the T button.

and i'm not saying it's perfect, by any means; you're exactly right that it only takes some of the edge off.

My apologies for the length of this post.

Minimally quoting relevant portions because multiquoting is still FUBAR'd and I can't be bothered to go through and make it look pretty when my edit button doesn't work.  (Goes back to last post in thread even within 30 seconds, let alone 10 minutes.)  *sigh*

Anyway.

I've said this once or twice before on these forums, and I'll say it again-I personally actually thought the spy system in DA was an improvement from DL.  I won't say it couldn't have been done better, but I will say that I actually like it.  That said, I know lots of people have complained about it and if you've managed to find a way to make them happy, you've probably managed to find a way to make me happy as well.

I take it the random events galaxy setting is for normal, not mega?  Fine either way, as far as I'm concerned-just checking.

From a mechanics perspective, the espionage upgrade is mostly the only thing, so far, of significance here-which is not a bad thing-so I could live with that being the only thing that got backported to DA, although the planetary governors would make things late game much less time consuming.

I know TA is the "latest and greatest", and I like it, but I'm not in love with it like I am with DA.  I made a post on this subject a few days ago, and didn't really get much of a response-mostly people telling me to "play the races as the developers intended them to be played".

Admittedly, I felt roughly the same way when going from DL to DA, but the super abilities finally sold me on it-and, oddly enough, spies were a factor as well.  Initially I hated them, but it became one of the reasons I played DA over DL.

But my primary issue with TA is that there does not seem to be a sufficient benefit to choosing a tech tree OTHER than the Terran (if you're going custom-if not, then you find the closest mix of tech tree and SA that suits you).  In other words, it's too good.  To put it yet another way: It looks like essentially a copy and paste job from DA, except for the layout.  I can understand why it was done that way, both for flavor reasons and to help people adjust to TA, but it still feels to me that TA is substantially less balanced than DA is/was.

Of course, I could go mod the files, and since I have yet to even play an MV game, that appears to be a valid solution-but then I'm not playing the same game as everyone else; and I'd be tempted to "fix" some things while I was there-such as the omega research center (which leads one to believe it is civ-wide, yet it is planet only) and hyper computers (which is at the end of the missile defense tree, well beyond what any rational person would "pay" for 20% more research), for instance.

-

In closing, I know your time on GC2 is devoted almost entirely to TA, and I understand the how and why of giving TA new things that DL and DA don't get, but it saddens me nevertheless.

Incidentally, could someone check to see that the fix for the social and military rounding bug that was in TA (I don't remember exactly when-I could look it up but you guys would probably find it first) makes it into DL and DA?  Because having 39 industry when you should have 40 is annoying (not actual values, just an example)-waiting an extra turn for a ship because you're 1 military shy when the math says you're on the money is painful.  I believe this was intended to be backported for 2.0, but I'm not 100% positive.

And because I'll probably be playing DA until GC3 launches.

I know and use the T key (buttons are things you click with a mouse, keys are things you press on your keyboard). What I'm pretty sure do not exist in GC2 are keyboard methods to scroll and select in the rally point dialogs for planets, ships, or fleets.

ah, got you, and point taken about keys vs. buttons. i do notice how the mouse wheel isn't very well implemented across the game's various lists. and for that matter it doesn't even work consistently on the lists for which it does work. the list of available planet improvements, for example: sometimes the mouse wheel works fine, other times the program doesn't realize you're trying to scroll down the list despite the cursor hovering over that list.

Some questions and comments

________________

About the ship editor:

-Will there be an option to control the miniturization and/or techs available? I don't know about you, but being able to design ships for the early colony rush (where miniturization can be limited) and early wars (where techs are limited) would be quite handy. Having everything at once can get in my way of designing those ships.

