Lightzy

Lightzy

Joined Member # 2373685
1 Posts 17 Replies 142 Reputation

benjamin, that's more or less how it works in civ4, like I said before-- if more planets = insane upkeep fees, then colonizing more straight away would put you in a bad position at first but if you survive you might be stronger much later on, but if you don't overexpand you can use 100% spending and focus on tech or military or whatever you want What I liked especially in civ4 is that if you over-expanded, your economy will simply grind to a complete halt and you'd die. you

72 Replies 63,123 Views

benjamin, that's more or less how it works in civ4, like I said before-- if more planets = insane upkeep fees, then colonizing more straight away would put you in a bad position at first but if you survive you might be stronger much later on, but if you don't overexpand you can use 100% spending and focus on tech or military or whatever you want

72 Replies 63,123 Views

Something the game Alpha Centauri did that was kind of nice was an "accelerated start". You pick that option, and everybody starts with empires that are similar in power and have about 50-100 turns of development. It was a way to skip the mad expansion rush and get on with the empire management and warfare. It also ensured that everyone had similar power at first (no one A

72 Replies 63,123 Views

Lastly.. i wonder if stardock is tired of people suggesting them to do something from MoO or Civ.. especially over and over. I think that when a huge ammount of your fanbase keeps pestering you with one very specific request, you don't 'get tired'. instead, you get the point. EDIT: BTW, I reckon its more of a moo2 ripoff

63 Replies 55,887 Views

"Well, I don't think that the definition of an expansion is to dramatically change the way a game is played or the balance of the game. But I could be wrong. And you aren't forced to watch those "damned movies", there is an option to toggle it " Happily, you are wrong. otherwise nobody would ever make expansions. Practically all RTS and TBS game expansions add new races/new units/new features that radically alter game balance. Even FPS expansions add new weapons and wh

131 Replies 88,951 Views

Heh, thats another thing indeed. The name of this thread is 'tactical combat IN EXPANSION'. What indeed do you want in an expansion? an extra race? more ship graphics? new campagin is a given. Personally I want things that actually add to the value of the game and make me want to play it more. not little embellishments. That means things like interesting tactical combat and multiplayer support. You keep saying 'well that can't happen because of the way

131 Replies 88,951 Views

When was I arguing with frogboy? And I stated most clearly the reason tactical control is important: because much of the strategic layer (namely designing ships and combining taskforces) loses depth without it since the algorithms don't take into account your intent. Secondly, it'll be a better game. You may as well argue that high tech graphics make the game worse (as many many throughout time have done) because blablabla takes resources off of gameplay not necessary

131 Replies 88,951 Views

Saying tactical combat would ruin the game even if you turn it off makes about as much sense as saying that telling a colony what to build next ruins the game, instead of just delegating EVERYTHING to governor AIs. And having no weapon ranges and stuff DOES MOST CERTAINLY NOT mean that options like 'defend certain ship at all costs' tags mean nothing. Combat algorithms, which I imagine are pretty damn simple to begin with, can handily and happily be altered by such pre-combat c

131 Replies 88,951 Views

My intention is that you cant design a fleet in a specific way in order to deal with a specific task because the combat AI algorythm is set in stone and doesn't know or care what you had in mind for the fleet, what you want to acheive. there's no smart way to use supporting ships in a fleet or have certain ships tagged as more 'expendable' so that they'd protect more important ships by placing themselves in the line of fire, and quite a lot of other things I can think of off the top

131 Replies 88,951 Views

K, there are so many ridiculous things said in this thread I can't remember them all so I'll just address the ones that itched me worst: * No emperors on the battlefield? well maybe no.. except for say, alexander, atilla, ghengis, the persian emperor alexander fought (missplaced his name), and just a few of the ones made famous in western culture. *an emperor wouldn't go down and command an army / it makes no sense - Back to alexander, atilla, etc etc. And i

131 Replies 88,951 Views

ah there we go. you have to click it and dl the rest of the libraries. talk about non-streamlined.. the whole stardock central thing is a bit of a mess. I didn't even suspect I wasn't preloading the whole thing until I decided just out of curiosity to check the size of the DL, and even then I couldn't tell if its right or not without checking here and seeing some reference to tutorials and movies and such which made me check it out again. I hope the gam

13 Replies 14,389 Views

dano and the rest, I see that you simply didn't understand anything in these games Ever played moo2 multiplayer? or RTW for that matter? I have a feeling that if we played head to head I would completely destroy you. thats where you see best the value of tactics, but here I think we can expect a very strong AI, so. In moo2 the missile/beam/fighter craft/etc issue was also way way more interesting than this freakin borin

131 Replies 88,951 Views