General Pants

Reply to Official Carriers/Orbital Bombardment Thread in Game Talk GalCiv2 Forums

For posterity, here is the revised version of my carrier proposal. I guess it still doesn't ADD too much to the game. I tried to design it to detract as little as possible, though. It probably fails: 1) HANGARS: A special "hangar module" allows a ship or starbase to embark one or more smaller ships: _____* hangar modules are just empty space... not very tough. They reduce the number of hitpoints in the hull. Larger hangar modules use slightly less space and are cheaper, but take mor

Reply to Official Carriers/Orbital Bombardment Thread in Game Talk GalCiv2 Forums

CLARIFICATION AND SLIGHT ADDITION Step 3) [...] e) Otherwise, fight a battle between the attacking fleet and the planet, with damage scored by the attacker applied to the planet's active defense grids. For each X number of rounds (see below), one troop transport (determined randomly) is considered to have landed, and is removed from the attacking fleet. When all transports are destroyed or landed, the battle ends. f)If transports succeeded in landing, go to the "invasi

Reply to Official Carriers/Orbital Bombardment Thread in Game Talk GalCiv2 Forums

STEP 3) ... e) ... mass drivers, tidal disruption, core detonation, and information warfare are not available as invasion tactics for the subsequent battle. [The prohibited tactics require space superiority and an undefended world for their proper execution] STEP 4) a)If the planet has no Active Defense Grid installations AND no defending ships, popup dialogue: "would you like to use weapons of mass destruction?" b) If yes, popup pre-invasion style dialogue, offeri

Reply to Official Carriers/Orbital Bombardment Thread in Game Talk GalCiv2 Forums

Here's how I see "Strategic Bombing" planet attack cycle working: STEP 1) You move your fleet onto a planet. a) Expend one movement point. b) If there are no defenders in orbit, go to step 3; c) Otherwise, dialogue box comes up: "Do you wish to attack the planet itself, or just the defending fleet? d) If answer is planet, got to step 4, else, go to step 2; STEP 2) Conduct a regular battle between the attacking fleet and all ships in orb

Reply to Official Carriers/Orbital Bombardment Thread in Game Talk GalCiv2 Forums

Galactic Civilizations II does not have the concept of carrriers (units that carry other units). There are no plans to add this into the game because Stardock does not feel it adds anything to the game other than additional complexity. My personal proposal allowed you to include more ships in a fleet, and take advantage of the sizemod to mount

Reply to Strategic Bombing in Warfare GalCiv2 Forums

All in all, I like the idea of being able to achieve true space superiority. But it's kind of low on my priority list. There would probably be a lot of effort to implement it, both design-wise as coding-wise. Actuall, it is already implemented, as "invasion tactics." An intial step might be to simply allow these generally. The AI would have to

Reply to The Invisible Stick in Ideas GalCiv2 Forums

Actually, I am not using the mod... Personally, I'd like to see these in the regular game. For some reason, I am really reluctant to use mods. Oh well...

The Invisible Stick in Ideas GalCiv2 Forums

THE PROBLEM: if I want to put an "arch" on my ship, it will have to be anchored on only one side. Or, if I want to use the "roll bar" jewel (the one that looks like the roll bar on the USS Reliant from Star Trek II), I can't make it arch above my ship without putting a support right in the middle. THE SOLUTION: an "invisible stick"; a long, thin structure like the antennae, that attaches at one end, and has a few hardpoints along it, and one on the end. This stick is translucent on the

Reply to So why expand the expansion? in GalCiv Journals GalCiv2 Forums

THIS is why I preordered. I once payed asking price a second time to buy a "new" version of a game I already owned, on the promise that the new version would be continually supported, expanded, and improved. This has not come to pass. StarDock did more between 1.2 and 1.3 than that company did for their "new" version. So I took the risk, even having been burned badly, because I wanted to believe you really were different. It is nice to see that my investment will bear fruit. Th

Reply to The complexities of marketing, publishing, and distributing in GalCiv Journals Stardock Forums

Ok, here goes: I very much respect you guys for asking... you didn't HAVE to. I am preordered. That was an investment in you. I trust you to do what is best to keep the game and your company alive, I will happily wait. I am shocked no one has proposed the obvious, X-Men movie-style: GALACTIC CIVILIZATIONS 2.5 "Contains the award winnng Galactic Civilizations 2 Collector's Edition, plus the all-new Dark Avatar "game novella" wit

Reply to Comprehensive(?) carrier proposal in Warfare GalCiv2 Forums

Keep posting General Pants, I'm really enjoying your posts and concepts on fighters. I appreciate the encouragement, but I think it might be time to stop. As it is, all this effort will probably get lost in the archeives [sic?] of the forum. Besides, with all the sensitivity to "spamming the lists" (I'm still not sure why this is such a big probl

