[quote who="Maiden666" reply="21" id="3567523"] Quoting peteincary2, reply 18 Completely unrealistic? Are you saying that it is has to be something in existence today for it to be realistic??? There also is not a single antimatter torpedo in existence today, would you suggest that be removed from the game too? And no
[quote who="wpkelley41" reply="28" id="3567530"] What EXACTLY is a "maxed out sensor ship?" I've seen this reference before. Thanks. [/quote] A cargo hull ship, that holds as many sensors as it can carry and nothing else.
I wouldn't mind just having only the movement lines for ships heading to that planet (or to a rally point or starbase) show when I select the target planet (or rally point or starbase). Not all movement lines when I select just a ship.
I tend to use world sizes as my main determiner for my manufacturing, tech, and wealth capitals. I don't rely on Ghost or Active Core, since the bonuses you get there (+50%) is really not more than what just one single building will give you. A 16 quality planet is way more powerful in research than an 8 quality Ghost planet. Since I usually choose a single class 16 planet for my homeworld, that is going to become one of my capitals. Then I just need to find 2 more really
This is why synthetics have such a big advantage. They can get up to +8 population per turn while only dedicating less than 10-20% or so of their raw production to manufacturing. This makes it fairly easy and quick to get a planet's population over 100 which gives huge production bonuses. And no, the Synthetic Pop Cap does not prevent these huge populations. That just made it require more micro to get there, but easily done.
[quote who="dansiegel30" reply="9" id="3567388"] Hmmm....but you doing a rush buy and turning manufacturing to zero is the same exploit, but in reverse??? Sounds like you want the benefit of a micro-based exploit, without putting in the effort into the micro. [/quote] Exactly. ;) I hate seeing production go to waste, so my OCD compels me to micro the heck out of the economy wheel if it is going to prevent wasted production. But really I see no point in having t
[quote who="Maiden666" reply="17" id="3567329"] Just that this explanation is completely unrealistic and would even further drag away from the immersion of the game. There is not a single biological or chemical weapon in existance which has been designed specifically to kill humans that would also kill a tank or an airplane. [/quote] Completely unrealistic? Are you saying that it is has to be something in existence today for it to be realistic??? There also is not a single a
Ship's hit points (and defense numbers) that are at 0.5 will display as zero in the battle viewer. Thus it can look like your ship should be dead, but it is still alive until one more hit occurs. For defenses, you can tell the difference between having 0.5 defense left and 0 defense left by seeing if the zero diplayed is a white zero or a grayed out zero. The grayed out zero is a real zero meaning you are going to start taking hit point damage with the next hit.
[quote who="dansiegel30" reply="7" id="3567206"] "wasted points if rush buy" aren't wasted, its now cheaper in credits to rush. Per 1.1 update notes: Balance You cannot select food and growth modifiers as a custom faction if you are playing a synthetic race anymore Rush costs are now modified by the turns remaining You can no long stack Yor assembly pr
[quote who="Stalker0" reply="5" id="3567120"]Since we are talking consistent nomenclature, did they change Total Manufacturing back to Raw Production in 1.10? Because Raw production was the old name. At least until the latest patch (which I have not played), it was Total Manufacturing....which I think is a much more confusing name. However, as you say, in the interest of consistency, I want to ensure I am using the right name. [/quote] T
[quote who="DARCA1213" reply="13" id="3566967"] Because its water based and slow and not weaponized. You could say that it's possible for it to effect both. You could also say synthetics are made of a substances that are non reactive to typical bio weapons. Which is why it's a valid suggestion worthy of soon to come warfare dlc*. (No such thing yet) Point is we know it would be one tech or specialization or thing added to synthetics when it comes to invasions. [/q
Are you using carrier modules? You might have lost a fighter or drone?
