|
I can't imagine when I'd ever want afterburners over shield capacitors or crystal-forged plating. Even on corvettes a shield capacitor seems like a better call, especially torpedo corvettes since I don't need them to get in close asap anyway. If I want my fleet to engage at close range I'll manipulate the jump/use FTL inhibitors to drop them on top of the enemy (or as close as they can get).
|
#
?
Feb 4, 2017 07:06
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 9, 2024 18:36 |
|
|
Coolguye posted:afterburners are good on corvettes and literally nothing else Really? Attack speed isn't all that? Well I built my ships wrong then.
|
|
#
?
Feb 4, 2017 07:07
|
|
|
Afterburners on corvettes only just means they'll outrun your point defence/flak/fighter screens and get torn up faster, thereby doing a poo poo job at being a distraction/torpedo delivery system. Shield capacitors number one auxiliary slot forever
|
|
#
?
Feb 4, 2017 07:12
|
|
|
Yeah, thanks to the way combat mechanics in this game work, all afterburners on corvettes does is make sure your corvettes get ripped apart by those missiles you're all convinced are useless even faster than normal because none of your anti missile ships can keep up. And if you put afterburners on everything to counteract this, then the guy with shield capacitors curbstomps your fleet. You could sorta make a case for afterburners in the early game before PD is a thing, except that then you're researching afterburners when you have vastly more important things to research and you are gimping yourself. In short: Afterburners are bad, like this thread.
|
|
#
?
Feb 4, 2017 07:16
|
|
|
Regenerative Hulls are great on Cruisers and Battleships I thought though?
|
|
#
?
Feb 4, 2017 07:40
|
|
|
Every time I play this I get right to the point where you start making doom stack fleets and then go 'well this is pretty boring/awful' as everything has ground to a halt and then start a new game. Paradox makes decent events but combat in this game is pretty bad. Granted I haven't played I a while so they might have fixed this somewhat.
|
|
#
?
Feb 4, 2017 07:48
|
|
|
Holy poo poo from the stream; you can now right click on a system with a constructor and have it Build Mining Stations, this isn't in vanilla is it? edit: gently caress, it is now if only there were some way to have your scientists go through all your anomalies without having to peer at the map VVV yeah, that's the same as in all the other games, but I don't think they ever mentioned it in the game Deceitful Penguin fucked around with this message at 08:04 on Feb 4, 2017 |
|
#
?
Feb 4, 2017 07:54
|
|
|
Get this.. you can cue up multiple systems with shift as well.
|
|
#
?
Feb 4, 2017 07:56
|
|
|
FISHMANPET posted:What the hell am I supposed to do about an ascended fallen empire that wants to reclaim the galaxy, when they're flying around with multiple 100k + strength fleets? I had a fleet that big and I beat one of their fleets then they brought 3 more and kicked my rear end. I'm rebuilding but it's relatively slow and now I see a 173k power fleet jumping into my system and that's gonna kick my rear end. Do you have Psi Jump Drives? Just run your fleet around in a never ending circle while they chase you for 10 years, then sign a white peace and go back to hulking up. Deceitful Penguin posted:Regenerative Hulls are great on Cruisers and Battleships I thought though? They are, right up until you find some living metal.
|
|
#
?
Feb 4, 2017 08:59
|
|
Yes, it's like a lava lamp.
|
I'm onto the repeatable techs so yeah I've got psi. I turned down the aggressiveness of the AI when I made the game so the AI spends a lot of time time just chilling. The 190k doom fleet destroyed a couple of mining outposts then they gave me a white peace. With all that my max fleet size is a 160k doomstack between energy and naval capacity. I did manage to join a federation and we vassaled an AI pretty quickly so maybe I've found a path to victory now.
|
|
#
?
Feb 4, 2017 09:04
|
|
|
ChrisBTY posted:Really? Attack speed isn't all that? it is not to be clear i was talking about afterburners on corvette swarms and i forgot to finish my thought earlier. corvette swarms make sense as a guerrilla force in a lot of wars because the AI gets cagey when its starports start getting blasted in the backfield, so being able to close with and destroy stuff quickly is helpful in that regard. larger starports have extreme range so afterburners can get you into range and firing as much as 10-14 days sooner on a level 5 spaceport. for a general deathball you always always always want something that will increase survivability more, and the list of that looks like this: 1) shield capacitor 2) mayyyyyyyyybe regenerative hull (not really) while we're on the subject of ships, i might as well ask for opinions on counter-designing this AI design. i always have a lot of trouble counter-designing against kinetics.  his main deathball consists of 53 of these and nothing else. i get cruisers in 2 years, and i've stomped on a couple of missile-using AIs to the point where i almost have level 2 missiles for free. i'm thinking about refitting the fleet to use those level 2 missiles to subvert his high evasion, researching level 2 armor, and clapping that on the destroyers i have right now. then spit out a good 5-10 cruisers and go to work with whatever corvettes i happen to build in the meantime. i don't see a ton of benefit in including a lot of corvettes in the battle plan since he's so one-dimensional. i do have the luxury of time because i snaked these designs by sending a science ship to his homeworld to scout him out. plan above workable y/n? Coolguye fucked around with this message at 10:51 on Feb 4, 2017 |
|
#
?
