|
I don't see spamming space habitats being something that's cost effective...
|
#
?
Jan 26, 2017 15:44
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 10, 2024 00:33 |
|
|
Bholder posted:I don't see spamming space habitats being something that's cost effective... The argument is essentially that for every habitat you build, you get more resources to build the next habitat, and so on. Eventually the snowball gets so big it's trivial to spam more habitats. However, this ignores the fact that the habitats will cost resources to maintain in the form of consumer goods. It also ignores the influence cost, since there is a hard cap to influence generation.
|
|
#
?
Jan 26, 2017 15:47
|
|
|
The one thing I would say is since you can't destroy habitats, they definetly shouldn't have in built space ports as otherwise they are just going to be the ultimate space port of invincibility that will be abused to poo poo. Also, have you considered adding "Destroy Space Habitat" as a war goal? I mean "cleanse planet" already exists so game mechanic wise it is a worse option (as you're essentially losing a chance to cleanse and replace the pops there) but its cool from a roleplaying perspective to not have filthy xenophobic habitats in your new space. Edit: maybe have it instead of cleansing for a planet? I mean if you're like "OK dudes please line up to be exterminated" I think it would be pretty cool if the engineers running the place basically self destruct the whole thing to stop you from using it since they are going to die anyway. This has a sort of historical precedence with the Germans sinking their own ships after WW1 and the British blowing up the French navy after France surrendered. Kitchner fucked around with this message at 15:51 on Jan 26, 2017 |
|
#
?
Jan 26, 2017 15:47
|
|
|
Kitchner posted:The one thing I would say is since you can't destroy habitats, they definetly shouldn't have in built space ports as otherwise they are just going to be the ultimate space port of invincibility that will be abused to poo poo. That seems like a good idea. I assume that as the owner of a habitat you will have the option to destroy it yourself though?
|
|
#
?
Jan 26, 2017 15:50
|
|
|
Chalks posted:That seems like a good idea. I assume that as the owner of a habitat you will have the option to destroy it yourself though? I think the habitat counts as a planet, and since there's no way to abandon your own planet without purging everyone I don't think it would be necessary.
|
|
#
?
Jan 26, 2017 15:52
|
|
|
Even without the consumer goods, habitats cost minerals (currently 5k according to screenshots) which as the dev diary stated something that habitats are less efficient producing.Kitchner posted:I think the habitat counts as a planet, and since there's no way to abandon your own planet without purging everyone I don't think it would be necessary. I've heard that some AI personalities start to purge their own planets when they are losing a war. Bholder fucked around with this message at 15:59 on Jan 26, 2017 |
|
#
?
Jan 26, 2017 15:57
|
|
|
Wiz posted:We do dev diaries on features long before balancing/iteration on those features are done. We're going to be testing, evaluating, and if needed, putting limits in place. It's fine to be concerned about the balance of a feature, it's just tiring when people make 100% certain predictions about how something is going to turn out when that something isn't even done yet. That's fair. I didn't consider consumer goods. And I'll try to moderate my tone in the future, I didn't mean to sound like a Paradox forums poster. Demiurge4 fucked around with this message at 16:07 on Jan 26, 2017 |
|
#
?
Jan 26, 2017 15:57
|
|
|
What will be interesting is the impact on population allocation orbitals will have. You'll have planets feeding food and minerals to orbitals producing research and energy, ultimately meaning that you'll probably want different species living in space to those living on planets. I can see a xenophobic empire breeding slaves to suck resources from polluted worlds, while the founder race pursues an intellectual life high above, effectively on their backs. I think I'll call this race 'Space Ancient Greece'.
|
|
#
?
Jan 26, 2017 15:59
|
|
|
Wiz, can orbital habitats have their own spaceports?
|
|
#
?
Jan 26, 2017 16:11
|
|
Yes, it's like a lava lamp.
|
I'm sad orbitals work only on planets rather than asteroids, and that they have a mineral penalty. If anything planets should be poor at mining, terrestrial mining and access to useful ores are insanely worse than mining asteroids. I was so hoping it was something more like an upgrade to mining/research stations. Find a nice +2 mineral deposit on an asteroid. Upgrade it to a small habitat that can fit 4 pops, now those 4 pops can produce on 4 +2 mineral tiles, or space mines in general have double the production. Keep upgrading as you get better orbital tech and eventually have it size 12 or 16 or what ever. A question though, if you build an orbital over something you can also possibly terraform like mars, what happens if you want to later terraform?
|
|
#
?
Jan 26, 2017 16:31
|
|
|
I'm guessing terraformable planets don't found as uninhabitable.
|
|
#
?
Jan 26, 2017 16:34
|
|
|
I think one of the dev diaries said terraformable planets will get a new modifier.
|
|
#
?
Jan 26, 2017 16:50
|
|
|
Rumda posted:I'm guessing terraformable planets don't found as uninhabitable. No. Uninhabitable means planets that do not even get the red planet symbol in the galaxy map. Gas giants, barren planets etc
|
|
#
?
