I'm sure this will probably stir a pot or kick a dead horse, but... The Epic Store is good for gaming, good for developers, and good for gamers.... People should give them less hate. https://www.pcgamer.com/epic-has-been-great-for-many-indies-says-x-com-and-phoenix-point-creator/ &nbs
[quote who="Fulgrymm" reply="73" id="3854946"] I'm still bitter about Impulse. I bought a bunch of non-SD games through there that had to be repurchased through Steam when Impulse died. Not doing that again, not for Epic, not for anyone. [/quote] I'm confused... all of those games are still on the Gamestop app. You can still play them on that App if you remember your login. Also When Gamestop stopped supporting the app for new purchases they
Each Civ will respond differently. You got a negative with the Xeloxi... most likely if the same scenario had been with a different race you would have gotten a + It is probably working exactly as it should based on that race's nature.
oh yeah I've been on that page before. I it is painfully in need of a modernization.... that blue is just harsh now. But B5 is scifi at some of it's best in my opinion. "The truth is a three edged sword." ah vorlons... Vorlons are the best. I've made more than a few B5 ships in GCII and GCIII over the years.
I suspect Brad is a Babylon 5 fan... That said... Yay lore!
Well, I realize this is still the beta builds... but one would hope they balance that. It is FUN to go out and war monger... but it is also fun to sit back turtle and win via other methods... all routes must have viable races/options..
I don't have GC4 yet as my circa 2012 computer is on deaths door and won't run it and something about a global pandemic made replacing it a pita (SOOON) But.... are diplomatic or research still a viable victory path? if conquest is the only viable way to win the game... then the civs are not the issue... the game balance is.
so what's so bad about the Iconians?
[quote who="Halicide" reply="29" id="3842254"] Taslios, Targeting N ships could be a solution. The only problem I can see is that it may be a lot more difficult to balance and code into the game. When you add a feature like that there can be unintended consequences that shift the power dynamic. Because it would be much more difficult to balance I'd go with damage reduction where you can adjust a few numbers to reach a more fair fight. [/quote
To your last post.... thrusters were pointless in GCIII if tactical speed helped in closing with the enemy.. or keeping away from the enemy.. or significantly affected hit rates. They would matter. [quote who="Basilisk83" reply="12" id="3841764"] the problem i think that there might be with a rate of fire change (even though it does make se
My thoughts would also require a change in the tactical settings one could assign to ships in the designer. Missiles: Slow firing. Long range High damage *High damage in cases of unarmored vessels* Beam: Ave fire, med range, med damage No change in damage against unarmored vessels Kinetic: Very fast firing, short range, low damage per shot. **Very high damage in cases of unarmored vessels** Po
Subjective question has subjective answer... This highly depends on what other games you play are. If you like Civilization, particularly older versions like 3 or 4... One or two games? if you've never really played a lot of turn based 4x games... much longer.
[quote who="Halicide" reply="21" id="3841611"] The problem that I would like to highlight is that in GC3 and currently in GC4 the combat system is very skewed towards a swarm of tiny ships. This is caused by the fact that a ship can only target one ship at a time. If a huge ship has 6 powerful lasers, it can still only fire at one ship before recharging. If it is fighting a swarm it can only take down one ship at a time which is far to slow a
Did anyone here ever play Gratuitous Space Battles? Gal Civ has one of the hands down best ship designers in existence. you can make the ships look like whatever you want. Why not make that mean something a little more in the combat? Rather than just ship types.. interceptor, Assult etc. Let the Player designate ship behavior in combat. So I don't have GC4 yet... so I'm not even sure if the stuff still exists
I turned ascension victory off in GCIII I find it the single most annoying victory type... But yeah the everyone declaring war on you at once mechanic is..... not cool
[quote who="aerez4546" reply="25" id="3837744"] Two things guaranteed on Gal Civ forums at least all the way back to Gacl Civ II days: 1) People asking/begging/rationalizing the need for tactical combat, at least once every couple months. 2) Gal Civ creators saying no there will not be tactical combat, and delivering on exactly that. Happy Thursday! [/quote] TRUTH
[quote who="tb801" reply="21" id="3837503"] Some kind of combat tactics is all I have been asking for from the get go, so I quite agree. I think I would buy "Galactic Tactics" if it were ever produced [e digicons]:blush:[/e] [/quote] Well some people argue it should be exactly like MOO2 with individual control over each unit. and that just does not interest me given the scope of this game and how many units you might have. <
I do think they should do more with the player control for the combat.. especially now that the combat can last turns.. there should be units that try to capture enemy ships, there should be units that only target fighters. There should be units that stay at range and snipe.. those sort of combat behaviors should be able to be set by the player before combat even begins. Give us fleet tactics so that the combat feels like more than just r
Really what SD needs to do is make two games.. Galactic Civ 4 and leave the tactics out.... It is a civ builder game not a combat driven game... and then Galactic Tactics where the majority of the game is tactical combat, getting research from tactical combat, that lets you build better ships... to do better tactical combat. Then people who really really really want the tactical combat can be pointed to a game of tactical combat.
[quote who="Gauntlet03" reply="1" id="3834163"] I was reading this and a thought occurred to me... Perhaps ship experience should be removed altogether and instead a single overall "Naval Experience" that applies to the whole empire. So essentially, any ship new or old can gain XP for the entire navy, which in turn gives some very slight advantage to the whole navy. This removes the issue of XP falling onto one outmoded vessel. I also like it, as it effectively repr
Stardock doesn't need starter cash... They really don't even need to make money from games. (yes they are a company yes they would very much like to but they don't need to) I bet they have yet to make back their investment in Star Control... They make far more income from Start 11, Groupy, Fences, Windows Blinds, and custom licensed products and technology like the actual Aero gui used in Windows that Microsoft licensed FROM Stardock. But again t
I think the first battle should be in the viewer... and then after that the player can just turn off the viewer or turn it back on if they want on a fleet by fleet basis... I say this because if I have a maxed out fleet and i'm about to take it against the other maxed out fleet... I kinda want to watch, but if I have just a mop up fleet against the dregs left over.. meh
Technology hurdles... At game start the Nebula are impassible do research.. they greatly slow your ships and perhaps damage them each turn you are in them Do more research. They slow your ships and rarely damage them Do MORE research They slow your ships Do More research They no longer slow your ships treat them as normal space Do all the research The stellar gasses in Nebula allow for faster repair and refueling of
I would. Actually i'd love a completely blind research tree as it would be more realistic. You allocate resources to fields and then get breakthroughs... A well known example being Viagra was supposed to treat baldness... not impotence. or 3m Post it notes... the glue was supposed to be a better stronger superglue/epoxy but it ended up just being tacky forever and never hardening... If we had research paths like astrop
Whooo tech treeeeeeee!!!
