Gauntlet's Race Mod at Galactic Civilizations III Nexus - Mods and community New version is uploaded R-1.6 This version is plugging some of the gaps in GRM by doing the following: Updated files as always. Adding citizen portraits to all race images... an increase in total portraits of about 200. Adding custom citizen names to all races that didn't
Quick note... working on an update. It won't include any shipsets, but will update some files, clean up some typos, and add some new backgrounds, race pics, and add citizen pictures to a lot of races that only have one.
[quote who="BIF" reply="16" id="3766369"] So then make it an OPTION. [/quote] There comes a point where too many "options" begins to negatively affect a game, mostly by diluting it's identity into nothingness. It also creates a lot more work for the game designers to balance, test, and update. The Z axis is pretty meaningless outside of any sort of tactical battles... which are not GC's focus anyhow. The best use I've seen of Z
Not really... see the shipsets we make are still part of the "part sets" of the default races... which then also have their default race ships. SO for example, I've made 20+ shipsets, and not only do I have sets that "cohabitate" menu space with the default designs for a part style... like Drengin... but multiple other sets of ships from other shipsets of my design because I've been forced to "double up". There are filters though, to filter out "core designs" and this works an
Been a while since I read on this chain... what fun! I do think it's worth noting, that there are really only a couple of people who are truly "stubborn" and the vast majority are open to change. Fact is though... few of those people agree. Though... I'm pretty happy to see the number of "Gauntlet has good ideas" I've seen in this thread... because you really all should just stop having opinions of your own, relinquish the burdens of freedom to me, and I'll lead us all into a
PS: Also... I decided to increase the customization of race's ongoing banter between themselves and others based on their traits/ideology/etc. The game has the ability to do this nicely, but wasn't "thorough". I largely rectified this for all races by creating a series of files that overwrite the game's default conversations, but in turn, are generally overwritten by individual faction flavor texts. You can find them under the main GRM mod folder: GRM\English\Text With
Hey there. I've done quite a bit of work with the Flavortext files. They are not super-complicated, but also, not great. It's hard to tell which parts are relevant and which are not. Also, the editor doesn't actually seem to work all that well, and you can't (last time I checked) properly upload AND download flavor texts off of Steam Workshop. So I gave up on the editor. I also noted, that a lot of conversation was controlled by certain files for ALL races. Most of which
I do believe that GC should have borders that matter more (TM?). However, firstly, the game needs to differentiate between a "border" and influence. Borders should be bubbles around your planets and star-bases and relatively very small... that results in allowing species fairly easy access to bypass them and move around/across the map. Your influence obviously expands well past these borders. The player can declare their borders open or closed to any given race, but the other
I was addressing your question and the possible reasons you received some negativity. I understand your point about climate change/etc. that you are making. I think my comments are relevant because the act of "Sending thoughts" or "Sending Prayers" is a useful mental tool that people use and abuse to avoid acting, and while you may use it earnestly, your encouraging a practice that on the whole... is counter-productive. Especially when it's done publicly ... I think your point
Personally, I think you should start with a shipyard and with basic weaponry to ensure the possibility that you can't (easily) sneakily curb-stomp an AI because they have no weapon techs and you rushed it.
