Talk:Galactic Civilizations II: Dread Lords

message: The reference link (#5 currently) to the StarForce article is no 
longer functional.Dp76764 16:07, 17 August 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: References Error

message: The screenshot that claims to demonstrate the use of bonus tiles seems to show an entertainment network built on a tile with a food production bonus [and thus negating the bonus]. Hopefully, someone will replace the screenshot with a more accurate one. Filippo Argenti 22:30, 7 February 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: This could in theory demonstrate the bugs in the AI prior to 1.4 which caused such behaviour. :-) GreenReaper 06:32, 8 February 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Erronous Screenshot 

message: This section seems to be a complete rip from a game jacket, press release or some sort of promotion.  Either quote it for what it is, or I'll take it down after attempting to find a suitable replacement.--Oni Ookami AlfadorTalk|@ 17:57, 16 February 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: It does sound rather like the voiceover to the introductory video. Should it be quoted as such or just removed/replaced? GreenReaper 19:01, 16 February 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  General Plot 

message: ..does anyone see any similarity to a certain other game? Not in terms of 4X, but concerning plot and terminology? I'm not saying its not a great game or even a rip-off, but shouldnt the obvious inspiration source be mentioned? --Echosmoke 13:46, 2 October 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: If you're not going to specify the game, it's a little hard to know what you're talking about. Note that the OS/2 version of Galactic Civilizations was first released in 1993, and much of the plot was created in that era. It would also be necessary to find a published secondary source that stated that "obvious inspiration", otherwise it would be original research. GreenReaper 14:02, 2 October 2007 (UTC)

text: Seriously, dude, this isn't twenty questions. Just spit it out, find a reliable source that suggests it, and reference it. The opinions of random wiki users are immaterial - what matters is the opinion of reputable game reviewers and other industry figures. If something is obvious, they will probably have mentioned it. GreenReaper 14:23, 2 October 2007 (UTC)

text: I'm referring to none of that, no. The paralells are much more specific. The games you mention show that your knowledge of computer games does not reach very far back or outside the mainstream, btw ;) --Echosmoke 01:15, 17 October 2007 (UTC)

text: Who know's what he/she's referring to. As you rightly point out, it's hard to find something truly unique in sci-fi, mostly everything has been done before. Star Control II for example has the common theme of bad empire, good union and precursors. Babylon 5 had to a similar degree. Stargate obviously had stargates. None of these were of course really original to these works, they'd been done before and will be done again. I presume none of these are what is being referred to since they are mainstream and not old enough but it does just prove the point, it's somewhat silly to play guessing games and I suspect you're right, echosmoke has perhaps played one game with some similarities and not realised how common these themes are. Nil Einne (talk) 07:10, 28 April 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Umm..

message: These two statements seem to contradict somewhat
:Serial numbers can be used multiple times and the company owner, Brad Wardell, has stated that they are taking an approach based on the view that people who install the game illegally were unlikely to purchase it anyway.
:Reselling copies of the game is against Stardock's license terms. Resold/used copies will not be supported, meaning that the buyer of a used copy cannot download game updates.
If the serial number can be used multiple times, then I fail to see how someone who buys a used copy can't download updates, unless the serial number has ben used so many times that it's not accepted (and of course, it's possible the cdkey was never registered with Stardock at all if someone didn't want to download updates or chose to do so via some other means). Also, presuming there is a serial number problem, wouldn't the original CD case or manual or whatever that contains the cdkey be sufficient to show you are the owner of that cdkey? The way I see it, whatever Stardock may like to say, their statements are contradictary and while they may not officially support owners of resold games, they do anyway. I believe GalCivII can also be purchased online in which case, it would indeed be difficult for an owner of a resold game to try and claim they are the rightful owner but this doesn't seem to be the case for owners of a retail copy, whatever Stardock may like to say. Nil Einne (talk) 17:35, 15 April 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: When you register a serial number with us to download updates, the key is linked to your Stardock.net account. If you don't have that account, then you cannot use the serial - it will not let you register it again. It is quite possible to install the game because the serial number is not activated on install, but then you are stuck with 1.0. GreenReaper (talk) 19:12, 15 April 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Not officially supported you mean? 

