naselus

[quote who="Larsenex" reply="10" id="3559477"] What are your thoughts on Sensors? I know that topic is a HOT tamale but I think a Starbase 'should' be able to see farther than a ship. In my case for MSB's is based on the fact that they are Stationary and do not have to have valuable room reserved for Engines and Thrusters (like on a ship). I know there are modules which slow down and hamper enemies in AOE but I would like to see those earlier or 'built in' on so

[quote who="Franco fx" reply="33" id="3559416"] Why not? How many financial centers are on Earth compared to production? 50:1 would be a conservative guess. It seems totally logical to me that you would need only a few. Don't count local banks in cities please. They are no more that Walmart for trading cash and are inconsequential when it comes to global economy. [/quote] 50:1 wouldn't be a conservative guess, it would be a complete guess

[quote who="joeball123" reply="7" id="3559384"] [lots of excellent analysis] [/quote] I think an analysis like this should probably discount some of the modules - if we just take the ones which upgrade the base's military power directly (rather than the buff mods and fighter bays, since those add additional separate ships) then we have around 30 modules. That reduces the cost to around 2000 manufacturing using the least efficient constructor build. That

I don't think an MSB should stand up to a whole 25+ log late-game fleet - but it should be able to go toe-to-toe with the even the largest tech-equiv ship in the game fairly comfortably. That way, with a garrison fleet it should be pretty hard to dislodge, but if you catch one undefended then you can take them out.

[quote quoting="post"]Project power, they should make anyone think twice about fighting inside the influence of them.[/quote] Once again, fully upgraded they give 145% bonus to attack and defense for all ships within ZoC. I don't think they need more than that, really. I'd agree with perhaps front-loading the bonuses a little more so they're more relevant early on. [quote] Area of effect should be LARGER for attack and defense pu

[quote who="Ericridge" reply="38" id="3558898"] Well, If I had a starbase orbiting planet Earth, I would expect it to rain death upon enemy ships deliberately ignoring the starbase in favor of invading my homeland. [/quote] You don't have a starbase orbiting Earth, though. You're not building it in orbit, even if it's on the tile right next to the planet. The entire solar system is like 6 tiles across. Anything not on literally the same tile

[quote who="Bamdorf" reply="23" id="3558917"] I take sharp issue with anyone who says money isn't worth much in the game as it stands. Perhaps some tweaks might be useful, perhaps a bit more maintenance, I dunno[/quote] I wouldn't say it's worthless. I'd say it's too easy to get, which is even more true considering that you can use it to complete the tech tree without ever trading away a single tech - in fact, it SHOULD be nearly worthless

[quote quoting="post"] I find that using high number of opponents doesn't work because the game does not have the resources(planets, systems, etc...) to support them. I'm playing with 40 factions with Insane Galaxy Size, Abundant Systems, Habitable Planets, etc... and there just isn't enough space and resources to go around, everyone has a couple of systems and spends so much time competing for things that you can only have one thing but lose everything else. For e

[quote who="Maiden666" reply="12" id="3558687"] sure, but otherwise comparing Insane to Immense isn't a big deal and in Tota you had a sensorcap of 15 there.... it simply doesn't make sense to balance a game to the most extreme settings, esp. when the grand majority of players don't even touch these scenarios...[/quote] Sure, but you also can't balance it against the smaller setting when other players might never touch those. It's another case (

[quote who="node10" reply="19" id="3558628"] I play MP and the Econ wheel & slider settings _still_ aren't being remembered between saves, which pretty much means you must rely on Imperial Econ settings for all worlds unless you enjoy remembering/setting the planet Econ every time you restore a game. (Protip: Don't. It gets old very quickly indeed.) That having been said, even when relying entirely on all planets set to Imperial Econ it's still a fairly

[quote who="oFFoyy" reply="4" id="3558626"] I understand and that is the point. You don't need 3 farms to support 8 population, it is waste of space on a planet. In this case 1 farm is enough: the planet would have 10 food and 9.5 pop, when the pop grows to 10/10 you build another farm or research an upgrade. [/quote] ... it's still going to have 3 farms in the end to hit 20 bil. Why not get them built early and avoid wasting turns of valuable growth?<

[quote who="Starchaser12" reply="24" id="3558611"] Except that, in my proposal, you could build that temple of ultimate evil, but the building itself would do nothing. (in cases where there is enough planets to max out both trees, whichever one you maxxed first would be the functioning one.)[/quote] Exactly, that's why I said your suggestion would work :) Anything to prevent the 'first world go evil, get evil building perk, second world go good, get good bu

[quote who="BuckGodot" reply="16" id="3558591"] And yet, if Stardock makes money much harder to get, there will be complaints from a whole other set of people who aren't as good at generating revenue. [e digicons];)[/e] . [/quote] It doesn't need to be much harder to get - I think maintenance could be increased globally by a couple of hundred percent and still not cause anyone any great difficulties.