[quote who="Chasbo" reply="6" id="3763112"] Explain how a post meant to garner sympathy and good vibes for a part of our country going through hell turned into "piss on Calif."? Also nitpicking the point I was making? Why can't you say a prayer for a man made disaster? I got no idea if prayers or positive thoughts sent make a difference but it certainly doesn't hurt. I didn't want to go on a diatribe about climate change. I thought the story I linked to went over ho
Hey there! Thank you for the kind words! I never try to be salty or for that matter chipper... I just try to be exactingly fair . But when saying goodbye to something I loved for a long time, it felt necessary to include some of the frustration that defined my experience. That being said, I share your feelings about GC3 ultimately it did not stand up to my expectations. I think there are a lot of reasons for that, most of them pretty reasonable (we do tend to put these
The best part about star lanes and such, from an immersion and storytelling point of view, is that it makes the vast cosmos far more digestible and the smaller (due to technical constraints) galaxies we play with, far more believable. Rather than me having to abstractly say... "well these 10 planets I own basically represent 50,000 planets" I can say "Space has billions of stars, but the form of transit being used only allows practical access to a very small portion of these stars. Th
That graphic is mostly what I imagined. Though I had thought it was possible all the individual systems abutted each other, without hyperlanes and adjacent tiles in each sector were visually adjacent and connected... but that transit BETWEEN those tiles and across the tile border was lengthy and abstracted off the map. This would avoid most chokepointing at relatively small hypergates whilst allowing for the distinction between in-system and out-system travel values, wh
Here are, in no particular order, some thoughts: Fewer but more distinctive civ abilities. ------GREAT. Most colonies aren't managed they provide what they provide. If there's a particularly amazing planet, you can train a governor for that planet that lets you manage that planet (this way, even on a huge map, you might only directly manage a dozen planets at most -- or only 1 if that's your preference). ------Some will reall
Based on my reading... it's less like Endless Space and more like the Total War games... with systems "abutting" each other, and transit from system to system being longer/abstracted. The map could still well be a completely flat series of hexes, but the inter-system hexes are no longer represented. If I'm right, choke points will not be entirely possible, certainly not like any system with star lanes, but more-so than now, where perhaps two fleets and a starbase may well hold a borde
I will say... just to make sure I'm clear... while I want a lot of ship design to have an impact on the battles tactically and the game strategically... I believe you can do that with or without a turnbased (or realtime) mini-game controllable by the player. It can all be auto-resolvable.
[quote who="tetleytea" reply="30" id="3759756"] You really think Galciv3 comes out ahead on the execution front? [/quote] No, not really... which is why daring them to "think different" when their execution on tried-and-true ideas has been lacking is probably more likely to end in sub-par results. I believe in the sports world they talk about "fundamentals" in this regard. Part of it isn't their fault, and part of it is the result of the wh
Eh. There's a creative element in taking a myriad of ideas from others and combining and executing at a h higher level. Something to be said for execution is all.
"I loved the Hex based map. I am not sure if there is an alternative but are squares better or hexes?" Hexes are generally considered superior because they allow equal and balanced diagonal movement. Square systems have to come up with little adjustment rules to account for diagonal transit.
People, arthropods, squids, and robots... lend me your data collectors... I present GRM R-1.5, now compatible with GC 3.9 and adding a new shipset and faction, the Indri-Tech (INC). This is my 29th shipset... and when you add the mercenaries, bazaar, anomalies, and resource mines, I think it's fair to say it's 30 shipsets... and I must confess, it is very likely my last.</st
[quote who="ForgottenSlayer" reply="18" id="3759646"] Ok I think I misunderstood your original post.[/quote] I think so... I'm not trying to be too specific (I don't think very specific suggestions are super-useful to devs at this early stage... and frankly they have their own ideas they want to try). But what I AM saying, is that something more Creative needs to be done with the galactic strategic map. That could be done in many ways... pe
Thank you! Update almost ready!
"I’m not seeing how a map with height would be easy to make, balance, or code. " Well I don't see anyone mentioning making the map 3d? But if you are interested, you can look up an ANCIENT game called Ascendancy. In it, systems are 3d bubbles and planets rotate around their star, the entry points to the system can be below or above the star... Planetary defenses could have a lot of range, so it often made sense to time your assault so your ships arrived in-system when th
I think there are many people on many sides of the combat divide... where I think there is consistency though... is wanting depth for design. What does that mean? It means your fans want to design ships that specialize and perform duties as part of an effective fleet. Currently, GC doesn't have this... it's generally fine to go with an entire fleet based on tiny or huge hulls or of any mono-hull... weapon choices generally don't favor diversity... defenses often don't ma