econundrum1

[quote who="zingo77" reply="26" id="3542097"] What am I hearing? Did you or did you not give us full tech tree from start- for 5 Betas you gave us full tree! In Beta 6 you limited it. Now people are angry towards you- its not your opinion to make! Its peoples! Or you dont care whether the means.... Is this officil Stardocks policy too? To disregard poeple? [/quote] So are you saying that Stardock should disregard those of us who agree that specializations should be limited i

[quote who="Frogboy" reply="23" id="3542091"] Not happening. I am very very much against the idea of being able to pick all 3 specializations. They're supposed to be a CHOICE you're making at the exclusion of the others. [/quote] Very glad to hear this Frogboy, that means those of us who agree with this can relax. It also seems clear from this thread that most people here don't agree with the OP as they assumed.

[quote]I really hate it. To the point I don't want to play the game anymore, its a game breaker. In all strategy games I focus on research and in GC3 my custom human race their first priority is to research, its part of my strategy. Playing with "specializations" sucks... I exited the game immediately I can't stand this... [/quote] Disagree, I like what they've done. If you can't stand to play the game because this makes it so awful I suggest; 1) Get

custom races created and saved in game aren't stored as XML I'm afraid if you want a mod race rather than in game custom you have to do all the work in XML.

In support of Beta6 I will say this it looks better and on my PC at least performance wise it plays like an entirely different game, not sudden 30 second pauses when zooming in and out of the map or going to other screens. Generally despite what others are reporting having spent some time with it myself now I'm finding it a lot more stable and performant.

I had the same issue once with the battle viewer in 5.2.

In-case anyone's wondering bik2 means better compression of the movies particularly for high resolution movies, and has much better more efficient playback among other advantages. It's only disadvantage is that the makers of bik & bik2 only make tools for converting movies to the former format freely available so for now no modding movies unless you can afford a commercial license to get your movies into bik2.

I disagree it got great previews, not reviews. Anyway I'm happy to put my fingers in my ears and pretend that the game has no bugs, glitches, flaws or broken parts. But I looked at some of those "Reviews" and they acknowledged there where issues with the Beta that would no doubt be fixed by release. If they aren't that will have an impact, I remember similar discussions of Elemental before it's release on the boards like start dock beta testers where too close to the game

you can always finnish you old game Trym it's just the ships won't look entirely right.

[quote who="Ed1975" reply="7" id="3542425"] Irony? [e digicons]:P[/e] [/quote] Fair point [e digicons]:blush:[/e] .

I can answer some of those the file format is .png for the static images you can use gimp or photo shop for those, unfortunately the animated movies are bink2 format and you need a commercially licensed bit of software to produce those so most modders will have to stick to static pictures for now. png allows transparency and foreground pictures should have a transparent background so they combine properly over the backgrounds. There are a number of different sizes look at the

[quote]2) Add a configurable max. fps option to avoid high system load. (Yes, it can be done using vsync...) [/quote] I'm not sure this is the cause of high system load, a lot of the CPU load is generated by frame independent stuff like the multi-threaded AI, not sure you would gain much from this as it would just reduce the GPU load a little. They may already have a max FPS limit for all I know. (3) would be nice but not essential maybe they can do this in a pa

[quote who="Illauna" reply="2" id="3542389"] It's pretty much ready to go now. Hell this game is in a much better state then half of my steam library right now. I've only really seen minor stuff like missing icons. Plus SD is very active after release and the community here also tends to help out. [/quote] Much as I love this game I have to disagree with you that it's ready to go now, it's not, 0.90 still has some big issue. Yes we all know here stardoc

As for Tech Trading, I'm happy to play with all tech trading turned off which I believe is an option though I haven't looked for it yet.

I think the decision to limit the specializations is great personally, a vocal minority are broadcasting lots of hate about this decision but as far as I'm concerned it's great for the following reasons; 1) Forcing the player to make a decision adds another strategic choice to the game, always good in a strategy game. 2) It is great for modders as it enriches the possibilities for custom tech trees. 3) It can be modded out by editing the tech trees to make the

There are two solutions to this; 1) taking all race name references out of tech names and improvement names. 2) Tokenise them with tags such as [RaceName] . I think the later is better because it creates the possibility for richer description. Of course it's only an issue for in game custom races, modders can just change the name themselves in the XML. This is likley to be something they look at post release it at all though I would t

[quote who="kestlstw" reply="11" id="3541931"] If Stardock doesn't fix this by release I plan on making my own tech trees that move the current "specializations" to their own lines, like a line for construction efficiency(-5% building costs, -10% building costs, etc), a line for building efficiency(+10% bonus to class type, etc) for example. This still reduces total number of techs so I will have to find out what else I can add in for actual specializations but I'll be happier wi

I don't think it does show what you mean though, the change makes a fairly minor difference to how many techs there are to research while adding more strategic depth to the game and more options for modders in describing race tech trees. I'm sure someone who disagrees with this decision will quickly make a mod available that takes out the specilizations and re-adds them as basic techs, that is fairly easy to do in the XML and will give you exactly what you want in a simple mod

[quote]because its now only the "half" of the whole techs researchable [/quote] Sorry but that is nonsense, there aren't that many Specializations, half of the tech tree is a gross exageration. [quote]The Idea is good that you have to specialize you and can't resaurch all the techs in one game but now you are finished with all the techs after a "couple" of turns. That reduce the fun extrem I feel so... [/quote] Another silly exageration, y

Yes maybe the Drengin wrote the diplomacy engine for GC3 [e digicons]B)[/e]

I've played lots of steam games off line it's pretty good that way as long as the developers support offline mode which Star-dock do. Anyway doesn't sound like they have any intention of producing a non-steam version at present. Maybe start a petition, if there are a few 100,000 people for which a non-steam version is that important they wouldn't buy otherwise I'm sure star-dock would consider it, but there would be costs for them so it has to be worth their while

Joking aside I'd agree that an are you sure message box would be a good idea.

Here's to hoping it's today, just the reduction in memory foot print is going to make it much more playable.

+1 very, very good idea.

[quote who="Plasma_Wolf_4X" reply="63" id="3540848"] When I read about the game, I decided to buy it because you can choose whatever you like to choose. I'm not buying a game so I can stress over things. I can't make mods (well, I probably can but I simply do not have time time, really not), so I'm looking for a mod before I play with this stupid lock-out system [/quote] If you consider that stress you've been very lucky to lead a life devoid of real stress.