Jasamcarl

Reply to Please fix trading! *pout* in Galactic Civilizations II GalCiv2 Forums

I like the trading system as is. I honestly really don't know if their is a 'fair' price for a planet. This game doesn't simulate a free market, but rather a mutually exclusive competition between a finite number of players. The price should be based on strategic considerations. Part of playing a game against an ai is that sometimes it will blunt your strategies. This isn't a multiplayer game and doesn't pretend to be, but it has to be atleast somewhat competitive; i think it gets the

Reply to Twilight Beta 6a in GalCiv Journals GalCiv2 Forums

I know it's late in the game for suggestions, but I would just like to throw out my support for diplomatic relations suffering as % of planets a player controls increases, along with equal diplomatic bonuses for all other players, and maybe an additional diplomatic bonus for civs fighting the dominant civ. I.e., smaller civs should (IMO) group together and oppose a runaway civs. This isn't necessarily about increasing difficulty, as it will atleast to some degree benefit players who suf

Reply to Dear Brad: Please Stop Working in Beta Reports GalCiv2 Forums

my guess is that rls is 1) exagerrating the number of ships for effect and 2) the ai is using better planet builds which would allow it to product both more and better ships.

Reply to Twilight of the Arnor Beta 4C this week! in GalCiv II News GalCiv2 Forums

[quote]I wouldn't mind seeing the AI use starbases, or diplomacy better. 1. The AIs never decommision old starbases. I've conquoured many of their sectors, leaving their old starbases behind so they have to pay maintaince for them. Inaddition, they don't upgrade them well. I don't often recall ever needing to destroy a military starbase because it was giving my oponnets too much of a boost to firepower, or slowing down my ships too much. I also haven't seen the AI max out an in

Reply to New tech speed is way too fast. in Beta Reports GalCiv2 Forums

Research time was adjusted to be based on the number of planets as oppossed to the map size, according to the beta 4 changelog. They noted that some adjustment might be needed.

Reply to Thoughts on invasion screen - not good in Beta Reports GalCiv2 Forums

[quote]I like the old screen better because it's simple and clean. Ivasion is just a numbers game, once it's started there's nothing for me to do to influence the outcome so I don't see any point in sitting there looking at stuff while the numbers count down. It's a waste of time for me and I always skip it. Like I've said before, simple tactical combat like the land combat in Sid Meier's Pirates would make invasions something more than a cutscene that's about as worthwhile as watching

Reply to Krynn consulate lost Stellar Cartography in Beta Reports GalCiv2 Forums

The reason that the marginal cost of spies rises is because it is meant to be something of a check on the largest player. Instead of risking an attack on the most powerful player, smaller civs use spies. If the cost curve of spies were flat, a large civ could more easily outspend the smaller players. In other words, the cost mechanic favors spy production of many small civs over one large one. I like this, and personally wish the ai would do even more to check runaway players so the lat

Reply to Military Strength Computed Wrong? (TA) in Beta Reports GalCiv2 Forums

The a single game's challenge might also may be mainted more consistently throughout if diplomatic relations suffered as a player got a higher and higher percentage of planets habited by major races. The number of habitable planets is the best proxy for player skill at any level (with the exception of the early part of higher levels given the ai's colony production advantage). It would make sense from the "ai like a players" perspective for the ai to make a more dramatic breaker with the planeta

Reply to Absolutely SICK of These CONSTANT Out of Memory Errors! in Bug Reports GalCiv2 Forums

[quote]This forum is so full of fanboys it is insane. This guy is ranting, and probably deserves some flaming, but he is right about one thing. Developing more expansions without fixing what is already wrong, is wrong. I get that Stardock didn't figure out they had memory problems until well after DA. What gets me is that everyone could see it playing DL. There were many posts saying, wtf this game has a leak, and Stardock completely closed thier eyes. I would glady buy an expa

Reply to Military Strength Computed Wrong? (TA) in Beta Reports GalCiv2 Forums

An alternative way of factoring in distance would be to simply use the ratio of the average coordinates of the player's planets to the average coordinates of the enemy civ's planets to the average distance between average enemy civ coordinates and all other civ's average coordinates.

Reply to Military Strength Computed Wrong? (TA) in Beta Reports GalCiv2 Forums

Ok, though I think the premise of this thread, that a self interested ai inherently leads to either better gameplay or a better challenge from the human pov, is somewhat simplistic, i guess i'll throw in my 2 cents conscerning how relative military capability should be calculated: [I]Military Strength Ratio * Tactical Ratio * Weighted Distance Ratio[/I] [B]Military Strength Ratio [/B]- a weighted average of the ai's military, industrial, and technological scores over the same a

Reply to AI in need of a tune up, or a boot to the head? in Game Talk GalCiv2 Forums

[quote] The Civ 4 AI is not only benefited by easier mechanics, i.e. how cities are conquered, but cheats like hell at the very early levels True. But that is the design choice of GC2. They decided to have a completely open game that the AI was supposed to be able to handle. If you're going to make ship design so powerfull, you'd better do a good job of programming the AIs to use it. Also I believe the modding flexibility has hurt the base game. It

Reply to AI in need of a tune up, or a boot to the head? in Game Talk GalCiv2 Forums

