What I object to is that there are folks that are expressing their legitimate issue with the current update ability and it's the people that have no such issue that consistantly in effect say screw them. It's fine you have no issue with SDC. I'm happy for you. However you have no right to belittle someone else's issue. Very good point, if they were the ones having difficulty, I am quite sure they would be just as upset as the people expe
Deathgerbil
Is it reasonable to cater to those people, though? If they paid for the game, then they have a right to the updates, the same as anyone else. I am on dialup because it is the only connection type available in my area (satellite is a non-starter due to latency issues). That said, a decent flash-drive and a friend with high speed internet (or a work connection with permission to use it) is really all that is needed. Yes th
I don't particularly like the process needed to install and update the game. It is a little confusing and there are far to many steps in my opinion. If you could choose to update with a stand alone patch OR through stardock, I would choose the stand alone. My main problem with it, is that I only used the program to update GAL CIV II and it seems a waste of time and disk space to have to install and update another program just to be able to patch the game. That said, Stardock support was
I am just dealing with what is happening now, lets hope such technology is able to do as you suggest! If such technology for whatever reason fails to come about then we are right back to what i am saying again. Could it happen much slower than i suggest? Well as far as five or six generations is concearned, i do not think it is at all unrealistic that 50% of the population would be insulin dependant, among other things. It is a guess of course,
In the discussion about insulin, why would the injection of artificial insulin be the final medical solution to diabetes ? It would seem to me, that the solution lies in the area of gene therapy to completely restore the bodies ability to produce insulin on it's own. If this happens then there are no "bad" genes to pass on. Just speculation you understand. I am just dealing with what is happening now, lets hope such technology is
In rereading what I posted about genetic traits not needed for survival being dropped, I thought I spotted a possibility for a miscommunication. Yes the body does tend to "lose" traits not needed for survival, but this would not have the effect of losing the ability to produce insulin just because this can be corrected through medical science. The reason is that the human body NEEDS insulin to survive. The fact that some people are enabled to survive without this ability does not change
I do not know why it is so hard for you to understand that in evolutionary terms, our biology will not hold on to things that are not needed for survival. *snip* That is how I concluded that humans will one day be unable to produce insulin naturally, and that is just one example among many. Hmm, let me see if I can be clearer about what the problem with this is. "will not hold on to things that are not needed for survival" , yes
Genectic degridation ? The gene pool itself is not degrading, but rather expanding in both directions, positive traits and negative traits. This actually increases our chances of survival since our ability to change with enviromental changes has a larger pool of potential to pull from. Even if I agreed with your idea of genetic degridation, which I do not, respectfully. 5 or 6 generations ? That is an extremely short time span. 100 to
Long term,, well i guess we are starting to see genetic degridation as a result of medical science already. So that will quickly increase. I would guess that after another 5 or 6 generations at least half the population in developed countries will be unable to stay alive without medical intervention. DIV> . Genectic degridation ? The gene pool itself is not degrading, but rather expanding in both directions, positive traits and negative tr
Thank you for corrrecting my misconception, I apologize for spreading bad information.
What does "creativity" do in terms of game mechanics? I've bought it a few times and never noticed much of an effect, so I quit. I usually max research and econ. I believe it lets you gain the next tech up the ladder (when you are researching a tech and get it and then the next one as well).
Far too many good books to pick a favorite, but just about anything by C H Cheryh (sp?) is good. The entire series about Miles Vorkosigan by Mary-louis Bujold is very well written and has an unusual hero. I can't believe no one (especially in this forum) has mentioned David Weber's Honor Harrington series or Johnny Ringo's "March Upcountry" series, both are epic space sagas. Also how about Steven White's "Insurrection", and "Shiva Option" books, truly chilling space operas. P.S.
