I agree that negative food having consequences could be a lot of fun, and a great challenge. But for all those complaining, there actually is a consequence. You are not allowed to build another city until you have +4. If you are -6, that means you need 10 food before the class 20 planet you just took over, with a pop of 4, can be built up.
While some complaints are design decisions (negative food for example, which does not bother me so much as it could be made better) others are actual bugs.
I'm glad to hear the range bug getting a fix. There are other old bugs, but that was the real game-breaking one for me. (edit) now maybe I can play a xenophobe who doesn't explore past a realistic boundary, and not meet every civ on the map by turn 100
This is just an intensive game. I played with 4G ram for a long time before getting a new computer (for other reasons than just this game) and I understand the frustration, but the limitations are there because (and only because) you don't have enough resources for a larger galaxy. I feel your pain.
the game is very playable on smaller maps with computers with less RAM. The game was designed to also take advantage of computers with more resources. don't hate on the designers for designing for us too.
regarding a galactic bank - I like the idea. GC2 (I think) had loans you could take out to pay off expensive projects, pay off in full, or pay more over N number of turns against income, with 3-4 different brokers? I could see that working out. regarding negative food - there should be a penalty. Perhaps each planet loses N% pop cap for every -1 to food, this could cause starvation on higher-developed planets. Perhaps an overcrowding happiness pe
as well, legions built on a planet still go into the global pool, they are not stationed on the planet unless you actively garrison them there.
I only occasionally run into a universe where the lack of Durantium is more than annoying. Usually there is not as much as I'd like, but that is what trading is for (buy their starbase if you can afford it) or the Market, if you have a gov't which can access it.
oh come on. This type of situation is unsustainable, and only possible if you could already win the game. Stop griping, everyone. It is one cool-ass planet.
I love kinetics. They can be expensive, but are small from the start, and the range issue is easily handled. otoh, Durantium has been a bit scarcer for me lately as well. I generally go for governments which can visit the market, when in dire need (and I have the cash) unless I have other priorities for the next 26 turns.
specific to point 4) - the percent bonus is to total population - so you had ( 5 + 3 ) * 250% = 20 on the nose
I can see how this might have been missed. Treasure hunters target dead planets, not empty planets - but if a dead is turned into a habitable (with ideology or events) the TH probably doesn't re-route.
if there is to be only one method, I much prefer the non-repeating projects (as it is again now). However, having a "repeat project" button, much like the "repeat ship" on the ship designer, would be quite nice. Sometimes I do want to repeat projects in the end game.
1. you get 10 legions when you research Planetary Invasion 2. each transport pod holds up to 5 legions
whereby AI gets unlimited range with trade ships, and send them all over the universe. this is finally starting to annoy me. Started my first ludicrous map after testing on smaller universes, and in the first 30 turns know civs from across the map, very far out of range. Please fix this issue.
give us some black-market DLC, pretend the Korath made you do it. I'll pay an arm and a leg (someone elses arm and leg, I'm not stupid)
I have started games with several races.. I still find tourism to be a necessary financial step to take, and it has improved VERY much since the beta, I just don't care for the adjacency fix. It seems cheap to me. Adjacencies should mean something, now I don't care if a tourism building has adjacencies or not. (edit) the emporium being the exception, +5% econ adj is worthy, but that is a very difficult building to get first
[quote who="Frogboy" reply="4" id="3711114"] I’d love to see more DLC like that added. But we take a lot of negative reviews of the game for merely having DLC so we’ve canceled most of the DLC projects we had. We are focusing on yearly expansions rather than periodic DLCs. [/quote] I truly wish that were not the case. I have found most of your DLCs worthwhile. Is there any chance of the aforementioned races making an appearan
[quote who="AdamMG" reply="1" id="3711081"] maybe 1% to Global tourism, each adjacency gives 1/100 of a bonus to hexes within influence radius.. [/quote]
maybe 0.01% to Global tourism, each adjacency gives 1/100 of a bonus to hexes within influence radius..
I got Intrigue as soon as it came out, so I will assume that the 3.0 release also has the tourism fixes. The beta made tourism too powerful. I like the changes, but now it seems like Tourism adjacency boni are worthless. +1% to local econ? Not even worth it. I should have a real reason to want tourism adjacencies.
They are in the splash screen. This gives me hope. Also bumping the post so others can chime in.
I have also yet to actually use a commonwealth. I tried once to see how it went, as an experiment, but never since. They seem worthless to me.
There were hints that these were going to be in a DLC (since canceled), and now their pics are on the Intrigue spash screen. Could there be good news coming? (well it might be bad news for edible aliens ... )
I have both won some and lost some. I do like the crises, they add something more to the game for me.