-Some ship modules are not easy to determine how advanced they are. The Terrans can unlock 3 HP boosting modules with their tech tree, 2 of which have similiar names, but are significantly different. The "Reinforced Hull Point" is found early in the tech tree and has moderately good stats. However, the "Hardened Hull Point" has a similiar looking name and is found much later in the tech tree (some time after large hulls) and has better stats. Suffice to say, it might be possible to mix weak, primitive lasers with a high tech HP boosting modules if one isn't careful.

-Some techs may be civ specific (or have other restrictions) and therefore cannot be traded. There is little point to mix and match parts on a single ship (unless you were bored or something) that no single civ could possibly have the techs for (such as evil weapons with good defense).

-The settings I would like to be able to play with is: Pick a civ and note their miniturization score (and other bonuses), pick a tech tree and select which techs you would expect to have when you are able to design the given ship (including miniturization techs, and planet improvements), player set miniturization, what other bonuses you have, and unrestricted (max miniturization with all parts).

-Will there be a universal ship style that all civs can use? I don't know about you, but I have about 10 or so early colony ship designs that have identical stats, but have different names because they one design can't be shared by all civs (variations exist for the Yor and Arceans for civ related reasons).

________________

About starbases:

-Starbase defenses is woefully inadequate late game. Its very possible to design a group of ships, or a single huge one, that can destroy the most well fortified starbase with relative ease. Have you guys considered reducing the number of modules required (with newer modules replacing older modules as installable modules), and/or increasing the overall strengh of starbase defenses.

-Will there be a way for starbases to form fleets with ships? I really hate it when my fleet moves away from the starbase it was defending because I miss-clicked something. Sadly, the guard command doesn't serve its purpose when an enemy ship(s) wakes up the defense fleet and makes it possible for them to leave their possition instead of having them skip their turns like they were doing a few turns before.

-Fortify Position command. We have the sentry command which causes the ship to skip it's turn until another civ's ship comes into sensor range. We have the guard command which restricts the wake up effect to enemy ships. However, we don't have a fortify command that ignores all ships. Starbases, especially minging starbases, are worth defending and we don't have a command well suited to their protection for reasons mentioned above.

I would love to see starbases being included in fleets. They should also be able to support fleet modules - it's a starbase, size really isn't a problem, right?

I'd veto the improved defenses, though - especially if we can fleet ships with them. Starbases should be able to protect themselves to a degree, but shouldn't be totally invincible. Case in point, in my last game I had a mining base in Terran space that had more kills than the rest of my fleet, because the ENTIRE TERRAN NAVY killed themselves on it. Thalan hyperion bases are pretty sweet, and are nearly unbeatable at low to mid level tech.

If you manage to get most or all the military mines, the Thalan Singularity Armor can make starbases self-defensible well past mid-game, at least down here at Tough diff. Add in some anomaly luck, a few of the Thalan +weapons techs, and the tree-top defs like Overlord Armor, and you can end up with defenses well above 100 and even approaching 200 per category.

I'd *much* rather see starbases able to join fleets than have better defenses, but I don't really like the idea that a choice is required. Since starbases can't move or attack, I have no problem with them becoming effectively impregnable if a rival civ or I choose to just pour on the constructors and have techs to make use of that resource stream.

But I've also had the occasional starbase turn out to be my "best fighter" on account of suicidal, stupid enemies. Maybe the real trick here is that coding computer players to make good decisions about whethe and when to attack starbases is really hard. I've seen quite a few situations where an enemy should have taken down one of my resource mines in vulnerable territory, but instead they go harrowing off on their insane 80-turn saga attacks on a fleet that will easily kill them if they ever manage to get within weapons range.

awesome...

One thing, is there a "do not build" option for specific starbase modules? It is better to have constructors sitting idle (and usueable for other projects) then building defense modules on a base deep in your empire. Or building the absolutely worthless sensor upgrades (speaking of which, those should really be improved...)

it's The Eyes of the Universe that's unbalancing, IMHO anyway. if it only caused you to see ships in the mini map, it'd still leave sensors and the sensor modules as very useful. but having just the minimap adjustment would leave it a bit underpowered. it's a trade-off in terms of whether it's better to leave it over or under powered.

