The AI should not only differentiate between transports and colony ships, but vary the amount of pop they load on those ships based on tactical decisions (like how much pop the providing planet contains, how far it's away from its maximum, how much pop the next enemy target has etc.).
[quote who="NorsemanViking" reply="46" id="3668855"] Quoting redviper37, reply 44 Quoting shayvaan, reply 26 Admin cap o
I think somebody mentioned something like that in another thread already, but I find it deserves its own thread: It would be great if we could set preferences for the defenses that automatically assembled ships get equipped with. In the moment as far as I know that is only determined by "BestDefense" or so in the XML files, and what is your best defense depends solely on the techs you have researched. But most of the time I need other defenses than those that I researched most
[quote who="GalCivius" reply="25" id="3668758"] Quoting DivineWrath, reply 24 -I don't like the specialization techs. I don't like how I can only pick one. I agree insofar that it feels "artificial" to rule out certain research completely just because you researched s
Yes, it looks the same. Perhaps the devs could just steal from MoO2 ;) The UI would need a lot of functions, but they were asked for so often by so many people without much reaction that my hope is slim whether we will see at least some of that in Crusade. On the other hand, hope dies last ;)
If the Devs could only make it possible in Crusade to finally being able to place the planetary capital ourselves ...
[quote who="admiralWillyWilber" reply="35" id="3668537"] I would like for there to be a galciv2 mobile app. Everything sounds good except the beginning admin cap seems low. [/quote] As I mentioned elsewhere why not give the player the possibility to adjust administrator number at game start like all other resources?
[quote who="admiralWillyWilber" reply="3" id="3668540"] Lists in distant worlds take out immersion. It is less fun not to explore. [/quote] I assume ForesterSOF speaks only from already discovered colonizable planets.
[quote who="erischild" reply="10" id="3668336"] Quoting lyssailcor, reply 7 Perhaps it's the population, my planets have about 20-40 pop each, but most of the time I have to load some of that in transports since I'm engaged in a long running war. It all depends on how you feel ab
Update your ships ;) That's the most expensive action in the game I think. Several thousand credits per single ship are not uncommon.
Hm, ok, I have most of the economy boosting techs (although presumably not as much as Publius since I play with tech rate very slow). Also I don't have those economic relics because I play with relics on rare. But still that doesn't explain the difference. Surely I don't favor my economy that much, most of the time I'm content with running a moderate profit of 50-100 credits and rather concentrate on research and manufacturing, but still ... Perhaps it's the popula
How do you make 11.000 credits per turn without putting only wealth buildings on all your planets? I'm 266 turns in my current game and get 175 credits per turn. Military and starbases suck up a lot (although I must admit that I modded my game so that starbases cost 3 instead of 1 credit per turn base maintenance). I have an income of Saving 741 + Trade route income 172 + Tourism income 115 = 1029, my expenses are Ship Maintenance 472 + Colony maintenance 276 + Starbase Maintenanc
Just reloaded so cannot confirm my guess: can it be that ships off-screen just jump to the next position in their predefined path by their movement rate and then apply their sensors only from this spot, so that this problem only occurs if the movement rate is bigger than the sensor range?
[quote who="Avatar137" reply="12" id="3668080"] Yes, I've been seeing this quite consistently since 2.0 came out. Was bummed to see that it had come back as it appeared "fixed" for me with 1.9. With 2.0 I just have to have ships exploring without being in view for it to occur. [/quote] That's how it's "working" for me also.
Although the game is heavily modded I don't see why an AI should be that much ahead techwise at turn 77. I see such thing in my games (always insane map, all AIs gifted, tech brokering off, but without modding tech-related values, tech speed very slow) also, it became better with 2.0, but still some AIs have unexplicably advanced tech (or warship numbers) although most of the time their planets look pretty crappy ... What doesn't keep me from playing on usually ;)
[quote who="mortili" reply="23" id="3667844"] The AI builds different ships for defense(no engines or life support) and offense, and as far as i know the AI will never use defense ships to attack, meaning it also wont use them to intercept your fleets. [/quote] But why then leave them in the shipyard and not at least move them to planets for defense? Apart from that, when the enemy is on top of you, you (that is, the AI) should use every means o
Just stumbled (again) over an issue loosely related to this topic: the AI often seems to amass a lot of ships (mostly war ships, but also transporters) in ship yards and is then not inclined to use them when an enemy is near. I can freely attack planets and asteroid mines with a fleet much smaller than what is in such a shipyard without the AI reacting (at least it does not by building a fleet from the shipyard ships and attacking me or by relocating the ships to protect their planets).
I assume that focussing fire on one ship after the other comes not from actual tactics, but from the way battles are internally solved by the code. If I would be the commander of a fleet with a damaged ship I would hold that in the background as much as possible, also since the ships are moving around each other a lot it would not be possible to always focus fire on a single enemy ship (we can assume that battle computers can calculate how a cannon must fire to hit another ship, but if that s
[quote who="Ser_JuJoo_Guppy" reply="2" id="3667658"]Essentially a super-sized railgun, was hoping to make it a railgun that had high damage, lower rate of fire type of thing. Is that type of editing possible? Creating weapons that still behave as weapons do in the game, but adjusting the exact numbers of that behavior? [/quote] You can make weapons with your own damage, but modifying things like rate of fire, range and accuracy affects always all weapons of a ship (because there
[quote who="MacsenLP" reply="32" id="3667649"] I like the variety of the citizens mentioned but lets face it some are going to be a lot more important than others. The % amounts associated with them don't seem very large. Many buildings currently give more than a 25% boost. [/quote] Citizen bonuses should be cumulative, not additive (meaning that they should be factored in after calculating the gross production from base production and improvement bonus
I hope not all terran citizens are called "Jones" in the final release ;) Apart from that: most things sound good, but: - I'm also sceptic about citizens not being relocatable after being deployed on a planet. - Don't attach citizen generation to a fixed number of turns. Instead, let it depend on the development level of planets: the more developed a planet in a certain area (food, manufacturing, research, ...) is, the more often it generates a citizen. Also, m
As far as I know a real warpgate function is not possible, just boosting speed as you described. There is an action "wormhole" that gets executed when your survey ship hits a wormhole, but that throws you randomly somewhere. If you could specify some coordinates or a direction and distance as parameters to that action that would be really great, but for that to come true we can only hope ...
Lay open the formulas and make the parameters moddable?
I play also on gifted and it seems to me that the AI mostly ignores anomalies and relics. But I set usually anomalies to uncommon and relics to rare so that I don't see much of them anyway and so I cannot be entirely sure.
I have no problem with tight clusters as they are now. But more options never hurt ;)