Vehement26

[quote who="Stalker0" reply="19" id="3856830"] I also disagree with allowing sensors to stack on one ship. That allowed you to create "super probes" in GC III that covered ridiculously swaths of areas, making any other sensor use irrelevant. I think the current model is a lot more balanced. [/quote] Personally, I'm a fan of this ship type. It's true that it provides a strategic advantage, but also makes it a valuable strategic target that has to be prote

Did anyone play Rules of Engagement and Breach in the 90s? ROE was ship to ship combat, and you could board enemy ships. Breach was shipboard combat game that allowed you to take tactical control of those battles. ROE would just move you into Breach to play out the combat. What about an optional planetary combat system, provided as DLC? It wouldn't unreasonable to charge for it. The hex maps from GC3 really laid the groundwork. Not to mention whole

Perhaps make the weapons systems more specific to the hull types? Tiny Lasers do 1 damage base, while Massive/Huge Hull is like 10 (Just as an example). Tiny ships simply don't get to mount the monstrous weapon systems, and the Massives get firepower that can really only be matched by similar class ships. 2 Mediums should not be able to pound a Massive into submission, not without a huge tech discrepancy between races. Maybe the fleet multipliers need to be removed o

[quote who="Croc411" reply="3" id="3856635"] Yes, except transports. It doesn't make sense to have more than one transport module on a ship anymore. [/quote] For combat purposes, yes. However, multiple transport modules could be use to create "starliners" to move citizens to planets more suited to their preferred skillset or to evacuate a planet (for whatever reason deemed necessary),

One thing that seems to be an ongoing concern is the overpowering capability of carriers. Well, let's be honest, that's real-life. Carrier Aircraft changed naval warfare forever, and we see it in the game as well. However, unlike in real-life, there's no dedicated weaponry to counter those craft. Right now, ships target a single ship with all their weapons (and 150 damage whales on 5 HP). What if there were weapons that would individually target ships? They

[quote quoting="post"] The whole one-per-ship module system is a mess. At the moment I can put only two carrier modules on a ship, no matter its hull. So you don't want me to build a Huge hull supercarrier filled with carrier modules, but at the same time you have no problem with me creating a Small hull with 2 carrier modules and throwing 40 of these ships into a fleet? Doesn't make sense to me at all. Same problem with many other modules. IMO, the only modules restricted to

This is happening with my own ships. I have 2 freighters in my most recent game that get stuck leaving my home sector. Ship range extends far beyond the gate.

I am having the same problem, but it started much later in the game (well past turn 200). I might have clicked it by accident, but I also noticed my default colony ships disappeared after I designed a different ship (is there an auto-obsolete kicking it?). Is there an edit we can make to reverse a ship's "obsolete" state?

My biggest wish for the Gal Civ franchise? A robust ground combat engine! Thoughts: *Ground combat classes (Marines, Infantry, Armor, Artillery, Air Support, etc). Each unit having different abilities, and movement levels *Planets conquered hex by hex (both by military and influence) *Partisan units spawned based on resistance level *Having to maintain space superiority to either do orbital bombardments (or send reinforcements) <p

One of the early things I've noticed when playing with the race customization options is that the descriptions of each of the traits only appear if you've actually chosen that trait. The "Hover Bubbles" don't appear from the selection in the drop down menu. I'd recommend adding this sooner when you start looking for more feedback on customization, since it's more likely traits will be selected if players know what they will do.