Actually, the comparison with the Witcher is very interesting, because both companies have something in common. Regardless of what your stance is on comparative game marketing philosophy, CD Projekt and Stardock have both relied on other sources of income in order to develop games. For Stardock it's enterprise software. For CD Projekt it is (was?) localization and re-release of third-party titles. So in both cases being a "good guy" has required some supplemental funding. It seems that in
Eilarais
[quote who="Trojasmic" reply="76" id="3380865"]How come nobody is pointing out that Gal Civ 3 will now use hex tiles instead of square tiles (see that new pic)? That's a big deal since Brad says he never liked hex tiles.[/quote] Huh. So what's the difference, exactly? I'm would be very interested to hear how the developers think gameplay changes between hexes and squares.
I got the game for free as well, so the DLC is a good way for me to show appreciation and fund future games/expansions/stuff from Stardock. If the game was just some fire-and-forget title from a major publisher then it would have been a different equation, but I picked these up because I want to see what Stardock can accomplish with all that DLC money. I want to see an awesome GC3 (or some other new thing), and Ironclad is working on some good stuff too.
[quote who="parrottmath" reply="7" id="3371981"] In the xml file that is marked as a block tile. In the editor it is difficult to see since it is also a starting point for a defending unit (or attacking I forget which). It has nothing to do with elevation, just a blocked tile that is difficult to see in their editor.[/quote] We may be talking about different problems then. In the case I tested, the tile could be selected but only if the cursor was some distance south of
[quote who="Heavenfall" reply="2" id="3372197"]Therefore, currently, you cannot alter saved games and must start new ones.[/quote] Well, that's what I'm doing so far. But I don't know how it's possible to test the late game under this kind of restriction, it seems prohibitively time-consuming to make a minor change and then have rebuild the entire scenario you're testing from scratch. Maybe the developers can shed some light on how this can be done properly?
So I'm testing a mid-game change, and I've noticed that all of the game data appears to be contained in the save itself. Is there a way to update the .xml files that a savegame uses, or is it necessary to start a new game each time?
[quote who="Heavenfall" reply="2" id="3371444"]My suggestion: just keep the old bloodline on the unit. It's not going to dramatically upset the balance or immersion.[/quote] Oh well. I've kept the old bloodline and in the end it actually improves the differentiation between Champions. Originally I wanted Moves=1 for tainted heroes, which didn't work with Mancer blood, but then I found that Moves = 1 creates under-leveled heroes anyway, which negates the bonus from tainting
I've hit this too. Just a shot in the dark, but I guess there is some elevation map for tactical maps that is separate from the way it's displayed on the screen? The cursor always seems to be targeting the tile that it would be pointing to if all the terrain was flat.
I'm trying to add a new spell called "tainted blood" that would change the racial characteristics of a recruited champion. I can add the new blood type to a unit without any problem, but I'm not sure if it's possible to remove the old one. Is there any game modifier that will do this?
[quote who="Heavenfall" reply="2" id="3369100"] I believe maxvalue minvalue only works for damage modifiers. You'll have to simulate it with a non-linear function. Actually I've never tried if ^ is a valid operator. How exactly are you casting the spell? If it is coming from a trait, ie battleautocastspell in battle, you can work with 3 spells instead of 1 and have them trigger only if 1, 2 or 3 death shards are available. Then you'd have a trait that gives you 10
Hi all, Does anyone know if it's possible to specify an upper/lower bound in tags for spells? I'm creating a new blood type that reflects 10% of damage per death shard but I want to cap the value at 30. I have so far but I'm not sure where to go from there. I see some params but I'm thinking that's only for random numbers, is that the case?
[quote who="Seleuceia" reply="60" id="3368235"] The Total War series says otherwise, but that's another matter...[/quote] Hmm, intriguing. I've actually never played Total War, so let's fix that right now..
