I wan't going to reply as I don't like the Colony Wheel but: [quote who="Dracul_JOSHI" reply="11" id="3598411"] So much this. I want to either have the wheel or my money back, because this isn't the game I bought anymore. [/quote] https://forums.galciv3.com/455831/page/1/#3478389 Are the two of you related, by any chance? I accept you want the Colo
GalCiv3 Forums
[quote who="naselus" reply="6" id="3598364"] I think it was the right choice, tbh. Improving diplo is nice, but would've been pointless if people were still walking away because the game was too easy. We can cope with the placeholder-y diplomacy as long as the game's actually a challenge. [/quote] This is the thing. We all want GalCiv3 to be a challange in some area. Probably even several areas (war, diplomacy, trade etc). Making the game difficult in the easie
That's the same for all ideology "gifts" (cough) as I understand it. Timing seems important in choosing which path to take: For instance the "No one declares war on you for 50 Turns" option. Why would you waste time getting that when it's only Turn 25 or so and no one's capable of attacking you anyway?
I prefer the idea of this being a game mechanic. To me, this is something that makes the UP more than just a "every so often, all us races get together and we vote on stuff.." As I've already stated when it comes to Espionage, the UP and it's inner workings or inner not-workings would add an extra layer to GalCivIII to those like me who prefer espionage/propaganda/etc to violence as a first option. Essentially, I think the UP should be more like the UN: Maybe not so far as to
Except if it is DNA, than population wouldn't go down on the original planet, would it? Unless the whole "population" count is a count of the number of DNA pieces available on any given planet?? Essentially what you're suggesting is there could theoretically be 2.5billion DNA pieces (how big do these pieces need to be? How long do they last? Skin flakes, hairs, etc ) from a man named Colin going to that new Colony. So the new Colony is getting Colinize
Does something like this need to be a bug - Ie why shouldn't a Race within the UP defy a resolution? That leads to resolutions where a Race is somehow punished for defying that resolution.
GalCiv3 Forums
I do like the idea of expanding the Diplomacy scale to 100 as naselus suggests - I think something that has a negative effect on your relationship with Race B should eventually lead to them putting you on their Shit List but it shouldn't be a linear "Every Turn, they get this much more pissed off that you're doing this thing" . There should also be a modifier in Diplomacy based not on what the relationship level between you and Race B is but on what Race B kn
I think the simplest solution is a "Refuse Gift" option. Which will, of course, offend the race giving you the gift. But the offence caused may be better than the tech you don't want. Or: A "Suggest Another Gift" option? A "Just Give Me BCs" option? - like a gift token, you get money to spend how you like.
banned because it ruins the immersion.
Sorry if this is already a possibility via the Mega Events but: Rebellion within the major races. Say you're at war with the Drengin. Time passes, things go either well or bad for you so (depending on the situation) you ask for peace or the Drengin do. Peace is agreed - except that there's a very aggressive group in the Drengin high command who split from the rest of their race. At that point you're fighting a break-off of the Drengin (as the Main Drengin) and also have to
Hey, at least there's no Veto rights in the UP. Look on the bright side. "Oh, that alleged Drengin massacre of ZenithIV, that killed 50million civilians? You all want an investigation?? Hey, looky-here at us Drengin and our Right Of Veto. Vote over-ruled. There shall be no investigation. Bitches!!"
