WIllythemailboy

[quote who="UnleashedElf" reply="69" id="3420739"]For a large percentage of the fanbase, tactical combat is the most in demand feature. Another large percentage (yourself included) seem to strongly oppose it.[/quote] Again, assumptions. Based on the forums, a relative handful of users are demanding tactical combat. A different handful are dead set against it. The hundreds of thousands of users who aren't posting here hold opinions we can't know with any accuracy. There are dan

I'm noticing a lack of influence points to be traded as currency. Is everyone's favorite carpal-tunnel-inducing cheese tactic confirmed to be gone for this game? Of all the repetitive things I've done in games, nothing else has come closer to making me download a macro generator than influence trading. If it's in this time, can we get something to allow bigger trades?

I'm noticing the red 'lava' effect on a couple big rocks in the asteroids (above Kona and another near the blue binary star). Possible bigger output nodes, or alternate resources mined from them? Clearly the morale-population link has been significantly altered, there's no way you'd have 32.2 billion people at 89% happiness under the GC2 model. I'm very concerned by the hourglass symbol with the 432 next to it in the far upper right corner. That doesn&#

They could let the size scale slider for parts go down to "string theory size", to add the functional parts at a size so small they can't be seen under any circumstances.

[quote who="UnleashedElf" reply="52" id="3420052"]Because a very large number of people will fight a large percentage of the battles themselves if given the option to do so. Being an opponent of tactical combat, I don't think you understand this. Many people like tactical combat for the sake of tactical combat. Others, myself included, feel that the game is significantly a lesser experience without a good tactical combat game. [/quote] I think you make unwarranted assu

[quote who="The Rusty Gamer" reply="2" id="3419754"] You still have the problem of conquering planets you can't use in Galciv 2 because the other race's technology is more advanced than you when they colonised it . I don't think the argument is valid and having different races use different types of planets in the beginning would make the game more interesting. There will still be common planets that everyone wants for one reason or another a

[quote who="Innocentia" reply="8" id="3419574"]Did they actually say SP was the focus? They wrote this would be the first multiplayer capable GalCiv, so I figured that means they'd design the game around this, not as an afterthought. I'm not holding my breath but I often think it's scary how conservative communities can be. There's a reason Apple is the king of consumer technology, and it's NOT because they stuck with what they knew.[/quote] It

[quote who="UnleashedElf" reply="44" id="3419343"] As I said, it really comes down to if they put in an auto-resolve, how accurate the auto-resolves really are. Some mods I've seen for some games make them pretty realistic.[/quote] That is covered in my post. If auto resolve ends about as well as you could do it yourself, why bother ever doing it yourself? Everyone will do the first few for the novelty factor, then skip them for the rest of the game's lifespan for the she

[quote who="18Zulukiller" reply="42" id="3419062"]What are you on about we already have auto resolve in game as is.[/quote] We have auto-resolve that is not optional. My point is about how idiotic it is to think "optional" will ever work out to actually be optional. Read it again until you understand the point.

[quote who="Ashbery76" reply="10" id="3418897"] Excuse me.The article is in latest pcgamer magazine in the UK for anyone to see for themselves.I presume the US one might have the same.Any what is trolling about it?[/quote] It's not showing up in Google searches, so until you provide any sort of evidence (the link to the article that should have been in the topic post), we have to assume you're just making shit up. Internet etiquette generally supposes someone prov

The problem here is that all races need to end with roughly equal ability to colonize everything. If Torian planets are all so far aquatic that I can't ever use them, what reason do I have to conquer them? It's just going to be a class 0 to me, which means conquering it is effectively destroying the planet. It just becomes genocide runs by a different name. You don't see a shark and a cactus ever competing for resources - neither can use what the other is using. The same w

[quote who="WIllythemailboy" reply="23" id="3418240"] Quoting 18Zulukiller, reply 20Total war games have an auto resolve button if do not want to fight a battle. Auto resolve is *never* an option. It basically falls into two categories: the auto resolve can fight a battle as well or better than the player, or the auto battle does worse than the player. If the first is true, why would anyone play out a

Honestly, the biggest Quality of Life improvement for building planets would be a favorites list for buildings. Most people will only use the same 5-6 buildings on each planet, with another 6-8 used situationally. Being able to have only those buildings on the list would be a big improvement. Building a lot of buildings isn't a huge problem, at least for me. Picking the few tiles that have bonuses or something is pretty quick, then it's just a matter of clicking