I like to see someone fix the hyper warp drive engine hardpoint because it is not centered on

the engine, it is off to one side so when you put it on your ship it looks funny.

The hardpoint mount should look like this       |      v      |       but not like this       |        v    |  .

Sorry for the double post.

Thank you.

 Aww

I agree setting the miniaturization value is key to determining when in a game (or if ever) a given ship module will become available.  Currently, when I design a ship in the game it always uses the current value.  If my miniaturization value is high then it prevents me from designing a simple ship that can be used early in a future game.  Being able to set the miniaturization value lower in the in game ship designer would be hopefull as well.

Way back I reported as a bug that starbases benefit from your hitpoint bonus but not your attack and defense bonuses.  The reply back from Stardock was this was by design; otherwise, starbases would become too powerfull.  I total disagree!  I agree with DivineWrath that currently by mid-game the only way to defend starbases is with ships.

The whole starbase defense issue could be solved by allowing them to join fleets. What does it matter if the base is weak, if you have some decent ships defending it and drawing fire?

I agree with the designed weakness of starbases - too often I see bases tank dozens of beginning/midgame fleets without much damage. My last full game I tanked the entire Terran navy with one fully fortified mining base - it killed literally hundreds of ships over a 10-15 turn period, and was barely damaged at the end. Of course, that was using the Thalan defensive tech, so it was stronger than the norm, but this is exactly what you guys are arguing for!

Surely someone's already answered this argument with, "Well, make the computer players smart enough not to pour fleets down a hole like that."

Honestly, when (and where) to attack/invade is the AI's weakest point, IMHO.

Does this mean beta 1 of 2.0 is delayed until Friday, or after Friday?

It should be out anytime today and if not ie server probs then tomorrow.

       Anyway, the 1.99 autmatic starbase upgrader is a welcome addition to a great game.   Tanking with a starbase or resource base is a great option when faced with a multiple front war, but it's not perfect.  Be prepared with some spare constructors or even a spare fleet.

Considering the huge amount of resources they suck up (in modules and the expensive techs), I think it's entirely reasonable for starbases to become almost impregnable fortresses when absolutely maxed out.  What you describe is not an argument against that, it just highlights an AI flaw which is badly in ineed of correction.

We already have carrier concept.  Fleet modules, particularly the Terran Warp Bubble concept carries the carrier concept into space.  Like what the devs have done there.

Starbase Manager is extremely welcome!  That said, I think it would be a lot more functional if, instead of a macro, you could provide it with several build lists on default, then allow the user to specify and name build lists as he chooses.  Priority listing is good for when you have limited technology and have a small number of choices (like when you only have 2 choices of starbase defense modules to choose from), but ultimately, early game starbase management isn't the issue anyway.

In any case, better than nothing, certainly!  Much better. 

I agree with fleeting with Starbases.  If you fleet your fleet with starbases, there's no need to code a Fortify unit function - just fleet your fleet with the starbase and it'll never move!  Of course, there is the little problem that allowing a Starbase to fleet early game could cause problems with AI fleet decision making.  It'd be serious cheese to plop down an Economic Starbase for attacking purposes early game!

A few points.

I. The Main Menu->Ship  Designer absolutley needs a miniturization slider.

II. Just a second to the "AI needs better deciscion making with regards to what and when to attack" thing.

I agree!

Hello 

Yup   It sure does. The only thing I can use it for is to check compents sizes and effects.

Mmm Nice day we have Mmm

The priority lists for starbases don't save (or don't load as the case may be) with saved games.  I've submitted this as a bug report because on particularly large maps it can take so long to get through a turn that the usefulness of priority lists diminishes because the next time you load your game you have to go around all the starbases and fix their lists again.