|
Deceitful Penguin posted:On the other hand, there's way, way less players in Stellaris so I don't see it being as much of a problem? I mean, random poo poo shaking up games is usually fun... To an extent. Too much random and you undermine the "strategy" part of the game. I think one of the most critical balancing acts in this kind of game is how much randomness you need to keep players thinking on their feet and re-evaluating their strategies without making planning and preparation useless.
|
#
?
Feb 10, 2017 17:03
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 9, 2024 22:35 |
|
|
GlyphGryph posted:Also will be able to build edible robots? This one is really important.
|
|
#
?
Feb 10, 2017 17:04
|
|
|
Torrannor posted:I've seen the Cybrex system even though I had the Yuuht (sp?) precursor chain, and I even caught one of the AI's science ships in the "investigate Cybrex remnants" mission earlier. Precursor event chains are still bananas. I end up getting fragmentary bits and pieces of several of them. The only one I can consistently complete, and I seem to get it all the time, is "The Last Osiron" or something like that. It may even be from a mod for all I know. eta: One time I found a system way the gently caress far away from my borders that had the "Hey a precursor anomaly might be over here!" event happen repeatedly.
|
|
#
?
Feb 10, 2017 17:10
|
|
|
Wiz posted:I feel like we just had a discussion about realism arguments when it comes to game mechanics. Probably just my imagination. I mean, realism aside, giving spiritualist empires wizards *feels* right. Playing xenophile/egalitarian and having no choice but to enslave your androids feels wrong. It would actually make more sense if materialists were the only ones who could make synths at all, since using technology to beat god at his own game is extremely on-theme. (and then if you were a non-xenophobe and some synths moved to your empire you'd still be able to give them rights, you just wouldn't be able to make more)
|
|
#
?
Feb 10, 2017 17:11
|
|
|
Splicer posted:Robots made of candy like some kind of Space Willy Wonka i think you're onto something here
|
|
#
?
Feb 10, 2017 17:20
|
|
|
GunnerJ posted:Precursor event chains are still bananas. I end up getting fragmentary bits and pieces of several of them. The only one I can consistently complete, and I seem to get it all the time, is "The Last Osiron" or something like that. It may even be from a mod for all I know. Yeah, i've never actually completed the Precursor chain outside of the day one version of the game. Even now I can never seem to get the event chain to fully pop without dicking about with the console. Not sure what's up with that.
|
|
#
?
Feb 10, 2017 17:25
|
|
|
GunnerJ posted:Precursor event chains are still bananas. I end up getting fragmentary bits and pieces of several of them. The only one I can consistently complete, and I seem to get it all the time, is "The Last Osiron" or something like that. It may even be from a mod for all I know. That's from the more events mod IIRC and it's pretty bonkers since you can finish it with only around 1k fleet power but can get an FE cruiser with a titan laser out of it. 
|
|
#
?
Feb 10, 2017 17:43
|
|
|
Grizzwold posted:That's from the more events mod IIRC and it's pretty bonkers since you can finish it with only around 1k fleet power but can get an FE cruiser with a titan laser out of it. Weird, I don't think I have that mod enabled. And yeah it's pretty sweet, although you really have to be careful of how you use it.
|
|
#
?
Feb 10, 2017 17:47
|
|
|
Archonex posted:Yeah, i've never actually completed the Precursor chain outside of the day one version of the game. Even now I can never seem to get the event chain to fully pop without dicking about with the console. Not sure what's up with that.  I also don't have leviathans yet, maybe there's something in there busting it? Jeb Bush 2012 posted:I mean, realism aside, giving spiritualist empires wizards *feels* right. Playing xenophile/egalitarian and having no choice but to enslave your androids feels wrong. 
Splicer fucked around with this message at 17:58 on Feb 10, 2017 |
|
#
?
Feb 10, 2017 17:56
|
|
|
Splicer posted:Robots made of candy like some kind of Space Willy Wonka https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QqdpNlvgVoQ
|
|
#
?
Feb 10, 2017 18:28
|
|
|
Splicer posted:I said this and GlyphGryph called me dumb how rude
|
|
#
?
Feb 10, 2017 18:29
|
|
|
Splicer posted:I'm running the game unmodded and the only "problem" precursor so far was some rear end in a top hat beating me to the finisher That might be possible. Leviathan can bork up some events in hilarious ways. I've had the "scan stars of various types" event trigger, only for the black hole I need to scan be the system the Dimensional Horror spawns in. Suffice to say that I did not finish that event until very late in the game.
|
|
#
?
