erischild

I haven't been able to get my games past crashes enough to be really late game, or past the point I feel big enough to just smash everybody, So, I am listening to some of the points being made and applying it to my games and thoughts as I get further and further. I like accommodating multiple constructor modules. I think it is an opportunity for a couple of tech developments and specialized miniaturization, and maybe a racial trait. I like that it would stack wit

[quote who="Rincewind57" reply="16" id="3536360"] I'll add my name here just to increase the numbers complaining about constructor spam. What I find most interesting is the lack of posters defending it. Fingers crossed on persuading the devs [e digicons]:)[/e] [e digicons]:P[/e] [/quote] I like constructors. It's not a popular opinion in this particular thread, but there it is. I understand reducing managment load, but some of the sugge

Tsk, tsk. All your Terran biases are showing. To another race, that is the epitome of chic and sexiness. Maybe. Haven't you had your mandatory Galactic Species Inclusivity and Sensitivity training? I hear they are still working on the Drengin section. It turns out "Inclusivity" translates as "add it to the recipe" in Drengin.

If a shipyard is further than 6 tiles from a planet, a colony ship in that shipyard cannot take population from that planet. If all you had were distant planets as sponsors, you could build colony ships, but not populate them. You could fly the empty ship to a planet and pick up people that way.

[quote who="SBFMadDjinn" reply="1" id="3535397"] I agree on the point wrt the 'bonus point' ideology buildings. I'm fine with the +X/turn as long as they come later in the ideology trees than they do right now. What I dislike, and is tied to colonization, is the buildings in the ideology tree that give a flat +X for building it. The only 'true' strategy is to take that early then spam it on all colonies. You can then sell it afterwar

As with all great art, the interpretation is open to the viewer. I think we founders came up with great names! I don't care what anybody else thinks!! I'm glad you got a kick out of it. I think that is the best thing to do with some of these names. I come up with quick little flashes of stories of settlers who named their system out of some pique or sentiment or really strange reason. GalCiv leaves a lot of space in its lore for you

The reason to have pirates right now is to make life hard for survey ships. I am not sure why that is unclear to anyone. It is the only thing they do. As they develop the role of pirates, we will see what happens. They promise something more complex and fleshed out. In the meantime, it is only a Survey action that will reveal hidden pirates. No survey, no pirates. We may find other ways to trigger pirates in the future. Watch out and be careful!

[quote who="Colgul" reply="10" id="3535091"] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Zs_qG1vPY_s We've all seen the trailer for Galciv 3 (excellent btw!) If you look 0:45 onwards, this is what I would like to be as a representation of the ingame graphics for fleet warfare. The thing is in the past it was pretty much standard fare to have an amazing looking trailer for a game and accept that the ingame graphics would be no w

I don't put starbases around single planets.. I put starbases around clusters of 3 or more planets. Paying all that maintenance for just one planet's bonuses doesn't make sense to me. (If the present maintenance costs make that a viable solution, maybe they can be balanced better. You could stack all the starbases you want around a single planet and still not have it pay off.) I can generally wrap three starbases around three planets without struggle.

You are going to have to explain to me just where you think GC3 is wanting in visual presentation. I can see well drawn nebulae, planets, stars, and other features. I can watch fully rendered versions of ships I create go out in battle with flashy explosions and everything.. And they keep making it better! I have a wonderfully informative high level strategic view that resolves to 3D the moment I zoom in. I'm all for eye candy. What do you t

There was a beta package at the same time as the founders package. You actually got a forum badge for it. I know because I went for that. I wouldn't have gotten the Alpha. Then Stardock let you upgrade to full Founders for a while, and I wised up and went for that. That upgrade offer expired when the founder's offer expired. At this point I suspect you were indeed part of the early release and not part of the initial Beta-only founders package that

I have a ticket in for this condition also.

I disagree. I like the system as is. It shouldn't be possible to totally trick out a star system like you are describing. It should be a case of diminishing returns. This insistence that anything less than full optimal is somehow unacceptable just does not work for me. You compare a non-spammer with a spammer as though I were competing against someone desperately. That is not my mindset. Maybe you are talking multiplayer. If so, say so, and

We could have a vote. I'm for new buildings following the upgrade path. I have never been in a position where I could build a modern building in one turn, never. I can only imagine it is a tiny fraction of the players who do get there. It seems a very extreme condition. I have no problem letting people have it both ways, but I think the defaults should be the settings comfortable and useful to the most players.

The game is not eating your CPU. It is using your CPU. It shows you how accustomed to sloppy inefficient programming we have all become. Seeing our CPUs actually being used instead of sitting there idle is a fairly new thing and Stardock is leading the way. But I can't blame anybody for being startled when they see it for the first time. One of the tricks Stardock is using is having all your idle time be spent in the AI looking and evaluating.&nbsp

I suspect that the UP meetings are affected by how we set up our galaxies and how we explore. I meet the other races fairly soon and my UP triggers up fairly soon after. I'm glad it's okay to have fun now. It used to be officially denied, but I was having fun anyway.

Nice stream. Thanks for the opportunity.

Yeah, thanks! I had a crash report I was trying to get through and it worked. I'm back to feeling like I am contributing to the bug hunt!

Good points! More feedback on battle viewer... Cinematic needs to have its clips be a little longer and possibly a little more random in length. It isn't as ADD fast edit as it used to be and I appreciate that. I get shots that have ships go through the camera. Although that does interesting things with my hollow designs, overall, it's bad for visualization immersion. I still think you need cinematic angles that slew, pan, and ti

That many centuries from now, the technologies we are implicitly assuming, the commercial, industrial, and political changes. All these provide enough leverage for a clever imagination to put farms wherever they need to be. Even a not so clever imagination like mine.

I am trying to upload the 13 meg zip file created by the support tool. Is that too big?

Last game it was in my second settled star system. I cannot remember a time I didn't find a new local planet. I think it has always been nearby somewhere.

I ran Insane size map on my 8 gig system on old processor and had no crashes. Some lag, but nothing horrible. I didn't go too many turns on that map. I have another 8 gig ram on order and am eagerly waiting. Had a crash on Immense and am trying to submit a ticket. Meanwhile, I am playing with the shipyard, again.

I like a company that keeps its promises. :)

Hmm. This is a new one for me. Looked into my steam client and saw a download scheduled for about two hours later. There was a "download now" button and I tried that. It downloaded and I am off to go play space emperor before my next scheduled business meeting. Later, I can get serious about it.