[quote who="NitroX infinity" reply="1" id="3418138"]As for economic tiles; aren't asteroids and moons (or rings, whichever of the two gives that bonus) enough bonusses? And don't forget trade.[/quote] Neither. Moons and asteroids give manufacturing bonus, rings give research. There were no economic bonuses other than structures, passive tech bonuses, anomaly bonuses and green mining starbase resources. [quote who="Tyrantissar" reply="4" id="3418746"] I seen

[quote who="ParagonRenegade" reply="2" id="3418706"] Quoting Zydor, reply 1 Wait until the Alpha is released. They have already been coding for months, and their original concepts are already in tablets of stone for the initial Alpha release. Right now they are dotting the i's crossing the t's for Alpha release. Until we see that, it just becomes circular speculation. Currently being in Alpha, huge amounts of the game could be still be changed, only when the

[quote who="yarodin" reply="102" id="3418692"]Sorry if it's how you're reading my posts. They weren't (and aren't) meant to be insulting, I just wanted to post valid arguments why mines are not completly useless, at least in my opinion. I find it rather annoying when my arguments are not countered or discussed but just dismissed as "jusitifications". If you have counter arguments, good. Bring them.[/quote] They're not insulting or anything, they just have the tone

[quote who="jecy99" reply="55" id="3418616"]Well i would certainly think a tiny fighter, would hardly take up as much maintenance as a normal ship that could hop from system to system,.. Perhaps you could use Tiny ships, and create "wings" Say a wing is 3 ships grouped, that in essence would become a single "tiny" ship" So sort of 3 for the price of one. [/quote] Are you accounting for the upkeep cost of the carrier module as well? My point is that the upkeep cost for fighters and the

[quote who="yarodin" reply="100" id="3418579"]1. The "justifications" are in no way frantic. I find them logically or I wouldn't have written them.[/quote] Sorry, but that's the tone your posts are giving off. Most of your arguments would be somewhat valid if we were dealing with a "real life" GC universe, but won't work well in the actual game due to the turn-based issues. Are you factoring in time to lay the mines, cost of tenders, upkeep cost, etc. or are you just assum

[quote who="jecy99" reply="53" id="3418464"]eating up maintenance,[/quote] Why would you assume fighters don't have the same maintenance cost as anything else?

[quote who="Lucky Jack" reply="4" id="3418389"] Quoting NorsemanViking, reply 3 Quoting Lucky Jack, reply 2 Since we can already scan our own planet today, I see no reason why any ship with even the minimum default scanners shouldn't be able to already support this idea. Gameplay reasons? Interesting. I just checked on GC2 and if you have reached an espionage level of "high" on the race owning the planet, you can see the plan

How well would this work in relation to a game where planets can be flipped solely by influence? Would planets that chose not to be in your empire also be targets, or would the AI decide to let them go their own way? For that matter, if a planet is sold to a hostile empire would its citizens be more likely to flip back to its original civilization?

[quote who="yarodin" reply="94" id="3418264"] Lucky Jack and I already told you why we think mines are a good thing. Ok, you can disagree, but please stop ignoring our arguments. We already told you what we thinj what the benefit is/would be.[/quote] Unfortunately, he's right. Nothing in your arguments amounts to more than "mines for the sake of mines" and a lot of frantic justifications for it. Not to mention the indiscriminate nature of mines. In toda

[quote who="18Zulukiller" reply="20" id="3418179"]Total war games have an auto resolve button if do not want to fight a battle.[/quote] Auto resolve is *never* an option. It basically falls into two categories: the auto resolve can fight a battle as well or better than the player, or the auto battle does worse than the player. If the first is true, why would anyone play out a battle? The AI can do it as well as you can, you&

[quote who="Gaunathor" reply="7" id="3416928"].[/quote] I think he was asking more for a "random civs but exclude the one who's tech tree I'm using" button.

None of those solve, or even come close to balancing, the indestructibility issue. There needs to be a way for an aggressor to eliminate them permanently. A mine sweeping module would be best; a hard cap on the number of mines and having heavily armored ships "soak" them would work. But once gone they don't magically reappear. For that matter, they shouldn't magically appear the first time, either. They would need to be emplaced one hex at a time, by a specialized ship, s