naselus

[quote who="eviator" reply="56" id="3592995"] You are where I was 5 minutes ago before reading your post: you are under the misconception that everyone plays like you. Whereas you set your manufacturing to 100% whenever you do upgrades, even with access to the planet wheel I prefer to keep my research/wealth colonies around 20% manufacturing full-time so the upgrades happen slowly and I do not lose wealth/research production during the upgrades. I don't know which style is more preve

Updated to 1.3.4: [quote] 1.3.4 * Added a global scope to hyperion logistics system. * Hyperion Shipyard now gives +100% military manu for the planet it's built on. * All defenses now have a flat Mass of 2. * AI builds more transports when at war. * Removed min relations requirements for treaties. * Tweaked AI's willingness to accept said treaties. * Hyperion buildings now correctly target ships. * Basic Car

[quote who="eviator" reply="54" id="3592964"] Second, the removal of the planet production wheel was in part to reduce micromanagement. As you strive for 100% whatever, probably though mods, you are self inflicting more micromanagement. I hope people recognize if they do this the self-inflicted micro is not the responsibility of Stardock to resolve. Nor AI balance.[/quote] Switching between the wheel and the focuses does nothing to reduce micro. You're still fa

It was good to see some of the progress on 1.4. For one, I'm glad that SD appear to have acknowledged that the rapid-fire patching every month was producing ineffectual, buggy patches and have given themselves more time for 1.4 - if it's coming out at the end of this month they have a whole extra 3 weeks for making the thing work right first time. The heavy AI focus also appears to be paying off in a big way. Being able to remove lots of the hated AI bonuses sim

[quote who="Avatar137" reply="8" id="3592865"] Thanks for the heads up. While watching it (I'm still in the process right now) I started LOL when Paul talked about the trading "bug" where the value of an item changes when you're getting offered something for it. I always thought that was by design!!! I was assuming they implemented a bartering system... Yes, a little annoying but once you learned the general accepted values you could just input that amount. So much for my role pl

Next thing you need to do is mod the AI strategies :) Then release the lot as a mod for players using sparser settings.

[quote who="Syntax_VI" reply="486" id="3592319"] Naselus, do you have any control how the AI views military power? It's such a big deal in diplomacy, and I really don't understand how the AI determines I am ripe for conquest. Late game its not such an issue, but I always find that even if I'm the toughest kid on the block the AI thinks i'm weakest. They must be calculating something in their score that doesn't make sense. I read in another

This might also be making the AI failing to build higher level terraforming. Not confirmed that tho, it's just a suspicion.

Probably not tbh. It usually only boils down to a few dozen lines of xml difference to get it working again.

Partly that's bugged in the hardcode. The AI seems reluctant to fleet sensibly with about 80% of it's forces.

[quote who="LeoncitoGB" reply="2" id="3592672"] Re number 1 - I'm very VERY far from an expert on XML but I wouldn't have though that it would be to much of an issue if all the splinter factions used the same tech tree, ship set etc. [/quote] The issue is more that the engine would have to spontaneously generate the factions mid-game. That's do-able, but would take some considerable engineering effort, rather than just mucking about in the xm

[quote who="LeoncitoGB" reply="2" id="3592674"] What is a string reference. and how do I change it?[/quote] It's the internal name of a string. A string is words that will be printed on screen. So in the case of FACTION_TERRAN_Name, there's a text file which contains something like this: [quote] FACTION_TERRAN_Name <String

[quote who="darenmoss" reply="42" id="3592668"] Anybody know when 1.4 is going to be released? [/quote] It'll be at least another week or two.

is how you reference the object defined in this code block in other xml files. is a string reference - the game looks at the text files, locates this, and then prints whatever string is attached there. is another string reference and operates the same way. refer to the various AI personality types. Different AI personalities react differently in diplo, and can have diffe

They don't double every time. Kinetics increase by 1 point, lasers by 2 and missiles by 3 for each level, so while differences are bigger at low tech they're much less impressive later in the game. I think there's more of an issue with the AI being too fond of military tech, at the expense of everything else tbh. It's running around with obsolete ships because it's not able to build newer ones quickly enough, and it starts building up it's

Yes, if there's one not in use then it can be used for anything you like, so long as it's listed in the Enums. Or if you re-purpose one that does something you don't need, i.e. if you dumped missile weapons and point defense then you could use those two code tags for more or less anything.

[quote who="a0152570" reply="500" id="3592619"] Quoting naselus, reply 499 but as you tweak engines it may further throw out the balance with tiny fighters stationed on carriers. The fact that they don't inherently need engines makes them pretty effective for their size (allowing all space to be weapons and defense).</

Also no. The fields are defined in the schema. You see at the top of the file, in the XML blurb? There's a line like this: [quote]xsi:noNamespaceSchemaLocation="../Schema/ShipBlueprintDefs.xsd">[/quote] This tells the game which Schema file is used to determine what's allowed in the table. If we go to GC3/data/schema/ShipBlueprintDefs.xsd and open it (you can use a text editor, I recommend notepad++), then i

No.

[quote quoting="post"] Greetings! Today I would like to ask you guys some questions about strategy games. 1. What specific features of diplomacy do you traditionally like the most? I want you to be as specific as you can be. Which parts of diplomacy from any game do you like the most? What parts do you remember long after playing the most? 2. Looking back, how many turns do your favorite games last? This is important to know the specific number

[quote who="a0152570" reply="494" id="3592455"] would you port this change please. Even though its faction wide, it could be made VERY small and give me a reason to build culture improvements. Does it stack with every addition culture building? [/quote] Yes. Very easy to add it: [quote] CulturePerTurnBenevolent <TargetType&

[quote who="jju57" reply="8" id="3592426"] By it being a variable that means you can't dictate to me what is fun and I can't dictate to you. We can change it to our definition of fun. And just like you make changes for small maps I want this exact same ability for very large maps. And it would be super easy to do. It is no more difficult then adding in any other XML variable. [/quote] The variable already exists and ca

[quote who="jju57" reply="492" id="3592447"] I have a different question. In the change log you have "Culture buildings now add small ideology point-per-turn multiplier effect." What ideology does this impact if I unlocked stuff in two ideologies? [/quote] The ideologies are separated out in the files, so you can specify each one separately - when that modifier was included, it gave a small % bonus to per-turn ideology gain for all three ideologies

[quote who="jju57" reply="490" id="3592416"] Yet on the small to medium maps I can move my ships in 1-2 turns max. So it happens right now. [/quote] Which is completely irrelevant for a mod that actively looks to balance only for very, very big maps. If a change breaks tiny maps but makes Insane maps work better, then I will adopt it. I have never played a game at smaller than Huge, and I never intend to do so - in fact, I only played that Huge map beca

100 moves wide is 5 turns to move from one end of the empire to the other unbuffed. That's way too fast. At 40 moves, that means you can shift your entire fleet to counter a surprise attack in 3 turns. That is why speeds need to be lower. Seriously, this isn't a matter of 'agree to disagree'... this is a matter of 'the player shouldn't be able to redeploy everything to one point in a very short space of time'.