points, like the korx do. It's not hard.
But, if you insist on nerfing the Yor, and taking what is IMO some fun and challenge away from the game, go to c/program files/stardock/totalgaming/galciv2/data/english/raceconfig.xml
You can change the starting abilities, techs, customisation points, minuturisation, logos, description, EVERYTHING about a race there. If you don't like the Yor's "Advantages", nerf them yourself. But I like a challenge, so I say keep things as they are.

Penalties are added same way as bonuses, just go to raceconfig.xml , and where you want the negative just insert it as -x% (x being the number of course)

Empyrean... you really need to research more diplomacy techs. Telling people they speak drivel, that they're stupid, childish, calling their opinions fallacies.... hell, I even read you say in another thread, and I quote "those peoples opinions dont count".

We disagree, deal with it.

You stated your opinions and no one attacked you personally, instead of strengthening your point with personal attacks you seriously undermine them.

You've got good points. Points I disagree with but they're well thought out and written. Now can you stick to playing nicely?

One thing I find interesting about the Yor... in a game I'm playing now, the Arceans control more than half the galazy and the Yor control the smallest territory. However, the Yor still out populate the Arceans. Otherwise, I don't see anything special about them. The Arceans have actually taken 4 Yor planets by cultural conquest. I simply don't see a problem with the Yor.

Increase loyalty, but that's the part of Yor you can choose for any race I think. This allows them to stuff more farms on their planets. Many tiems conquering a Yor planet I had to immidiately demolish 2 or 3 farms.

Empyrean... you really need to research more diplomacy techs. Telling people they speak drivel, that they're stupid, childish, calling their opinions fallacies....

First of all, if you had any idea what a straw man was in the first place, you'd know that it is a logical fallacy, not just a smear you apply to someone else's opinion. It's not a big step to go from "logical fallacy" to "drivel". Those who rely on those fallacies are stupid and childish. If you don't like my saying so, then deal with it.

hell, I even read you say in another thread, and I quote "those peoples opinions dont count".

Don't take that out of context, and if you're going to quote me do it directly, since spelling and punctuation actually do matter sometimes. In any case, there were some people who wanted to know how the game worked, and a couple others (you among them) who didn't care. The curious group was met with scorn on your part (your suggestion came across as close to the turn-based equivalent of button-mashing), when I pointed out that the opinions of those who don't care how the game mechanics work are not relevant to the issue. You construed my statement to be a dismissal of everyone who disagrees with me, and that's not the case. If someone disagrees with me on grounds that are not fallacious to begin with, then there is room for respect in disagreement. However, if someone bases their position on a fallacy then I'm going to point out where their reasoning is flawed. You especially have done this, misrepresenting what others have written and then attacking them for it, or telling them that their style of gameplay is inferior to yours. You didn't attack me, but you acted like a real punk to others who didn't do anything to bring it on themselves.

An "argumentum ad hominem" essentially takes the form that "You are wrong because of X irrelevant fact about you." Calling someone an idiot, or a stupid child, or something else is not an ad hominem unless it is a premise of one's argument. "You're wrong because you're a stupid child" is an ad hominem. "You're a stupid child because you're relying on logical fallacies to support your argument" is not.

You might want to go look that up before you try to teach its meaning to someone who already knows it better than you.

Because if all the CIV's were balanced then they would all be robots like the YOR to begin with. This is what made Master of Magic great, it wasn't balanced either. Same for the origional Age of Wonders Undead were greatly overpowered. I'm glad they went this route because it makes each race UNIQUE, DIFFERENT, more or less worrisome. If you want balance go play something else, this ISN'T a MULTIPLAYER game,....thank god.

Because if all the CIV's were balanced then they would all be robots like the YOR to begin with.

That just doesn't follow. There are a ton of different ways to play and win; just because races are balanced doesn't mean they all have to be the same. Again, think of Starcraft. There is variety there even though there's only one win condition.

Um if their so overpowered because of their racial ability then why do you want it on the custom race screen?

It isn't possible for everyone to be overpowered at the same time. If other races had the same potential, the game would be balanced regardless of where the standard is set.

and in reality the priceing of it would force you to take a penalty to get it anyway.

Pricing would have to be determined if/when that gets implemented.

As for the diplomatic penalty, there is no trace of it in the raceconfig.xml file, where the other data is stored. I think their diplomatic problems are from them being evil. The AI plays each race differently, and the Yor don't seem to be very active diplomats in any case. For the player, the only shortcoming they have to overcome is being evil to begin with, and there are other races that have to deal with that but don't have the inherent advantages that the Yor get.

Is the fact that the AI developer said that they have a major diplomacy penalty not enough for you, especially since it's already been said? Do you think you know better than one of the guys that wrote the game?

