The Gal Civ 2 AI was the reason I played the game! Candidly, the Gal Civ design has never been my favorite (I like it, but not my favorite). But the AI brought such good challenge that I loved to keep playing it.
[quote who="peteincary2" reply="33" id="3561007"] I did some extensive testing last night and updated the Wiki Page for Ship Roles with the new information. [/quote] Very interesting, so if I understand this correctly, I should make missile boats support ships, this will cause them to stay in back and maximize their range.
[quote who="joeball123" reply="37" id="3560915"] This is only really an issue with escort-capital pairings because for some reason the developers chose to make it so that not one ship role preferentially targets capital ships before escorts. If it were the case that there was at least one ship type that actually prioritized going after capital ships, or if ships would act a bit more intelligently when faced by such an extreme difference in the capabilities of their potentia
I agree with maiden. you have to start with the best scenario for defenses. If they aren't worth it there then they aren't anywhere. from there it's a question of when defenses are worth it. also we are comparing defenses to hp, but that is really the wrong comparison. I can't really increase my hp or my defense, only with lots of durantium do I have that option. its really a question o
We probably need to see some combat sims on this one. Take a fleet of medium ships or something, load them with guns. Take another fleet, same config except you swap some of the weapons for suitable defense, and see how they perform. My gut tells me that once you have enough weapons to kill a ship in a few rounds, then defenses will be stronger than more guns, but no sense speculating when we can just find out.
I took a look at the sensor rebalance. Some of the sensors as currently written are actually mathematically useless right now (I don't the sensor array in a specific thread). Beyond that, I think the sensor paradigm is going in the wrong direction. Right now the lowest sensors are so cheap on mass that they are the easiest to stack, whereas the highest level sensors are extremely mass heavy. One example, for the cargo hull, the navigational sensor is the onl
[quote who="trims2u" reply="2" id="3560358"] The problem is that defenses degrade during the engagement, while weapons fire DOESN'T. So, the value of 1 point of defense degrades over time, while 1 Hull Point will always stop 1 point of weapons fire. [/quote] Another argument that could be solved if we actually knew how defenses really worked. From my own experiences though, 4 defense is worth much more than 4 hp. Defenses blunt damage, and while th
2 Navigational Sensors provide a Range: 4 Mass: 20 Cost: 18 Maint: 0 1 Sensor Array provides: Range: 4 Mass: 20 Cost: 65 Maintenance: .3 As it stands, the sensor array is 100% useless. Perhaps this was intended with some of decaying return effect that has been discussed, but without that, there is 0 benefit.
[quote who="joeball123" reply="28" id="3560266"] While it is true that a sensor range of 2R is not necessary twice as good as a sensor range of R, I would point out that it is less than or equal to twice as good as a sensor range of R, as far as early warning goes. [/quote] This may be one of our focuses of disagreement.
To the op, I would like to see that saved game so we can all see how you did it. to everyone else, back off the op a bit. the op is highlighting a potential exploit in the game...and this not some super cheese start that requires a lot of weird combinations. This is pretty simple to do. this doesn't mean the sky is falling, it doesn't mean the game is doomed. Just means it's an area that the devs need to look at.
[quote who="joeball123" reply="18" id="3559900"] Quoting Stalker0, reply 17 Looks like its time to fight math with math! The number of tiles observed by an object with a sensor range of R is equal to 3R^2 + 3R (+1 if you include the central tile, i.e. the tile containing your ship, station, or colony),
[quote who="ddvorak" reply="41" id="3559709"] The AI just doesn't get this. I see many AI planets I conquer where there's no attempt to specialize the planet. I see AI planets where there are no uses of the adjacency bonuses, or at least not wise uses. [/quote] I would agree with this. Honestly if the AI just did the following: 1) Forgo all building upgrades until every tile has a building (including terraforming). 2) Build building
Looks like its time to fight math with math! A cargo ship with 9 Sensor Arrays provides a range of 36. Strangely enough, without miniaturization bonuses none of the higher sensors provides any greater benefit (they take up too much mass to actually provide more range). So we have range 36 for 348 manu. This in circular area terms is 4071.504, but since for the most part we care about the part that looks out, lets cut that in half. So ultimately this Sensor Ship grants
While Manu cost is a factor, you have to be careful about weighing it too heavily. while a sensor ship does cost a lot more than a starbase sensor platform, it is hugely more powerful at that role. Further, because you don't need a lot of sensor ships, the Manu cost is not a large investment At all. It's a drop in the bucket compared to all of the manu you spend elsewhere. another consideration is that a manu world can get such high number
I think that ultimately the MB accomplishes what it needs to, I think it just takes too long to get there. 1) The bonuses should be a bit more frontloaded. 2) Some of the techs (and the military modules) can be consolidated to provide the bonuses more quickly. 3) The bonuses can apply to the starbases own weapons and defense, ensuring it is the strongest of the starbases to take out.
both sides of this argument have made their points crystal clear...so I think further debate is pointless. We will see what the devs decide. for me the argument is now around starbase sensors. If sensor stacking remains, starbase sensors should either be massively improved or removed, they serve no purpose in the game that another mechanic (sensor ship) doesn't do better. if sensor stacking is reduced in some way, starbases sensors should be adapted
One thing they added recently is resistance reduces enemy influence, making it harder to culture flip. i think resistance is weakish but not too bad, personally I think planetary defense is weaker...or at least more narrow
Right now, the only thing I use rush buying for other than early colony ships, is upgrading buildings on science worlds. I save a lot of science by not having to slide the slider to manu to build the buildings.
I would say the thulium archive is a bit on the weak side. the solar plant I also avoid, just not quite with it. the capitals are just fine, they are expensive but very powerful. honestly I think the regular upgrades are some of the weakest. The amount of investment it takes to get to those high end buildings can take 100 turns or more to pay for themselves. i did a Math check a while back and found it was better to do all the standard ter
[quote who="00zim00" reply="130" id="3556982"] Speaking of useless, I wish you could make trade resources better with techs or something. Later in the game I feel like just destroying most of them as you can replace them with much better improvements. Do the resources just add a 5% per planet? I wish they instead modified your TOTAL research , manufacturing etc. Instead of a per planet bases. [/quote] While the adjacency they provide are for the planet, the actua
[quote who="trims2u" reply="81" id="3556495"] Quoting AlienFromBeyond, reply 78 Quoting trims2u, reply 56 Also, I notice
[quote who="Yavrim" reply="8" id="3556034"] I do feel the cost to upgrade is way too high, with Xeno factory perhaps it should have been +15 to upgrade instead of +45 (ie so the total cost of basic factory and Xeno combined is 45 as opposed to 75 as it now stands [/quote] I do agree with this. I ran some optimization exercises a while back and determined that the upgrades are often not that great. If you can't buy them, its often not worth spending manu on th
[quote who="Scynix" reply="50" id="3556008"] My only real complaint about this is the fact that, from the perspective of someone who predominantly plays 4X/Strategy games against living people and not AI, I've always felt the AI in *every game* since the 80's has had serious deficiencies, and has essentially never improved. These games will get a lot better if we can move past trying to make a shitty AI into a less-shitty AI and focus purely on game/gameplay desi
In summary, this is intended behavior. Unlike in Gal Civ 2, upgrades cannot be built directly, you have to upgrade each step in turn.
I like the population changes. Its harder to get the highest numbers, but population overall is stronger. I think its a good change...and just more intuitive to the player.