[quote quoting="post"] Here is a screenshot i took after invading a planet: http://images.akamai.steamusercontent.com/ugc/39750633470478717/140D110AC38D1D10EB1B12D55A166B59C19233BF/ And this is only turn 100. Late game i've seen AIs go to +30 food when the population on the planet is <10. I don't know the exact percentage, but i would say on about

[quote quoting="post"] At the rate in which computers are becoming exponentially more powerful, do you all think there will come a day when, by Galciv 5, that we can have 512 million opponents all at once together with 1 billion stars in a galaxy? That would approach reality [e digicons]:)[/e] [/quote] Wait... you've not only contacted aliens, but have counted how many types there are? :O

[quote who="spleeze_" reply="9" id="3558542"] Sorry guys if this has been crazy debated already! I have not seen, so I apologize. I personally do not see this as an exploit at all, and it felt balanced in CG2. Maxing a cargo with decent sensors gave a realistic sensor area, and still required the I build a few of the things to get a good coverage of the border area only. In CG3, the math seems way off. So it just seems like getting back to CG2-calculations is the best things h

[quote who="ChaosGuy" reply="14" id="3558556"] Lol-- so that's what you guys are complaining about? Okay, here's the thing-- once you've got a 40-50 planets empire-- you've already won and the game's over. Unless youre playing with some wacked out settings or its a one vs one and you oppponent has a similar empire, everything is woirthless at that point-- money, ships, planets-- losing a handful of any will not affect your overall progress. <

[quote quoting="post"]n't affect the rest of this post much though) Fighters should not instantly replenish after battle; either require a cooldown (say, 5 turns?) to re-build, or perhaps more interestingly: require the carrier visit a shipyard or military starbase for re-supply. [/quote] <p

The whole diplo game feels quite restricted and placeholder-y, tbh. I've been assuming it's going to get a serious looking at in patches; once the diplo AI has been improved the player can be allowed to fiddle with it more and things like Threats can be added.

I've managed to make a loss once, but truth be told you can use one level 10 planet set to 80% econ, 20% manufacturing and that'll fund a 40-50 planet empire comfortably. Money is so easy to come by presently, and so limited in what you can do with it, that it's barely worth having in the game.

[quote who="Starchaser12" reply="21" id="3558255"] I wasn't going to respond to this thread as I am not really interested in seeing Ideology change, but I am so against this option that I had to post. Civilizations change their nature. Once benevolent or malevolent societies can become reversed. The Third Reich is a good example. The only way to proceed realistically even partly along lines like this is relatively simple and would probably involve the minimum

[quote who="NightshadeXL" reply="36" id="3558261"] Tell me, do garrisoned ships still have maintenance fees? Or are there only fees for ships that are flying? I ask because I didn't seems to have as big of maintenance when I had ships garrisoned. Anyways, the point is that having a military starbase and a planet, you must now have a fleet at both to protect them both. This means spending twice as long building fleets (and possibly twice as much maintenance). It&

[quote who="Smithy6482" reply="4" id="3530536"] I'd rather see a limiting of choices based on previous selections. IE, If I choose any of the first level of Malevolent options, I would be automatically locked out of the top level or two of the benevolent tree. Take a 2nd tier and you're locked out of the opposing ideology's 3rd, or 2nd and 3rd tier (Stardock determines balance). If you choose a 3rd tier option of either benevolent or malevolent, you are locked out of ANY (fur

[quote who="Echillion" reply="34" id="3558240"] But they do give attack and defence bonuses to allied ships and fleets with the starbases zoc I think? could be GC2 they did that? [/quote] They still do, yes. Really huge bonuses by the end game. The argument here is that some players want the starbase to be more directly powerful rather than indirectly - using it to protect stuff in it's own right rather than enhance other protection.

[quote who="Sansloi37" reply="31" id="3558200"] I too would like it if the AI could utilize this; they will build military starbases near their planets, but I'm not sure how well they target enemy starbases for destruction prior to invasion attempts. [/quote] The AI is pretty keen on starbase kills, so I'd think it's probably ok.