Feb 4, 2017 10:48
|
|
|
Yeah, armored cruisers is likely the only thing available to you at that stage of the game that isn't going to result in a near even trade of fleet strength when you go at him, so long as he keeps all those corvettes in one fleet. That's probably your best bet. The only reason I'd use any corvettes when you do commit is to draw fire off the cruisers for a few precious days, but depending on your armor tech you may not need any.
|
|
#
?
Feb 4, 2017 11:00
|
|
|
it will likely be level 2 armor. i have the card locked in from stomping the last few AIs and i don't really fancy my luck on getting level 3 in a timely manner afterward. weapon wise, missiles are my best bet here right? im not tripping on that one? armored corvettes is a pretty strange design choice for an AI
|
|
#
?
Feb 4, 2017 11:09
|
|
|
Wouldn't lasers chew through those since they lack shields? Not that 17% damage reduction is very impressive. 
|
|
#
?
Feb 4, 2017 11:14
|
|
|
I just fought my first War in Heaven. It was a massive conflict and it was really cool and fun even though it made my computer chug like a dying train. Until it ended in a white peace?! How is that a thing? Is that a bug?
|
|
#
?
Feb 4, 2017 11:27
|
|
|
A combination of both is what I'd go for. Probably primarily lasers on the cruisers since they'll be out front, and then if you have a group of destroyers with missiles sitting pretty behind them you'll likely clean up pretty handily. Missiles are pretty poo poo against larger fleets in general, but they can absolutely wreck corvette swarms thanks to the range advantage and negation of evasion, combined with the fact that corvettes literally cannot have PD. Missiles are a good choice here. Obviously you'll want the lasers in your small and some of your medium mounts, with the missiles in all the large mounts and whatever mediums are left.
|
|
#
?
Feb 4, 2017 11:28
|
|
|
Today's Tradition tree is Prosperity: https://twitter.com/dmoregard/status/827821942883418113 https://twitter.com/dmoregard/status/827824208210173952 Also, tangentially-related: https://twitter.com/dmoregard/status/827822587111731200 Makes sense to me; where every other tree seemed at least somewhat flexible and useful to many people, even if they aren't for everyone (Pacifists may not want Domination, for example, but pretty much anyone else could probably make use of it), Purity, at least based on what we heard about it, sounded like it was Xenophobe-focused.
|
|
#
?
Feb 4, 2017 11:30
|
|
|
On the downside, once your civilization collapses thanks to the space elves loving a new Satan into existence, technology would become the domain of a knowledge-hoarding priesthood who'd ritualize all aspects of learning. 
|
|
#
?
Feb 4, 2017 11:33
|
|
|
CommissarMega posted:On the downside, once your civilization collapses thanks to the space elves loving a new Satan into existence, technology would become the domain of a knowledge-hoarding priesthood who'd ritualize all aspects of learning. Quiet you fool, we don't want another Spot the Spacemarine incident
|
|
#
?
Feb 4, 2017 11:36
|
|
|
Prosperity does look like quite a good generalist tree for almost any empire on its face from these two alone.
|
|
#
?
Feb 4, 2017 11:38
|
|
|
Korgan posted:Quiet you fool, we don't want another Spot the Spacemarine incident I'm not worried, though. Unlike GW, Paradox actually makes money.
|
|
#
?
Feb 4, 2017 11:39
|
|
|
CommissarMega posted:I'm not worried, though. Unlike GW, Paradox actually makes money. 
|
|
#
?
Feb 4, 2017 11:40
|
|
|
Yeah making traditions work in a way that they're based on playstyle rather than ethics is a really good thing, you could feasibly have 2 empires with identical ethics but very different strengths and weaknesses due to different traditions. One change I haven't seen anyone really discuss (possibly it was only mentioned on stream) is how pops, ethics and happiness work now. You no longer get happiness impact directly from having policies that pops dislike based on their ethics, instead your pops' base happiness is based on the happiness of the faction which they belong to. There's also no longer pop modifiers for ethics. What this means is that there's no longer an incentive to annoyingly micromanage it so you have materialist pops doing science etc. - there are still traits which impact tile production but those are determined on a per-species basis and don't change which makes them easier to handle. For a hamonious empire, rather than worrying about avoiding individual angry pops, you want to try and make your factions happy and increase the attractiveness of your happy factions to your pops. Other than determining how happy they are (via their faction) I don't think an individual pop's ethics actually do much in 1.5 which is probably a good thing given how many pops you have.
|
|
#
?
