Im basically with Kiwi Greg on his ship progression, with the exception of BattleCrusiers. BattleHammers are far more effective due to thier extraordinary hitpoints. Additionally I find that if I can make it to BattleShips I can make it to Dreadnaughts and go for them instead. So: Defender -> BattleAxe -> BattleHammer -> Dreadnaught Hasn't failed me yet, even vs Genius AI. But then again I play a really strong military game.
From what you all are saying, it sounds like there must be a bug with SBs and Fleets, somehow.
Yeah, I always have this feature on. The real gripe tho is that immediately after a SB is built on the resource, it disappears off the map. This forces you to manually keep track of where every resource is. Why should you have to do this, if the game doesnt allowed for resources to be moved?
I really like how resources show up on the galatic map. They are a strategic objective, like systems, and it makes it nice and easy to plan your defense/offense around them. But, whenever a SB is built to harvest them, they disappear off the galatic map. This forces me to remember where all the AI (and sometimes even my own) controlled resources are. Which just strikes me as bookeeping... after all, I detected them already, right? And they aren't going anywhere. Does any
Version 1.2 Econ resource, I believe? Just that one starbase could move, it wasnt empire-wide Movement stopped after I exhausted the 4/0 and it never came back No Drengin were killed as a result, sadly :) Nope, it was a normal SB, not a terror star Yeah, it appears that it is a bug. I think the way I got it to happen is that I had a constructor fleeted with an attack ship. This fleet was then ordered to move to an enemy starbase. It did, destroyed it, and then aut
But all the behaviors I listed there? ...they came from an all Intelligent AI game.
The AI always attacks the closest planet/unit. So putting all you defenses on your borders is a workable strategy.
So, the other night I was playing a game and I managed to get it into a state where a newly built SB had movement points! It had 4/0 movement points and I was able to move it, *along with the attached resource*! Very bizarre. Has anyone else seen this kind of behavior?
Consensus seems to be that ships repair faster in orbit. I dunno about SBs without repair modules. Look in this thread: http://www.galciv.com/forum.asp?BID=GF&id=46542
Sweet. I'm so looking forward to facing some more challenging combat intelligence. Also, I've never had a problem with slow turns.
I know this has been covered before, but I just have to bring up again that the combat AI (even at high levels) in GalCiv far too basic. The only trick it seems to know is to have each of it's ships head to the closest enemy unit/world. Which of course leaves it wide open to many exploits: impaling the AI on heavy fortifications, luring away whole battle groups with sensor drones, picking off (the consistently) unescorted non-com ships. A couple of simple suggestions that hopefully sh
Stardock Forums
The lack of chokepoints in GalCiv doesn't bother me. After all, chokepoints are really only applicable to the surface of planets, where different terrains make movement/combat hard or impossible. But space is far more analogous to sea than to land. There is no cover or chokepoints at all, except for the occassional bits of land and whatnot. I'm no naval genius, but it seems to me that naval/space combat would revolve around Detection, Range/Firepower, and Speed, most of which appear in GalCi
Why doesn't the galciv team turn over the forums to some trusted admins? I'm sure the people here have the skills and desire to manage a small forum system. $140 can't be a big dent in the GalCiv budget at this point, one would hope. And they can pick out someone they've known for a long time and just let them remotely administrate on a (controlled) machine of thiers it should be possible.
I have a somewhat similar experience when Major Races contact me for diplomacy. Sometimes when clicking 'Reject' the game will just crash straight to the desktop. I don't have a reproduceable case, but I have seen this at least 6 times on my machine.
Stardock Forums
Yeah, no joke. I have never played a game where the developers were so involved and attentive. Cheers!
Frogboy, on the Capitalization issue, I can see what you are saying about a player being confused when thier economy "collapses" because they switched thier build queues to something other than idle. But I think that arguement only holds water if the queue is really blank. If you had an actual money producing queue item (ala Moo2 and civ2) then the connection b/w build queue and economy would be clear to the user. It's like: "If I remove the money++ queue item from my major colony, my income
I'm hands off as well. It's good to hear that you can managed large numbers of planets in that way tho. Maybe I will boot up a Huge galaxy and play Culture or Research and just try to stay away from ships completely. Tho, in the culture games I've played so far, the judicious use of war has accelerated my victory in many cases :) I wonder if anyone has tried to win a military victory on a huge map?
Yeah, I usually set the abundancy to common on smaller maps and occasional on larger ones. But the question still remains whether GalCiv scales. If you can only reasonably control a static number of planets even as the maps get larger, then it doesn't scale.
So, I've played a decent amount of games so far, but I've felt no inclination to go beyond the Medium sized Galaxy. It just seems to me that, by the endgame, there are almost too many planets (not to mention ships!) for me to deal with. I try to use all the automation features... Governors are a godsend, even if it is annoying to switch between them, but they don't handle ship production well. And I use autopilot as much as possible, but you can't really depend on it when entire sy
Bossy, I've been seeing the same behavior as you. Occassionally it will be close enough rangewise to the AI empire that you can rationalize it away with a starting racial pick or early tech bonus. But I've seen the exact same situation: AI colony 4-5 sectors away from thier next closest world in the early game... explored all the sectors surrounding and found no SBs or colonies of any kind. In particular there was an occassion where the AI empire to my east attempted to beat me to a
Book... you mean like paper? I thought that was obsolete nowadays :)
Yeah, it direct changes the basic stats, no +#. And for that matter, if your opponent has BattleAxes, I wouldn't suggest going to war until you have at least Frigates. In my experience nothing short of them is cost-effective to take on BattleAxes.
Stardock Forums
Za H: 1) If you put any kind of penalty on a cash back program, players will simply not use it. That is effectively what is happening now, except the penalty is 100%. But we've all developed coping mechanisms for this (personally I just go like 60/0/40 or 0/60/40) so why would I change my pattern if there was still a penalty?
solvalou: Indeed. Now that you get how planetary economics work you see the problem that many players are running into. Check out the "Wanted: Best solution for 'wasted' resources issue (Slider allocations to non 'active' projects" thread for discuss ad nauseum :) It's sticky, btw, so its right at the top.
That sounds more like it, BoogieBac. Thanks. Although I must say that +4 attack seems pretty extreme. As if defensive ships didn't have it easy enough to begin with?