I know I'm coming off as dickey in these replies, but I guess what I'm looking for is a bit more empathy. I agree with a lot of the problems with the AI noted here, and I'd be all for making the AI more agressive (i.e. i'm a big proponent of diplomatic relations suffering as a result of holding an increased proportion of habitable planets, or having shown a high degree of tactical ability), but the devs have other priorities that aren't necessarily in line with mine. It's what I'd like, but it i

Reply to AI in need of a tune up, or a boot to the head? in Game Talk GalCiv2 Forums

[quote]I agree in general: We always get told how great the AI is and how much better it is than in any other game out there but in reality it's not that bright at all (and not better than the Civ4 one, for example. In fact it's worse, if only due to poorly balanced and exploitable features that the AI can't handle too well). It's still pretty good but it could be so much better. And should be, if we are to believe Stardock marketing. Oh, and yes, I am quite disappointed with how the AI

Reply to AI in need of a tune up, or a boot to the head? in Game Talk GalCiv2 Forums

[quote]Jasamcarl. Why do you always get personal in your mindless fanboy posts? My problem with the devs is they spend thier time on new bells and whistles, and leave problems like this laying around. I won't buy TA. Mainly because it looks like it will essentially have the same problems as DL and DA. DA's AI is better than DL, but not in the war department. I would think just a small change here could make the AI much better, and I just can't understand why resources

Reply to AI in need of a tune up, or a boot to the head? in Game Talk GalCiv2 Forums

[quote] This is one of the things that is difficult to program in. Could you please explain here (in mathematical terms perferably) how to have the AI identify that they are losing the war, and that their "superior" military isn't up to the job? If you could, the devs could work on it right away. Um come on it's not rocket science. All it would need to do is keep track of say the last 10-20 battles with each race in the last x weeks. If it sees that it is l

Reply to Alternative suggestion to Right of Passage Treaty in GalCiv Journals GalCiv2 Forums

Kind of reminds me of someone complaining that they could win the fight if the other guy would just hold still! lol

Reply to Alternative suggestion to Right of Passage Treaty in GalCiv Journals GalCiv2 Forums

Sneak attacks can be detected without a war declaration. If you take a planet within one or two turns of a war declaration by either side, you have committed a sneak attack. A small rules change to hold allies responsible for the behavior of the war starter would handle issue two. I fight and destroy entire AIs in four or five turns...Anytime past the very start of a game I will generally be taking s

Reply to Alternative suggestion to Right of Passage Treaty in GalCiv Journals GalCiv2 Forums

Sneak attacks can be detected without a war declaration. If you take a planet within one or two turns of a war declaration by either side, you have committed a sneak attack. A small rules change to hold allies responsible for the behavior of the war starter would handle issue two. I fight and destroy entire AIs in four or five turns...Anytime past the very start of a game I will generally be taking several planets by turn two of

Reply to Alternative suggestion to Right of Passage Treaty in GalCiv Journals GalCiv2 Forums

And just in case you were replying to me willy, the defensive advantage for defending population would apply against any invader who attacks you while you are at war. It would basically be an attrition rule that helps losing civs. This has the benefit of actually helping new players who are more likely to be on the recieving end of a dogpile (thought perhaps not much) and weak civs in general. For those who care about realism (and I don't), you can call it a 'desperation' bonus or whate

Reply to Alternative suggestion to Right of Passage Treaty in GalCiv Journals GalCiv2 Forums

That could still be worked around. I occasionally park ships covering transports right next to an enemy planet, then wait for them to declare war on me. It neatly avoids the diplomatic hits from declaring war, and you don't give up the surprise aspect at all. All you lose is some control on the timing, and your enemy suffers the diplomatic hit, not you. This also works if you have an ally. Bribe the comp to attack your ally, and they're generally too dumb to r

Reply to Galactic Civilizations II: Twilight of the Arnor in GalCiv II News GalCiv2 Forums

You are setting too tight a schedule for beta releases. I totally agree. I am also very suspicious that you could be handing us the cheese platter here. Therefore this Beta s not only about finding the usual small bugs, but also about tweaking the game balance a lot. Tis cannot be done in a week - especially for larger maps! Example: So I have normal propulsion and can trade for special propulsion tech (or better yet: st

Reply to Alternative suggestion to Right of Passage Treaty in GalCiv Journals GalCiv2 Forums

I haven't read recent posts on this thread, and this is based on an idea already mentioned, but because i liked it, i'll expand on it. When a player is attacked or it is apparent that the player was the victim of a sneak attack (planets taken within one or two turns of a war declaration), that player gets an advantage bonus for defending subsequent planets from invasion which rises with each planet taken. The advantage lasts until the player is at peace. For each planet that player capt

Reply to Alternative suggestion to Right of Passage Treaty in GalCiv Journals GalCiv2 Forums

One thing, if the AI is in war state, it shouldn't declare war until it attacks. Civ IV does this Cultural borders can be made by using a constructor and influence starbase, so that earlier proposal won't work too well. Let the AI sneak attack a bit as well. The ai will not be able to sneak attack as well, because humans are inherently more aware and in a better position to exploit ai ship positioning, especially when its

Reply to Alternative suggestion to Right of Passage Treaty in GalCiv Journals GalCiv2 Forums

You got me. Damn upgradeability. Though this would still make it more expensive than is currently the case. Let's add another rules change, then..the inability to upgrade a ship without an attack rating? Problem- too artificial. I want sneak attacks to remain in the game, but at a serious diplo penalty. Open/Closed borders is a great idea if done right- it's hard to do right though.