double post

Props for defending a detractor to someone appearing to defend you. A balky forum day prevented me from getting into this thead sooner. I wanted to go on record supporting both the masses-in-jewelry request for GC2 and the notion that GC3 should support off-planet "productive" populations.

Re the jewelry, because I'm a big-map fan, I almost never zoom in to the low-level map. But if I could see art that evoked the teeming masses on a custom ship a-la Iain Banks Culture novels, I would take a few more close looks.

Re "produce some income," I'm on record in other threads as wishing that off-planet assets could do this, but I don't expect anything before GC3. After GC3, I'll be prepared to scoff ferociously if planets are required rather than optional for a player civilization.

it is ok I understood what the detracter was talking about and he didn't know what I was talking about

In that case, I'm sorry for misrepresenting you.

Kudos for making a Star Trek race work in GalCiv.

Anyway, it still really bothers me when people blatantly misspell things where they have only seen it written down. It's understandable that, after hearing a word, say 'hearing', one misspells it because they don't know how ('heering')...

...but a word that you have LEARNED from in print? If you've seen a mission in GalCiv with the title, 'Death of the Korx', how can you POSSIBLY spell it 'Knox'?!

Excuse me from digressing. I concur: it would be cool to have off-planet taxable population. Unfortunately, ToTa is on feature lock, and you can't, erm, mod in a new mechanic

Thanks for understanding, Danielost,

LordZarth

I may have misspelled a word but I have not referred to any galciv 2 races in this thread.


For future reference. The Tholians are the ones that spin the web, I forget the name of the episode.

yes i know