leiavoia

Another gotcha with closed borders is that current and future "friendly AI" routines you activate on your fleets (such as Patrol, Scout, Explore, etc.) will need to take the enemy closed borders into account. This is part of the basic pathfinding algorithm and likely isn't modable. Having experience with programming pathfinding, closed borders has the potential to totally cripple the CPU by trying to exhaustively pathfind for fleets in which no goal solution exists (you're tot

The reason why i ask is because i fondly remember the early game of MOO 1 and 2. Colony ships usually took 20-30 turns to develop until you can get your homeworld ramped up. Those first few colonies were absolutely critical, defenseless, and must be well-chosen. While your first colony ship is in production, you've got scouts running around doing their thing, so it wasn't just next turn next turn next turn. In GC3 (and 2), colony ships are practically disposable. I use mine as

May i ask an uninformed question? What would happen if the cost of colony modules was, say 1000% of normal?

1) player-defined colony economic slider groups (AKA "governors") 2) list of unclaimed planets ( where Class > 0 ) 3) put the economy slider in easier to reach places. it's currently burried on a subscreen. It would be better if a mini version replaced the planet-graphic on the planets list (the planet graphic provides no useful info anyway), and/or was on the main colony interface. It's too important to be on a subscreen. 4) refactor the whole constructor i

[quote who="marigoldran" reply="213" id="3578238"] Does Brad know the constructor to colony ship trick? Because if I played Brad in GC3 I would crush him. [/quote] Yes, in fact he is interested in teaching the AI to do this as well. It's not an issue of the developers being idiots; it's an issue of being able to script in specific tactics (like this one).

[quote who="Gauntlet03" reply="10" id="3577970"] While I'm not a realism fanatic, the idea that you get benefits from a tech and can employ it, but still have to research it and don't really understand it, is counter intuitive. [/quote] In fact, we all do this on a daily basis. Does everyone understand everything about their car, computer, or plumbing system in their home? Nope. Do we use them every day anyway? Yup. "Tech Licensing" is basically an abstract

This was asked previously in the thread, but things have changed since then: Would this mod be useful for Medium/Large/Huge size maps? I won't ever play Insane or Abundant, but i like all the changes going on with this mod. Anyone with experience with this on smaller maps?

Sounds good to me. I would think this could be easily accomplished with a simple data flag on each tech to indicate whether it was 'researched' or not. Creating the often requested 'no-tech-brokering' game option would create and use this same exact data, so why not make it more interesting?

There are some technical problems with adding "supply", however: If supply is short, which consumer-objects get to have the supply and which do not? What happens if you promise supply to another civ and your supply dries up? (you would have to limit trade to stock-on-hand)

I vote for stockpiling as well. However, this would require resources as a supply instead of just to build things, as Petri mentioned. Otherwise i could build my Durantium Refinery and then abandon the resource mining starbase because the Refinery has already been built. I like this idea more though. If you destroy/seize a resource, you basically shut down it's ongoing production enhancement for the AI you nabbed it from.

[quote who="Gauntlet03" reply="25" id="3576114"] Specializing planets should be done by building the correct buildings ... Factories are factories, labs are labs. If you put the wrong thing on your planets... well hopefully my bombardment will nicely flatten the area for new developments. [/quote] Now that i think of it, i like this idea better. No sliders for anyone!

On carriers: they need some time to regenerate. I'm not sure exactly what the formula is, but i have always noticed that if i go into battle and a few fighters get shot down, i will be down a few fighters if i go directly into another battle. This is not new.

Keep the slider and remove the micro by doing this: Create "classes" of sliders. Players define and manage their own classes of sliders on the Economy screen. Planets get assigned to a class instead of each planet having a unique slider. Changes to the global class affect all planets assigned to that class. Example: I would create:

I'm sure you're right about the graphics card, but it does affect game play because i can't see what ships are in my fleets without clicking on each "empty" space. I also can't see which ships are which when making fleets or on combat displays.

I have this problem on every game right from the start. I also don't get ship icons rendered for ships that i create. System-default ship icons do render. I'm thinking this a file permissions issue.

As a workaround, could you give Planetary Invasion to the race as a starting tech?

[quote who="AlLanMandragoran" reply="14" id="3569985"] Are sensor boats a strategy or an exploit? [e digicons]:troll:[/e] [/quote] Also depends on which game. GC2 = strategy. GC3 = exploit. (GC2 has a 15-square hard limit on visibility)

For perspective, economy was the big problem for the AI in GC2. It would spend itself into the ground and couldn't figure out how to lift itself back up. It would try to fill every available space with more buildings but it didn't have the income to support it. I suppose it's a similar issue with GC3's current AI. I'm sure it will get upgraded as the game continues to improve. It's already on the radar.

As a practical matter, if we could define how many auto-save slots the game maintained, submitting save games for AI debugging would be easier. Currently, game only supports 2 slots i think.

Meta-question: Must all factions be equal? Is it okay if some are better at some things and worse at others? When Master of Orion was the big deal, certain races were "better" (Sakkra, Klackon, Psilon) and others not so much (Darlok, Mrrshan, Alkari). Part of the joy of playing was to take a gimpy race and lead them to victory against terrible odds. I've noticed that GalCiv tends to attract a different audience that wants everything to be 100% equal and balanced. This isn&

On a similar note, i often get " you are on a war path" even though i've never started a war and have virtually (or literally) no military power. I most often see this message from malevolent races. Perhaps this is triggered by defeating pirates? Pirate-squashing should increase your cred, if anything.

In a committed relationship, you learn to just say you're sorry and not try to figure out what for ;-)

[quote who="Larsenex" reply="10" id="3567305"] What I find amusing is we are all 'gamers' and as such we play games to kill time. [/quote] Small correction: we play games to have fun . You can kill time in all sorts of non-fun ways. I only play on small to mid-size maps because large maps cross the line from "fun" to "work".

[quote quoting="post"] what is this crap? ... forces itself upon me like a box of stale dicks ... spewing out pieces of garbage ... crappy, unchangeable default that squanders my manufacturing ... drop such a reeking turd ... a colossal waste. Please, someone,... [/quote] Where i come from, this is considered insulting language. If you are making a request and want results, try courtesy. It works.

I would guess that the list is actually sorted most-pop to least-pop. So unless you get allies voting for each other, everyone just votes for themselves and the most-pop empire will always win.