Maiden666

[quote who="marigoldran" reply="23" id="3587771"] If you guys think my post style is childish and immature, so what? I don't know who you are, and you don't know who am I . Why should I care what you think of me personally? Do we know each other in real life? Consequently, your opinions of my posting style are unimportant. Consequently I will do as I wish. As long as I do not insult you personally (which I have not done), and keep my statements grounded in fact,

[quote who="marigoldran" reply="19" id="3587686"] I think you had to research trade to get freighters, right? There were better things to research as I recall. [/quote] Getting trade was fairly easy as it is an early tech whose prereqs were very low in cost and totally necessary if you wanted to speak to the AI, besides you also got several other bonuses and abilities (like Econ Cap improvement...) or you simply took it from the Korx. Besides, your (vali

[quote who="marigoldran" reply="14" id="3587591"]Gal Civ III gives away economic bonuses like an evil step mother handing out apples. Makes the game boring, and repetitive. That's the main point behind the thread. All other considerations are unimportant and secondary. It's quite clear you've missed the main point behind this thread. [/quote] Judging from your others threads the only thing you really found interesting is finding exploits, then

[quote who="Frogboy" reply="9" id="3586856"] When we do replace the per planet production wheel, we're not going to just take it out and not put something 3else there. Instead, you'll have a system that will allow you to emphasize a particular focus for the planet. It won't command your citizens to all go work in factories. Rather, it'll be more like providing subsidies to citizens who choose to work in factories or labs or what have you. [/quote] What would

[quote who="Lord_of_Void" reply="9" id="3585050"] Removal of the wheel is a wise decision and they promised there will be something else instead (maybe on civ level like in GC2) It has been stated several times that this game is not about micro-MGMT, but about CIV level decisions - that is the main argument against a tactical combat simulation part as well so why have a feature to have literally unlimited options to configure each planet to? [/quote] In GC2 the

[quote who="Empress_Fujiko" reply="6" id="3579680"] If it ignores enemies too, why is it called "guard"? [/quote] Because if it wouldn't you could lure that ship away. Let's say you want a ship to guard a specific spot, if that ship would fly off to attack a close enemy it would run into the risk of not getting back in one turn, leaving the spot exposed to be attacked or taken by others. Nevertheless, both options are sub-optimal at best. What we need

In GC2 shiptemplates could hold functional modules - however, only for their outward design, they were actually without function (*). So, essentially, one could use all available mods - functional or not - to make a design without any limitation whatsoever. That this is not possible right now because of blablabla is just a lame excuse - the game could simply be coded to work like the prequel did and that would be the best solution, and given the fact that the code already exists it sh

TBH devs should have just taken up the game where TOTA ended, as of now, it's much mor eincomplete and who really cares about 64 bit or better gfx for a strategy game?

Thank God the american faction never builds into foreign ZOI, like their McDonald's econ buildings or Monsanto farming [e digicons]x_x[/e] [quote]but it leaves a slightly unfinished expression.[/quote] it's really just in the beginning phases. frequent updates are to come over the next decade with additional DLC, and because alot+the AI as well is datadriven, the modding capabilities are enormously. So it can - and will - get better if you just give it some time

I don't think that the ships are landing on that rallypoint "at once" - but rather one by one, because the calculations for each ship is done individually as well. What we need is a RallyPoint that creates a fleet when 2 or more ships stand on that point, and everytime a new ship enter this point the game has to check if there's still space enough available in those fleet(s) and if true, add new incoming ships to them. If untrue, create a new fleet and put the ships there. It should f

[quote who="Presto1914" reply="6" id="3568618"] But, it should just say 'player 3 won by ascension'. [/quote] it should even warn the player a few turns before an AI can complete certain win conditions...

