RavenX

[quote who="Heavenfall" reply="5" id="3557759"] Played at a friend's. Check out https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iWKSopTFf2U for some gameplay [/quote] Hahaha Awesome :) I'm subscribed to his channel I just hadn't seen that one posted up. Honestly I only watch one out of maybe every 10 vids TB does. This is the first time I've seen any full on gameplay. Thanks for the heads up :) <br /

[quote who="Heavenfall" reply="3" id="3557735"] The physics engine is nice but the bodies keep spazzing out. Camera and clipping on executions is terrible. [/quote] Wait have you played it? How did you see these things? lol I'd really like to see some full on gameplay footage. If it's as bad as you say maybe I'll wait for a patch or a sale to pick it up.

[quote who="Heavenfall" reply="1" id="3557732"] The gameplay sucked ass, it's just repetitive "go there kill X" until you choke on it. Graphics/theme is the only thing that stands out as ok in an otherwise tiresome drudgery. [/quote] Yeah I'd have to agree the gameplay in all of these types of iso shooters is a one off. They're all the same. No replayability. Just a one time play through, then maybe more so for high score rankings. It's more of a "arcade"

You know she's just a paid mouthpiece right? She's all raving against Hatred and then come to find out she's invested in a company doing writing for other Very Violent video games. Do some digging into her, you'll see. She's not as squeaky clean nor half as self righteous as she pretends to be. If I were you Brad I'd distance Stardock from even mentioning her name if I were you. Her hypocrisy is overwhelming. She says she's against all this stuff and then her

Not sure how many people have had their eye on Hatred or not, but it comes out Monday on Steam for $20. The game has been in the media thanks to it's theme but honestly it's no worse than Postal, and games like GTA V have far worse content and activities (like Hookers, and then killing those Hookers for a refund). Then of course there's the one Call of Duty MW 2 airport level. To me Hatred is quite tame in comparison. It's not often I get into a isometric shoot

That's the NSA for you. You'd be surprised what else they (and other agencies) have done over the years to screw us in the name of "safety". Unfortunately when people find out legitimate information on things like this people don't believe them and they instantly get labeled as a nut job or conspiracy theorist. Look up the history of the OSS some time. Some of what they did back in the day will knock your socks off.

[quote who="BuckGodot" reply="137" id="3557502"] Sigh. Give me a bit. [e digicons]:P[/e] Here's what I'll do. I'll put in the three files necessary (with a modified MapSizeDefs) in a single zipped file and throw it on my Google Drive account. It will be the base 101 settings though, so you're not getting 1500 planets on Immense. Sorry. [e digicons]:P[/e] The only thing I have to think about is the MaxHabita

Dude you're The Champion!!! I took those 3 files from your 1.01, edited the MaxHabitablePlanets> line where you said, and now on the Immense entry I can put in those variables and it's AWESOME!!!! Colonize All netted 1008 planets. That's good enough for a 20 player game. I might even drop it down by a few hundred. On Immense size that fills in everything perfectly on Scattered, which was all I needed to be happy. [e digi

[quote who="BuckGodot" reply="134" id="3557495"] Yeppers. Works. [e digicons]:)[/e] Copying over the 1.01 StarSystemDefs.xml and the 1.01 MapSetupDefs.xml to my mod folder WITH a modified 1.01 MapSizeDefs file gave me my standard 1500 colonizable planets or so. Make SURE you put in MaxHabitablePlanets> for each map size and make it high (I put it at 2500 on Insane just to be safe. [e digic

[quote who="BuckGodot" reply="133" id="3557491"] Did a super quick look and I got a modified MapSizeDefs file to work. I took the 1.01 XML I put up and added MaxHabitablePlanets>XXXXX MaxHabitablePlanets> to each map size. I put it BEFORE the Rift generation entry ( ), and it appears to be working. Did a quick test and I have 713 planets ge

[quote who="joeball123" reply="23" id="3557489"] Top of the main screen, click the button that says Govern, then go to the Colonies tab. There's a list there that can be sorted by name, planet class, population, influence, approval, research output, net income, and manufacturing output. Only works for your colonies, though. [/quote] Yeap I saw that one. I was thinking from the main screen, where your colonies are listed on the right hand side. There should be lit

