Yeller123

You don't think removing a faction because of fluff is a bit overkill? Edit: I agree that a game feels better when everything in it tells a cohesive story, but cutting a huge piece of content from the base game because the writing doesn't match their fluff won't make the game better. And given that there are game play bugs and balance issues still being worked on there are bigger fish to fry imo.

That goes a ways towards explaining why fighters are so over powered.

There was some sort of bug that was making influence calculations wrong. From the 5.2 patch notes: " Fixed an issue where influence would be incorrectly calculated" I also noticed that there are some diplomatic penalties planed for taking over/threatening planets with culture. I think they just haven't been fully implemented yet. Hopefully the combination will make things more balanced. - <

I think offering a treaty requires good relations. Could that be the problem?

The temple is suppose to be unique building. The bug I think is that until you finish a unique building the game lets you start as many as you want.

[quote who="Blaze of Glory" reply="4" id="3535437"] I also don't like benevolent and pragmatic relations is the same as benevolent and malevolent relations. [/quote] I agree, imo one step away should be neutral. That way only good and evil would dislike each other for ideology. It would fit with the diplomacy bonuses given by the neutral tree.

[quote who="SBFMadDjinn" reply="3" id="3535311"] edit: though, I think the combat simulator hurts the small ships more than the larger ones wrt in combat speed due to the small ships getting to the enemy first adn getting shot first. [/quote] Large ships tend to waste a lot of their fire power atm. If they could spit fire I'd definitely agree that the smaller ships should out gun them. But at the moment a huge hull will swat one

You could, but then you'd have to increase the capacity of the larger hulls to keep it balanced and you'd end up in a similar place to where you started. Keep in mind small hulls already have a much higher tactical speed (ie the speed boat). But for travelling long distances larger hulls (ie an aircraft carrier) should have the advantage. A speed boat racing an aircraft carrier would certainly accelerate more quickly, and have a higher top speed. But

[quote who="Blaze of Glory" reply="10" id="3535275"] Well, that was CIV and this isn't. Sorry but true. However, it could be like total war where there would be a massive diplomacy hit. That seems pretty fair. Do that and others DoW on you easier with little to no diplomacy hit since you were untrustworthy. [/quote] Ya, the AI evaluating trustworthiness would be great. Being trustworthy should be worth something, but more importantly cheeseing the

It would help slightly if credits per turn and trade resources had some kind of end date. But as far as I can tell you get them from the AI forever.

[quote who="peregrine23" reply="1" id="3527379"] There are no weapons in GCIII that can fire from one hex to another, so as long as a ship doesn't enter the actual tile of a starbase or shipyard it is staying out of range of their weapons. [/quote] You could make it work with the fluff by saying the starbase is launching drones or fighters.

[quote who="Franco fx" reply="5" id="3533809"] Ahh, so this trait is giving you planets that you are going to get is 10 turns anyway. Not so powerful after all, if it is working as intended Are you finding culture flips to be too easy? I am not. I won an influence victory on an immense map but it took over 300 turns and did not come easy. I could have won a military victory long before that. I don't understand how anyone can say that the AI is easy to flip

[quote who="drakkos137" reply="6" id="3533163"] The thing we're all missing here is, if you're taking them over culturally, and they are happy with your culture, then of course, they aren't going to respond militarily, in fact, they'll tighten the relationship between your two people, until, at its logical conclusion, the two become one. [/quote] The people on the planets enveloped by your influence want to change sides, but its doubtful their

[quote who="Kyricus" reply="3" id="3533151"] Even more surprising was the diplomacy menu, they were still happy with me! [/quote] Maybe a two tiered solution. Overwhelming culture flips normally (ie if they colonize a planet in the heart of your empire you should have a decent chance of being able to flip it without issue) but flipping planets at the current strength requires something like a declaration of war that

I think the biggest problem with culture is that you only need one planet to win with it. Culture needs to be weaker at large distances than it currently is.

Similar in function to what I suggested above, but perhaps a military star base could maintain mine fields around planets, shipyards, and star bases within its radius. Mines could damage ships (and/or destroy cargo hulls). They could also remove a percentage of attacking troops (the troop modules hit mines on the way down).

Yes, they've said in the streams that improvements are on the way.

I like the idea of military star bases being able to protect planets within their radius. Perhaps they could be equipped with long range weapons/fighters that would do a very small amount of damage each turn to every enemy ship inside their radius. That way enemy transports couldn't move in until the military star base was destroyed. Edit: You could justify laser/mass driver attacks at that range lore wise by saying the star base was launching dron

[quote who="Meglobob" reply="19" id="3527469"] 1. Any future DLC released are free to you, players like me after pay. Brad says GC3 will have a 7 year development life and there will be lots and lots of DLC, all free to founders I assume. Note Brad also says there will be expansions and everyone will after pay for those. [/quote] Just to clarify, the people who paid $100 get all the expansions and dlc. From&

For some reason the most recent update I can see is 06/11/2014. Anyone know why?

Don't forget that the AI has to do more than win. An AI that only tries to win gives you vanilla civ 5, which imo takes a lot of fun out of the game. In gal civ players need to be able to manipulate the AI. From simply researching diplomacy techs to get better trades and increased friendliness out of the AI to allying with it and keeping that alliance while the player goes for one of the victory conditions. The AIs also need to behave differently

Will we be able to use bink 1 or does it only work with bink 2?

Any chance this question could make it on? From the support forum: [quote who="pendrokar"] Galactic Civilizations 2 used Bink 1 ".bik" videos, while GalCiv 3 uses Bink 2. Bink 2 does not have publicly available tools with which to encode ".bk2" videos. I tried to have the XML point to a ".bik" file, but then it gets ignored. I also tried renaming a ".bik" file to ".bk2", but GalCiv 3 still thinks it is a Bink 2 video, which does not end well. On

I enjoyed my first game, but the AI certainly didn't help. I played on Apollo and won a domination victory on my first try. I had one AI lose a war while having over 50 000 energy in the bank. After the initial battle the AI would also just drip feed its new units into my army rather than trying to form a new front somewhere. They also never allied with each other. On the plus side the affinities played differently, and I lik

Unlocking Persuasion in the benevolence tree causes a crash. I tried 3 times from an auto save one turn back with the same result. Edit: oops, just read the faq. Ticket sent