Seriously, late game I'm pretty much drowning in resources with nowhere to put 'em. Last medium game I finished with ~150 refinery ships floating around, and a similar number of trade ships. Bit of overkill, but hey.
let me reclarify; they aren't exactly "seperate", but there is a limit on how many cap ships you do. I really detest that system -- what happens when I'm the head of a 10,000 planet empire? Even if I simply linearly scale a reasonable number of capships up to match my new empire's size, I run into that limit long before I reach my usage of ship points. I thin
And I've been playing with a Sova... so far it's a bit fragile, but working pretty well microed.
Umm... Am I the only person with a nagging suspicion that rapid-colonizing Akkan would be IMBA as hell? Maybe right now, but that seems pretty tweakable balance-wise, to me.
I'm sorry, but a ship jumping out when its taking heavy damage is just the enemy ship being smart. Sure, it sucks have a ship jump away with just 1 or 2 HP left (and I've had that happen to me...), but you can do it to the enemy, too. And if it REALLY upsets you, just have your vessels follow it to the other end of the jump point <img id="ImageResize_Image_2" onload="ImageResizer.createOn(this);" src="http://images.stardock.com/gc2/T_DL/sm
Yarlen: Excellent hexenjag: Eh, not much a fan -- that'd slow down the early game *considerably*. The capship is the pirate-breaker, and having to wait for research could be rough.
Currently, all the capships we've seen are (theoretically) all equally valuable. While I know some people want to change that, I think keeping them flat-priced has some advantages. For example, might it be possible (particularly in MP) to choose which class you want as your capital ship? Might add a bit of variety, particularly to the early game... (do I go for the firepower of the Kol, the early colonizing of the Akkan, etc).
While I certainly don't mind the current Cruiser situation, this is also reasonable: Take cruisers double their supply and production cost. Give them some more armor and shielding and give them a boost in weaponry, especially the Kodiak and the Command Cruiser (For the Command Cruiser add a few autocannon turrets, the TEC need some more kinetic love. Or whatever). Just a bump for the Robotics Cruiser. And an extra squadron or two for the Carrier but only
I thought battle3 was kind was weird, probably because of the breathing thing. So far battle 4 sounds awesome though. Weird, but battle 3 is actually my fave of the 'battle' series, simply because it's very unique. And hey, looking through the Sound dir, we hear what the advisors for the other 2 races sound like.
You can't be sure! possibly some sort of enhancement could boost the power output to 110%. A photon accelerator? Who knows! I can. If you can get 110% efficiency, you hardly need those solar panels. You're creating energy out of nothing
there is a technological excuse or counter excuse for absolutely anything in a scifi universe. I'm not interested in how they justify the lack of Fog of War in system from a story or realist point of view. Purely Game Play, as a game is it better or worse without fog of war in system. I say worse, as it limits tactics. I like it as is, from a gameplay and realistic (*shudder*, I really hate saying that when talking about a game) point of vi
It's been mentioned that the savegames are currently completely uncompressed, human-readable files to make it easier to find problems/etc atm. So, yes, it's just a Beta thing, I believe.
-Some dead zones which are uncolonisable. Maybe areas with a black hole, nebula or high density asteroid field, things that can affect your ships one way or another. For example High-density asteroid fields slowing damage ships passing through them, the lager they are the more damage the accumulate. Nebulas disable shields. Black hole slow ships down or destroys ships if small ships with smaller engines get to close. Also pirate bases could be found in these zones
Totally agree -- my first reaction to "Move" being keyed to "D" was a big "huh?", then I checked the other keys, noting the positions, and got it. I'd heard of setups like that, just never seen them as the default... and I love it. Kudos, Ironclad.
Personally, while I have nothing against competitive MP, I can pretty much guarantee that the overwhelming majority of my MP games will be co-op vs computers, possibly big, long games. My brother and I love to play games together, so that's just the way these things tend to end up.
Don't defend the flaws... instead think of ways to improve upon them. Give them an idea, it doesn't necessarily have to be do-able but it could spark another idea in one of the designers heads. Well, that's just it -- I don't consider it a flaw, as it's fun atm Ohhh and there should be solar systems with 2-3 stars in them too. T
- the auto save gets veerrrryy annoying... it takes forever to save the game (with my really nice computer, about 5-10 seconds) and it occurs like every 5 minutes. Now I like autosave because I always forget to save my game then it freezes.... but every 5 minutes is just too much for the length of time a save takes. It's been covered a bit -- long story short, you can disable it, change the interval (see the stickies), and it's currently unoptimized for
I have no problem with the concept -- the implementation currently leaves a bit to be desired, however, as there is little indication of when colonies will instantly flip. If, say, you couldn't colonize planets until they wouldn't insta-flip, or even if there was a 'Enemy propaganda in this system makes it highly likely this planet will quickly revolt -- do you wish to colonize anyway? Y/N?' message, it'd be useful.
Wow... dunno how I missed that. Yep -- disabling "show team colors" fixed that right up. Thanks.
Just a little annoyance I figured I'd throw here in hopes of getting it changed. Unless I'm missing an option somewhere, the only icon colors that are displayed on the map are red for enemy, green for you/allies. The enemy being all one color is fine, but allies having the same color as you is a bit annoying -- it's difficult to find your own ships without band-boxing the grav well and sorting t
Question: Does changing the graphics like that involve any gameplay level (e. g. damage done) calculations? Well, the I reduce the damage to compensate for the reduced cooldown, so effectively, the damage should be the same... however, that's not really going to be the case,
Glad everyone seems to like the effect. My first thought was "oooh that looks very BSG". I won't tell you how much I love the scene where the defensive barrage opens up at the end of the BSG mini series. That's exactly what I wanted -- BSG's guns are exactly what I think of when I think 'autocannon'. Flak could use a little improvement imo, as well -- wh
Rockin', thanks. Did so, and must say, I rather like the effect. Here's a quick & dirty capture of how it looks (as butchered by google video): http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-407227294302653153 With the original quality here: http://rapidshare.com/files/43930951/KolAutoCannons.avi.html All I did was drop the cooldown and damage by a factor of 6. Although, in retrospect, I imagine this also affects shield mitigation. :/ Ah well.
Okay, got a pair of games under my belt, and while everything is damn *beautiful*, one thing that I think detracts from the combat is the whole "salvo" mechanic. I mean, it makes sense for some weapons (frex -- the Kol lasers. They work nicely in the massive charging laser of doom style), but for others (autocannons/many guns in general) it looks awkward. I think things might look a lot cooler if many of these weapon systems had their cooldown times reduced very significantly, while lowering
An option for the game to only keep a certain number of autosaves would also be nice. I just finished playing my first games today and came back to nearly 3GB of saves (I know you said you haven't bothered with compressing the saves yet, but even taking that into account, I certainly don't need my past 50 saves lying around. 2-5 are plenty, imo. )
