I'm not sure if it does it because the code detects the research being empty and planet being colonized, or if it's actually coded to do it that way. Though you do need to set your research and your builds on the first turn. That said, I agree that immediately opening them may not be the best option, as I usually want to look at the galactic map, and make my ship moves, be
I'm pretty sure I've seen the surrendering race removed from the Diplo screen when it happened in one of my games.
The Colony Ship is a specially modified ship that would not normally be possible to build. IIRC, Stardock has said they'll bring it in line with the game mechanics when the mechanics become a concern down the road.
I don't know whether Open Log Directory is supposed to work, but I know that Submit Exception Report doesn't do anything; you have to attach the log to an e-mail. ([email protected] is where you should send SmartException Reports.) My installation on Windows XP is located at C:\Program Files\Common Files\Stardock\SmartException. It might be a different path if you're not using Windows XP, though.
Sounds like you don't have DirectX 9 installed; and so far as I know, the Beta doesn't install DirectX with itself. You can download 9.0c at http://www.microsoft.com/windows/directx/default.aspx
Happened to me too. One of the Stardock people e-mailed me back saying it seems all invasions of the player crash the game.
I've also found that clicking the "find" button to make sure all autopilot ships have moved helps to get the turn button back.
One other thing I forgot to note. You can access AI starports and launch their ships for them. Would be handy if you have an unescorted transport bearing down on a planet. I imagine this was simply not removed for the Beta, either intentionally or unintentionally.
So, I played a quick Beta 2 game. It seems I've had much less trouble with this Beta than most. Download went fine, activation went fine as soon as I granted it access through the firewall. No crashes to report. However, there were some bugs. Major ones: -I'm not 100% sure if this is a bug, but I certainly hope it is: combat does not cost a move. I had a technologically advanced ship called Cruiser II, and it could pound Drengin Defenders forever th
According to the front page, it sounds like you will not be able to get Beta 2 if you pre-order after its release. But it also sounds like people will be able to get on board for Beta 3 regardless of whether they were there for Beta 2?
Costs and other stats are still up in the air so far as I know, as SD has said that the values and techs in the beta are all going to be tweaked. And it's not exactly rock-paper-scissors in that each defense [i]will[/i] help against all three types of weapons, but at a reduced level against the two it is not specifically designed to counter.
I would hope 512 MB would be enough. Probably just bugs that somehow don't get saved with the game.
It would be nice to expand Good vs. Evil in to two dimensions. Really, though, I'm more concerned about improving Neutral. It seemed to me there was little benefit toward taking the middle path in GC1; unlike evil, you don't get the diplomacy difficulties, but unilke both good and evil, there are no additional techs. Extremism, one way or the other, was the way to go; it would be nice to make Neutral in to an actual third option.
Vanyel, on the range thing: had you reloaded a saved game? Influence determines range, and since influence is not yet saved, all your ships will tell you they need to go in to stasis. I'm afraid games must still be either played through to conclusion or abandoned when it's time to quit.
There is more than one English keyboard. I use a Dvorak layout and I don't have problems with it and GC2. (It's remapped through Windows; the keyboard itself is not remapped. Perhaps that's the difference?)
The main advantage to fighters I can think of (assuming the fighters, too, could be designed) is allowing the player to skimp on fighter craft's range and speed, since the carrier would compensate for that by having them onboard except during battles. However, if that's the only advantage, it seems to me one might as well just add in some extra miniaturization levels on range and speed modules to accomplish about the same effect. Fighters are great in games
In GalCiv2, the 3D engine allows you to zoom in and out. I imagine you'll be able to find the zoom level you want.
I forgot about starbases. Allowing a planet-less race to continue so long as it has a starbase is an interesting idea, and I don't think it would be bad; starbases are sitting targets just like planets, and since they require expensive constructors and maintenance, there wouldn't be too many of them. So long as a race cannot remain in the game through ships alone, I think allowing a race to stay in the game up to any other point would be fine.
If range is based on influence, and a race has all its planets conquered, wouldn't the ships, including colonies and transports, be stuck dead in space unable to resupply?
I haven't had a reply to any of my reports. Unless they need more details or something I wouldn't expect one. I have no idea how many they're dealing with, but I would imagine that would end up being hundreds of replies... And yeah, [email protected] is the catch-all address for bug reports, CariElf's just asking to be sent this one in particular.
Makes sense the starport would be in close orbit or on ground anyhow, where it would be closer for shipping to and from and easier to protect. Question: Currently I see military production being spent on worlds whether or not a starport is present. Will this be changed for starportless worlds? If not, it seems to me the player will be forced to build starports everywhere to avoid sending money down th
I definatly agree that the RP's should rollover, even if this isn't realistic. Like Uruguru said, we can't encourage micromanagement by rewarding players who know how to fiddle with the knobs. Music to my ears. Now, can we
8.5 out of 10? Wow. No diplomacy, trade, little research, no play balancing... since you think Beta 1 is that good, I fear for your personal life when the real thing is completed. Personally, I haven't even bothered to think what I'd rate it. I could, but I don't have much desire to for Beta 1, so much is still missing.
I agree games like MOO2 and Civ3 do show you shouldn't make such instantaneous (or near instantaneous) travel unlimited in scope. However, just like other things - starbases, for example - I think it could work out if there were limits placed on them, either officially by limiting the number a player can build, or unofficially by making them cost so much it isn't worth building more than a few. All you have to do in Civ3 is devote enough workers over enough turns and voila, you can trav
I would guess no damage, and it just takes a while for the attacker to finally score enough hits if the weaponless defender has very good defenses.
GalCiv2 Forums