Was he speaking of an actual diplomacy penalty (which seems like it would be in the xml file if that were the case), or was he referring to the Yor AI's tendency to be diplomatically inept? One of those penalties applies to players, and the other doesn't. If there really is a penalty that is stored somewhere other than the raceconfig.xml file, then I'll concede the point, but there seems to be some ambiguity on the matter.

Also you're still just plain asserting that the Yor are overpowered without giving any real evidence other than of the "because I say so" variety.

No, I'm not. Of the two inherent, unmodifiable bonuses (logistics and miniaturization) the Yor are number 1 in both of them. Oh yeah, and they start with a whole pile of relatively expensive techs, too. Try to recreate their tech setup with a custom race and you won't even be able to get half of them.

It's impossible to have 2 or more sides that are different AND equally powerful in all situations. Perhaps you are only looking at a small subset of conditions and failing to see the bigger picture, where they are equal and not overpowered?

I never said they had to be equally powerful in all situations. I said that when they are playing to their strengths they should be equal. They should not all be equally powerful in all situations; the problem is that the Yor have inherent advantages that other races do not have, making them better when playing to their strengths and less weak than they otherwise should be when they're not.

Empyrean... you really need to research more diplomacy techs. Telling people they speak drivel, that they're stupid, childish, calling their opinions fallacies.... First of all, if you had any idea what a straw man was in the first place, you'd know that it is a logical fallacy, not just a smear you apply to someone else's opinion. It's not a big step to go from "logical fallacy" to "drivel". Those who rely on those fallacies are stupid and childish. If you don't like my saying so, then deal with it. hell, I even read you say in another thread, and I quote "those peoples opinions dont count". Don't take that out of context, and if you're going to quote me do it directly, since spelling and punctuation actually do matter sometimes. In any case, there were some people who wanted to know how the game worked, and a couple others (you among them) who didn't care. The curious group was met with scorn on your part (your suggestion came across as close to the turn-based equivalent of button-mashing), when I pointed out that the opinions of those who don't care how the game mechanics work are not relevant to the issue. You construed my statement to be a dismissal of everyone who disagrees with me, and that's not the case. If someone disagrees with me on grounds that are not fallacious to begin with, then there is room for respect in disagreement. However, if someone bases their position on a fallacy then I'm going to point out where their reasoning is flawed. You especially have done this, misrepresenting what others have written and then attacking them for it, or telling them that their style of gameplay is inferior to yours. You didn't attack me, but you acted like a real punk to others who didn't do anything to bring it on themselves.

Your constant rudenesss beggars belief.

Now, I've been polite, but you obviously neither recognise it nor respect it, so let's try this a different way you uncouth, pretentious bigot.

First of all, do you think you are somehow exceptional in your knowledge of the English language. Why do you keep pointing people to a dictionary reference? It's like you just learned that expression "straw man" and now you have to use it every time you speak to someone. Other people do also possess intelligence too you know, you don't own a monopoly.

The quote stands, I will be happy to link it if you like. There is not a single drop of scorn on my part in that other thread, it is in fact a polite, and interesting discussion until you chime in with your ungracious, self appreciative statements reporting other's opinions as being totally lacking in worth just like in this thread, while naturally you (and those who agree with you) are somehow innately correct . Everyone else builds off fallacies huh? How contemptuously ignorant!

You say that you will point out that people's reasoning is flawed. Please do try to do so as I really haven't noticed it.... at present all you do is offer insult to try to undermine their position rather than dealing with their point of view. Let's get this perfectly clear shall we.... the things you call "fallacies", "straw men", "drivel", "childish beliefs are other, real human's beliefs. I don't know if you feel like you have some moral or intellectual supremacy but you are surely lacking in the empathetic appreciation of diverging opinion.

I, especially have attacked people and told them their gameplay is inferior to mine? Hmmm, now you are hallucinating as well. Maybe it's just a link between your total lack of appreciation for other people's opinions that makes you misconstrue people's statements as attacks. This IS a discussion forum and people do talk about methods of play. Stating a diverging idea in a polite manner does not constitute an attack.... this probably seems fallacious to you too.

Oops, your vocabulary slipped... best go look in a dictionary to find your word for next week.... Punk denotes either the music scene and its devotees or, in US slang, a young man who fights and is involved in criminal activities. Are you accusing me of a crime here or of being an adherent to 70's music?

Let's see if you can garner some respect now for someone who treats you in a like manner to the way you treat others.

As the rest of this post is probably going to be like water off a duck's back, let me leave you with one punchy catechism: The quality of your argument is not important as the delivery of it.

Well I saw YOR and OVERPOWERED and thought you would like this screenshot.

Link