Breaking the 'normal' barrier.

Myself I think its silly and also boring sticking to exactly the same strategy game after game like you are.

You have to adapt to the situation of the game, like dont spread out so fast, I slowly work out backing up planets with ships and starbases etc. So when i do meet another race they have already met somone else therefore having a go at them instead of me.

I havent got AP yet but will do exactly the same in the games in it. In the one im in now I started week but now im building up my empire and getting powerfull.-----SLOWLY------

What do you exactly mean?

What is your build order?

What techs are you researching?

What planets (associated PQ) are you colonizing?

What is your galaxy settings?
[Message Edited]

If I read you correctly (1st post in this thread)... you normally play the senarios rather than random maps? Anyway, I play the random maps (huge - rare planets) or some of my own maps (I have AP). But as the others have said, your methods will depend greatly on what victory type you plan on, the location of the other players, what planets you claim (and thier quality), and how difficult you set the AI players. I generally set the Altarians to "Pure Good, Incredible," and the Yor to "Pure Evil, Incredible." The other AI players are a mixure all above normal and some set on neutral. Apart from that, I find myself often going for a cultural or tech victory; not to say I don't cream a few AI along the way to either goal. Then there are mods... I often use those. That said...

I sort'a do as you: I go for planets quickly unless my viewing range shows no AI nearby... in such case, I divert money to tech research. It is important on random maps with rare planet settings (as I often use) to get what few planets there are before the AI find them. I set my economy full at 100% spending (50 tax rate if possible) going negative until all my savings are gone; then set to about +10 surplus.

I find it very important to make contact early and get freighters going to the edges of my borders. Once contact is made, I trade for other techs and money. The money I set to arrive over a 10 turn period (or more). Don't do bad trades. Some of the minor AI are ass-holes in that regard. The trade money income helps normalizes my spending, but it allows me to begin to put money toward planet improvements.

I find myself often stuck going for a 14 PQ or 15 PQ planets, so:

Builds:

Soil, Nucleur Power (mod), Fusion Power, Entertainment, Bank, Manufacturing, Habitat Improvement... then money sorts of improvements; more production improvements, and more moral improvements... along the way, my better planets get the achievements built... plus, I strive for the diplomacy trade good. The Antarians usually get that hit point trade good before I do (I forget what it is called), so I trade them for it; I like getting the gravity accelerators as well.

Important, I think, is to get a Star Base (or several) going near your best planets in the same sector for production improvement bonuses (mfg and social). I try to get Star Base speed modules built first so that I can send freighters and constructors out from the sector faster to distant places. And several Star Bases in the same sector with speed modules will all add-up for a cumulative speed bonus.

As early as possible, I que up funds for making Star Fighters; and my better worlds try for Constructors (for Star Bases) and Battle Hammers. That helps the AI leave me alone while I continue to "catch-up" on technology... I often fall behind on tech while I try to get my planet improvements going. My spending percentages are something like 20, 60, 20 (respectively). I change it as needed, of course. Later in the game: 20, 20, 60 (respectively). Or for war: 60, 20, 20 (respectively - typical... not always, of course).

Getting a freighter (for trade) over to a neutral AI will help them not get angry against you as early (all other things being "equal").

Mid game? Anti-matter missiles are king; I also like the Death Knight and Frigate.

I play the evil alignement as often as the good alignment. Some times I go evil in order to get some planet production bonuses or PQ bonuses (if lucky), then attempt colonizing a useless world in an attempt to get an offer toward becoming "good." I disban the world if nothing happenned. Watch your social abilties to see your rating change.

Heh, I also make my hero explorer ship (use auto explore if the monster eggs are not near) to collect as many of the bonuses from space junk as possible... sometimes it becomes the most powerful ship in the game.

Type of government and picks? Depends on how you want to play... Me? I go for Fereralist, Technologist, or Industrialist... or my own creation (like environmentalist or spy master). Picks include diplomacy +50 or +60, range +1 (mod), speed +1 (mod) and others just depend...

While I do use mods, it doesn't mean the game is any easier... I do lose about half of my games on random maps. When winning, I often quit, as I seldom have the time to play all the way to the end. I like the first 2 or 3 hours of the game the best.

Well, at the early stage of a planet, Fusion power has a too high cost for its benefit. I generally go for :
Soil enrichement, habitat improvement (PQ bonus means greater production and better morale), bank (for money), entertainement network (35 Bc for a +20% morale improvement is nice for starting planet).
Then my build list is ordered after:
- production costs: my list contains first project that have a building cost lower than 100 BC, then those equals to 100 BC, then those between 101 and 200 BC, then those between 201 and 400 Bc
- maintenance costs: I never build project with 4 or 5 Bc of mainteance, and I put porjects with 3 Bc for maintenance at the end of my queue

I usually never go to war first. War is wasteful in the beginning of games unless you can get a one turn kill. Diplomacy is king at higher AI intelligence levels. I never take out the minors unless they are in jeopardy of falling to a major. The minors are more useful as trading partners for techs since they give you better deals. I also try to have at least one trade route with each minor when practical. Keeping the minors in the game as long as possible allows them to weaken your opponents. Also use diplomacy and bribes to get the strong majors to war with each other instead of you. Finally try to keep the weaker majors from falling to your opponents by occasionally gifting military techs.

I fear that if you get a step by step you will go straight to the maso level. Not that that is a bad thing, but it takes alot of fun learning the nuiances of the game. With that being said there is a stratigies thread on the left of the screen that may assist you. I have develpoed my stratagey from 4 or five from there.

