DMF

[quote who="Publius of NV" reply="8" id="3690555"] Well, I can't speak authoritatively since I have Crusade and my memory of the base game are fading. Crusade deducts the admins as soon as you build a constructor. Sorry for the incorrect guess. [/quote] So you build two ctors, they get blown up, and you lose two Admins? I don't like that at all!

The section on roles is good, as I mentioned in another thread. But the section on combat is perfunctory at best. The section(s) on ship design are little more than recitations of Designer mechanics. And there are topics (e.g. Administrators) that just aren't there. The problem with depending on a player-maintained wiki is that the players rarely know the logic behind game occurrences. As far as I can determine, what is in the wiki is, in most cases, litt

DVCS = distributed version control system I'm sure SD has one internal to the company. Compatibility questionable, and unless you intend that they expose the code base too, they would have to maintain two distinct repositories. Potential modders (e.g. me) aren't interested in paying monthly fees for long-term access to a short-term project. Now, if GC were an open source, community project, your

There are still people playing the older versions. If I have a save game old enough, I'm going to change strategy. Instead of going after the Drengin infrastructure, I'll leave it intact with will have them producing more ships and keeping the ^%#@ Thalan engaged, meanwhile, largely shielded in the back (I had to take a planet just to be able to get to the Drengin) I will build enough to produce attack ships and transports. That means that the scenario

1.03 is "current". It's hard to say that it's out of date because there is so little specific in it. Rather than "manual", the title should be "quick start guide". Six pages on ships and no mention of combat? or how to move them?! And a few statements that are just wrong: With enough constructors, you can eventually develop a starbase with full mining, researching, cultural and military capabilities. Sorry, no

Yes, one Admin per base. But you can't build two bases on the same constructor. Both modules must be used on the same base. (Note that using a multi-point constructor to build a Shipyard is possible, but wastes any modules past the first.) Grintch, not broken. It works fine (at least pre-2.5).

If the one Admin per constructor theory were true, that would explain it because I did that very thing - took the three constructors. But the theory is completely bogus . Taking them did not cost Admins, and the dozens of multi-point constructors in the game did not cost any Admins. Only the construction of a Starbase costs Admins. (at least, that's what I thought.) Whatever it was that cost the Admins, it was after I had spent the "last"

In GCII I was very effective concentrating on defense and hit points. My fleets would survive to shoot twice - a lot like having twice as many fleets. Now I find that rather than a "next generation" of GC, in terms of combat it is an entirely different game where that strategy doesn't work. IME even well defended ships will usually lose to a ship that is not nearly as well defended, but has some moderate edge in firepower. I do think the addition of roles and t

Again, this is 2.3.3 BASE GAME. I am still most curious about how one loses Administrators without using them. Does planetary morale have any effect?

The word "Administrator" is never mentioned neither in the Manual nor in the Wiki. Where do they come from? How do you get more? What techs or other attributes affect them? How are they used? How are they overused? (esp. how did I suddenly end up with -3 ?) I see that there are a bunch of guides out there. Do any address the matter of Administrators?

Yes it does. I'm playing the base game so there are no Citizens. I have no idea how Admins are produced, save through increasing Admin ability through research. I started with 8 and that never increased with population, new colonies, or production. Yes I have Pollen (and have had previously) but it appears to have no effect on anything. Now, it that all that a Military Starbase does? +1 to each attribute? The things are totally useless unless you go wit

I'd rather that it be addressed by Stardock. There's rules, right? Is it too much to ask what they are ??

[quote]3. Switch defense type: The game doesn't allow you to control what defense type you use. [/quote] Amen, brother. I've posted on this already. No response. Last time it was Shields against a gunner; this time it's Armor against a beamer. It's like the Designer is working against the player!

WTF is going on with Administrators?? I max out my starbases so have zero Administrators. Suddenly the dashboard tells me that I have -3 Administrators and I've done nothing! I had to take down all but two of my starbases to get 3 Administrators to build three f*g WORTHLESS Military starbases. +3 ?? Big whooptee deal! Maybe the universe was different when you were a grasshopper. <

Cheez, Hero. You withdraw funding and you make the game later.

Yeah, except we haven't seen any Arceans. I got a DLC with hopes that I'd get the race - one of my favorites - but no. I have been fortifying a bunch of starbases expecting some sort of an assault, but we have theater superiority. Hmm. Flip it around. Nice idea. Thanks.

Playing the second scenario where one has to team with the Thalans to beat back the Drengin and clear the route to Earth. Apparently the overall goal is to make nice to enlist the Thalans against the bad guys (they're suspicious because they think we're going to destroy the universe doing it) and that part is going well. We're dominating the space lanes, killing random ships, starbases, and shipyards.) Have taken a minor planet. The problem is, how do we clean out th

?? That's not my understanding. Wiki: "Support ships start in the furthest back starting position and will not advance forward until" [there's no one else left]. Fighters deploy according to their role, not that of the carrier.

frickin quote button

Make it not flat. Of course, the hexes would not be the same size, but they don't need to be. My own self, I think a globe is over the top, especially if it had to rotate - or be rotated. But it is an interesting idea. I'd like to see an implementation to confirm my doubts.

IMO "faction" is a good term to represent either a single organization or a group of them. Neither "race" nor "team" would work as well. I asked the question wondering whether the combined power of a team would be represented in the Faction Power display.

[quote who="DMF" reply="2" id="3690378"] I trust that the 1/3 off-type effect from GC-old still applies. ? E.g. Ship with 6 Beam defense and no Kinetic defense gear has an effective 6/3=2 Kinetic defense rating. [/quote] Edited : bad math

That's a nasty one. Good catch.

I started a ST:D thread. It deserves its own.

I was favorably impressed with Star Trek: Discovery tonight. It wasn't great, but it's a good start, and given the chance I'll watch more. A couple of negatives: Guest starring Michele Yeoh? What, you people don't have the budget or sense to hire her as a regular? The GODAWFUL volume of commercials. It's like they were trying to recoup the entire investment in the fi