Yup all to true. Paul sis say the same thing in the last stream and that they would be tweaked.
a0152570
[quote who="Publius of NV" reply="4" id="3519029"] Quoting DivineWrath, reply 1 Something that I would like is to be able to see (from the starbase screen) is a small map of where it is at and its area of effect. I'm thinking a civilization game style map. I asked for something like this w
Beta4. Prob already known but… Numbers are not consistent. E.g. laser range increase is 0.6; missile range increase is shown as 50% Does the laser 0.6 currently translate into a 60% increase ?
Thanks DivineWrath , The thing that really confuses me is why the designer and shipyard lists are different. Bamdorf : Yup i do realize, just figured i try the squeaky wheel approach. &
Thesw Man that was a quick response, thanks for the info.
[quote who="Larsenex" reply="4" id="3518744"] here are a lot of bugs in the fight viewer. It was not ready for release. Stardock should get an F for this "beta" it's much closer to alpha. [/quote] Yea but an A for effort [e digicons]:thumbsup:[/e] . Actually its been well known from the start that the classical definitions of alpha /beta don't apply. I agree, in those terms GC3 fits closer to an alpha but the whole purpose is to generate feedback, ideas,
[quote who="Thecw" reply="6" id="3518755"] The real need for the templates is that (custom) ship classes use them to allow the auto ship designer to generate the various versions of that ship. So there is a Terran_Scout template (in "steamapps\common\Galactic Civilizations III\Designs") which in combination with the TerranScout class (as defined in ShipClassDefs.xml) and the ScoutBlueprint (as defined in ShipBlueprintDefs.xml) allow the auto ship designer to create the various incarnatio
[quote who="ayork1" reply="3" id="3518737"] I think the designers want you use to use tiny ships as cannon fodder. If you had 10 tiny and a massive with kinetic guns it would tear things up. Haven't tried a carrier/kinetic combo yet, but it seems like it would be extremely deadly. [/quote] IT IS! [e digicons]:grin:[/e] . IMHO it is OP right now and will need to be nerfed some, exploit it while you can. The tiny ships as
[quote who="Taslios" reply="2" id="3518727"] Either way, some indication of what the ranges are would be nice... [/quote] Completely agree. I see no reason why they can't put range (and firing rate) into the weapon description right along with mass, damage.. etc. Larsenex 's tips are good, yes you need to remove weapons to
Thanks all for the info. I have been avoiding actual ship design as they are not likely to be compatible from release to release. I am just using game ships and changing component and if i saved it with template checked i couldn't find it again. Appreciate the explanations.
In GC2 you got some production credit when changing out one building for another (e.g. Mfg bld->research bld). In GC3 you first destroy the old building then rebuild the desired one from scratch. I can understand why you did this and would not mind so much if you got something back when destroying it. If you don’t want to go back to the GC2 method, the simplest may be to provide cash for scrap recovered form buildings destruction. With t
Here is a dear dummy question. What does save ship as a template do? (Vs not checking in upon saving a new ship design)
When my fleet attacks a starbase, sometimes my missiles and/or kinetic weapons are fired off in a random 360 degree direction as displayed in the battle viewer. They seem to register correctly as hit/miss on target despite being shown going away from it.
I know you know this .. but please move it up on your priority list. 1) The ship list (in shipyard/ designer) is really unmanageable, it has gotten so big and I can’t even figure out the logic of the order in which they are listed. Suggestions: Additional “sort” options in tabs or drop downs Fighters vs non fighters Sort/display by hull size Permanently remove ships from list so obsoletes do not return. Create a &
Starbases vs ships? WELL how do you like me now? Big improvement in beta 4. See new post https://forums.galciv3.com/460800/page/1/ (this one getting long in the tooth)
The previous thread has gotten V big so I stated a new one. Beta 4 shows a big improvement in SB battle performance. To try see by how much I redid a test similar to the one ran with beta 3. (see reply 16 in orig thread https://forums.galciv3.com/460135/page/1/#3513849 ) Then: single wimpy Ranger A0/8/8- D0/20/0 always won vs starbase 10/20/19- D23/63/25. (recap:** cheats used to stage the battle, build u
Have seen the same bug on small & med. maps
[quote who="Gilmoy" reply="1" id="3517741"] Um ... send another constructor and choose Repair Starbase? [e digicons]:D[/e] [/quote] Is this true? I haven't had any damage yet so i can't test it.
I have seen this also, and had them hang around for a lot more than a turn or two. Turning the FOW off and observing, it appeared the ship stayed put until the AI race found another planet to send it to.
Agree. Great idea and great write up Tsathoggua [e digicons]:)[/e] . Tully hope SD will do it in an expansion, it's way too major for first release.
Add, Lock camera so we can see what happens in a particular spot. Sometime i want to observe an action (outpost firing, enemy movement ...) but typically when i hit the turn button the camera immediately moves to idle unit
Any thoughts on adding rally points? Pioneers could really use this. On medium and larger maps it can be difficult (time consuming) to spawn a bunch of pioneers to fortify far away outposts.
Consider adding capability to put user defined flags/text markers on the map? On and maps medium and up it gets very hard to remember and later find key items (like a frozen hero monument). it would be very helpful if we could place a user marker of some kind on/next-to it. Added user text would be great but even if they were just numbered flags that we could quickly return to, it would help a lot.
[quote who="Director" reply="67" id="3516866"] Darca, if the weapons and defenses for a starbase are not meant to ever be useful then I think the devs should take them out of the game. Right now they are a waste of good constructors. [/quote] AMEN! make them really mean something or get rid of them.
[quote who="Franco fx" reply="25" id="3513849"] Until they take down that beta disclaimer you must click to go play space emperor, I am not going to worry about balancing in the game. When Beta is over and the game is declared pretty much ready, I will complain if the sb aren't beefed up a little bit. [/quote] Don't wait Franco, that's what early access is all about, they have asked for feedback and ideas and i bet you have good ones [e digicons]*_*[/e]