GalCiv3 Forums
My attitude is I'm not even going to look at a mod until Stardock tell us they're done with GalCiv3: No more patches, No more DLC, No more expansions. I know what I'd like GalCiv3 to be and that is most assuredly isn't there yet but I'm putting my money on Stardock doing something about that before I go into "where's a mod that'll make the AI do this, that..." mode. Disclaimer. The above opinion is in no way influenced by the author's compariti
Good to see Stardock have arranged for regular updates so everyone has months - nay, years! - of complaining "It's still not ready!" or, as we say in English "It's not the way I like it!! AARRRGGHHH!!" I fully expect Stardock will do a great job with the espionage system and I fully expect that there will be something about the espionage system that I won't particularly like and I fully expect Stardock to at some point read my complaints about the espiona
Just focussing on #5 would suit me fine. I want to really be able to use the Xploit part of 4X. Making Diplomacy full-powered starts that process (you said not to go on about espionage, so I won't). I hope your focus on Diplomacy does mean only your Friends show you all of what they got. That those races less than Friendly to you do treat you like some weird stuff that ended up on their shoe/horn/whatever.... Nerf the Upgrade Ship thing: A ship should onl
I assume I'm in there somewhere. Didn't realize there were so many of us! [e digicons]:D[/e]
I haven't seen it for myself, but someone found my star Wishupona... I actually advocated for each Founder being able to start with their Named Star as their home system. Obviously that didn't meet with grand approval in Stardock as that hasn't been implemented. To be fair, it does sound quite nit-picky and probably a pain to code. Under what circumstances does the Credits Screen show up? I've lost several sandbox games, one or two campaigns and no Cre
GalCiv3 Forums
Get rid of that advertising blurb thingy - "GalCiv 3: How You Rule Your Galaxy" - right the eff now!! "GalCiv3: Not Good Enough To Challange a Chess Grand Master!!" Now, that is a slogan to stand by and speaks the truth of this game. I'm sure Stardock's advertising folk are coming up with Building Sized Posters/Full Page Ads/Primetime TV slots with that phrase as we speak. And the lay-offs are coming and Frogboy and his cohorts are be
This is definitely something that there's no point giving the AI the ability to do right back at you - because you won't fall for it. My ideas: A third-party (something like a bank) who oversees any "credit per turn" trade. The buyer has to pass on to that third party a certain amount as confirmation of the trade deal (say 10-20% of the total bc to be paid). Then, that third party pays out to the race you've bought from the credits as per the agreement (say 7bc/tur
I agree. Nations break treaties as and when it suits them, why shouldn't races? Of course, your standing in the UP should take a dramatic turn for the negative but if you think it's best for your race to break that treaty, I think you should be allowed to. Mind you, if you were able to make other races go to war against the race you've got the non-aggression pact with, that whould help A: Beat that race and B: Lessen - or maybe even avoid - disapproval in the UP....
GalCiv3 Forums
So an exploit is either: Players finding something that A: Got missed/overlooked (The Diplomacy Screen That Tells You Everything About Your Enemy And Not One Spy Needed - Obviously just needs tinkering with to solve that) or B: The developers didn't think the consequences through and really shouldn't exist at all (The Colonist-Free Colony Ship That Used To Be A Constructor - Should this even exist as being doable?). Next question is how many exploits bother the developers enou
GalCiv3 Forums
Does someone have a thing for offering snuggler colonies? Makes a change from socks, I guess. So, either with a small ship or bigger ship, what you're suggesting is you just kill a planet's shipyard and if you keep at least one ship near that planet to kill any newly minted shipyard, that planet's borked... And the reasons for that are the AI can't sceam like a girl for help once it's shipyard's destroyed and it can't build a bigger, better,
[quote who="marigoldran" reply="40" id="3561423"] "AI realism" should be an option players are allowed to choose. I agree. Not everyone can handle it. In fact most probably won't be able to initially (WHY THE HELL DID THE AI LIE TO ME, RAWWWWWR. I HATE THIS GAME. I NEVER WANT TO SEE IT AGAIN. RAWWWWWWWR). And then after they complain, they'll probably go back and play it more BECAUSE IT WOULD MAKE THE GAME FREAKING ADDICTIVE. P
GalCiv3 Forums
Yep, GPP, or why not use GDP??
I've read discussions about the difference between intelligent AI and realistic AI and the difference seems to be"realistic" (which a lot of people would like to see) means AI will do certain things sub-optimally, will have weaknesses and flaws as any gamer (who hasn't learnt to mix-max to the...well...max) does. The thing would be what does the AI do to limit the possibility of it's weaknesses/flaws being found and expoited as well as doing things to maximise whe
[quote who="stonehold" reply="3" id="3535454"] Aw heck, I wouldn't really want to know which part's yours. It'd take away from that whole I-love-x-name-you-know-who-you-are thang. [e digicons];)[/e] Came across another little gem this morning. 'Wishupona Starbase' ... ha! I hope they keep these names (at least SOME) when the finished product is released. Good on you, Founders, Coders a