GalCiv3 Forums
Well put !
Nope, tried it & still no luck here :-/ I haven't had the 'not loading' issue & most of that mod is quite good, so its kind of a shame. The tech tree changes are quite well written and the designs are cool looking, but in not recognizing the ship names, I don't get awarded any bonus ships whether from events or ideology choices (game doesn't seem to recognize them even in the design folder). You can play around this but its
GalCiv3 Forums
I'm with Larsenex, its a better game as-is. Still, it’s nice that Brad has a bigger plan as we’re just going in circles here in this thread I think. The idea of a “hard” political border is a fiction. History is full of examples where war broke out after someone crossed a border, but that’s because a) they got caught doing it & b ) the other side felt it warranted going to war. <p
Interesting ideas. Reconnaissence gives a scout ship at each planet you own-- I was expecting to get one at the starbase, not one per existing planet. Not sure thats what you had intended?
GalCiv3 Forums
Yet again, influence isn't a border and you don't have force fields protecting your "zone". There are always open borders treaties, to solve a lot of these problems, but if the "possession is 9/10 the law" scenario (meaning who can get their 1st with a gun, regardless of what a map says) isn't to your liking, then you're not much for history. I like the challenge of having to figure out how to allocate resources to make sure the things I 'claim
When the French were initially defeated by the Germans in the 2nd World War, a significant portion of their military assets went over to the British, not the Germans, in fact their entire naval fleet couldn't decide who they should join when the land forces were defeated (until the British made up their minds for them) so there is a precedent for the existing method. So, you're going for making it a more enjoyable experience for you as a player, I get that, but you're also
Hmm, seems any "gift" ships do not appear-- whether Ideology or ships from debris fields. Nice work overall though.
GalCiv3 Forums
So wait-- now we DO need transports? This was just a troll post wasn't it?
GalCiv3 Forums
[quote who="marigoldran" reply="5" id="3561701"] The point is you don't actually need to even go to war to win the game on the larger maps. That's how broken the mechanics currently are. And did I manage to hit a nerve? Oh I'm so sorry. I apologize for hurting your feelings. ... Would you want... a snuggler colony? [/quote] I don;t think you hit his nerve, I think he was just pointing out t
Posting to pretty much agree with and re-state the three main points made already: 1) Thanks for making this thread Frogboy! While its possible you may take things in a different direction from what's discussed in this thread entirely, being open to the idea that the players might actually have useful input is quiet nice. 2) The Trade imbalances that even "beginner" players can take advantage of need to be addressed somehow. Particularly the "trade strate
GalCiv3 Forums
Hmmm then perhaps something isn't right with the abundant setting. i see another thread out there with someone surprised how few stars spawned when he set it to "abundant" for that. Still, 12 major and 4 minor races on a huge map (clusters) do make it seem busy so much so that if I had gotten say 9 black holes instead of just 5 I probably wouldn't have thought it was lacking, but yes, 12-13 was what I would've expected as well.
Stardock Forums
Thanks, did not know how to do that. And it turns out "abundant" on a huge size galaxy means... five. Now its likely my settings as I look at that map, as I had 12 major civ's plus "uncommon" minor races for another 4, although in my mind "huge" was a setting that should've allowed for a whole lot of races. Perhaps I made it too crowded for the black holes to populate.
Well, firstly-- rushing planetary developments scales-- meaning it is cheaper to rush somethign on a planet that only has 3 weeks to go than something which has 8. & The fact that ships always cost full price actually adds to the game. Now that 6 ship border patrol fleet you have actually has some worth. Losing it means you actually lost something worthwhile & you can't just spam out replacements. It also means that the decisions on w
Stardock Forums
I have to agree carriers do seem a little OP currently, especially sicne the AI doesn't take the presence of fighters into account when pickign its battles. I would agree that your points #2 & #4-- higher build cost for the unit itself, and longer CD on rebuilding fighters would help to balance this.
Stardock Forums
Lol-- so that's what you guys are complaining about? Okay, here's the thing-- once you've got a 40-50 planets empire-- you've already won and the game's over. Unless youre playing with some wacked out settings or its a one vs one and you oppponent has a similar empire, everything is woirthless at that point-- money, ships, planets-- losing a handful of any will not affect your overall progress. My recommendation-- start a new gam
Well as you said, it does require a little imagination as we play our pretend games. In this case, for me, part of any population exists either in a nomadic fashion and will settle where they can once there is living room. Or perhaps they are coming from all your worlds combined and the population on those worlds IS offset by new births. or perhaps first one, then the other. Dealer's choice, but point is, game is as feasible as you want it to be.
Stardock Forums
I like the way the game plays currently. Yes-- rush-buying ships is ineffecient. That means that 6 ship border patrol fleet is worth quite a lot, and losing it doesn't mean you can instantly replace it through money. On the other hand rush-buying planetary improvements is totally viable (it even scales down the cost the closer to completion something is) and often quite ciritcal to take advantage of. You really should be rush building your first f
Well, I believe it represents not just births but also new arrivals. Calirfornia's population went up pretty fast on a weekly basis during the American gold rush. As more housing & food resources get built and become available new colonists are allowed to settle from elsewhere.
So, I recently set up a game with the black holes setting on "abundant" (game title was to be "Battle for the Sea of Holes"- get that refence) & I've so far explored 1/2 the map and not come across a single singularity. Someone else posted a thread that they had tried creating games with "abundant" planets and were getting odd results. Can anyone confirm this setting is working as intended?
GalCiv3 Forums
Impressive work! The ship designs are very creative and the tutorials are quite helpful. Are any of the races available to download yet?
Didn't know that, but seems like they've swung it hard the other way then. A single ship of 2.5 pop attackers has a very good chance of taking a 10 pop world. Again I can work with that from a fluff stand point since just to attack, the attacking fleet has to have air-superiority over the target world (space superiority?) which can allow a smaller force to deal with a bigger one. But the attackers should at least get more attrition though if nothing else changes. &nb
Hmmm just found this in another thread: http://galciv3.gamepedia.com/Ground_invasions So, based on how its set up-- the more developed a planet is the less likely it is to defend itself... (because you divide defense by the number of tiles). As development also tend to correlate to population, the argument could also be presented that the more population and factories a planet has the less
Since there doesn't seem to be a link on this anywhere-- does anyone know how planet defense works? (Are we sure its been turned on?) I had a recent match where I had planet D at 10%. Enemy attacked with a single transport ship, had 'Soldiering" -- looking at the numbers, my 10% planet D cancelled his 10% bonus from soldiering on his side of the ledger. That left 2.5 pop attackers versus 2.6 pop defenders (out of something like 9 pop, multiplie
GalCiv3 Forums
Not sure either, but as you note, from the math it's most likely that 0% defense. Which could make sense-- as having 8.3 million people who are willing to fight but have no stored weapons to do so versus 5.2 million well armed soldiers is very likely only going to end one way. Still, probably needs to be tweaked in that even though they wouldn't win, the civvies could still cause a decent amount of casualties.
Is there a way to tell which parts these are when designing a ship? I just wanted to be sure my game had downloaded that from Steam.