Feb 10, 2017 18:37
|
|
|
Jeb Bush 2012 posted:I mean, realism aside, giving spiritualist empires wizards *feels* right. Playing xenophile/egalitarian and having no choice but to enslave your androids feels wrong. It ends up coming down to limitations on the ethos system trying to represent all of culture and philosophy and politics together, and the idea that your empire has 2-3 "official" ethos that hard lock everything. I'd prefer to have everything open to everyone, but certain things soft-locked due to pop/faction reactions. Sure you can research and build synths in your empire where 75% of the population are spiritualists, but those pops and their associated faction(s) are going to be pissed to the point that it's not worth it. Have the mechanics of the game "lock out" certain paths and playstyles. Believing that intelligent robots even are sapient let alone deserve the equal rights is not something everyone would agree with. A pacifist egalitarian society sounds "ethical" and "good" so we assume they have nice and good views on robot rights, but that's probably because you as the person thinking that personally are "materialist" enough to think robots would ever be capable of being a "real" person. In the old ethos system we had 3 points to spend, so if we were fanatical pacifist we could be either egalitarians OR materialist, but not both. In the new system state-ethos seems to be driven much more by factions. So if you have an empire that is 40% pacifist, 30% egalitarian, 30% materialist. I'm assuming you can embrace all 3's factions and make your official state ethos fanatic pacifist, egalitarian, and materialist? I'm not sure how that all works now. And would the 70% of pops whose "primary issue" isn't materialism become upset at robots? I'm not sure if per-pop happiness as as affected by your policies now that a lot of those effects are taken up by factions.
|
|
#
?
Feb 10, 2017 18:46
|
|
|
It's not that it's impossible to imagine an otherwise tolerant society that is bad to its intelligent robots, it's just bizarre to have literally everyone other than the science kings behave that way. Maybe more importantly, it's also much less exciting as a bonus for materialists. Like, being able to build intelligent robots, that's cool as hell. Being able to treat them well is nice but much less exciting, and also completely useless if you want to be an evil empire backed by intelligent robot slaves. (which still seems pretty materialist to me?)
|
|
#
?
Feb 10, 2017 18:53
|
|
|
again, we are losing out on what's truly important. that being the megamod i'm planning to make make an xkcd universe where everything works differently depending on how much acid you've dropped in the last day or so and how blindly unfunny you are. a blood sample and pre-game quiz will be required to figure out these bits of data. this begs my next question, which is do you guys prefer the blood sample to be taken from your palm or should i just get WAYYYYYYYYYYYYYY up in there and have the quadcopter jam a proboscis into your neck
|
|
#
?
Feb 10, 2017 18:58
|
|
|
just as long as there's enough blood left over for the blood god, idgaf
|
|
#
?
Feb 10, 2017 19:02
|
|
|
Splicer posted:I said this and GlyphGryph called me dumb Well, it is dumb. But I don't feel like copying and pasting my old answer on this again, so you just have to trust me on this. Jeb Bush 2012 posted:It's not that it's impossible to imagine an otherwise tolerant society that is bad to its intelligent robots, it's just bizarre to have literally everyone other than the science kings behave that way. Evil is neither materialist nor spiritualist. Besides if you want to be evil, you have to be wasteful on purpose. It's pretty drat evil to enslave your citizens out of spite, even though it brings you nothing. 
|
|
#
?
Feb 10, 2017 19:08
|
|
|
Libluini posted:Well, it is dumb. But I don't feel like copying and pasting my old answer on this again, so you just have to trust me on this. it's not though
|
|
#
?
Feb 10, 2017 19:35
|
|
|
Do we know if we can "fully" embrace 3 ethos? Why not be fanatical pacifist, materialist, and egalitarian at the same time? So long as the ethos are mutually exclusive it seems reasonable if all choices are more or less equal. ie fantatic X isn't "better" or "higher level" than non-fanatic, it just comes with bigger bonuses but also bigger penalties. Fanatic pacifists get a bigger pacifist bonus, but they also have stricter rules and reactions to war. I never really understood the 3-point system. It's like being asked about 4 issues having the options "strongly disagree, disagree, neutral, agree, strongly agree" but having limited points to answer. All 5 options for each ethos should be equally valid, from neutral to fanatic. Neutral gives the greatest flexibility in each category but no special bonuses and then each step in an opposed direction gives more bonuses but also more penalties and less flexibilities. An empire neutral or in the middle on every issue should, more or less, be as valid as someone with 4 extremes and be balanced in such a way that there's no point cost involved, just different choices.
|
|
#
?