[quote who="dansiegel30" reply="3" id="3567002"] Bonus topic: And finally, pop versus a factory on a huge world, dedicated to manufacturing. Trying to keep it simple, lets say 25 tiles available, average of 6 pop or 100% manufacturing from each tile. X is the number of pop buildings. Y is the number of manufacturing buildings. Now we need two (6*X) * (Y*1.00) = total manufacturing Well, its been ages since I had t
I don't like the idea of mass starvation and death of billions of people in one turn which is supposed to be one week of game time. I never liked that it happened in GC2 either.
Try here: https://forums.galciv3.com/forum/1067 The sticky post at the top of that forum contains the opt-in information.
Since the formula for raw production is just the population of the colony (with no exponent or modifier) it makes a lot of sense to have as much population on the planet as possible. Even with the recent introduction of a Synthetic Pop Cap in opt-in 1.1, the synthetic races are still able to mass manufacture excess population by either building huge populations on another planet and transporting them in, or moving population off a planet temporarily to allow the Assembly projects to be built
Update from the 6/19/2015 Dev Stream for those interested: The question of projects wasting all of your stored carryover manufacturing was brought up, and there was mention that it would be looked into so that at least you don't lose all of those stored points. (Does not sound they will add to your project, maybe just not cause them to disappear.) Wasted points if you rush buy was not addressed. Hopefully this would be looked at as well.
[quote quoting="post"] Additionally I think it should be limited per hull type tiny and small ships shouldn't be able to have carrier modules by design after all how can tiny and small ships carry additional small ships here are my limit ideas... [/quote] Why can a tiny ship not carry additional small ships? Here is a screenshot of a small tugboat carrier in case you are having a hard time visualizing what this would look like. <a href="http://screencast
I think this happened in 1.01 not 1.1 Still can get free population by upgrading a constructor to a colony ship and land it directly on the planet without loading any people on the colony ship.
Here is some feedback from playing with 1.10 opt-in tonight, playing with the Yor. Positives: Love having the Raw Production tooltip on the Colony Screen Thank you for ESC closing the shipyard window Good to see rush prices have dropped for partially built ships. Not so Positive: Yor tech tree still has duplication of Market Center in the Interaction tech tree... You first get Market Centers with researching Xeno Commer
I have no problems trading with credits, but that is immediate credits. What exactly are you trading? Are your offering credits per turn? (If so there is a new check to make you unable to offer more credits per turn than you are can afford, though I am not sure how it calculates that.)
By the way, you can break non-aggression treaties. It just gives you a small -1 diplomacy with that civ. You can actually break any treaty that does not involve an up-front payment, such as immediate credits, a technology, starbase, planet, ship, etc. So if you just want a "temporary, breakable non-aggression treaty" just offer it for credits per turn or some durantium resource. Then break it when you want. I have not seen the AI break any such treaty, not sure if that is some
[quote who="AChallenge" reply="6" id="3566576"] @Peteincary2 You added that you had 6 transports - that's 30 logistics points. That is a pretty heavy fleet, matched by 6 medium ships or by 3 medium and 5 small ships. Since logistic points are what determines fleet size, and not firepower, one less small ship and the battle fleet is smaller than the transport fleet. You said this happens "frequently". After a few times I would think a reassessment of tactics wou
[quote who="AChallenge" reply="2" id="3566526"] As to the situation above, where you lost your transport fleet: sorry, but sending undefended transports into uncleared enemy space is just bad tactics. I clear the area of my advance with battle fleets, then move my transports in under escort by medium and small ships. Forcing the AI not to attack week targets makes the logistics system worthless since you can circumvent the limits simply by stacking a second fleet. [/quote] T
This question came up on the 6/12/2015 dev live stream. I wanted to give some feedback since it was not clear how this worked. If I attack a hex that has a stack of ships/fleets on the galaxy map, it seems to automatically attack the strongest ship/fleet in that stack. There is no way to attack a weaker ship/fleet if I want to. Cycling through the enemy fleets and placing another on the top of the stack does not effect this. The only option I have is to attack the strongest ship/fleet