naselus

[quote who="Syntax_VI" reply="553" id="3596222"] Also remember, as near as I can tell, the AI doesn't research this tech either. So far I've never seen the AI unlock anything more than the 2nd level of terraform, and most only ever do the first. This is from multiple games 300-500 turns a piece. I would guess the N/A projects bug does *probably* stop the AI from terraforming (and other things probably) but what stops them from researching the tech? it

The weird behaviour in the build queues that occurs when the upgrades become available may interfere with it's ability to build terraforming improvements altogether. The AI certainly did terraforming previously, so unless something good was specifically broken by 1.3 it seems like a plausible cause.

[quote who="Director" reply="2" id="3596069"] Before this is implemented I would want an end to the AI declaring war on me on turn 20 when their survey ship transits a wormhole into my side of the galaxy and then 'wages war' on me for the next 300 turns, refusing all peace offers. [/quote] I'd want that regardless of if this is implemented, tbh :P

There's already a suitable stat for that - the AI keeps track of it's own 'war weariness' for diplomacy, taking penalties when it loses and getting bonuses when it wins (and slowly upticking over time). It could fairly easily be adapted to add a variable penalty to morale; though I doubt it's moddable just yet. It might be once we get the shiny new code tools Paul has hinted at in previous dev streams, though.

[quote who="androshalforc" reply="1" id="3596033"] in theory you could make a mod that reduces the cost to produce all upgrades to 0 however i think you would still be limited to one per turn [/quote] ...or you could just make the techs give +x% output bonus to the specific building, rather than unlocking the next tier.

[quote who="mrblondini" reply="16" id="3595994"] I do like the idea of expanding the Diplomacy scale to 100 as naselus suggests - I think something that has a negative effect on your relationship with Race B should eventually lead to them putting you on their Shit List but it shouldn't be a linear "Every Turn, they get this much more pissed off that you're doing this thing" . There should also be a modifier in Diplomacy based not on what the relationship

Meh, they're handy for balance tbh; I dislike the idea of a scientific discovery causing a huge jump in output overnight. But it's causing too many issues. As for tech; I suspect the AI's big hard-on for military is more down to them usually being at war with one person or another for huge chunks of the game (without either side actually fighting, usually). I'll see if I can tweak the weights some.

I suspect it might be something to do with the colony capital upgrades. Will revert them to vanilla style.

[quote who="a0152570" reply="9" id="3595883"] I think he was supportive of considering it in a wishy washy sort of way [e digicons]^_^[/e] ) [/quote] Yeah, I think Paul kinda personifies most people's reaction to it tbh. "Really? You care about [i]that[/i]? Sure, whatever, if we're not doing anything remotely important one afternoon then why not..." It means a lot to the guys playing it as a planet-building sim, and no-one el

[quote who="a0152570" reply="10" id="3595882"] I get your point but come on, a moral bldg cost 1 or 2 turns, especially if you put the planet on mfg focus (if you really need to) and some of the empire wide techs arent that far or that expensive. I never have a big issue with moral despite the LEP. I have more issues with early-mid game $ than moral. [/quote] You're missing the point :) 'Bad design' doesn't mean 'unmanageable

[quote who="Rhonin_the_wizard" reply="8" id="3595876"] What about that morale project they introduced? Though I also think LEP should be changed to a maintenance cost, [/quote] It's not really an on-the-fly thing. Aside from the fact that, as a project, it automatically comes last in the build queue (and so doesn't work if you're trying to build a more permanent solution), but it also doesn't make much sense. The primary reason to keep high

[quote who="MacsenLP" reply="9" id="3595838"] I'd make nebulas larger [/quote] Funny thing - the bit arrays for the nebulas are HUGE. They're like 32x32 or something. But they're barely used. For example: LargeNebula1 10 11 00000000000000000000000000000000 0000000

[quote who="Caesar1978" reply="6" id="3595864"] and the only option you have at this time is.. when you didn´t like where the capital was randomly placed is.. abandone the game...Start a new one... and that you can do until you are a happy.[/quote] Or you could just, y'know, ignore the incredibly minor bonus you might get from having the colony capital placed ever so slightly to the left, and play the game instead of obsessing over getting the plane

A few notes on a couple of your points, Pere: [quote who="peregrine23" reply="5" id="3595745"] -Can't change tax rate is a good change. It allows you to control approval on a planetary basis, where it matters for this game.[/quote] I'd heavily dispute your second sentence, tbh. You can't really control morale at all. That's the big reason why LEP is so hated by those playing on bigger map sizes; you're fairly helpless t

To be honest, I'd be happy just to have the ability to name areas of the map on the fly. I don't really need a bunch of random names for some arbitrarily-chosen black holes or nebulae popping up from the start. But I'd like to be able to name chunks of the map myself as the game evolves, so that the map starts to develop some character. Naming constellations and sectors would help a long way there.