Feb 10, 2017 19:49
|
|
|
Jeb Bush 2012 posted:it's not though It is. Arguably from my view point, though. So let's drop this or do you want us to exchange ten posts of "Yes" and "No" until we just report each others posts and give up in disgust?
|
|
#
?
Feb 10, 2017 19:53
|
|
|
I will mediate the disagreement. You are both dumb. I am dumb. We are all dumb, and no one cares. Please resume discussion about the many different ways we will be able to commit acts of genocide in the next patch.
|
|
#
?
Feb 10, 2017 20:00
|
|
|
Does this ever go on sale? It looks good but my aversion to paradox mapgames and budget makes the standard pricetag a little high. Might be willing to risk it with the new content being shown in streams and on sale though.
|
|
#
?
Feb 10, 2017 20:01
|
|
|
Baronjutter posted:Do we know if we can "fully" embrace 3 ethos? Why not be fanatical pacifist, materialist, and egalitarian at the same time? So long as the ethos are mutually exclusive it seems reasonable if all choices are more or less equal. ie fantatic X isn't "better" or "higher level" than non-fanatic, it just comes with bigger bonuses but also bigger penalties. Fanatic pacifists get a bigger pacifist bonus, but they also have stricter rules and reactions to war. It's meant to represent archetypes or races. I have had issues with it being on a wheel since the start, though I get the concept of "you can't mix and match stuff from the opposite side" and I get the idea of playthroughs being distinct. I don't think it does a very good job of pushing you towards a playstyle or making your run interesting. I think the idea of locking stuff behind these decisions is to introduce more variation. If you go materialist this run, you'll have robots but you won't get to play with psionics, you'll be using tech to keep your dudes happy, and you'll be using certain approaches to end game crisis. If you do spiritualist next run, robots are gone but you get psionics. If that ties into locking it to certain FTL types, and between the Unity trees and additional content giving each of the archetypes some neat toys and constraints, then I think Stellaris could get much more interesting over time. It could also start tying in to the tech tree, and then perhaps the archetypes would have innate bonuses to ship component stats. I feel like putting ethos on a wheel (same complaint w/ habitability) was an odd way to represent the choices available and what you're choosing between. Limiting it to two seems like you could plan on the player having a 'primary' ethos (one that will be l2) and a supporting ethos that will be l1. I also suspect there could be balancing issues with Tier 1 / Tier 2 talents and how the progression would go. Overall there isn't enough differentiation in Stellaris so I'm ok with it forcing you a ' primary ethos' for each run.
|
|
#
?
Feb 10, 2017 20:04
|
|
|
OwlFancier posted:Does this ever go on sale? Paradox had it on sale a couple of days ago. 
|
|
#
?
Feb 10, 2017 20:29
|
|
|
Any word yet on when these updates hit? Because they seem kind of baller.
|
|
#
?
Feb 10, 2017 20:33
|
|
|
OwlFancier posted:Does this ever go on sale?
|
|
#
?
Feb 10, 2017 20:34
|
|
|
Ersatz posted:Any word yet on when these updates hit? Because they seem kind of baller. Last I heard, "a couple months"
|
|
#
?
Feb 10, 2017 20:36
|
|
|
Coolguye posted:again, we are losing out on what's truly important. that being the megamod i'm planning to make make an xkcd universe where everything works differently depending on how much acid you've dropped in the last day or so and how blindly unfunny you are. a blood sample and pre-game quiz will be required to figure out these bits of data. lol, just lol if ur not taking a sample of brain tissue for the initial set up.
|
|
#
?
Feb 10, 2017 20:52
|
|
|
Libluini posted:Well, it is dumb. But I don't feel like copying and pasting my old answer on this again, so you just have to trust me on this. But seriously, are you saying the "It feels wrong" bit is dumb or the "It would be cooler if only Materialists could build AIs to start with" bit is dumb (or both)?
|
|
#
?
Feb 10, 2017 20:53
|
|
|
Tarquinn posted:Paradox had it on sale a couple of days ago. Huh, oh well. I was kind of expecting it to maybe go down when the expansion hits as that is usually how steam does it.
|
|
#
?
Feb 10, 2017 20:53
|
|
|
Nuclearmonkee posted:I will mediate the disagreement.
|
|
#
?