Hey, I too am new to the GalCiv2 world, having just picked up the game this last weekend. I've already played a couple of games where I've run out of money because I didn't time my economy right, and I've played a game where I discovered the universe was too large for me to run (too many planets). I'm getting the hang of it now, but I'm wondering how certain people claim to be able to beat the AI when it's on it's hardest level (I'm playing DA). At the Bright
Picking all the improvements for all of your tiles won't have a bad effect on your economy as long as you have things build in the right order, ie, some economy buildings first. Generally, I would agree, but if you are playing with a huge or gigantic map with lots of planets, you can get into a hole pretty quickly like this. If you are rapidly expanding and queing up a full slate on every planet, you can end up getting buildings faster than y
If you are haveing money issues, then yes this is probably part of the problem. Try building a few factories, starport, and some econ buildings (cueing these up) and then come back to the colony later to build the rest of your buildings. The intial factory has no maintenance cost, so if you wait to research the factory line until you have some population to generate taxes, this can save you a lot of maintenance costs. morale buildings aren't really needed until your population g
Something to consider about medical technology is that it doesn't just provide treatments for ailments/deficiencies, it sometimes COMPLETELY cures/removes the deficiency. What I mean is, taking the insulin thing, it is possible that medical science will discover a way to completely cure the diabetic of his condition and make him into a "normal" individual. The idea that our advances in medical science will lead to some sort of de-evolution due to a polluted gene pool, doesn't take this into a
See, it's really not an anomaly. It's a precursor trap. It works like a glue pad for space ships. Aliens check in, but they don't check out.
Well, I seem to have little trouble with challenging, but tough is giveing me a run for the money. I turn tech trading off for my games. It seems ( I can't really tell, mind you) that with tech trading on, the AI swaps tech amongst themselves willy-nilly and you end up trying to compete with the combined research potential of however many opponents you have. Even on tough with tech trading off, I can keep up or slightly ahead in tech. My current problem is to stay ahead (or at least keep up
Well I have upgraded ships and given it a diffrenet name but when that upgrade screen comes up, it only list other ship designs of that class. For example: Lets say I have a Large Scale ship called Enterprise and I also have 3 other Large scale ships and lets say I call them by the following names(Battlestar, Carrier, and Cruser) Ok now lets say that I just research a tech that gives me Warp drive. So now I want to upgrade my Enterprise class design with the n
How about this: The evil benefits remain as now, printed out for anyone to see. For that matter the current good benefits remain, also. But behind the interface, there is a random chance of other, subtler benefits for choosing good - perhaps an increase in Luck, perhaps an increase in Influence, Diplomacy, Creativity, Defense,...perhaps the occasional unique blessing, like a 10% chance that your ship/fleet can't be hit in the next battle (a cha
yeah beeen good shud be harder Yes, it should be harder to accheive a good alignment, but that does not mean that there should be NO events where being good pays a dividend. That was my point. I don't want to turn it on it's head, but there should be SOME times when choosing good actually pay
I have a question. I noticed that when I finish upgrading a ship design and I already have ships of that older design on the map, A ship upgrade screen comes up after I hit save un the Shipyard. However it does not have an entry for my upgraded design on the list. Is that a bug, or am I missing something? As it stands I have to go and select the ship that needs upgrading then update it. If I understand what you are saying, you are upgrading an EXIS
We've been over this again and again and again. Evil is not stronger. It is faster, easier, more seductive. The straight and narrow path should be HARD to walk. I wasn't proposing switching the ENTIRE event listing, but I do feel there should be SOME events where the good option is benenficial. As it is now NONE of them are and it feels a bit forced. Also it does not have to be a zero-sum situation, as my example above illustrates. There can s
I really think that there should be some (doesn't have to be many, just SOME)events where you actually get a bonus for picking good. Right now there is not a single landing event where choosing the good option does anything for you other than keeping you from having to pay to align yourself with good. If the idea is to make it hard to be good, then have the evil choices also provide a boost, but differently. I was thinking something like. "A sentient race at pre warp tech level is
I think it would be great to put all of those inhabitable planets to use. Maybe some kind of mining on them? If anyone here has played the old Windows 3.x classic Stars , you'll know what I'm talking about. If this feature is not implemented, it would be nice if there was an option to turn off viewing inhabitable planets. They often make for a lot of confusion and clutter, especially when playing on a large map. What about being able to