[quote who="adamb1011" reply="37" id="3570128"] Hey naselus can you please take a look at the ancient trait? it gets really overpowered as map size increases [/quote] Already did; annoyingly, it's xml is simply calling a n effect in the C (and so isn't directly adjustable). I can switch out the effect for something else, but I've not decided what would be best yet.
The 'mods' that are available through the workshop are largely just factions atm; you can download them from the Create Game screen (there's a 'steam workshop' button next to the 'create custom race' one now). If you want actual proper game-play-changing mods, then the workshop for 1.1 doesn't seem to support them yet - they're still handled by manually finding and downloading them from a forum somewhere.
[quote who="Vidszhite" reply="29" id="3570114"] UPDATE: I fixed it. In GalCiv3AIDefs, I increased to 16. It now very aggressively pursues invasions when it has transports, especially on large maps. No longer does it sit on piles of transports when it's at 3 wars, it uses them any way it can, which is exactly what I was hoping for. A side-effect of this is that the Drengin became MONSTERS!! Move over, pre-nerf Krynn, the Drengin are in
After a few soaks, it becomes clear that while the AI [i]does[/i] invade, it doesn't do it very much or very well. I regularly see stats screens at the end of 400+ turn soaks where the AI has colonized 100+ worlds, managed to build 2000+ warships, has fought 1000+ space battles, has taken and inflicted staggering losses... but has only actually bothered to invade 4-5 planets in the whole game. And that's the successful, aggressive AIs. The peaceful or weak ones
Sneak peak at the changelog for 0.5: * Maintenance reductions from techs now apply to overall colony maintenance; effect divided by a factor of 5. With thanks to Lavo_2 * Reworked Approval. 100% approval now offers no bonuses. Less than 100% approval directly impacts on production, growth, resistance and influence at a 1-to-1 ratio - so 50% approval gives -50% production, growth, resistance and influence output. * All growth bonuses from tech and improvements
It's been kinda funny watching this debate evolve over the past couple of weeks and half a dozen threads, tbh. Initially, we were in two camps - the 'LEP is broken' camp and the 'LEP is fine' camp. Those who played on larger maps mostly fell into the first group, those playing on smaller maps into the second. The broken group proposed things like changing how LEP was applied, or adding a map size check, and the fine group said these things were not r
[quote who="KarlBar99" reply="35" id="3570040"] One thing that would hugely help with the starbase spam is to make mining rings work like the Xeno-Archaeology line. I.e. can fit on any base. [/quote] That's one of the first changes I implemented tbh. I think it's fine to either have mutually-exclusive rings OR the exclusion range, but both is just overkill.
[quote who="Vidszhite" reply="1" id="3570058"]The Kinetic/Beam/Missile/Tactical Support are classified as Transport .[/quote] Holy god, that's a good catch.
Kind of a small one, but... Could we please get the option to auto-upgrade ships on repeat build? If I've told shipyard 97 that I want it to produce Destroyers, I want it to produce the best possible destroyers my empire can. I don't want to have to come back to it every 3 turns to tell it to move from mark 13 to mark 14.