Jan 26, 2017 17:23
|
|
|
How do you increase your energy credits cap? I unlocked Gaia World Terrsforming but it costs more credits than I can actually save.
|
|
#
?
Jan 26, 2017 18:20
|
|
|
Libluini posted:I've read the dev diary. Answer: No you can't, habitats are handled like planets in space and since there aren't ways to destroy a planet, there also aren't ways to destroy a space habitat. Going off of the orbital mod out there this isn't a bad thing. Unless they're programmed otherwise empires love to target orbitals. They're basically war crimes magnets due to a lack of defenses. I've got three xenophobic empires in my current game nearby that love purging that I actually went to the trouble of befriending just so i'd never have to worry about them nuking the crap out of any of my orbital habitats and butchering tons of pops in the process. Mind, the fact that orbitals are currently able to be put in the game and attackable means that it's probably going to be a mod to do it eventually. Likely it'll end up as most features like that do, if the modders use their head. You'll just have a "do you want to commit this atrocity?" policy option that lets your empire opt to target them.
|
|
#
?
Jan 26, 2017 18:24
|
|
|
Fork of Unknown Origins posted:How do you increase your energy credits cap? I unlocked Gaia World Terrsforming but it costs more credits than I can actually save. Research. Ctrl-F for "energy storage capacity" on this page to see the techs.
|
|
#
?
Jan 26, 2017 18:28
|
|
|
Fork of Unknown Origins posted:How do you increase your energy credits cap? I unlocked Gaia World Terrsforming but it costs more credits than I can actually save. Do you have the two terraforming resources? They're pretty key to not insane terraforming costs.
|
|
#
?
Jan 26, 2017 18:29
|
|
|
Wiz, any plans to make asteroid colonies? Also general question for the thread that I know has been asked but I forgot: How the heck do you get Horizon Signal to start? Can you just go back and forth between two black hole systems and hope for the best, or what?
|
|
#
?
Jan 26, 2017 18:34
|
|
|
Pakled posted:Research. Ctrl-F for "energy storage capacity" on this page to see the techs. There should be way more of these techs though. If only so that I don't have to cash my energy in with the traders so damned often.
|
|
#
?
Jan 26, 2017 18:45
|
|
|
PittTheElder posted:There should be way more of these techs though. If only so that I don't have to cash my energy in with the traders so damned often. Energy storage is, in fact, a massive RL issue. Not being able to save up a ton of energy is pretty realistic. The odd bit is that it also seems synonymous with currency in the game, of sorts, which is a bad currency, but meh.
|
|
#
?
Jan 26, 2017 18:50
|
|
|
Baronjutter posted:Do you have the two terraforming resources? They're pretty key to not insane terraforming costs. I only have one. My resource flow is so insane that I'm trading minerals for futures right now (I give you 5,000 minerals, you give me 35/month for 10 years) so I could afford to terraform something, I just don't have the energy capacity. I'll keep looking for techs but I haven't seen one in a while for that.
|
|
#
?
Jan 26, 2017 18:57
|
|
|
PittTheElder posted:Wiz, can orbital habitats have their own spaceports? Wiz @ Paradox posted:We are currently playing around with the balance of Habitats and Spaceports, so I'm going to have to come back on that later, but I'm leaning towards habitats having an integrated Spaceport. PittTheElder posted:There should be way more of these techs though. If only so that I don't have to cash my energy in with the traders so damned often. God, yes. In a current game (which I have won, I'm just going through the purging motions to get Suffer Not the Alien and then never again), I have a cap of 83,000 minerals...but still just 10,000 energy.
|
|
#
?
Jan 26, 2017 18:59
|
|
|
Fork of Unknown Origins posted:I only have one. My resource flow is so insane that I'm trading minerals for futures right now (I give you 5,000 minerals, you give me 35/month for 10 years) so I could afford to terraform something, I just don't have the energy capacity. You need both terraforming resources to make Gaia worlds in 1.4. There's more ways to raise storage capacity in 1.5.
|
|
#
?
Jan 26, 2017 18:59
|
|
|
Wiz posted:You need both terraforming resources to make Gaia worlds in 1.4. There's more ways to raise storage capacity in 1.5. Ah, got you. Guess it's time to "liberate" some strategic planets.
|
|
#
?
Jan 26, 2017 19:01
|
|
|
Fork of Unknown Origins posted:Ah, got you. Guess it's time to "liberate" some strategic planets. Keep in mind that they can be traded for, as well.
|
|
#
?
Jan 26, 2017 19:02
|
|
|
Morrow posted:Energy storage is, in fact, a massive RL issue. Not being able to save up a ton of energy is pretty realistic.
|
|
#
?