Reply to Comprehensive(?) carrier proposal in Warfare GalCiv2 Forums

Hey, I didn't get what was aimed at who!!! Where's the reply to my post. There are so many things in their that almost render your idea "stupid"(no offence). Please give a direct clear reply to me after reading my post carefully. I am sorry for all the posts; there was a lot of constructive criticism, and I thought it would be better to

Reply to Strategic Bombing in Warfare GalCiv2 Forums

Oh yes ya know there's so much moral difference between commiting genoside from orbit without your guys getting hurt, and commiting genoside up close and personal WITH your guys getting killed. In all fairness, there is a difference: if you are invading, you are actually fighting FOR something, and giving your opponent the chance to fight back.<b

Reply to Strategic Bombing in Warfare GalCiv2 Forums

forget about all the missles and point defenses for a second, what about beam weapons? this should be as close to point and shoot as it gets, no need to calculate trajectories of missles and whatever, just consider the bending of the beam due to entering the atmosphere (think of a straw in a glass of water), and since everything would be turret mounted, you could attack fr

Reply to Strategic Bombing in Warfare GalCiv2 Forums

Where the heck is this feature at? Chucking asteroids? Are we playing the same game? It is one of the "invasion tactics": Mass Drivers Description: By attaching drive-thrusters to nearby asteroids, we'll be a

Reply to Bugs bugs bugs.. in GalCiv Journals GalCiv2 Forums

I don't mean to bug you, but I have posted elsewhere suggesting that you group the ship components to streamline design. From where that slider is in the third screenshot, I REALLY think you ought to consider it (if it is possible): https://forums.galciv2.com/?forumid=247&aid=130902#1014000

Reply to Galactic Civilizations II: Dark Avatar Availability in GalCiv II News GalCiv2 Forums

how do I vote?

Reply to Comprehensive(?) carrier proposal in Warfare GalCiv2 Forums

Sorry for the multiple posts, I seem to have trouble uploading large posts. What a shame... 4) [NEW RULE] LOGISTICS (the process, not the technology): It is clear to me, especially from Ugleb's comments, that carriers and starbases with hangar modules will have to be able to spawn their own fighters (ala StarCraft). Just allow them to build short-range ships, one per week, at the same price as a

Reply to Comprehensive(?) carrier proposal in Warfare GalCiv2 Forums

Second, a couple points to respond to Ugleb, The Regicide, The Night Hawk: 1) [CLARIFICATION] Having a hangar module makes a ship a carrier. Carriers require +1 logistics points over the regular hull size. It might be best if this were scaled, such that having, say, 8 fighters gave you a +2, but the best cut-off would have to be determined by playtest. 2) [MODIFICATION] Sure, scratch the whole bit where missile defence works on fighter weapons. If y'all son't think it is n

Reply to Comprehensive(?) carrier proposal in Warfare GalCiv2 Forums

Ok, now to reply to the ton of constructive criticism everyone has provided recently: First, I'd like to clarify my reasons for submitting this idea: The way I tried to set this up was to provide a method for including carriers in the game that: 1)wouldn't heavily overload the game with tons of tiny ships; 2) would require minimal changes (= programming and playtest time) to the current game design; 3) not tip the balance of the game; 4) permit you to get a

Reply to Comprehensive(?) carrier proposal in Warfare GalCiv2 Forums

This is the 6th, maybe even 7th carrier thread I've seen in the last week alone. Why can't we all just merge those threads and keep a centralized discussion? If you will check the data at the top of this page, this thread was initiated three weeks ago. The reason it has been active recently is that I posted a reference to it on Night Hawk's threa

Reply to Comprehensive(?) carrier proposal in Warfare GalCiv2 Forums

I didn't read all of this post but... sorry guys, Stardock isn't going to do carriers. It's been said plenty, stop spamming the forums. I never thought this dead idea would be spamed as much as multiplayer. I relish the irony of being accused of"spamming the forums" with carrier ideas by the THIRD person in one day. Keep our boards clean, Azru

Reply to Comprehensive(?) carrier proposal in Warfare GalCiv2 Forums

FOR THE REGICIDE: Lighten up. I posted this because I didn't think the carrier discussions out there provided a comprehensive plan that made carriers workable and didn't blow the balance of the game. If you are tired fo reading them, feel free not to. The topic was clearly stated in the initial post, so it shouldn't be hard to avoid. 2. Point Defense

Reply to carriers in Warfare GalCiv2 Forums

Well, they have said they won't bite on orbital bombardment no matter what (hence why MY post on the subject was a "plea"), a tactical interface would require a huge amount of programming for something that I'm not sure many people care about (sadly, not even me), it sounds like they may do the Terror Star some day. I don't know if they care about carriers or not, but they probably have better things to do than read another carrier proposal. They are also probably hesitant about carrier

Reply to Strategic Bombing in Warfare GalCiv2 Forums

My appologies. Dude, I hope it didn't sound like I was coming down hard on you or anything. Just a friendly, geeky discussion!