[quote who="Stalker0" reply="1" id="3545313"] approval = pop / morale X 100, as shown in the approval tooltip [/quote] I think you've flipped the ratio. [populaton] / [morale] > 1 if [population] > [morale], which is not the expected result. [morale] / [population] > 1 if [morale] > [population], which is as expected. Checking in game, approval does in fact appear to be [morale] / [population] expressed as a percentage.
[quote who="Stalker0" reply="5" id="3544890"] A planet gets production = population + base modifiers (the colony capital gives +5 for example, and there is a tech that gives some). [/quote] This is not correct, despite what GalCivIII Economy 101 says. The current model for production is 2 * (population)^0.7 + (flat production bonuses). +1 base production and +1 population are therefore not equivalent in general. Going from 2 population to 3 population or from 3 population to
[quote who="tesb" reply="70" id="3544716"] @Unknown_Hero i can not reproduce that: e.g. population: 13, happiness: 100%, raw science: 27.5 according to the tooltip my colony capital gives me 5 total production, i.e. using the above formula (population)^0.7 + 5 = 17.04... != 27.5 i know from ingame data that happiness is a direct multiplier to raw science/manufacturing/credits, but
[quote who="tesb" reply="59" id="3544461"] again no disagreement. however arriving at such an optimum is not always possible: 1) you need a few factories to build up the planet, otherwise it takes ages or a lot of credits. destroying those few factories might be unwise because you probably need to upgrade buildings as you progress through the research tree. 2) you may not have that many tiles to get to the optimum in short: on most smaller and middl
[quote who="tesb" reply="57" id="3544388"] what is even worse is, when you go into debt the game sets all planets at 100% econ, however you often get more credits with a setting somewhere between production and econ with a econ stimulus project. i would not be surprised if even the ai/game did not know how to use the governance system properly. [/quote] Firstly, it makes some degree of sense that you'd be unable to use the economic project when in debt. Your factories ar
[quote who="Franco fx" reply="1" id="3544170"] Kind of a nubie question, what do the plus bonuses do? I know that +2 does not double anything but I am not sure what the math is. I think I have seen it explained but I don't remember what it was. [/quote] If it's +X production that you're curious about (as in with the bonus on the colony capitals, or for the Civilization Capital, or similar bonuses), then it's a flat bonus to the base production of the planet,
[quote who="trims2u" reply="24" id="3543254"] The largest number of adjacent tiles ... You want the capital to be surrounded by as many blank (bonus-less) tiles as possible. [/quote] Except that, as mentioned earlier, this is quite clearly a sub obtimal choice of location for the colony capital except in cases where you'd only be building a small number of buildings which benefit one another in the area. Three mutually adjacent facto
[quote who="Frogboy" reply="69" id="3542553"] Bear in mind, you CAN trade other races for the tech too. [/quote] To me, this is worse than simply being unable to obtain the other mutually exclusive technologies. For the technologies to reasonably be mutually exclusive, you need to be making tradeoffs that prevent you from getting the other benefits. Otherwise, there's little good reason why I could not, given sufficient time, develop those other benefits on my own.
[quote who="kestlstw" reply="51" id="3542193"] Also all the people saying who keep saying it doesn't make sense to have cheaper, more powerful and smaller engines, because that is exactly what has happened with cars, phones, tv, powerplants, factories, etc. ad nauseam [/quote] Technological progression does not eliminate the possibility of design tradeoffs. In many ways, it opens the field for ever larger degrees of specialization. Relative to when the technology was int
I agree with BuckGodot; if you're going to insist on making some technologies mutually exclusive, then make sure that it makes sense for those technologies to be mutually exclusive. It makes a degree of sense that I can make my engines smaller or more powerful but not both, or that I can make my factories more cheaply or with higher output but not both, as these are tradeoffs in the solution to a single problem. Having to choose between being able to build a habitat on a barren world and
[quote who="adamb1011" reply="25" id="3541005"] 1) Your assumption that there are no starbases really understates the problem. 5 economic starbases is easy to achieve. +res/manf techs add to it. And relics... etc. 600% is really easy to get. [/quote] Try reading this part of the last paragraph of my previous post again: [quote who="joeball123" reply="22" id="3540960"] ... if we relax the assumption about starbases so that the effect of the starbase is to increas
[quote who="adamb1011" reply="18" id="3540926"] Currently, the best way to specialise a planet in research is NOT to build 100% research. Which makes no sense. The "best" option* is to build about half factories, half labs, swing production slider to full manufacturing, and then build research project. [/quote] This isn't entirely correct, even accounting for the footnote. First off, let's assume that we're building only labs and factories, and we'
[quote who="Maiden666" reply="45" id="3540333"] You have the same mechanics already installed on weaponmods/defensemods in conjunction with racial bonuses, changing buildcost might influence time to build as does increased military racial or additional planetary perks etc. [/quote] As far as I know, there are no diminishing returns on any of the weapons or defensive components. [Ship rating] = round([component count]*[component rating]*[bonus]) is a setup where you will AL