Jan 26, 2017 19:11
|
|
|
Wiz posted:You need both terraforming resources to make Gaia worlds in 1.4. There's more ways to raise storage capacity in 1.5. Orbital space batteries confirmed.
|
|
#
?
Jan 26, 2017 19:48
|
|
|
Wiz posted:Keep in mind that they can be traded for, as well. Well yeah if you hate fun.
|
|
#
?
Jan 26, 2017 19:48
|
|
|
Fork of Unknown Origins posted:Well yeah if you hate fun. Why else would I make Paradox games for a living.
|
|
#
?
Jan 26, 2017 19:52
|
|
|
Wiz posted:Why else would I make Paradox games for a living. The mad pussy you guys must get
|
|
#
?
Jan 26, 2017 20:08
|
|
|
GunnerJ posted:Wiz, any plans to make asteroid colonies? I'd love to see more advanced stations or modifications to asteroids, rather than more habitats that bring the fiddly Pop system into play. Like a special advanced research station on asteroids that gives a slight bonus to Materials research, or maybe even opens up a unique tech or something.
|
|
#
?
Jan 26, 2017 20:15
|
|
|
Wiz posted:Keep in mind that they can be traded for, as well. There is a trade - blood for terraforming liquid (and gas). Sounds fair to me. Though usually it's your opponents blood and their terraforming gasses, so not so fair to them...
|
|
#
?
Jan 26, 2017 20:24
|
|
|
I don't think I've ever set up a single trade in the whole game, other than the odd one-time mineral trade, but now enclaves have replaced that. Really wish there was more diplomatic interaction in that respect. Something like moo trade treaties. Both sides agree to a "mineral treaty" or something. It starts off costing -10 minerals a month but goes up every month, and then starts turning a profit. Eventually both sides are making 5% of the smallest side's mineral production a month. They are profitable long term investments that makes countries really think twice about hostile acts and build trust.
|
|
#
?
Jan 26, 2017 20:28
|
|
|
Splicer posted:Beyond Earth did the same. Take previous non-space game's resource system, Ctrl-R Money -> Energy seems to be A Thing. BE did it because everything about that game is an inept attempt to ape alpha centauri
|
|
#
?
Jan 26, 2017 20:29
|
|
|
At least on the surface. Mechanics wise it felt nothing alike, plus much worse. Firaxis seems to be incapable of teaching their AI how to play Civ games.
|
|
#
?
Jan 26, 2017 21:34
|
|
|
Psychotic Weasel posted:There is a trade - blood for terraforming liquid (and gas). Sounds fair to me. I leave them some scrap to analyze. Mostly their own but still. My current playthrough is actually pretty funny, I went pacifist and planned on federation building, but through a series of decisions by empires around me not to join my federation I've been liberating, vassalizing and integrating at least as much as I did with my militaristic playthrough. The complicated thing is one of the associate members of my federation has a defensive pact with the (formerly) largest rival empire nearby, so each time we do a land grab the federation ends up at war with them, we blow up all their stuff, then go back to being space-bros after. They don't even mind when I blow up their frontier outposts and settle nearby planets so they can't reclaim the territory.
|
|
#
?
Jan 26, 2017 21:55
|
|
|
PittTheElder posted:At least on the surface. Mechanics wise it felt nothing alike, plus much worse. Firaxis seems to be incapable of teaching their AI how to play Civ games. Mostly they don't care, because it doesn't really affect sales much and you get about the same amount of poo poo from customers regardless of how good or bad your AI is. It's more important for us because we want to keep people playing for years rather than releasing 1-2 expacks and being done with it.
|
|
#
?
Jan 26, 2017 21:57
|
|
|
Wiz posted:Mostly they don't care, because it doesn't really affect sales much and you get about the same amount of poo poo from customers regardless of how good or bad your AI is. I think it's just different experiences. In Civ it always felt like the other Civs were just different types of players all playing the same board game. When you play CKII, EUIV, or Stellaris, you feel if someone is nice or a dick it's because they, in the game, is nice or a dick. Some of the people you meet are basically only there to be nice and die to a bad guy.
|
|
#
?
Jan 26, 2017 22:18
|
|
|
Wiz posted:Mostly they don't care, because it doesn't really affect sales much and you get about the same amount of poo poo from customers regardless of how good or bad your AI is. And that's exactly why I'm still playing your games and will probably never buy another Firaxis game.
|
|
#
?
Jan 26, 2017 22:20
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 10, 2024 00:33 |
|
|
Kitchner posted:I think it's just different experiences. In Civ it always felt like the other Civs were just different types of players all playing the same board game. When you play CKII, EUIV, or Stellaris, you feel if someone is nice or a dick it's because they, in the game, is nice or a dick. Some of the people you meet are basically only there to be nice and die to a bad guy. Yeah, the asymmetry really helps with that. You're not one of multiple players in a balanced game, you're an individual trying to make your way in a universe that already has a bunch of stuff going on in it.
|
|
#
?
Jan 26, 2017 22:24
|
|