I still have the old Master Of Orion habits: get the production up so that other structures get built faster; that's why I go for the nuclear (low cost) and the fusion plant early. That thinking my not work so well in GC/AP? I would imagine some people have modded the fusion planet for a little better return for the cost. But I see where you're coming from as well... I find myself often buying that habitat improvement straight-up with cash gained from trading tech with AI players - due to it's importance (and that particalar item gives me a better PQ than the original - I modded it from 10 to 30 and took the cost up some).

I modded several of the starting items for stronger effect in banking, factories - power plants, and PQ... as I want a faster paced game, given I don't have endless hours to commit to it. That's what I loved about Master Of Orion II... very fast paced and often intense (if chosing hardest difficulty in a late developed or "Advanced" universe).

About manufacturing power: don't forget that a part of the bonus given to manufacturing must be paid. So if you aren't at 100% spending rate (default is 50% in january 2178), and generating a lot of free production (manufacturing capital is a must but can only be nuild on one planet), having manufacturing bonus and lower spending rate is generally the same that not having manufacturing bonus and a greater spending rate. Especially if production is wasted (ie more production used than required) on the completion turn.

Never thought I would say this, but I have to agree with Fuels Chief.

You need to worry less about going up the scale and experiment more with the myriad of options in the game.
Play it as it was intended.

I have mastered Maso, several times, but I much prefer the 'Normal' level. You have the freedom to try all the Governments and abilities.
The only things that are constant for me are that I like playing as evil, and I like to win with a military conquest at the end.
Culture flipping along the way is always a help.

Basically, stay out of war, until you are ready. Have a strong military to prevent an attack on you.
Lots of trade.
Build up the minors.
Bribe with money or techs to make the opposition fight amongst them selves. Have some transports near any battle to move in on any undefended planets.
Make alliances, when you have the tech and the money. Go to war when asked to and the next turn offer peace, at a price to the attacked empire.
You can make a lot of money and techs this way.
[Message Edited]

Thanks for the vote of confidence Marquesa. LOL

The Marquesa De Sade and others mirror my own view as well. There are many published strategies in the Strategies forum by myself and others that show how to beat MASO.

Over time I worked up to MASO and I find that the most fun I had playing the game was setting the AI to normal. When you do this you can more easily experiment with different playing styles.

When you play MASO it is very hard to use anything other than the "accepted" method for beating MASO. The computer "cheats" too much at this level although stardock calls this bonuses and not cheating.

Thanks for info.... see if I understand you... so you're saying that in order for mfg bonus to truely be effective after a certain point (as in a bell-curve), then the player needs to try to commit funds to it at at 50% or higher, hopefully at max for maximized bonus? Or is the threashhold a varible depending to the mfg maintenace cost (or whatnot)?


As an aside, not sure if this is related, but I recently created a simple improvement "regular" mod (for use in advanced technology periods of the game) where the maintenance cost is a negative number at -50 0r -75 as an improvement structure for all worlds; thusly cutting back on some of the planet maintenance costs. Watching the numbers in the game, it appears to actually work.

//------------------------------------------------------------------------
IMPROVEMENT NanoParts
//------------------------------------------------------------------------
Name "Small Parts Manufacture"
Model "ManufacturingCapital"
Type "Normal"
Tech_Requirement "NanoTechnology"
Cost 500
Maintenance -50
AI 30
Description "This new Nano Technology decreases the cost of maintenace with reliable parts. Build these factories everywhere to reduce planetary maintenance costs by 50 credits"
ENDIMPROVEMENT

I think this is a very bad idea. Don't forget that the AI can build this. More, only at the end of the game can you find planet with mainteance costs of 50. And the bonus is for each planet where you build it. Looks like easy money to me.

And if you have maintenance problem, try to find a way without modding. An important part of the game is understanding the game mechanisms and making them to work for you.

Only reason I did that particular thing, even when the AI do it (which I don't mind), was I have always felt that the game economics algoritim is a bit of hog on preventing the player from having a decent surplus of the collected taxes. I still do fine with or without the mod, BTW, and I just see it as yet another feature to research. Toward the end of the game, even with this mod active, most of my planets still have total maintenace costs that are still well positive in the 3 digits (most of my worlds build a goodly part of the available improvements depending). Plus there are some Borg and Telapathic mods very late in the game which have very high maintenace costs (to prevent excessive use).

Easy Money, heh? Yep, as when one of those late game arriving minor AI agrees to pay the player 5000 credits a turn for 50 turns. That happenned the other night after I attacked it a turn after it arrived and then asked it for peace and "demanded" my "terms." That's "easy money." I couldn't believe it either!
[Message Edited]
[Message Edited]

Well, take a look at this thread http://www.galciv.com/forum.asp?BID=GF&id=197938, it should be clearer

Well, there are some penalties linked to PQ of planet for collecting associated taxes. And you can have others sources of income:
- trade routes, created by you or by AI to yours planets)
- tribute, if you manage to get BC for AI over many month

In some games I have played, the trade income was greater than the collected taxes (gigantic map with freighters obtained from AI close to their planets are very nice). And don't forget that happy colonists pay taxes

And don't forget that not all improvements should be build ...

Thanks Peace Phoenix. Inspite of some of my comments, I still kind'a like the economic system, due to the fact I appreciate original design (as it seems to me); and it becomes clear the player must look at other ways of earning income (like trade and other things you mention), and that adds a new dynamic missing in many other space 4X games (or were not explored enough in thier innate designs); the end result is the diplomatic route is advanced greatly, as is social construct (culture); so that war isn't necessarily to end-all end-all point of the game as it is in most other 4X games. BTW, I like the culture "movie" victory the best... kind'a neat win it plays

*I like the culture "movie" victory the best... kind'a neat win it plays*

Have you seen the beyond human victory movie?