message: Wikipedia:Footnotes#Caution_on_converting_citation_styles
I would like to convert the citations in this article from  and  format to the new ...  format so the references are easier to maintain. The new format automatically re-numbers the references. Post your views please.Electronic mass (talk) 20:20, 5 July 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: By all means. It's a bit messy at the moment. Rooker75 (talk) 04:01, 15 October 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Consensus on converting to new reference style 

message: I was going to revert this but decided to tag it as  pov instead. 
Unfortunately, designing a ship has little to no effect on its combat abilities, since tactical combat is still missing front the game.
My own pov is that this sentence is incorrect and shouldn't be there even if it were, but I'll just tag it and leave it at that. Rooker75 (talk) 06:02, 11 November 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: I've removed the "unfortunately" and reworded it. Claiming it as a shortcoming is unfair because the game is not designed to be a tactical shooter - it's like complaining that Civilizations doesn't allow you to control individual soldiers. If you want that, you want another type of game. GreenReaper (talk) 11:52, 11 November 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: That is better but I still consider it inaccurate. If I design a ship without adding weapons, that has a pretty important effect on its abilities. If I design it with weapons but no defenses, it doesn't last very long. If I design it without engines, it won't matter whether it has weapons or not because the war will be over by the time it finds something to shoot at. It looks like nothing more than someone just wanted to rant a little that he can't control his ships with the WSAD keys. Rooker75 (talk) 15:23, 11 November 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: That's why I put the "other than component selection" bit in there as well. Maybe the "since tactical combat is not a feature of the game" should just be taken out. GreenReaper (talk) 15:51, 11 November 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: I noticed that the lack of tactical control is mentioned in the combat section that follows anyway and does it in a more neutral tone, so that would probably be best. I was actually going to rewrite that whole section from Races down to AI, but my PC decided to crash right in the middle of it, so there went an hour's worth of effort for nothing. Maybe I'll try it again after I decide whether or not to set fire to this bloody thing... Rooker75 (talk) 01:27, 12 November 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: If you were using a recent Firefox, it would have restored the form when you restarted . . . GreenReaper (talk) 09:20, 12 November 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Ship design has no effect 

message: I haven't played this game, but the economics section is making claims about the Civilization series which doesn't sound right to me.  In Civilization you pay for industrial output with resources, a fraction of which determines tax revenues; the claim in this article is that there is no connection between industrial output in Civilization and the civilization's income.  There are definitely qualitative differences between the systems used in the two games, but it feels like there's an implicit "Civilization sux because it isn't realistic" slam in this section that just seems inappropriate and inaccurate; I'd like to suggest it be reviewed and perhaps revised by somebody more familiar with both games.  That said, this game sounds pretty cool :) David A Spitzley (talk) 13:53, 26 June 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: You are reading way too much in one sentence, I don't get that impression you describe. In any event if you think Civ is misrepresented go ahead and change it but I don't see that it is.--Xenovatis (talk) 14:08, 26 June 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Economics section seems dodgy 

message: can one play this game without the original Galactic Civilizations II installed?  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.126.102.22 (talk) 20:42, 18 March 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  is this standalone? 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just added archive links to  on Galactic Civilizations II: Dread Lords. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add  after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add  to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:
*Added archive http://web.archive.org/web/20081023202512/http://forums.galciv2.com:80/100828 to http://forums.galciv2.com/100828
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at ).
Cheers.—cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 04:31, 21 March 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 3 external links on Galactic Civilizations II: Dread Lords. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
*Corrected formatting/usage for http://forums.galciv2.com:80/100828
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20081219075643/http://www.gamespot.com:80/pc/strategy/galacticcivilizations2/review.html to http://www.gamespot.com/pc/strategy/galacticcivilizations2/review.html
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20090417015939/http://esupport.stardock.com:80/index.php?_m=knowledgebase&_a=viewarticle&kbarticleid=457&nav=0,52,146,1473 to http://esupport.stardock.com/index.php?_m=knowledgebase&_a=viewarticle&kbarticleid=457&nav=0,52,146,1473
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 08:42, 7 January 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified