Osbot

[quote who="pleb87" reply="350" id="3624069"] I get massive lags on my laptop but it's pretty old (i5 dual core 1.7GHz, 8GB RAM, 1GB VRAM GPU) but my desktop runs much better (i7 quad core 4GHz, 32GB RAM, 4GB VRAM GPU). However even my desktop has lags, especially since I installed the new mining stations, but it's a shame as they're really good! [e digicons]X([/e] [/quote] It's really too bad. The new ship sets are amazing, but I simply

Quick question. Just came back to the game after not playing since last May. Been following this mod for awhile however. So I'm using this mod + all the DLC and the ship designer is so unbelievably laggy. Is that from this mod? Rotating ships is chunky, scrolling the design list is delayed and sluggish. I run a cutting edge gaming PC, so it isn't a gpu/ram/cpu issue. EDIT - Just loaded up a vanilla race, unlocked all tech, and it's horrific like this too. So

Anyone done collectors or systems alliance yet?!

[quote quoting="post"] Exponential growth, and the power of Benevolence Level III and super traits Patriotism and Colonizer. Also, there's no maintenance costs to speak of, apparently. I look at the people who actually try to build up their world early game and I'm like: TROLLLOLOLOLOLOLOLOL. Just build colony ships with different engines (slower and cheaper colony ships for planets close by. Faster and more expensive co

I think one way to make military starbases useful is pretty simple. Once starbases can have fighter modules, allow the starbase to launch a fighter based attack on any enemy fleet inside their zone of control once per turn. It makes sense, before the base has fighters/assault fighters it has limited projection capabilities. Once it does, it can send its fighters to attack beyond its own weapon systems range. You could go one step further, and allow a friendly fleet inside a st

Basically, I think having the ability to assign templates to groups of planets and then adjust that specific template through the planetary govern function would be so, so, so helpful. You could then have 3 or 4 or however many templates running on as many planets as you want and instead of having to adjust the govern budget screen for each one, or hit them all with the exact same plan you could tailor them to roles and levels of development and cover your empire far more quickly.

[quote who="J5S" reply="12" id="3557538"] Wow I don't think I'd be patting myself on the back over the way it plays. Maybe sells after being promoted and the 3rd of a series but this game has no where near the depth or refinement of the previous rendition. From what I can see it also isn't satisfying a fair number of the users on metacritic either. I don't want to be too one sided but nobody has been able to trust "game" review outfits for years and so getting a high awar

[quote who="Frogboy" reply="65" id="3557080"] Quoting Seilore, reply 59 Okay so it's a little better now, still not the Thousands of planets promised , however, it's around 600 planets now which I still feel is too low. On another note the game is <str

Awesome.

[quote who="BuckGodot" reply="7" id="3556855"] There's been a lot of discussion and analysis over this this thread about this: https://forums.galciv3.com/466422 Admittedly some of it is by Your Truly and I don't want to repeat it all. [e digicons];)[/e] But the upshot is, things look fine on maps to, oh let's say Large. But after that, it gets hairy. The actual dividing line might be up to personal prefer

[quote who="Magnumaniac" reply="21" id="3556773"] Quoting Osbot, reply 18 This seems like a user issue, not a game issue. If someone has a toaster for a computer, they should reign their settings in. I don't have a toaster, even 300 turns into a game on abundant immense or larger galaxy settings with h

[quote who="Frogboy" reply="13" id="3556681"] Quoting Magnumaniac, reply 9 Well, on the Steam reviews default view (i.e. what everyone will see when they first look at it), you have to scroll a long way down before you start seeing blues exceed reds. Looking through those negative reviews, I can't see any that said "ga

[quote who="cwg009" reply="74" id="3556470"] Quoting Frogboy, reply 72 It is very possible it's too much. We'll be reading feedback on it. I'm just not sure how much "fun" there would be managing 6,400 planets (which is the number I counted in my tests). There is a magic number in there so

[quote who="Frogboy" reply="72" id="3556467"] Quoting Osbot, reply 70 I think 1.02 goes overboard on nerfing star frequency. I'm checking out the changes and I'm not sure if this is a joke or not [e digicons]:)[/e] Abundant stars on an immense scattered starmap looks to have less stars than a rare stars

[quote who="Frogboy" reply="62" id="3556445"] Quoting a0152570, reply 58 First time I ever saw low lose your cool ( yes, just a little bit) but deserved [e digicons];)[/e] If you stick around long enough you'll see it many times. In fact... Fr

I think 1.02 goes overboard on nerfing star frequency. I'm checking out the changes and I'm not sure if this is a joke or not :) Abundant stars on an immense scattered starmap looks to have less stars than a rare stars on scattered clusters from last build. I'm actually terrified to even look at the lower settings. Immense map is going to have like 20 star systems on rare stars?

Playing on an immense galaxy, checking out the new map changes. Abundant stars. Ok, so where are the stars? Abundant scattered stars looks like rare scattered clusters from last build.

[quote who="redviper37" reply="11" id="3556259"] IIRC, in GC2, a defense provided 1/3 of its efficiency against other weapon types. 100 armor would provide 33 defense against missiles. Is that still the case? [/quote] I don't believe so.

[quote quoting="post"] So I restarted a new game. As I have stated before the default amount of habitable planets seems a bit too many on 'uncommon' and not enough on Rare. Anyway, I started an Insane, 15 AI, Rare/Rare and pretty much occasional on everything else: Resources and Anomalies. I left the game settings on 'Normal' and then set the Drengin and the 'Yar' (Benevolent trading Yor) to 'Gifted'. Oh

Defenses are bacically useless in the competitive phase of military operations. They function as an HP buffer and more guns is pretty much always the better option. Jammers on the other hand, those are more useful. A flat reduction of the opponents accuracy on every single shot. Yes please.

One thing I will say. Patriotic is so insanely strong on large maps. I'm currently playing a game on challenging (I've modded the difficulty to give +4 morale to AI on this difficulty). I'm playing with the base races + 20-25 custom races. I have 3 custom synthetic races all of which have patriotic. In any given game one or all of them will be super powers. In this one in particular, one of them snowballed. Their military score right now, is about 5x higher than th

[quote who="Larsenex" reply="10" id="3555832"] The Surrendering issue was one that was in GCII. There will be an option to turn it off, however it may be down the line in July or August. I am happy with the Surrender feature. It feels like old GCII. I see the previous post where someone ragequit over an AI surrendering and making that person go into neg treasury. First thing i would have done is go over each and every planet and reset all the planets to

[quote who="Seafireliv" reply="6" id="3555802"] Well, sure, have it as an option, but I wouldn`t use it. It seems silly to want to control how another Faction acts in its fights towards another, just because you don`t like it, so you want a never ending war which is even more ridiculous. [/quote] The issue is that AI factions are surrendering to other AI factions they are at war with, when 4 or 5 or 6 factions are BETWEEN THEM. They are not losing planets. They are not fight

[quote who="erischild" reply="5" id="3555792"] Quoting Osbot, reply 2 Feels like it cheats you out of a real fight when the AI just surrenders if it sees itself as too weak to fight a super power. I don't understand this reaction. If the AI surrend

The issue isn't whether or not there is a cyclical climate shift based on variables like the wobble in the earths orbit of the sun on an 18,000 year cycle. The issue is, are we speeding the process up. I would argue we most certainly are. To put it another folksy down home way. Your house is on fire, it's a really big house. You probably can't stop it from burning to the ground and you didn't cause the fight, but you can certainly walk into the living room, pick up a b