Blaze of Glory

[quote who="TurielD" reply="97" id="3562115"] The AI is currently not capable of using its Strategic Resources on the advanced/prototype versions of its Medium and Higher ships, because the blueprints can't be activated. They can only use them once they get to Ascension level auxilary weapon tech and Large ships. It's caused by some mistakes in the ComponentClassDefs.XML file as opposed to the ShipComponentDefs.XML - looks like weapon augmentati

[quote who="SamDominion" reply="95" id="3562040"] I've been hesitant to say much about the AI because I believe that Frogboy and the SD team have a handle on it and will get the issues resolved. I also have enough patience to wait for them to do their job. Having said that, here are some anecdotes from my current "fun" game. Immense, around 12 AI's all "Gifted", uncommon x 3, common minors, uncommon resources, rare black holes, uncommon anomalies, slow game paci

I would rather they become client states (think Vichy France in WWII) Everything in my area of influence is mine and the rest becomes a vassal/client state. Perhaps I can demand some key planets on top. Anything in someone else's area of influence becomes theirs. Examples are the collapse of European colonies and Russia snagging east Poland when Germany attacked Poland.

[quote who="naselus" reply="55" id="3561551"] Quoting Stalker0, reply 54 Is that per weapon or per barrage? Lets say I have 8 25 damage lasers as a quick example. Would that 1 point of shield counteract the whole 200 points of damage, or just 1 25 attack....leaving the rest of the damage to go t

[quote who="AlienFromBeyond" reply="55" id="3561564"] As much as I agree with a lot of the points marigoldran makes, I can't help but ignore every post because I am tired of the ALL CAPS YELLING. [/quote] Agreed.

[quote who="Bamdorf" reply="51" id="3561526"] Quoting marigoldran, reply 32 No, no, no, no, no. Don't compliment them! If you do that, they'll get lazy. They're SMART people, and if you compliment smart people, they get LAZY. I KNOW from experience. They probably know it too.

Interesting concept. Really it could effectively get rid of difficulty levels for the most part. If the ai got penalties or bonuses in relation to the player as the game went on. However, that would potentially make the game insane as an empire with a couple of planets left started cranking out ships every turn. It would require a lot of work to balance this.

[quote who="a0152570" reply="4" id="3561190"] A CEO asking and listening to his customers, who wouda thunk it possible, God i wish i could have come and worked for you. Dispite your great lead in, not sure.. is this the kind of thing you want a report/comment on? * Ai is typically aggressive declaring war early, probably a little too soon or not accounting for my production/research ability. Seemed to judge me mostly on mil power. Once

Really, 90% play BELOW normal? Or is that how many of those that finished a game? Are those the folks that have 200+ games in their inventory and only play about 30 hours and move on? As to changes that would effect lower levels, make certain subroutines only kick in at normal or whatever level you deem it to be. That the AI doesn't have local focus explains a lot about why it is doing some weird things. That alone would go a long way. However, as you said, that is t

[quote who="peteincary2" reply="41" id="3561077"] Quoting Blaze of Glory, reply 40 I was disappointed when they removed the concept of each defense had value against other attacks. Armor should apply to everything, but the increased armor reduces the speed and/or maneuvering. It should not be used ov

[quote who="Director" reply="43" id="3561224"] Strategic Studies Group (SSG) had games with some of the best AI that I've ever played against. After that I'd have to list GC2 and then some of the Paradox titles. [/quote] Wow, SSG. That is a name from the past. I think the first tactical game I had was Gray Grigsby's Kampfgruppe. Then Steel Panthers. That was a heck of a learning curve, but I loved it. Met a very good friend playing SP turn base

[quote who="Larsenex" reply="36" id="3561057"] The Ai in GCII was excellent. It was indeed ahead of its time. As stated many times some posters fail to see the forest for the trees in the way. At the time and even now, it offered a player a challenging game which not many other 4x games can still claim. You were hampered by the fact it was hard coded so the amount of work you could do was limited by putting in hundreds of hours of code rewrite, something nobody wants to do. <b

[quote who="Bamdorf" reply="34" id="3561051"] Suppose one could create an AI that was as good in GalCiv as Deep Blue is at chess. Well, that would be interesting to see, but not much use to me as a gamer trying to have an enjoyable experience. I would just be seeing how long I could last before I got crushed. A game is an entertainment vehicle, not a vehicle for measuring one's tolerance to humiliation. [/quote] That was the p

I was disappointed when they removed the concept of each defense had value against other attacks. Armor should apply to everything, but the increased armor reduces the speed and/or maneuvering. It should not be used over and over in a battle. IMO it should really just add hit points to the ship and be done with it. Shields also could defend against each. It wouldn't add hit points, just reduce up to X damage a turn. Perhaps it would have to recharge by X

[quote who="Azunai_" reply="2" id="3561038"] if i remember correctly, they had a different invasion screen in late beta when i first played the game. something with a display of the tiles on the planet and stuff like that. invasions frequently crashed the game in that beta version, so it seems like the short term solution was to use the simple results window we have now. [/quote] They are reworking it. It was confusing and a bit dull. I don't miss it and am excited to se

I have to break into the creaky vault of mine called memory for this. Lots of cobwebs there.... Overall, the GCII AI was very good. I agree with most of what JTS80 has to say, although I don't really think that much of the Total War ai strategically. The biggest issues I had with II are there in III As JTS80 stated, shipbuilding Slow ships that are ok for defending, but too slow to react. This makes it easy for the player to build a flee

[quote who="AlLanMandragoran" reply="50" id="3560239"] Quoting putty101, reply 36 So I asked for someone with some authority to explain how it really works and all I get is a bunch of people reverting to the 3rd grader playground tactics of "uh huh!" Hi, In other words, “I am the on

[quote who="AlLanMandragoran" reply="40" id="3560240"] I heard Chuck Norris plays GalCiv3... [/quote] Only on insane maps, with 99 godlike AIs and he finds it too easy. This is while taking down ISIS/ISIL and cleaning up various street gangs. Oh, he plays GalCiv3 on a Microsoft Pro, the original. The extra power of the Pro 3 makes it too easy as well.

[quote quoting="post"] What should I do? I'm a master level chess player and I day trade as a hobby and so according to my code of ethics, I CAN'T not min/max. I've tried to change the AI to Synthetics on Godlike and I make two AI to work together and be on the same team. Nothing works. The AI is too dumb. What should be done? [/quote] I would like to know your settings. Maybe do a stream. We would all be interested

[quote who="MottiKhan" reply="46" id="3560219"] Quoting a0152570, reply 45 I am done with ys and it looks like others are too. You are correct. I find that it's quite easy to ignore those such as him. [e digicons]:thumbsup:[/e] [/quote] J5S???? (not you guys, Put

Beta patch up!

[quote who="Frogboy" reply="36" id="3560031"] Sorry J5, you're too toxic for our forum. [/quote] Was wondering when that would happen.

[quote who="marigoldran" reply="1" id="3559860"] I want to have more fun, but I can't. Aaaaaaarrrrrgggghhh. They made the AI too dumb. [/quote] Just a question. What level are you playing on?

Until you can add tiles by improvements. I think it has a penalty on production too, not sure.

On a dev stream Paul said Brad nerfed it too much. Looking at the XML, that is very true. It was too much before, too few now. I believe Paul said he was upping it. Perhaps 1.03?