[quote who="Ashbery76" reply="58" id="3368112"] I am certain that GC3 will have tactical combat and I think it needs too.[/quote] The problem is that, historically, the strategic and tactical levels both contribute to the same binary state: You either win the battle or you lose it. If you can get +1000% to your empire's build rate then it doesn't really matter how inept you are at ordering your units around, and if you can maneuver around any obstacle then it doesn't
Steam forces all updates unless you are in offline mode. The 'do not update game' setting is just there for our amusement, apparently, because no one has ever gotten it to work in the 8 years Steam has been around.
Ok, I know FE was promised free to purchasers of Elemental but I just did a re-buy on Steam. I figure that since the developers have supported this game beyond any reasonable point, I would buy it beyond any reasonable point. I've heard good things so far, so here's hoping it's awesome!
[quote who="GoaFan77" reply="42" id="3220534"]Right now, the main complaint about titans is that they make frigates obsolete. The idea is there needs to be some time of unit you can mass produce that would be immune to this. Your titan and capitalships would probably still be the backbone of the force you use to kill a titan, its just you could funnel the rest of your fleet supply into Corvettes to help them out with extra damage and the debuffs.[/quote] Right, so corvettes will have
I thought Win8 wasn't officially released until October 26... Anyway, this is the case for a lot of games right now. There's going to be some friction between game makers and Microsoft over Windows 8, so it's not expected that compatibility problems will be sorted out right away. The best solution for Win8 right now is to dual-boot with Win7. If you can't do that, then you either have to downgrade or say goodbye to all of your old applications. At least, that&#
[quote who="GoaFan77" reply="36" id="3220448"]In Sins, "Dodging" just translates into another damage reduction. 25% chance to dodge would thus reduce damage taken by 25%. And Corvettes are so fragile compared to the damage titan AoE's could do they would need something like 90% chance to dodge. May as well just make them immune.[/quote] I don't know if it has to be as simple as that, though. What if the AoE-resistant corvette's abilities make the Titan vulnerable to larger
Various optimizations made to movement, IAttacker and rendering systems for improved performance. Players may no longer contract Pirate missions (via Diplomacy) against TEC Rebel factions who have researched Truce Amongst Rogues. Increased formation distances between frigates and capital ships to prevent ships from clustering too closely during group phase jumps (which slowed things down while they waited for formation). [e digicons]:)[/e] Added new Cor
For my fleets it's fine to target these structures manually, but the AI has real trouble whenever they decide to invade a system. If they can't take out the starbase, they'll retreat without touching any of the phase blockers and sit at the edge of the gravity well while I mop them up. I'm thinking I can fudge the entity a bit to get the behavior I want, say by putting a gun on it that does 10k damage but can't fire. But I'd prefer to not have the whole enemy f
It's impossible to know without looking at the code, but it is likely that the passive ability will be slightly cheaper from a CPU utilization standpoint. Yes, the engine is going to be going through each autocast ability for each ship/structure some number of times each second to check if it should fire. The amount of overhead you add to this will depend on the condition and target assigned to the ability, for example the aiUseTime "OnlyWhenManyTargetsInRang
Does anyone know which attributes of ships and planet modules are used to determine targeting priority? I am currently trying to bump the priority of jump blockers so that fleets (bombers especially) will try to destroy these before taking on the starbase.
Ah yes, this was my entry to Sins as well. The good news is, once you get a basic build order down there will be no spam. You will have to build a steady stream of units and send them to your choke points, but that's mostly in the early game while you're building up your economy. After this initial phase, the tech tree starts to become very important and you can kill AI ships at a 2:1 or 3:1 ratio without even microing. Bounty is not the most effective thing to spend money on
[quote who="Astax" reply="14" id="3180893"]Oh you can whine about this and you'll get the good ole' response of: "I CAN'T HEAR YOU OVER THE SOUND OF ALL THE MONEY IM MAKING!" This is just one of the more annoying pimples that have inhabited the backside of sins for ages, but never was so much as a concern given to it. Notice how there is still no option to disable auto-pinning of star bases, or is there? I have not bought Rebellion.[/quote] This used to bother me a b
Saw this when playing as TEC Rebel in 1.03. I researched the pirate peace treaty and the bounty button next to my player disappeared as expected. However the bounty against me would still increase from time to time. After this, waves of pirate ships would enter my gravity well but were not hostile.