[quote]Drex, am I reading correctly: You ask teammates to leave because they can't play as good as you (yet)?[/quote] No. He said he WANTS to do that sometimes, not that he does.
[quote]What I would like to see (even in the current version of the game) would be a revamp of the current system of acquiring ships. I do not think all capital ships should be available immediately and cruisers and even some frigates require research. In order to make this balanced, Ironclad had to significantly cripple the capital ships so they wouldn't overwhelm everything. But isn't that kind of the point of building a massive battleship? They kind of underwhelmed me when I built them...they
I seriously don't have a problem with the developers changing gameplay mechanics. That's what expansions do. That said, it shouldn't be hard to add toggles to turn off some of the big changes. I think a single player campaign would be a great addition. If they can script it well, if could be a great addition to the lore of the game. As the game stands now, it has very little "life," that is, elements that make it living and breathing. A SP campaign adds a tangible backstory to the race
I still say that a great part of the migration of gamers to consoles is because PC's don't have fixed hardware specs, developers and publishers release buggy games that cause nightmarish conflicts with drivers and repeated patching, and they release stuff that won't work on a lot of machines. Consoles are quick and easy. Any veteran PC gamer knows from experience that PC gaming is often anything but.
The fellow who posted above about the difference between consoles and PCs is on to something. Compared to consoles, pc's are a pain int he butt. I qualify myself as a medium core gamer. I'm serious about pc gaming. I have spent thousands of dollars over the years on PC upgrade, hundreds of man hours messing with failed installs, driver issues, game crashes, and the like. PC gaming is hurting precisely because of the practices publishers and developers. It's not about piracy. Yes, pi
[quote]Well in patch 1.3 I hope they add something to the info you get when holding over different things like trade ships, and refineries etc. Exp: A trade ship would say how much it is hauling and what you were getting from it each time it delivered.Want to hear something funny? That's exactly how it used to be. There was no trade income per second, there was just how much all your trade ships currently carried (on the ships themselves for that ship, and the credits infocard). But people compl
[quote]Looking forward to improved AI. I haven't played much recently because I was rolling over the AI pretty easily, and I'm not the best RTS player in the world. Hopefully now it'll put up a good fight.[/quote] Well, maybe they'll do it like some games do it, give you the option to accept to deny the surrender.
[quote]I Down loaded the game from stargate. What I would like is a game Manual.[/quote] There is one. It's in the game's install directory. I found it myself by accident. I would change the installer so it installs a bookmark to it in the start menu directory.
This is an interesting point and one I agree with. Now that it's pointed out, wiping out a population just to get the planet is indeed distasteful. It would be nice if there was some way to get the planet without nuking it. Of course, added to that there could be rebellions on planets you've just taken over, or on planets you own that get influenced by culture too much. I'd prefer that over population just disappearing or something. Sort of like Medieval Total war when a city's happiness falls b
I agree. Diplomacy needs to be tweaked. Missions need to be a tad bit more realistic in their approach as to what the player can be expected to accomplish. That and the AI needs to beat on itself a bit more rather than ganging up on the human player solely.
I wonder what the absolute (non-developer supported) minimum specs you possibly could play this game on are.
[quote] For godsakes there are people screaming their lungs out on this forum about "Fix x" or "Fix y" and you guys are fixated on voice acting . [/quote] Oh come now. This type of trolling is not welcome. People are just saying that it would be nice to have a more substantial ending for the game when you win. It's sort of a valid one. They're just saying that a substantial ending would be a nice addition, not that it's vital. Take
I agree with other posters. Increase the time frame for finishing missions, with maybe the possibility of outright rejecting them so another will pop up eventually. I also like the suggestion of more resource requests. I also think the AI needs to be a little more aggressive at times in defending its planets and working to actively reinforce them when attacked. I also agree that defense needs a bit of buffing to make it more worthwhile spending money on. Both gause cannons and
Oh. I like #33's suggestion a percentage failure would be a great compromise... And the more you have in system, the higher the percentage is, with a limit. I too think turrets are a little under strength.
I'd tie military size to economy rather than colony/population count, though often these are the same thing. Say, a certain percentage of your economy may go to military forces. The larger the economy, the larger the forces. The down side to this is that your fleets will be capped at how large you are. The tech research model has the advantage of a player being able to field very large fleets even if they're small so long as they do enough research. For real world examples, look at the
[quote] "Oh, and another suggestion... Put a button in the icon menu of stations and ships to allow you to scrap them. " -At the bottom of the the picture of the item you have selected in the middle of the screen there is a little tab for scuttle. That is shown to you in the tutorial. [/quote] Never noticed that before. Now I feel dumb. Oh well. :P
I strongly disagree. Not all players have infinite time to play games. I certainly don't. I love this game and larger maps, but the game simply takes too long to play. an AI surrender or having other optional victory conditions would speed things up immensely (and help pacing), and of course, it shouldn't be too hard to make those victory conditions optional so players can turn them on and off before starting a map. In addition, it would give players something to aim for. Right now th
Yeah, I always wondered about artifact research too. If it's not an actual in-game ability, then the references should be removed. It's awful misleading. Oh, and another suggestion... Put a button in the icon menu of stations and ships to allow you to scrap them. This would be really useful. I bought my game off of Stardock (hence no manual) and there doesn't seem to be any obvious way to scrap them. Maybe a key command I missed, but an icon would be nice.
I remember reading a couple years ago that with the release of Vista, Microsoft was going to make a big push to help bring attention to PC gaming in shops... including buying prominent shelf space if necessary. Boy, that happened. It really is frustrating to be a PC gamer. The market is going to consoles. The problem with consoles however, is they're not designed for the type of games I like to play. Like sins. On the bright side, my Gamestop had at least 2 or 3 pre-orders and
My suggestion is... give the player the ability to demand stuff from the AI akin to how they do to the player. It could be simple stuff, like resources or something, but it would make dealing with the AI more rewarding. As it is you're practically their slave to keep them happy, running off all over the place. There should be a more substantial reward for bothering to do so... say, the ability to ask them for stuff, resources, tech, etc. I also agree with others here who say that sieg
That was one of my observations about the game too, the diplomacy model forces the player to be at the beck and call of all the other races, but the player has very little way to demand anything in return. I agree that the tech rate should be scaled for huge maps.
