NightshadeXL

The minimum speed or minimum armaments on transport ship options are highly favorable to evil empires. The sharing of wealth is also favorable if you're massing ships and they're all trading. You just have to change your playstyle to make use of the resolutions.

Clearly we have some very adamant Star Wars fans. However, it's been hinted at a couple times so let me say it loud and clear. Star Wars is crap. Not once was anything in the star wars universe made consistent or plausible. The movies, games, books, all say complete different things, even from each other. It's complete waste of time trying to compare Star Wars to anything that has even made a slight effort to use science, like Mass Effect or Star Trek. Th

[quote who="Empress_Fujiko" reply="40" id="3562848"] Yes, it is possible to build up so much production that you can build a large ship in one turn - the same amount of time it takes to build a small ship. However, that still means that during the turn the planets building the large ship have to do much more production than the planets building the small ship. That means if you build a small ship, you have more resources that go into research, influence, social building, money ... .<br /

[quote who="TMPhoenix" reply="11" id="3562482"] - Add a minimum contract length, before it can be cancelled. [/quote] I like this. If you make a deal and you're giving anything per turn, then you are forced to not declare war. The other party getting the items can declare war if they wish to forgo what you owe them. This prevents outrageous trades as 2000000 gold per turn would kill anyone, no matter what you got out of the deal. You'd be invaded 10x o

[quote who="eviator" reply="1" id="3562142"] Fortunately the devs are aware and surely have plans to correct this. [/quote] I really hope so. Can you think how unbalanced this would be in multiplayer if there was AI as well?

I'm all for allowing multiple ships/buildings to be built at once and I don't see how it hinders balance at all. The game already has dozens of ways to exploit it, in fact planet specialization is a type of exploit but it's one that is so common that it's simply thought of as a feature by the community and the devs. But it just makes no sense that you can build a huge hull ship in 1 turn but you can only build 1 tiny fighter in the same amount of time? Because of ship

While I knew that war would cancel any trades and resources on loan, I did not know that you could enter a creds/week that was greater than your income. I honestly thought there would be some kind of check there that you can earn as much as you say you'll pay. I think that is definitely a bug. Where as the idea of trades then going to war is perhaps a design flaw.

[quote who="joeball123" reply="35" id="3560821"] As far as defending planets goes, I would be okay with military starbases being capable of supporting a small garrison force or some such thing on nearby worlds, though it would need to be done in such a way that the garrison actually takes time to be replaced rather than coming back for free every time a battle occurs (or, for that matter, each turn, unless it's a really cheap garrison force). However, I would not be okay with these g

I fully disagree. Each colony should be self sufficient and there should be no increased maintenance. If the imperium of man can have a million worlds, so can you. As for gameply perspective, if all you're doing is expanding than you're very vulnerable to being attacked and having your colonies stolen. I'd rather see Transports being unlocked from the start as a solution than increased maintenance, because as long as you make some wealth planets, the maintenance won't bother y

These are all great ideas, but so far no one has addressed the issue that you can just avoid a MSB, go around it and take out planets. I know some people are against having so much power on MSB to defend planets, so maybe MSB should have some modules that give them production and a shipyard so that you can still function if all your planets are taken. I know this idea is terrible as where would the economics come from for fleet maintenance but honestly I don't see why someon

Good explanation of all your points.

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's just not economical and it's not practical to have t

I fully agree that military starbases need work. I think every starbase needs a massive buff to HP because having 30 modules and only 200hp is stupid. there should be some buff to hp for each module, so that simple starbases are still easy and so that fully upgraded starbases require dedication(if military and can fight back) or more than a simple defender(if other type). As for the role of military, I do see it as useless at the moment. Either they need to have artillery type

Quite simply, I would like to have the map visible during the trade screen. Even if in a smaller more compact window. Reasons for this is it is not always simple to know where certain planets, ships, starbases are just from the name, and when trying to trade it would be nice to see where each item is in the world so you can plan trades based on your current needs for distance projection or influence. And if the map could scroll to where each item is when you click on it to add

[quote who="Bellack" reply="67" id="3556688"] Quoting NightshadeXL, reply 63 Quoting Seafireliv, reply 56 <br /

[quote who="Seafireliv" reply="56" id="3556109"] Quoting NightshadeXL, reply 48 My brain is broken because I decided to back up my opinion with empirical evidence? Wow, you're a real piece of work. One defrag on a SSD won't kill it. If you're that obsessed about the lifespan of your SSD then I guess you better not install

[quote who="dragoaskani" reply="47" id="3555940"] Quoting , quoting post (loading screen is like 2-3 minutes on PC with 16 GB RAM) Clearly your system is a piece of shit. Replace it, upgrade it, fix it, whatever. Don't blame the game for your shoddy 2nd rate hardware.<br

I know that. But you can't just say defraging doesn't do anything without proof.

[quote who="trims2u" reply="34" id="3554353"] Initial load time for GC3 is heavily dominated by your disk's ability to do random I/O. GC3 is loading a whole lot of small files these days, rather than one big archive. It's harder on the disk I/O, but much, much easier for Mod-ers and expansions if you do it this way. On a fragmented HD, I've seen load times 5-6 minutes. Defrag that and it drops to about 1 minute. On my SSD, I get a load time of about 10

I personally think every starbase types should get hp for each module so that starbases aren't so easy to kill late game. Maybe military starbases should get more hp than the rest if hp per module was ever implemented. If it's not, then maybe they should be the only type to get hp per module.

[quote who="Ryat" reply="21" id="3554487"] I was disappointed with the campaign until in a Dev stream Paul mentioned that the 3 missions was just a starter. They have much more planned. Some free, others, well, I'm glad I went elite founder. [/quote] I'm very interested in this, do you have a link to the stream?

I'm not sure what you're asking... if you're thinking it's a window because your mouse cursor leaves the screen if you have dual monitors than there is a setting in the options to clip the cursor to the screen so that it no longer leaves the map.

[quote who="Rhonin_the_wizard" reply="12" id="3554096"] I prefer the campaign of III to the others, it's less frustrating and the missions feel more important. [/quote] I can agree with this, the campaign feels much more important and planned than just a pre-generated galaxy scenario from the previous editions. I still don't remember any previous campaign being less than 5 missions. I just appreciate a good story and because the galciv3 campaign is that

Yes, one play through I did the exact same, traded and had them super buddy buddy with me, fully green but I never teched to alliances. then they turned on me instantly because my influence was encroaching them.

I'd like to hear some strategies for beating mission 2. I always seem to find that once I defeat the Drengin fleet, that they no longer produce ships and sit there waiting to be invaded even with 50000 credits. But once I do this the Thalian always decide to declare war and I'm always at a massive tech loss to them, so they stroll around with 100 beam capital ships and if I try to counter they just amass a large number of well rounded ships. And because of the tech disadvantage it&#39