Do you ask yourself why the people wants a new GalCiv3? GC2 have all thing that really good game should have: good AI, nice graphical environment, battles visualization, pirates, minor races, standard events and megaevents, independent government (UP), ethics which change relations between playeers nad more things which can change balance of game... But GC2 does not have the one thing that changes "good game" into "cool" or "incredible perfect" game of few last years. It is the [B]M
Antar2004
Do you ask yourself why the people wants a new GalCiv3? GC2 have all thing that really good game should have: good AI, nice graphical environment, battles visualization, pirates, minor races, standard events and megaevents, independent government (UP), ethics which change relations between playeers nad more things which can change balance of game... But GC2 does not have the one thing that changes "good game" into "cool" or "incredible perfect" game of few last years. It is the [B]M
[quote]there are multiple threads why Galciv 2 multiplayer are not developed. You should search the forums around for them. Not having a multiplayer do not detract the quality of a game. It might even added value to it. Consider the elderscrolls series. People play it over and over again because of the non-linearity of game play and immersive story line. Galciv 2 has strong AI and random map generation...[/quote] The simple way is building game for muliplayer mode! The dump AI stra
I think that the never-ending techtree are good route to good strategy game. Of course, I think about only some tech like: -all weapon systems -all defense systems -logistic -miniaturization Why this is good way? </fon
[quote]Sorry for saying this but i like TS's as they are - without defenses. I am completely positive that they are powerful enough as a weapon, and if you use them properly you can destroy civilization in 10 turns.[/quote] When you use your research points to find complete technology of TS, the opponent can find better weapon or defense systems (or can build many ships). Now if you build the TS near enemy star system, the opponent player (yeah, human! ;) ) will destroy it immedia
"Ethical Victory (as Alliance)" - to win you must declare (only declare) your ethical. Its mean that after the game, players can declare which ethical will be in use, like team-games. Now, the team (not player) is winner if have most influence points or summary rank/score after X turns. In "standard" games, the teams only declare side " f.e. blue and red", so this is only declaration to be a team member. Here in GC2 you have special bonuses from alignments, so the better way is if you ch
Here are all answers on your problems :) [quote]Diplomacy is a problem, especially the diplomacy skill stat. Players are not bound to make friends or enemies based on a diplomacy stat, and an attempt to do so would be highly limiting of strategy and diplomacy. As an alternative, prehaps a population could approve or disapprove of policies, and a player would incur certain penalties(perhaps morale penalties, perhaps political penalties) for acting against their population's wishes (espec
[quote]Make Terror Stars the ultimate HUGE ship with normal capabilities + the ability to destroy stars (although I would prefer planet destruction myself....)[/quote] Correct. Terror Stars are now too expensive. If I pay many many research points, it should be "secret" and "unexpected" weapon to use - f.e. should shot to target by distance 10 grid titles or be very fast (one engine module should equal speed as your engine technology)... Second. If we have "traditional"
I played few test games in ToA environment. My opinion about Terror Star: this is a bug . Why? - too expensive in techs - too slow - too weak (TS is destoyed when is attacked by one ship with one laser1) - too long time from completing build to ready to use status So, if you spent many many time to discover all TS technology, you have expensive, extremelly slow and weak moving stabase, which "only" may destroy all star system.