[quote who="BuckGodot" reply="130" id="3557483"] Sorry, I mean MapSizeDefs. Apologies. Too many similarly sounding XMLs. [e digicons];)[/e] I'll take a look and see what's going on with that Rift error message you have in your next post in just a bit. [/quote] LoL no worries. Made that mistake plenty myself. All I want to do is have a Immense system with the star and planet modifiers like they were..lol. This really shouldn

Also if you need help with the pics themselves let me know. I can convert formats and resize for people if need be.

I couldn't get custom pics to work from the "mods" folder in documents either. Use the Factions Folder in the Documents\My Games\GalCiv3. Drop your pictures in the 4 folders inside the factions folder and if they're the right size and format "PNG" they should show up. Some of the modding functionality doesn't work from the "mod" folder yet from what I understand.

Not sure if it's mentioned already but there's no way to sort planets either. Not by size or population or anything, unless I'm missing a screen that sorts them somewhere.

Yeah just dropping them in from version 1.01 isn't working. I keep getting a code error: \common\Galactic Civilizations III/Data/Game\MapSizeDefs.xml(146,12): error: element 'RiftAppearanceChance' is not allowed for content model (internal name~really long string over and over) From MapSizeDefs

[quote who="BuckGodot" reply="125" id="3557461"] Thanks. [e digicons]:)[/e] You very probably will need to add MaxHabitablePlanets> to MapSetupDefs as at least one other poster noted it crashed without it. Make it something high, and you should be fine. [e digicons];)[/e] But if you can get it to work without it, that'll be great news as well. [e digicons]:)[/e] [/quote] I can find MaxHabitablePlanets > in MapSizeD

lol Nice BuckGodot +1 for you my friend. I'm going to drop these map xml's straight in the current build and see what happens.

[quote who="BuckGodot" reply="109" id="3557345"] Quoting RavenX, reply 108 Can you zip up the two map xml's from that version we're all needing and host them? That would be awesome [e digicons]:)[/e] . I'm not actually signed up to any hosting services. Might sniff around Dropbox and see i

[quote who="Frogboy" reply="82" id="3557203"] We have a poll. It's the Steam data. Unless you're suggesting that a disporportionate percentage of people who play offline also play the largest maps. Look, just change the XML if you want bigger maps than what we provide. [/quote] Is the Steam data telling you the map sizes being played on? Not sure if online multiplayer is working or not, haven't tried, but that would definitely account for people playing o

[quote who="erischild" reply="88" id="3557231"] On the other hand, I do appreciate the fact that Frogboy and Stardock pay attention to all of their users, not just the <1% vocal minority posters on this forum. (and I count myself as one of the <1% ) It shows that they are a business, not a hobby. It is one of the reasons I can be confident they will be around for a long time supporting and growing this game. I also dislike the judgement implied in "the lowes

[quote who="naselus" reply="78" id="3557188"] all in galciv 3\data\games. Mapsetupdefs.xml allows you to change the modifiers applied to the base. If you have enough stars and dead worlds, but want to increase the number of habitables without adding more stars/resources/asteroids etc, you'd change the numbers in here. Mapsizedefs.xml allow you to alter the Base (which seems to be the constant used for most map features) and to change the maximum number of habita

[quote who="Thorrbert" reply="72" id="3557124"] <br style="font: 13px/18px Arial, Hel

I actually think this all sounded organic and awesome. That's a good strategy. The only real lack here is the player should be presented with some minimal info on what's being given/surrendered and given a choice whether to take it or not as econundrum1 suggests here. [quote who="econundrum1" reply="2" id="3555655"] I agree you should ha

[quote who="Frogboy" reply="66" id="3557082"] We balanced the numbers in beta based on what beta testers had. And the founders had substantially better systems than most people. The actual values on planets is in the XML, anyone can change it. So if you want to have 25,000 habitable planet on a map size 20X bigger than insane, you can do that. [/quote] Indeed. I'd say the majority of the customer base for this game has what you and I would at lea