Still wondering whether anyone has seen an AI buy a starbase, or at least try to. I've seen plenty of cash-rich AIs with no durantium/anti-matter/elerium/etc. Do they just buy those resources at the ever-growing cost?
I think this is my first thread with a subtitle. Title and subtitle pretty much say it all. I played for many, many years without once thinking about buying a starbase from AI player. The new Administrator mechanics combined with the serious scarcity of durantium on mid-to-late-game very large maps made me start doing it. Lots. I don't dig into the XML or read lots of threads from maximizing players, so I don't understand much about the relationship status functionality. It just seems
Now I remember reading about that ages bar somewhere. Thanks, DW. Still, it seems like the UI should be more direct, maybe striping age-limited boxes with the color for their age.
Hi. I'm running 3.8 and using a custom faction with the Ancient trait. In the shiny new tech tree, I can see Living ships at the end of the Precursor Traditions line and in the Tree view, if I select it, it looks selected. When I close the Tree view, I'm not researching anything and I do not get the no-research notify button a second time. I had picked it as the third or fourth in a research chain and wonder if viewing the tree after I did that might have broken something?
Several years back, learning that you'd started in BBS-land made lots of aspects of Stardock fora 'click' for me. The bandwidth back then was, um, laughable in comparison and the world appeared monochrome, but it was somehow more exciting and. And it was easier, at least for me, to find spaces where the moderators were active and focused on free but civil discussion. Local BBSs around starting around '83, some FIDONET in there, stayed engaged with a particular one for many year
[quote who="jabberjaws" reply="24" id="3745588"]Instead of helping us guard our territories as I wished with mines or other , we are now more vulnerable to invasion than ever .. absurd[/quote] Doesn't seem all that different to me. Once things start getting feisty on the map, I start rolling out sensor pickets. Lining hyperlanes with them shouldn't be too tough unless you go crazy with the things. Mines would be fun, though.
Argh! The Unit Transports seem to completely ignore the nearby hyperlane, and there's no way to course correct manually...
DataKeyTech_Name is still there.
I'm soon going to have the first hyperlane booster tech. Is there any chance that the speed boost is limited to civs with the tech, or better yet the owning civ?
Banned for still being at this after all these years and not yet managing to ban everything.
[quote who="Rhonin_the_wizard" reply="2" id="3745437"]Have you tried verifying integrity of game files?[/quote] Thanks for the quick response. I'm updating now and will post again if that doesn't do the trick.
[quote quoting="post"] I've had several weird Notifications from anomalies getting searched. One reads "Survey - WeaponKeyModule_Name" I think I've seen a couple of variations, but I'm looking at the Nth one that made me think to type up about it. [/quote] [Update] DataKeyTech_Name
I've had several weird Notifications from anomalies getting searched. One reads "Survey - WeaponKeyModule_Name" I think I've seen a couple of variations, but I'm looking at the Nth one that made me think to type up about it.
[quote who="Publius of NV" reply="6" id="3744436"]And avoid black holes.[/quote] As often as I have to tell people to "read the screen/manual/sheet-in-your-face," I had to learn this the hard way. My rig can finally hold up a Ludicrous map, though, so that little detour isn't a big deal on a really long lane.
[quote who="charlando" reply="13" id="3745385"]It would be a huge improvement if there was some setting for habitable planets in between the current "common" and "abundant" settings.[/quote] Seconded.
So the patch did fix much of the tech tree confusion for Synthetics, but it still does not allow them to use Extreme Colonization. I have a lovely Corrosive world in a good spot, but somehow TPTB are refusing to let me deploy ceramometallic exoskeletons for the colonists.
[quote who="rap33042" reply="19" id="3742149"]Somebody forgot to fix the God-awful planetary auto-upgrade button. I still have to untick that option on every new planet! Arghhh! Please give us a global option in settings; those who want it on can have it that way. And I can disable it everywhere because I hate it :-)[/quote] Agreed. The Civilization panel has room for a whole tab that could hold some global options for colonies and choice-techs, e.g. Precursor Mysteries. I often like
I am playing the 3.6/2019-03-14 patch and the problem seems to remain. I'm playing a custom Synthetic species, can see Environmental Engineering as a search result in the tree but not in the tree itself. I burned quite a bit of trade goods and cash before I figured out that buying the techs gained me nothing. [Correction] I thought I was on 3.6 because I just bought Retribution from GOG. But apparently the patch is not rolled out to them yet. Might anyone know when 3.6 will b
Has anyone tried to use a hyperlane that you don't own or seen an AI use one of yours?
I know I'm not alone in being so happy to see custom fleet names getting sticky at last. I'm installing just now and can't wait to see that simple change at work. As usual, the change list overall illustrates what sets Stardock Games apart from the mega-corp shops. Thanks for sticking to your long-haul, good listening approach.
Is there an ETA on when the GOG version will be available?
Do you have a date for when the update will be available on the wonderful world of GoG?
I don't know how many since first-Windows Gal Civ folks like me are still around, but I've bought almost all the GC3 DLC. And I avoid Steam whenever I can on account of the noxious gases emitted by the mobs. The best thing about the GC series is that the devs, even when experiencing a moment of "somewhat tumultuous design history," are engaged directly with people on these boards. Brad et al can be quite tenacious when sticking to design choices, but they also have regularly
[quote who="implodinggoat" reply="13" id="3703464"]We've been asking to let us choose where the capital goes forever and it doesn't happen. [/quote] I know, I've seen the requests now and then for over a decade[e digicons]X|[/e] But I've also seen that the devs/managers have some mystical tipping point that when triggered yields the results 'you/me' want. One of my favorites from GC2 was the advent of the turn-count alternative to the Week of thing. I'm no coder
[quote who="implodinggoat" reply="8" id="3703262"]Will you please make the colony and civ capitals into spaces that we can build on? Like the tile bonuses (caverns, wild grain etc) are?[/quote] If this means 'let us choose Colony Central as part of colonization procedure,' I would really like to see that. I'd settle for yet another AI tweak that would eliminate the painfully common Stupidest Spot Imaginable choices that have been reliable through every version of GalCiv I've