naselus

From the description, my gut instinct would be that its a thermal shutdown. Grab a copy of Coretemp and check the temperature the processor is hitting when the game reaches the map screen - the processor will happily keep overclocking itself til it hits around 85 degrees and at 105 it'll automatically close down. Some minor graphical changes could be causing the gfx card to work a tiny bit more intensely since the patch, leading to it just nudge the ambient temperature up too much for the

[quote who="KapitenR" reply="26" id="3608409"] Don't take away my 160 sensor range and 160 moves ship away! It's the only thing which can annihilate the AI in late game in a reasonable time since the AI currently isn't good in managing on huge maps so it gets really boring. I think that the AI should be more capable of managing the late game and build reasonable fleets faster then 3 moves per turn. A limit for the move

[quote quoting="post"] This is a rant. [/quote] It certainly is. Feel any better for it? :) You're right on all counts (though I'm not going to be setting a time limit til I walk away). The UI needs some heavy work, both in allowing us better control and in relaying relevant information quickly and cleanly without forcing me to dig for it. In particular, I hate the totally underutilized bulk-order list, which as bee

[quote who="Mystikmind" reply="3" id="3608083"] Well what you are doing is posting your opinion and then adding a link so you can have the last say and no one will disagree with you here, nice trick![/quote] Not really, he's pointing out that implementing it is more complex than just 'can it be done', and then pointing out half a dozen threads where we've discussed it in great detail, looking at the pros and cons and feasibility of adapting GC3 to w

[quote who="GalCivius" reply="3" id="3607772"] Specializing into several tasks, branches etc. is not the same as doing only one type of stuff on a national (or even on the planetary) level. [/quote] Fair point. Read Ricardo's [i]On the Principles of Political Economy and Taxation[/i] with regard to comparative advantage instead. Or look at how the British Empire was industrially organized - every city did one thing, really, really

[quote who="wpkelley41" reply="20" id="3608144"] Does anyone still use the "All Starbases Mine" and "Military Mining" mods? They are a step in the right direction. [/quote] Yup. To be honest (and to tie this into a wider debate), I suspect that if a movement nerf were implemented then that would make MSBs more attractive too. If we can't simply scream through the ZoC in a single turn then the buffs on MSBs and the attendant fleet thi

Glad you got to the bottom of it - and it's a useful thing to know, too.

[quote who="Rectunator" reply="654" id="3608307"] I am playing a fresh install of the 1.5.1 version of this mod and for some reason the diplomatic get off my lawn -options are not showing in the diplomatic dialogue screen. I can only see the pre-1.5 options of war and trade. [/quote] Due to an outdated UI file. Have already fixed it for the next release (some time this week).

[quote who="Franco fx" reply="4" id="3608183"] My personal mods (which are not appends) have to be repaired after nearly all version changes. I have to copy and paste the new files from the steamapp/GalcivIII and redo the mod. Not sure this is pertinent to the OP, I am no mod expert by any means [/quote] Probably not, since I don't do that and my mod is hugely invasive. I've only heard about this issue occurring with custom tech files

[quote quoting="post"] Greetings folks, This post is written in Comic Sans because Nasellus loves it! [/quote] Grumble grumble grumble. Now where did I leave my face-stabbing knife?

[quote who="Taslios" reply="15" id="3608158"] Balance issues for this game are insanely hard... in a small map stellar folders are silly fast.. but on the bigger maps it still takes FOREVER to get anywhere. [/quote] That is kind of the point of a big map though, no? If you want to play a game where you can get ships everywhere in the space of 2-3 turns, play a smaller map size...

The debug is exceedingly unhelpful with this kind of thing; it doesn't even really identify exactly what in the file causes the problem. Just ignore the log as it'll send you scrabbling after red herrings. Others have found custom tech-trees causing these sorts of map gen crashes due to some weird formatting thing (this has happened 3-4 times over the past six months). The only way round it that seems to work is copying the file out again from scratch. I think t

Yeah, it's altogether more complex than just minor tweaking :)

Cut and paste the whole tree into a single file in regular old notepad. That sometimes fixes these map generation errors.

Morale indirectly helps, since it increases both resistance and influence output at high levels and penalizes them at low levels.

[quote who="Rectunator" reply="2" id="3607913"] Well shame. I was about to start exploring the game files. I was hoping one could use whatever the modifier is that affects the "one per hull" support modules to similarly limit the engines. [/quote] Well, you could preclude them based on each other's presence. That'd limit you to 1 per hull, so you'd probably want to double or triple the movement points per engine. But yeah, you'd once again stil

As far as I know, we cannot limit the number of engines per hull directly. But there's several things we can do. We could, for instance, chance engines so that instead of taking up space, they reduce the total space by a % - say 20% per engine. This would prevent you stacking more than 5 engines on a hull, without breaking small ships. I suspect you can do this by opening up gal civ 3\data\game, finding the Shipcomponentdefs.xml file, opening it in notepad and

[quote who="Simplicity123" reply="13" id="3607672"] The problem is with the additive nature of components in general. Strapping 20 engines on shouldn't be 20x as effective. There should be some exponential decrease for each new component. For example, if the first engine gives you speed 1, then the second gives you 1.5. A third would give you 1.75. A better engine might give you 2. And then a second better engine would give you 3. <b

I don't care if the enemy respect my demand to leave or not. It's great if it ignores my demands when it feels strong enough. What bothers me is that they're still choosing to occupy my territory when they're getting their ass kicked by another empire. I'm still seeing the AI sitting idle in my territory when really it needs it's fleet elsewhere. The AI should respect borders by default and ignore them when it feels powerful enough. It should not

[quote who="exelsis" reply="3" id="3607354"] Give it preclusions for colony and civ capitols. Should be crash-free without letting it clutter the improvements list. [/quote] You could just set it to unbuildable for the same effect.

Hmmm, might be due to the stacking penalty. Though it never used to cause a problem.

[quote who="Rhonin_the_wizard" reply="2" id="3607540"] There is an option to tell AI players to remove their ships, it's in Let's talk about something else. [/quote] Even so, their default behaviour appears to remain 'All go and park in the player's territory', which is kinda sucky - especially when they do so even when under attack by someone else.

Not really. Specialization is pretty much all pros in real life, too. Check the first chapter of [i]Wealth of Nations[/i].

Try moving it to it's own, specially-named mod folder, i.e. my games\gal civ 3\mods\stumanfumod\game My mod contains a modified version of the file which works, so it's not broken.

No, that's correct. What happens when you launch the game?