[quote who="naselus" reply="30" id="3567687"] Yes, but that's not the implication I'm making. I'm not claiming you can fall 'through' a black hole (like somne cheap 1950s pulp novel ), but rather than as you enter a black hole the laws of physics break down. [/quote] What laws exactly? That photons are pulled back? The curvature of spacetime allows for greater values than c, this is not a contradiction of Einstein's theories. This also explains the i

[quote who="naselus" reply="27" id="3567631"] As to whether the laws of physics can be altered, well, yes, they can. That's how Black Holes work. The laws of physics change once you cross the event horizon. It's arguable if you're still in the universe at that point, And with regard to 11 dimensions, we exist in 11 but only perceive 3 (4 if you want to include time, though really we don't have any free action in it). [/quote] Alot of this is debatable.<

[quote who="naselus" reply="22" id="3567537"] Irrelevant. If you are genetically modifying the organism, you can specialize it to the point where it attacks metal preferentially. We're working on a nano-scale at this point. 'Organic' is just carbon compared to silicon at the scale we're looking at. IF you insist that biologicals must be organic (which they really don't, as it's arguable just how alive some micro-orgnisms are - prions, for example, are basically ju

[quote who="peteincary2" reply="18" id="3567351"] Completely unrealistic? Are you saying that it is has to be something in existence today for it to be realistic??? There also is not a single antimatter torpedo in existence today, would you suggest that be removed from the game too? And no Zero G Arenas that I know of either. Not sure how far the government is into developing the Doom Ray, but I'm pretty sure we are at least several years away from that being realistic too. Etc

Just that this explanation is completely unrealistic and would even further drag away from the immersion of the game. There is not a single biological or chemical weapon in existance which has been designed specifically to kill humans that would also kill a tank or an airplane. Now you could say that immersion is totally irrelevant to the balance or totally irrelevant to a TBS but on the other hand having some specific techs or mechanics not working against certain factions or races e

I'm sure Yor aren't made from simple metal but alloys which don't rust, otherwise they couldn't go outside during rain, and also an atmosphere may hold water anyway that will corrode them over time. And because they don't need to breath and can withstand pressure much better than carbonbased landlifeforms they shouldn't have difficulty surviving Tital Waves, just like Data in ST they sink to the ground and walk back to land. Guess they don't have openl

If you are that kind of person that plays to the very end your map is going to look like that all AI planets are taken, all their ships defeated, you get it.... I'm not sure what exactly you're asking for - but are you asking for a mechanism that will do that automatically for you? Such a thing usually features a high risk of getting out of hand in some scenarios... just like AIs at one point all surrendering to one another... maybe it could be that influence/cultureflip could

Well, one thing is for certain, if you specialize an/the AI to pick a certain strategies, a human can build a tactic around it and exploit it sooner or later. It usually just a matter of playing a few games a realizing that specific patterns always show up. For example, you've proposed tat the AI should flee from unbeatable forces and give planets up in order to regroup, which, consequently means also that the AI should engage hostiles if the chances are great he is going to destr

Not at all [e digicons]:thumbsup:[/e] . The first list I took manually out from a software called "Stellarium", which makes you see the sky on your computer screen. Wolf 359 is very hard to see there because it is brown dwarf star. Good to have wikipedia around for this :)

[quote who="marigoldran" reply="59" id="3562414"] The difference in Gal Civ II is that you couldn't expand as quickly because your economy would crash. As a result the AI APPEARED to be stronger. [/quote] then you did it wrong, you could either (a) techtrade/broker (b) rely on anomalies with add. surveyors (c) breeder SA (d) build only market center/ fertility clinics initially to take you up any of the above methods worked a

[quote who="marigoldran" reply="18" id="3562584"] Would you rather have the AI run away from superior fleets it can't beat or TOWARDS superior fleets it can't beat? [/quote] they should fight because then, there's at least a small fight that transports are destroyed and the conquest of planets is delayed. keeping planets (=production) is one of the main goal in a war, because a war ultimately is a comparison of military prod output with technology level act

think it would be nearly impossible for an AI to be perfect the game has too many possibilities of what to do. but the AI should not cooperate when being exploited by the player. surely this is or can be frustrating for new players when they don't get what they're asking for, but such things could be part of higher routines that aren't used for beginner, normal diff. another prob is with engines and range. the AI put so much range on ships sometimes they fly in regions com

[quote] If you hate dealing with lots of colonies, why do you play large/abundant maps?[/quote] [quote who="erischild" reply="103" id="3562295"] For me, and many others, large maps are the primary attraction of GalCiv. There are a profusion of issues being raised in this thread. This one is the lack of efficient empire management tools. GC2 had such tools in place. They weren't perfect, but they helped a lot. I like the shape and

I just think that a colony ship without any colonists shouldn't be able to create a colony at all. Such a ship should stop at a planet with an error warning. Because, it's perfectly fine if someone upgrades a ship to a colony ship and takes it to a planet to load some people in.