[quote who="GiggleFish" reply="3" id="3540654"] 1, Cryogenics/ keeping a population in a suspended state, if you're moving an entire population like that it'll take a lot less space to just stack them in chambers than it would to say include normal food, medicine, exercise and entertainment. [/quote] I don't know if they're giving size numbers in GCIII yet (or if they will at all), but in GCII TotA you could look up two of the dimensions and the mass of the s
[quote who="Wer900" reply="39" id="3539077"] In that case sensors could simply be assumed to operate by sending out small probes via Alcubierre drive to the area of effect. That makes the most sense in light of how they work. [/quote] The issue of assuming that sensor range represents a number of probes being sent out is twofold. One, it requires that you have the ability to launch large numbers of probes in short periods of time. Two, it requires that the probes move very,
[quote who="TheBirthdayParty" reply="36" id="3538907"] The location of the sensors can move faster than light, but necessarily the sensor scanning range? Not a criticism, just a thought. [/quote] The maximum amount of time that it takes for whatever the sensors detect to travel from the detected object to the sensor cannot exceed 1 turn (or 0.5 turns, if the sensors are active rather than passive). Since sensor ranges are measured in the same units that ship movement range p
The most detailed information I know of on the influence mechanic suggests that zones of influence are determined by a function f of the total accumulated influence at your colonies, where f is something like max(h(inf1, rng1), ..., h(infN, rngN)), with (infX, rngX) being the influence of and range to colony X. If f exceeds a certain threshold and isn't exceeded by the influence of another culture, then the tile is yours. Sounds alright, so what's the problem? Well, my underst
[quote who="Franco fx" reply="6" id="3531559"] In fact I have never heard the term armor used in Star Trek. [/quote] Voyager introduced a deployable ablative armor in one of the last episodes. It was one of the toys that future-Janeway brought back to help present-Janeway take a shortcut home through the Borg transwarp system. I think USS Defiant was also said to be armored in at least one of the DS9 episodes.
[quote who="Larsenex" reply="9" id="3530567"] Now all of this is already in game. However the Pie shaped LONG RANGE projection now makes Star Bases an offensive tool as they should be. [/quote] Why should military starbases be offensive tools? Regardless of the shape of their area of influence, a military starbase is only going to be offensively useful in a very narrow window of the game, before and after which they're back to the current situation of 'wasted investm
[quote who=" Lord Shadow " reply="8" id="3529355"] Does anyone know what would be the best layout for 24 class planet (23 slots, 1 goes to colony capital) to have the maximal outcome of one type of resource, let's say research for example? [/quote] If you have Y slots for production multiplier buildings, of which X are factories, and each production multiplier building gives an average bonus of B, then the overall multiplier is 0.25*(1
[quote who="BuckGodot" reply="11" id="3528859"] There was a nice UP resolution in GC II that said that if there was a DoW, all now enemy ships within an ZoC were put outside of it automatically. This stopped the Mass Ships Near Targets and then Declare 'exploit'. [/quote] There are two major things about that UP Resolution that I hated, as well as a minor thing or two that annoyed me. Firstly, cultural influence boundaries and actual territorial boundaries did
[quote who="Lightbanee" reply="4" id="3529076"] Aren't the Drath extinct now? [/quote] Their homeworld was destroyed, but to the best of my knowledge the GCII campaigns never explicitly completely wiped out the Drath, and all that the GCIII Databanks seems to have to say on the matter is that the Drath have disappeared. As such, while the Drath are no longer (or not currently) major players, they are not necessarily extinct. It should also be remembered tha
[quote who="DarthGoogle" reply="34" id="3527622"] After you reach those sacred +300% mp you are better off.. with what? Building more factories? More labs? [/quote] If you are trying to maximize your research output, then after you reach the +300% manufacturing bonus, you should add structures that improve the lower bonus unless the structures that improve the higher bonus offer a bonus which is at least (larger bonus)/(smaller bonus) times greater than the structure that im
I agree with peregrine23. If anything on one of my planets is going to be off on a tile all by itself, I would rather it be the Colony Capitol than just about anything else. Why? Because the colony capitol doesn't gain anything from being adjacent to anything, which means that it's more optimal for the colony capitol to occupy as few possible adjacencies as possible than it is for it to occupy as many possible adjacencies as possible. The only time it's really beneficial to stick
[quote who="Simplicity123" reply="6" id="3519799"] If this is the case, then the wormhole "artifact" should just be thrown out. I can think of few situations where I want to send my (likely single) survey ship on a Lost in Space adventure. [/quote] Personally, I would rather have both stable and unstable wormholes than only one or the other. However, if I cannot have both, I would rather have unstable wormholes. Do I like having my survey ship thrown halfway acr