[quote who="joeball123" reply="16" id="3595643"] At least in 1.3.x and earlier, the XML supports projects that lack any prerequisites; the Economic Stimulus and Cultural Festival projects are implemented as such, and in older versions of the game the other projects weren't linked to techs either. [/quote] Oh, I know. But it wouldn't be the first time that the devs have 'forgotten' such a thing is possible, or have arbitrarily dumped an unlo

[quote who="Frogboy" reply="1" id="3595586"] So having a different economic system than galciv ii == broken?[/quote] Now, be fair. He didn't say that. And you clearly didn't think the GC3 system was [i]that[/i] much better right now, since you're literally in the middle of implementing massive balance changes to it. I agree that the GC3 economy has the [i]potential[/i] to be better than the GC2 one... but it isn't there yet. S

They've always been step functions, as Joe notes. It's a bit weird that they are tbh, since the XML structure allows it to be set to a step of 1 manu with no issues. To change it, go to game/planetaryprojectdefs.xml, change every instance of to 1, and then divide every entry by 10. This will make the bonus map directly to social production.

tbh,, I've been wondering why ANY project is tech gated recently. Now that they all cap at 100, none of them a super-powerful or anything, and it just creates a wave of micro going back and changing the projects on the right worlds when the 'correct' one is finally unlocked. I don't think the ship building project is on a T1 tech to slow the early game down - since you can research it from the get-go more or less. I think they probably just had to unlock it on something and wa

It's a solid patch in an area the game needed most - the strategic AI. Most AI improvements thus far have concentrated on the fleet AI... which had nothing to work with on the supply-side. Addressing this is the single biggest improvement since about May to making the game FUN. We should now, at least, be rid of the 'I've played once and owned Godlike' posts, and strategic difficulty posts should be confined to the ultra-hardcore fringe where they belong (So Macsen, mostly - :

[quote who="Syntax_VI" reply="542" id="3595277"] I've found without the bonuses that the AI has lost this ability. They usually hemorrhage themselves building that early military and fall hard in science /econ and stop colonizing at 35-50 planets. Its really hurt them, hence I tried to limit myself to even the playing field and am still running away with it. [/quote] I'm tempted to push back the AI's military build up a bit tbh. It currently sta

On Insane, it generates about 1200 habitables. I usually play with 32 players, so the average empire size is around 40. RE: 1.4 - while I'll be downloading it from the next release of the mod onward and will start reconciling the changes, the mod probably won't be working on 1.4 until the end of the month. I only release for the current version, not opt-ins. I certainly won't be supporting it on a version other than release. As t

[quote who="sdwood" reply="536" id="3594341"] If you make factories only provide military production, it's going to make building up new worlds take a _lot_ longer, and upgrading will eventually take forever. Generally, the first thing I build on a world is a factory, even if it's a research or money world, because that cuts the time taken to build other things down enough that it's worth it. I guess you could make a colony-unique building that provides social p

[quote who="Maddhawk" reply="5" id="3594307"] Sure are aggressive in this post. I took the liberty to highlight your aggression there. I certainly didn't criticize you in my post.[/quote] You'll get used to it. There's nothing quite like watching Joe deliver a barrage of angry maths. Take a look at reply 3 here: https://forums.galciv3.com/471999/

[quote who="Syntax_VI" reply="534" id="3594259"] cant say that I'd be in favor of lowering social manufacturing either. would it just be to slow manu worlds down? [/quote] Partially. It'd bring them into line with other worlds in terms of upgrade speed, it'd remove the ability of the player to do something the AI can't, and it'd cut the temptation to micro it somewhat too. I'm mostly just q