Feb 10, 2017 20:54
|
|
|
Baronjutter posted:I never really understood the 3-point system. It's like being asked about 4 issues having the options "strongly disagree, disagree, neutral, agree, strongly agree" but having limited points to answer. All 5 options for each ethos should be equally valid, from neutral to fanatic. Neutral gives the greatest flexibility in each category but no special bonuses and then each step in an opposed direction gives more bonuses but also more penalties and less flexibilities. An empire neutral or in the middle on every issue should, more or less, be as valid as someone with 4 extremes and be balanced in such a way that there's no point cost involved, just different choices. If you could be fanatic in four different categories, why wouldn't you? Okay, sure, maybe you want to be more neutral sometimes for roleplaying purposes, but the default position would be one of the fanatic positions on each ethos axis, because the most interesting content and strongest bonuses are tied to that. It would end up destroying what makes each ethos (and especially the fanatic version of each ethos) special, and remove the empire-defining character of each ethos/combination. If you're suggesting that the game be redesigned so that the "neutral" positions are just as interesting, well, okay, I guess that might work in theory (assuming, of course, you could actually find a way to do it well), but it would also mean completely redesigning everything about the ethos system in the game, so I'm not sure it's that productive a suggestion.
|
|
#
?
Feb 10, 2017 21:00
|
|
|
Just wanted to mention that I am running a game on the latest version and finished the Cybrex chain. It was my first precursor success across some 200 playhours since Stellaris launced. So they are not completely borked.
|
|
#
?
Feb 10, 2017 21:05
|
|
|
They added a fix in the last update that will randomly stick an anomoly to a previously surveyed planet/asteroid/star so you are a lot less likely to get stuck at the end of a chain. I had finished a few of the chains before this fix was added but it was far, far more common to just get stuck with 3, 4 or 5 of the artifacts then just run out of things to examine. Or have the reward system spawn out of the blue if someone else was kind enough to finish it for you. But now I'm also finding it a lot more common to find artifacts from multiple precursor chains, though only one quest will ever show up in the situation log.
|
|
#
?
Feb 10, 2017 21:33
|
|
|
I'm sad because I am getting towards endgame for the first time and I've finished up all the artifacts for the cybrex chain but there's no "end event" triggering and also there appears to be a planet called Cybrex Prime in a neighbour's space that's got a baller ringworld in it that's giving them approximately infinity engineering RP e: also I got the enigmatic fortress opened up but didn't research the black hole in time so the fortress restarted. I killed it again iirc but the event didn't reopen like the wiki said it was supposed to
ChickenWing fucked around with this message at 22:08 on Feb 10, 2017 |
|
#
?
Feb 10, 2017 21:49
|
|
|
Psychotic Weasel posted:They added a fix in the last update that will randomly stick an anomoly to a previously surveyed planet/asteroid/star so you are a lot less likely to get stuck at the end of a chain. That event rarely seems to work for me - it pops and says we found something new at "."
|
|
#
?
Feb 10, 2017 21:49
|
|
|
Splicer posted:I said this and GlyphGryph called me dumb You were specifically advocating we should lose the ability to build robots even if you've already built a bunch, even if your civ is mostly robots and we've been building them for centuries, if we drift away from Materialist. I'd be fine with limiting the research for synths to materialists, but not with suddenly magically banning what has become a societal norm. That wouldn't feel good or fun or contribute to good stories at all, imo.
|
|
#
?
Feb 10, 2017 21:51
|
|
|
Viscardus posted:If you could be fanatic in four different categories, why wouldn't you? Okay, sure, maybe you want to be more neutral sometimes for roleplaying purposes, but the default position would be one of the fanatic positions on each ethos axis, because the most interesting content and strongest bonuses are tied to that. It would end up destroying what makes each ethos (and especially the fanatic version of each ethos) special, and remove the empire-defining character of each ethos/combination. Personally, I see this as a story and discovery game. The concept of most empires in the galaxy getting progressively more and more fanatic as time goes on actively appeals to me in that regard.
|
|
#
?
Feb 10, 2017 21:53
|
|
|
So far in playing Utopia my favourite thing has been playing as space nazi humans, but accepting refugees from events. Then we eat them.
|
|
#
?
Feb 10, 2017 21:53
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 9, 2024 22:35 |
|
|
from: coolguy to: everyone arguing about something dumb subject: URGENT body: im gonna fart into your soul signature: 
Coolguye fucked around with this message at 22:00 on Feb 10, 2017 |
|
#
?
Feb 10, 2017 21:53
|
|