[quote who="a0152570" reply="30" id="3570019"] You totally read my mind and agree. Question: how have you modified the blueprint now that summon calls the "basic constructor" which afaik can't be upgraded as tech progresses. Before the "basic constructor" IMPROVEMENT [e digicons]X|[/e] , i had a modified constructor that worked great >best single engine, no life, no sensors, and as many constructor modules as will fit. It worked g
Oh yes, I don't really think you should be able to, for instance, build a huge hull covered in sensors and have it completely reveal even the largest maps. I only really play on Insane sizes, and frankly, I need cargo hulls with 40+ sensor range by mid-game just to keep an eye on what's happening within my own borders, and keep an eye on my closest neighbours, but I generally don't allow myself to stack sensors on anything bigger than a medium hull. A restri
I already explained why in a previous post, though the quotes were screwed up. I do wish this forum just defaulted to HTML rather than this horrible word interface. Anyway: [quote] Global Morale = (global pop + LEP)/Global Morale[/quote] This was a central element in your proposed changes to LEP. There is a very, very basic logical error in this calculation. And limiti
[quote who="dansiegel30" reply="19" id="3570005"] Thank you for the correction. Nevertheless, the AI doesnt understand the vital need for such intelligence, nor take advantage of it, by any means compared to a human. [/quote] Actually, on lower difficulties, where they suffer fog of war, the AI does benefit enormously from sensor boats. As far as I can tell, the AI needs to be able to see planets to attempt to colonize them in lower difficulties (unti
[quote who="dansiegel30" reply="28" id="3570011"] As well, we all build MANY types of constructors. Range, move, and # of constructor modules can vary greatly. Such as list would be small, as it would be filtered on your ships that actually have constructor modules. Being able to pick the constructor type summoned in the SB menu would be needed IMO. [/quote] Do we? I generally just use the best one that's available, based on the modified
[quote who="hardcore_gamer" reply="6" id="3569998"] This could be solved by allowing the player to choice to only get news about certain empires. Say there are a couple of factions that you concerned about and only want to get news from them. Then the game should allow that. Problem solved. [/quote] Well, yes. That's why I said as much in the post you quoted. But even then, you need to avoid frequent repetition, and to draw a line between what a p
I'd rather just have the starbase allow me to 'order' the modules I want from the list and then summon the necessary constructors, tbh. Do that and remove the 'basic' versions, and we get the best of both worlds; those who want to automate it can just lay out what they want the starbase to become on placement, while those who like constructors can continue to tailor them as they do presently.
[quote who="Stalker0" reply="34" id="3569920"] so...Star Wars wins this one. Why are still talking about this?[/quote] Because there's nothing quite as entertaining as observing joeball's combination of relentless logic and complete lack of sense of humour :)
[quote who="Vidszhite" reply="3" id="3569983"] However, most races will use what they perceive as the most damaging weapon in the situation, so they will even adapt to balance changes without being told to. [/quote] I don't think they will, you know. From what I can tell, the AI's ship building choices are largely random and AIStrat-dependent, and it's tech choices are also largely random. It will pick the best-equipped ship of a given role (so
[quote who="AlLanMandragoran" reply="14" id="3569985"] Are sensor boats a strategy or an exploit? [e digicons]:troll:[/e] [/quote] Depends what map size you're playing on.
They're tricky to do right tbh. Get it even a little wrong, and they become tedious and annoying distractions rather than useful; and while you could just put them in the event log that way turns it into another piece of administrative busywork rather than a cool, immersive feature. The simple fact is, even when this idea was done well (MOO2 and GC2 both managed it), the information itself just wasn't that useful - and if it WAS useful, it would have been better to have that accessibl
Generally speaking, if you can give a detailed description of a game-winning plan in one sentence, it's an exploit. If it takes a couple of paragraphs then it's a strategy.
[quote who="KarlBar99" reply="48" id="3569951"] Lots of half-baked conjecture.[/quote] Once again, LEP does not, in any way, limit the rate of growth. It acts solely as an absolute limit on growth. That's all. It has no impact on how quickly you can expand. And it will NEVER impact on how rapidly you expand unless it is completely reworked, in such a way that there was no reason to use approval for it in the first place. The argumen
[quote who="Gaunathor" reply="45" id="3569891"] Quoting naselus, reply 29 Well, their first plan is to add a stacking research cost from expansion. Any links to where they said that? All I heard was that the devs want to adjust the research cost based on the total amount of habitable planets o
It might be worth seeing what happens if you re-activate the cloaking devices that are presently commented out, too - they might have component types that are usable in the same manner.
Yeah, I need to take a look at the AI weighting on tech choices; it's still largely the vanilla values. As to the AI having negative resources, this is fairly mysterious. I think they're allowed to upgrade without a resource check. They do this in vanilla too.