DsRaider

I talk about this all the time in the Elemental Forum but the key to good distinct races is for them to actually play different. Resource boosts and different planet preferences are not enough. [quote who="UnleashedElf" reply="14" id="3419563"]3. The Drengin would be unique in that their economy operated heavily on slaves (maybe from the other worlds too, ex: Torians slaves). Strong weapons and troops, maybe strong (slave based) economy. Weak at diplomacy, culture, and maybe populati

[quote who="joeball123" reply="17" id="3413023"]Yes, it's reasonable that eventually you'd run out of resources in certain areas. It may even be reasonable that you could eventually deplete a star system of its economically viable resources. However, on the time-scale of GCII, and given its production levels, it is unreasonable that you could deplete planets and asteroid belts in a time frame which can impact the game, unless GCIII turns represent years and models actual mines rather

I could see the in space resources like asteroids depleting over time. Of course then new ones would have to pop up as well... Maybe you would need to get better and better mining tech to unlock more asteroids when your old ones deplete. I really like this idea because it makes maps more fluid and alive. So say your asteroid mine runs out so you research the next level only to find that the nearest one is just on the other side of a border. Thus you have to start a culture or physical

Nice to see carriers but I have to wonder about what they will do...

[quote who="jim_viebke" reply="293" id="3411743"]I'm glad to hear that Brad and the team are staying true to GC.[/quote] Well he didn't say some form of tactical combat wasn't in the game just that micromanaging every unit ala MOO2 was out. Which is good because I don't think anyone in this thread wanted that.

[quote who="mattiscool555" reply="29" id="3411537"]I'd see fighters in space kind of having a reverse history to fighters on earth where they'd make up the bulk of your early navy, but would take more of a secondary scouting/support role as larger and more advanced ships become available.[/quote] Hard to scout without FTL. Even with FTL small ships like frigates or corvettes would be much better for this because they would have all the things fighters don't like extended l

[quote who="yarodin" reply="22" id="3411387"]Would you mind me to tell why an atmosphere fighter is more useful than a space vessel?[/quote] I originally posted this in the Tactical thread. [quote]In space you are moving through vacuum so it is very different from moving through atmosphere. Large ships move so slowly because they displace large amounts of water. Small boats move much faster because they can skim over the top of the water, and fighters move even

I understand why some people think tactical battles would be a bad addition however I have to disagree. I think Stardock can develop a system that doesn't require tons of micromanagement, doesn't get too repetitive, doesn't give the players a huge advantage over the AI, and can be auto-resolved. To just leave any sort of control over ships out of the game is a huge drawback and totally unnecessary. For me having a say in how my fleets fight is a must. Watching them circle around l

Very very cool. I can't wait to see what it's capable of.

I like mega events that change the world and make maps more interesting more then little events that present you with moral choices and little rewards. Some ideas for universal events would be: Subspace Shift: All wormholes are randomly mixed up, and lead to different exits. Several new wormholes are created. Mysterious Signal: A mysterious signal travels through the galaxy. As a result new anomalies are created through the galaxy for everyone to explore. <p

I have always wanted to do this in Sins or other 4X games. It annoyed me to no end that Sins had long trade routes you could raid but it was pointless because you gained next to nothing from doing it. At the very least if other players have unguarded trade routes you should be able to run in and steal everything that isn't nailed down for a serious economic reward, and a serious penalty for the robbed player. A way to disguise the controller of you ships would be icing on the cake.

Even if tactical combat doesn't get added some major things need to change from GCII. The old system will not work at all for the reasons people have said before. A lot more depth needs to be added to ship design and counters somehow. Humans aren't going to make the same mistakes as AIs, unless they are really stupid they won't let you hard counter their fleet or put fleets in stupid places. This means ship design will become super boring in multiplayer as everyone just uses a lit

[quote who="psychoak" reply="155" id="3407036"]Properly modeled, it would be sheer dumb luck for a large projectile to hit a small strike craft, slightly less luck for a light speed beam weapon from a similarly cumbersome turret of size to do the same. The smaller and faster the turret, the simpler the task would get, and the less penetration it would have. Missiles would be similar, trading velocity and size for increased penetration and explosive power, for reduced maneuverability.[/quote]<

[quote who="screamingpalm" reply="152" id="3406926"]Rock Paper Scissors is a real system though. In Napoleonic times cavalry would force infantry into square so horse artillery would have a compacted area of targets, for example (plenty of other real world examples in all eras of warfare- certainly naval warfare being a good/better example). I think the issue comes in where there is a difference between subtlety (soft-counter v hard-counter). Any system that rewards the player that uses combi

[quote who="Frogboy" reply="22" id="3404680"] I think you guys will like what we're doing with the battles. I'm dying to talk about it but I'd be instantly killed off. I think it'll seem obvious in hindsight.[/quote] It implies they are changing something anyway.

Rock Paper Scissors systems only ever work because there so simple they are impossible to screw up. I would rather see a real system. Calling rock papers scissors strategic or even tactical is inaccurate to say the least. I would prefer a system where I have to think a little deeper then just looking at a my enemies units and building whatever their incredibly obvious weaknesses are. Doing that doesn't make me feel challenged it makes me think I'm playing a game for 6 year o

I would also like to see a system where you can give orders before combat, and where weapons are differentiated. In particular I would like to be able to break fleets into formations and give formations different orders. So that all my different types of ships aren't acting the same. I think different ranges for different weapon types is also must have. Your fleet would be divided into formations on your own turn and before combat you would give all your formations Stances and Pr