random50

random50

Joined Member # 2415008
0 Posts 24 Replies 5,805 Reputation

I hear rumours that the focus buttons have been changed and the all-X strategies have been dethroned as the optimal way to play. Can anyone give more details? I'm considering whether to buy the expansion and this is probably the major decision maker for me. (I know that sounds an odd thing to decide on, but I really disliked the way I felt forced into the all-X strategy in Dark Avatar/Dread Lords; going for a balanced approach and deliberately playing suboptimally was

5 Replies 8,111 Views

[quote]You could require groups that receive payment for develoment kickback to SD. Those that did it for "free" would not need to kickback to SD. Ick...enforcing this would be painful. You'd probably be better off not requiring a kickback at all just to avoid the potential legal trouble.[/quote] I think it could be manageable. Look at the NWVault for example...add in a cost to download and it could work pretty much as is. I think you'd need to require registration using the serial co

63 Replies 43,480 Views

[quote]I have no problem with the ai denying techs or having astronomic demands for a deal. BUT I have a problem with the ai giving tech like candy to each other. The problem isn't trading human vs ai, it's ai vs ai. Stop them from sharing everything like closest friends (while keeping the human out) and nobody has a reason to be upset any longer.[/quote] The AI applies the same rules to trading with other AIs as it does to trading with the player.

48 Replies 28,496 Views

Are you sure it doesn't scale already? I thought I read somewhere that it did, and that makes sense considering many techs on very slow still take more than a week even with dozens of research dedicated planets (that would correspond to a year per tech on small/medium...I'm pretty sure that doesn't happen!) Perhaps it just doesn't scale fast enough? Anyway, I'd quite like an even slower speed, but not with the current tech cost balance. I already find the early techs too expensive re

35 Replies 33,351 Views

A lot of people I've seen comment on the subject seem *fundamentally opposed* to paying for mods. To them, it's not just a question of quality - they would not even be willing to pay for a mod that was *far superior* to the original game. As I see it, it's added content which somebody has put a lot of their time into. I don't expect the original game for free. I don't feel *entitled* to receive mods for free. Lower quality is to be expected and can be reflected by much lower prices

63 Replies 43,480 Views

[quote]The problem lies as you go up in difficulty. At Suicidal, you might get 100bc for a tech by selling it to one AI. Let's say you needed that same 100bc tech, you'd have to play 1000bc. In some cases, the AI won't sell it, even if you offer it every single planet you own.[/quote] Is that really a *problem* though? It is supposed to be "suicidal" level, after all. I don't know how the advanced players are doing these days, but when I was last playing this game (a year or so ago, p

48 Replies 28,496 Views

Both KOTOR2 and NWN2 suffered primarily because of the klutzy graphics engine. Both of them had pretty strong storylines, although KOTOR2's in particular got truncated thanks to those (beep)s at Lucasarts. If people weren't so obsessed by the cosmetics (graphics and sound), we wouldn't be reduced to only seeing a handful of game releases every year (it's basically impossible for a small team to produce a game these days), nor would we be forced to keep upgrading hardware just to play t

45 Replies 122,896 Views

Develop good modding tools then just leave it to the gamers. One thing I'd be interested in seeing is a company willing to publish the better community produced mods and share the revenue with the creators (perhaps after the active development cycle is ended). There's *already* some very good stuff put out for most moddable games even when people are doing it completely for free. Imagine what might turn up if the modders had at least the *potential* for some financial reward at the

63 Replies 43,480 Views

If it *is* going to be standalone, you should probably stop advertising the old version so prominently on the Totalgaming frontpage. I know I'd be *pissed* to shell out for a game then see a new version released a couple of weeks later!

38 Replies 13,326 Views

I really, really hope that a) The English version really does come out b) Stardock distribute it! https://www.elementalgames.com/forum/msg.php?lang=eng&forum=rangers&theme=484&page=auto The changelist on page 2 sounds like it's really ironed out most of the more irritating aspects of the gameplay.

38 Replies 13,326 Views

However, does that mean when you conquer the planet with the MCC or ASC on it that you destroy the planet? I'm not sure. I've never seen the AI build either!

27 Replies 14,730 Views

Nah, we probably don't want blatantly visible handicaps that would not fit in with the 'realism' of a galactic universe? I'd say the production and research levels the AI can pull in on a virtually empty planet at suicidal is *fairly* visible.

12 Replies 8,628 Views

It's rarely wrong to be building markets in preference to building nothing. When to start building up other stuff is much trickier. You don't want to wait until you can completely afford it because you will then have a prolonged phase where your economy will grow much faster than your capacity to spend the extra cash. This could easily end up leaving you well behind in the race. Equally, building up too early will leave you in a nasty financial hole. I judge it by feel...after a few

14 Replies 8,502 Views