I used the vanilla pirate ship set with one of my races and now with your mod when I select the backup pirate ship set to keep the same look, I don't get the starting ships (colonizer, survey and scout) on map generation.
You might be unable to rename stars but you can rename individual planets in their govern tab. Everything else has already be mentioned by trims2u.
At first I found the idea very interesting but the problem with conical sensors is that if you move the ships in a circle you also get 360° of coverage but at way longer range. So instead of being a tradeoff restricted cone sensors but longer range vs 360° but shorter range, it becomes a tradeoff longer range with micro vs shorter range without micro. Even if you don't micro the ships, sensor ships with 120° sensors free up 2/3s of the sensor power while still having a large e
[quote who="Go4Celerity" reply="6" id="3632743"] Working on it. Does the " !-- " in have any purpose? It isn't present in the other defense commands. Anyone? [/quote] It starts a comment, so code inside the marks doesn't have any effect. It starts with . Comments are used as an easy way to disable code without deleting it.
[quote who="ForesterSOF" reply="10" id="3632359"] Each movement would have its own chance. The negative would not build up. [/quote] So it would trigger when you issue the command? If we have access to that trigger it could work but: Moving the Starbase 1 tile or half way across the map would have the same chance of destruction. imo just don't destroy the starbase on a coin filp, I fail to see why it would need such a large downside. B
[quote who="ForesterSOF" reply="8" id="3632350"] Moving them should not only be slow like shipyards but potently catastrophic. moving as starbase could have a 50% chance of destroying itself from the structure not being as strong as a ship. With a tech one is able to build better starbases and reduce this to 25%. [/quote] So on average it would destroy itself after 2 or 4 tiles of movement? Sound like a good way to make it completly unusable.
In my opinion this is age of accension tech as it can multiply the amount of available planets and reshape large parts of the map(dead systems) and as such should only be avalible very late and at large cost.
AI pay half the maintenance for stationed ships, but a moderator mentioned that this will be changed to effect all players in a future patch. But yeah it's the reason that the ai is spamming so many military ships and for the military rating quantity goes over quality.
Hive: +4 raw production and +1 adjacency to anything and +5% raw production per level MotherHive: +8 raw production and +2 adjacency to anything and +5% raw production per level
Counter question on what kind of computer system does this neural network based ai run?
[quote who="KapitenR" reply="2" id="3623720"] [RESERVED] (Just in case. I don't trust the maximal length of a post.) [/quote] Trust me, it's long enough. If you don't, my suggestion post should be able to convince you.
[quote who="slothDC" reply="325" id="3623274"] When I hit the download button, Nexus tells me I have to register to download files over 2MB - on the registration page, there is no free registration option. Are you not seeing the same options presented? [/quote] Oh, had to log out and go to the registration page but immediately understood what you meant: There are only checkboxes with costs but the clue is you don't need to check any to create your account, jus
[quote who="slothDC" reply="323" id="3623250"] Out of curiosity, is this mirrored somewhere other than Nexus - maybe at one of the mod sites that doesn't charge to download over 2MB files? [/quote] What are you talking about? nexus doesn't charge for downloads!
[quote who="blademoor" reply="15" id="3622094"] Technically speaking, Diminishing returns is the easiest to do. The problem with trying to say... force triangulation is that if you have hundreds of sensor equipped objects (planets, shipyards, starbases, ships of all sizes) in an insane sized map, the calculation would bog down the system horribly. I'm actually in favor of a combined solution of using diminishing returns and possible different sensor types. A base se
[quote who="Taslios" reply="3" id="3621732"] or even better... can only be TARGETED by a ship with sensors dear lord that would end the sensor boats. [/quote] That could be an interesting addition to my intel systems expansion suggestion but I don't get any feedback anyway, so it's seems pointless to waste any more time expanding that post.
Uncheck the Merc Expansion in the DLC section for GalCiv3 in steam should do it. Edit: That probably disables the new races as well, so I agree there should be a seperate option for those who want the races but not the mercs.
Check the Custom Races subforum of the modding subforum But there are very few with shipstyles. Edit: Here is an EVE Online Race mod with ship sets Edit2: :/ There seems to be a Star Trek mod in the works but it's not out yet and I couldn't find any other ship sets. It's probably to much of a hassl
It's the difference between the pathing algorithm calculating a precise approximation of the direct path or a rough approximation. The length of the paths is the same but the differences lie in the performance, a precise path probably uses more processing power or memory space or both. So it's just a question of the optimisation of the pathing algorithm. /just the humble opinion of an informatics student
Don't want the auto-designed ships clog up your list? Then this is for you.
[quote who="stevezar" reply="29" id="3617086"] I would favor some sort of diminishing returns on engine use. [/quote]Diminishing returns are stupid to convey via the ui because each time you add a module it chnages the benefit you gain from it. While with the planned percentage of capacity solution, that is not the case and is a lot more intuitive.
There should be a link in the resolutions settings that takes you to a window where you can enlarge your text and icons without reducing your resolution.
[quote who="Chibiabos" reply="76" id="3616966"] but its entirely lost because of a flaky combat simulator that decides my ships should play nice by not firing until the enemy can fire back despite my weapons having supposedly greater range. [/quote] If anything is flaky, then it's the battleviewer and not the simulation. Battleview is inaccurate in many things, look at the combat log for analysis not the firework show.
You can uncheck dlc in your steam library if you don't want to use it. That will probably include the Expand-alones.
They don't. They're actualy hindering you because you waste the capacity. It's better to have a sensor ship that is not part of the fleet.
There are also three movement types: attacker, defender and stationary but what the exact difference are is again not in the xmls. -_- Edit: Max speed is 3.2 and acceleration is 2 base line, might be usefull if you intend to use thrusters...