In GC1, if I recall correctly, trade benefits equally to both sides of the trading route. This is not good, in my opinion. Look at how trade seems to work on our planet: - the side with the highest technology level provides high technology goods - the side with the lowest technology level provides basic items This means that any trade should result in some technology transfer. Also, the current scheme doesn't favor establishing trade routes; it is as good to wait as to d
moi-meme
While I like the idea of how trade is conducted (with the mini freighters etc...), it has a major drawback: if you want to play correctly, you should, during a war, kill all of your opponent's trade routes. You are at an unfair disadvantage against the computer here: - it knows exactly where all the mini-freighters are (just strain your eyes on the map in GC1 to get that information!) - It can (and does!) shadow some/all of your mini-freighters with small attack ships
About the council: First, we must define what the council is: in terms of GC1, it is not a political entity ; it is a trading entity that defines the trade rules between members (we are far from earth-UN here ; much more like earth-WTO). What use is it: it defines the trading conditions between it's members. Mostly, it establishes trading limits. Also, belonging to it (for trade reasons) means that you abide by it's decisions, which gives this
Maybe that's not a bug. Anyway, there seems no way to build a "custom" constructor (for exemple one with advanced engines which would go much faster that the basic design). Yves
When I put all economic cursors left (at the 0% setting), something strange happens: The total of the three cursors exceeds 100% and reaches up to 200%. For example, I had cursors at: military 0% social 50% research 50% then, I moved social at 0% the research at 0% and finally got a 50% social rate and a 150% research rate. Later, playing again with the cursors to see if there was some repetitivity to that process, I got: military 1% social
yes, that's mostly the same with weapons, although you sometimes get weapons with a bsic damage of 2 or 3.
Last time I did invade a planet I had 250 vs 650. The indicated advantage for me was 2, against 0 to the opponent. I selected standard warfare. I was surprised to see that my opponent got a 2 (I got 2 too). I was also surprised that the result was: no death on my side 650 death on their side. Are there not some things wrong in all of this ???
The new tech tree associated with the new ability to custom build ships implies a lot of balancing on the ships elements, which is not currently done. Let me explain. When you build a ship, you get to choose: - attacking weapons (number, type) - defensive layers (strength, type) From the offensive side of things, here is what you see:<
1) Agree 2) no necessary ; this is flavor. If easy to do, then yes. 3) Agree ; we need more techs for ground combat. The result is almost always a win for the attacker, especially with some money in your basket, which was not the case in Moo: money should not be sufficient to ensure a colony capture. 4) Agree ; flat trees as done now have huge drawbacks. I'll post something about this in another thread. 5) Agree an don't agree ; bombardment should be possible (and planetary s
When an enemy has a colony ship around a planet , I can select it and send it in space. I even get the cursor to fill it with the number of citizens I wish it to carry out. Great prior an invasion... but well, I doubt the enemy should let me manage his colony ships like that
No. I meant that I had at least once a ship with a set destination that refused to move. Did happen once with my Survey Flagship.
I agree with Lord KiRon . I still sometimes play MOO2, just because no other game around that I know has that diversity mix. Yves
If you're afraid about balaincing problems, make it an optional feature: all races having same atmosphere / same prefered tileset. About how the AI could handle this, I think not that bad: Moo did not a bad work with this and I remember Silicoids either screwed up or being the top dog. Furthermore, there is not that much micromanagement invoved ; in any case, not much more that there already is. Yves
In the ship creation panel, I can choose from a (long) list of drives. One of them is always better (i.e. lower space, lower cost). Why bother should all the others (which I won't choose unless I'm crazy) ? The same with each weapon class.
In the ship creation panel, the graphic for that drive doesn't appear.
When I discover a new tech that applies to ships, the "new improvements" list keeps repeating the same ships (depending on the tech) many times.
When improving the market into a trade center, the time to build the improvement was indicated as "-6" instaed of what I guess should have been "16".
In the domestic policy panel, my civ was rated as "8String" instead of 8th in economy.
this has no effect. More generaly, a lot of other techs seems not to have any effect, or the associated building do not seem to exist (stadium for exemple) ; it would be good if non implemented features were clearly indicated so as not to report them as bugs.
I can see some of my opponents ships in places where the map is not revealed. Is this normal ?
When playing on a gigantic galaxy, you cannot see the stars in the minimap, so you have to zoom it. This is a bit tricky (in general), and even impossible when you try zooming near one of the map edges (or at least the superior edge). It would be good if the stars did show on the main map, even in uncharted territory.
I have been attacked by invisible ships. I am not aware of any cloaking kind of technology (at least not at this part of the game). Might this be a graphical glitch ?
My survey ship (don't know for other ships yet) can go one square beyond the range limit as indicated on the map.
this doesn't give access to new improvements even though the text indicates it should. I researched (in order): manufacturing theory xeno-factory xeno-bank xeno-mining
sometimes ships on autopilot don't move between turns.