Feb 4, 2017 11:46
|
|
|
I did notice that and I think that it's a good thing. It cuts down on a lot of planetary tile micromanagement a little bit. While I like managing planets and building, tile management was something that I never really enjoyed. The less overt management of happiness on a micro scale, the happier I am as a player. Traditions definitely allow for you to play a far more unique empire than previously, which will probably lead to even more interesting multiplayer games, if that's your cup of tea. It's certainly mine. You'll also be able to play multiple games with the same ethics that you're comfortable with, yet pick different traditions and it will keep that imperial template fresh for a while to come.
|
|
#
?
Feb 4, 2017 11:57
|
|
|
RabidWeasel posted:Yeah making traditions work in a way that they're based on playstyle rather than ethics is a really good thing, you could feasibly have 2 empires with identical ethics but very different strengths and weaknesses due to different traditions. Yeah, I like this too. With Purity replaced, nothing is ethos-exclusive(ish; technically you could go Purity on any non-Xenophile but it doesn't seem as appealing). While some might not be good for particular ethics (as before, Domination for Pacifist, or Harmony for Xenophobe, for the two I see), most work for anyone, and even the few that don't are basically only bad for one particular ethos and work with everything else. While Xenophiles will really like Harmony, for example, pretty much any non-Xenophobes will likely wind up with multiple species in their empire, so diversity bonuses aren't bad. And heck, even Xenophobes may benefit from the happiness part of that tree. quote:One change I haven't seen anyone really discuss (possibly it was only mentioned on stream) is how pops, ethics and happiness work now. You no longer get happiness impact directly from having policies that pops dislike based on their ethics, instead your pops' base happiness is based on the happiness of the faction which they belong to. There's also no longer pop modifiers for ethics. What this means is that there's no longer an incentive to annoyingly micromanage it so you have materialist pops doing science etc. - there are still traits which impact tile production but those are determined on a per-species basis and don't change which makes them easier to handle. For a hamonious empire, rather than worrying about avoiding individual angry pops, you want to try and make your factions happy and increase the attractiveness of your happy factions to your pops. Some of this is new to me, hence my not discussing it; I've read the dev diaries but I don't remember seeing some of these things (like pop modifiers for ethics being gone entirely; I was wondering about that, given the one-ethos-only change), and others I just read the discussion on rather than joining in, but on the whole I like what I'm seeing. Though I do wonder, if pop modifiers from ethics are gone, that presumably means that ethos bonuses are all empire-wide now, unless something really changed. There are also ways to change your government's ethics, such as by embracing factions. This has me wondering if you can upgrade/alter your bonuses in-game, and if so, if there's any significant reasons to not push yourself towards the Fanatic versions of whatever you want so you get the larger bonuses there. (I haven't watched the latest stream and stuff yet, and may have missed information elsewhere, so if this has already been addressed, whoops.) Roland Jones fucked around with this message at 12:36 on Feb 4, 2017 |
|
#
?
Feb 4, 2017 12:18
|
|
|
Some future patch should allow sectors to terraform planets, they tend to sit on big energy (or is it money?) reserves anyway. And maybe make them more willing to colonize planets.
Dwesa fucked around with this message at 12:48 on Feb 4, 2017 |
|
#
?
Feb 4, 2017 12:42
|
|
|
 Have you considered using sex to make their utopian yet joyless existence collapse?
|
|
#
?
Feb 4, 2017 12:59
|
|
|
Both tradition trees we've seen so far seem to have really nice buffs. Will be interesting to see how many trees you can pick up over the course of a normal game. Also, Coolguye, you should go for exclusively Cruiser fleets with only armour and sections picked to maximise small slots. Lasers in small slots, missiles in medium. Begin engagement at max distance if possible.
|
|
#
?
Feb 4, 2017 14:16
|
|
|
Roland Jones posted:Though I do wonder, if pop modifiers from ethics are gone, that presumably means that ethos bonuses are all empire-wide now, unless something really changed. There are also ways to change your government's ethics, such as by embracing factions. This has me wondering if you can upgrade/alter your bonuses in-game, and if so, if there's any significant reasons to not push yourself towards the Fanatic versions of whatever you want so you get the larger bonuses there. I don't think this was addressed, Wiz did say at one point on stream that he wasn't going to embrace his (very happy and popular) egalitarian faction to gain fanatic egalitarian because he was happy with his ethics, so I assume that you don't get a 'free lunch' and have to abandon an existing ethic or something.
|
|
#
?
