Strange nobody of the devs is commenting on that? Too busy maybe...?
What about suggestions b) and c) ? Nobody interested in immediatly getting displayed in how many turns a ship is actually completed while changing the manu/research/wealth and/or social/military settings in the planet screen? Same for updating the remaining turn in the manu queue?
I just tried it and it is extremely unpractical. Especially when the queue list is full (which is almost always the case if you opt auto-upgrade) there are no "empty spots" to hover over... And how about the same for research or the other questions...?
Why is that so complicated (hover over empty (?!) space???) and not just displayed somewhere? Nobody new will be able to find that. @ devs: could you comment on the other issues, too, please?
Where exactly to I have to hover? Is the selection area the one above the queue where I can chose new buildings? For the current building the actual building progress is "grayed", but if I complete the building in this turn and some excess points should go into the next one, the new building in not "grayed to the amount of points transferred" in the next turn. This is confusing...
4 Examples + Question on CUMBERSOME micro-management: 1) Manu: Suppose I can complete a certain building in this turn using 10 manu points and my planet can produce 15 manupoints if I use 100% manu, 0% research, 0% wealth. So if I use this setting, what is going to happen with the excess 5 manu points? I was told in beta 5 that these points are saved somehow or get into the next building in the queue. However that doesn't seem to be the case and also it's nowhere displ
How actually do you program the ai? I mean, is it only kind of simple if then else statements or what else? I also ask because you say it can learn and second because you say you dont need suggestions and we would be surprised how easy you could fix issues...
Thanks for your honest replys and I'D LIKE TO APOLOGIZE FOR THE LURID TITLE I'VE CHOSEN. Good that you renamed it... The reason was, of course, to grasp your intention (and get more feedback from other players) because I think the game is already great and with a little AI improvement it can easily get the best 4x available for the next years. You put already so much effort into it, so let's try to solve the "last" tough issue. 1) ad better AIs - on an ordi
1) I think most of the game is great: graphics, lots of features, UI, sound, ship designer, tech tree, faction design. Very good! 2) As I understood, this whole beta testing effort is because you want to receive feedback from players to be able improve the game before release. AI is, for me, the issue that needs to be improved most. That's why I posted the issue at all, trying to help you in creating a very good (as opposed to "only good") game because I've the impression that
Just a short reply: 0) I'm for sure not the only one; see above or link below for an older thread... 1) I played on insane and godlike with 5 major AIs (the rest "occisional"). I built 1 RnD planet, 3 Manu planets (incl. Homeworld; which has RnD, too), 1 Wealth, 4 trade routes, 2 shipyards; only a two starbases); traded a bit of my "not so important techs" for x credits per turn (as explained), got lots of money; can thus buy quickly new buildings --> get in tech lead (
To be honest, the AI is in a disastrous state at the moment. Even at the highest available difficulties, the AI is inefficient, suicidal and lacks a decent strategy to actually win the game. If you browse through the posts, you can see more and more beta players complaining about that and in my opinion this is the worst point of the game currently. One can forgive if there is some small graphics bug, or if the UI is cumbersome, maybe even seldom game crashes. But one completely looses
I also observed that the ai wasnt building anything. And if it built stuff, it doesnt group the same type of buildings to harvest adjecent tile bonuses. I am playing on the most difficult level with the godlike ais and they are still so stupid. Will that be further improved?
2 things more added to the list: 8) Game crashes on victory 9) AI can only build weaker ships than me. Instead of grouping them into a fleet, which would mean that some ship already built have to wait for the completed construction of others, the AI attacks my huge ships with its extremely weak small one. No chance, waste of resources etc...
I like the new tech tree. One has to specialize on certain issues more and improve one's tactics. If was too easy anyway to get all these cheap bonuses of "all three specializations". And where is the specialization if you don't have to?
1) SFX fails regularly after having been in combat (was not the case in beta 5) 2) Graphics bugs in invasion screen: only the faction logo is shown, the rest black. 3) Graphics bug in combat: all of a sudden all was black. It worked 50 times in the same game and always in beta 5, but now... 4) If one destroys the race who is the current UP-Leader, there have to be immediate re-elections of the head of the UP. In my game, the Drengin still are making suggestions even if
Sry, I'm from Austria thus using a German keyboard. STRG = CTRL. Thx for picking up the input!
Yeah, but if you at peace, then the AI trades bad. The game simply becomes extremely easy if you can easily trade in all techs...I am playing now without trading, but that's not a sound solution. You have to optimize the AI so that it calculates better what to trade and what not. AND: I'm on suicidal and 3 AIs on godlike and the game is still much too easy. I conquered 7-8 planets until now and it's really a catastrophe what the AI is building there.
Just to be sure: In the new Beta the "AI should have been boosted". Does that also apply for the trading issued discussed in that posting? The AI is still making the same stupid things... Yesterday, I received 25 (or so) CREDITS PER TURN (!!!) for some very "useless" tech from different AIs (majors and minors). That's much to much and makes "earning money" all to simple.
Gaming Situation: Suppose, I want to complete a factory this turn and thus need to spend 30 manufacturing points. In order not to waste excess points, I have to adjust the balance between manufacturing, research and money (short MA, R, MO) in a way the provides exactly 30 MA points, of course and the rest goes into R and/or MO. Usability Problems: 1) Suppose the lever between civilian spending and military spending is 100% at civilian. Then the actual values for
If a tech doesn't need all available research tech to be completed within a turn, the residual points go directly into the next tech, which is perfect. But, if I can not simply pick the subsequent techs I want to research simply by holding down e.g. STRG or SHIFT as it's common in most programs. Especially that is problematic if I want select a tech as the "next tech" and the current tech that's being researched is a "split into 3 tech field". Then automatically the upper most of
I just read the comment that the AI will be as good as in GCiv II or better. I definitly hope it to be better because the same trade issues that we mentioned here were also very bad in GCiv II.
I also recognized the sam issue regarding trading in a peade treaty. Also, I am very pleased to hear that the AI is just being optimized. Disabling tech trade would indeed be a pity, but it has to be made sure that the AI can also correctly estimate/calculate mid- and longterm consequences from certain trade agreements. I also would suggest to introduce some mechanism that forbids or at least punishes an imediate declaration of war shortly after a 'substantial trade' b
The AI trades so badly that one can easily outperform it and win all too easily. Examples that should be fixed: 1) You can trade in a substantial part of an AI-opponent fleet against some techs (and maybe some minor ressources or quite remote and userul starbases). Thereby the AI looses all its defense and the players fleet is greatly and quickly strengthened so much that the AI can be crushed within a few turns. 2) One can easily get the alone tech leader by simply trading te