Feb 4, 2017 16:21
|
|
|
RabidWeasel posted:I don't think this was addressed, Wiz did say at one point on stream that he wasn't going to embrace his (very happy and popular) egalitarian faction to gain fanatic egalitarian because he was happy with his ethics, so I assume that you don't get a 'free lunch' and have to abandon an existing ethic or something. Shifting to Fanatic Egalitarian would've removed whichever of Pacifist and Xenophile had the lowest attraction from my empire ethics.
|
|
#
?
Feb 4, 2017 16:26
|
|
|
Wiz posted:Shifting to Fanatic Egalitarian would've removed whichever of Pacifist and Xenophile had the lowest attraction from my empire ethics. Ah, okay. I was wondering about how, if the limit of 3 ethics points total remained, how it would decide what you lose on a shift. That makes sense.
|
|
#
?
Feb 4, 2017 17:49
|
|
|
How does fanaticism work with the new pops? Can a pop be fanatical or does that still count as two dots?
|
|
#
?
Feb 4, 2017 18:16
|
|
|
Psycho Landlord posted:A combination of both is what I'd go for. Probably primarily lasers on the cruisers since they'll be out front, and then if you have a group of destroyers with missiles sitting pretty behind them you'll likely clean up pretty handily. great idea. i have about 15 destroyers that are currently configured with PD because the last war included approximately all the missiles, but i can have them refitted in a couple of days. i also have the red lasers card locked in from pirate debris so i can research that to clap on the cruisers. no angle on blue lasers right now but for a fight like this it shouldn't matter. this is the last guy i need to subdue and vassalize before my galactic neighborhood is all under my heel; after that the local democratic crusader has shown up so I will need to go into hardcore building mode to catch up. fwiw dudes having done this for 4 games now I very highly recommend a first contact war if you see your closest neighbor is using missiles. all you need to do is hold them bottled in their home system until you get PD destroyers and there is basically no way you can lose at that point. having an early vassal is really nice because when the rest of the neighborhood lights up they implicitly accept that this race has always been sucking your dick and they don't really question it at all. my current game i vassalized my first opponent in 2228 and it owned.
|
|
#
?
Feb 4, 2017 18:52
|
|
|
Splicer posted:How does fanaticism work with the new pops? Can a pop be fanatical or does that still count as two dots? I think that pops now have just a single regular ethic but if your government has a fanatic ethic then you'll have twice as much ethic attraction towards that ethic from your government so you'll end up with more pops with that ethic. Also I used the word ethic too many times and it no longer means anything.
|
|
#
?
Feb 4, 2017 19:02
|
|
|
So here's a newbie question: How do I tell a sector to purge all the goddamn xenos? I set it to purge and it doesn't seem to be doing it at all.
|
|
#
?
Feb 4, 2017 19:42
|
|
|
What would happen if you embrace a faction who is diametrically opposed to one of your government ethics would you gain a point in the most attractive other ethic.
|
|
#
?
Feb 4, 2017 20:35
|
|
|
I foolishly posted on Reddit in an argument over naming the authoritarian-egalitarian axis (this will never end) and predictably - though I didn't see it coming because I'm not a crazy person - got told my line of reasoning was wrong because the opposite of authoritarianism is actually libertarianism. I am so happy that I don't have to interact with these people in the real world.
|
|
#
?
Feb 4, 2017 21:26
|
|
|
RabidWeasel posted:I foolishly posted on Reddit in an argument over naming the authoritarian-egalitarian axis (this will never end) and predictably - though I didn't see it coming because I'm not a crazy person - got told my line of reasoning was wrong because the opposite of authoritarianism is actually libertarianism. I am so happy that I don't have to interact with these people in the real world. I'm glad that I get to read a recounting of the argument you had on reddit arguing about the same old labels that have been discussed since release, as well as explaining that your position is the right one because you are not a crazy person.
|
|
#
?
Feb 4, 2017 21:31
|
|
|
You'll never please everyone because these are really abstracted mish-mashes of culture, politics, and economics trying to fit on a 5 point axis. I can absolutely understand how a libertarian who views the most important aspect of society being how much "the state" has control over things would absolutely view the axis as going from Authoritarianism to Libertarianism. You could rename that anarchy or what ever but to them the most important aspect is looking at that ethos as a slider of "state oppression". We'd really need like Hoi2 levels of political sliders or more to make everyone (or at least more people) happy. The more abstracted the system is, the more chance you'll have that certain people feel their ideology isn't being correctly or fairly represented, or the ideology they want to have in the game doesn't quite fit with the mechanics.
|
|
#
?
Feb 4, 2017 21:34
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 9, 2024 18:36 |
|
|
It all sounds like the Repugnant trait to me.
|
|
#
?
Feb 4, 2017 21:36
|
|