|
CrazyTolradi posted:Yeah, this was my reaction. It's way too slow to appeal on any level to that type of player. These are the kind of people who can't play a single match/game for more than an hour and not be bored, I really can't understand the fear or loathing toward that sort of gamer. you are taking his exact wording too literally. the paradox equivalent of the "e-sports" type exists, they're just super groggy instead of twitchy
|
#
?
Feb 25, 2017 00:30
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 13, 2024 05:58 |
|
|
I hope games discussion on the internet reaches a point where calling somebody a Star Citizen is equivalent to Godwin's Law.
|
|
#
?
Feb 25, 2017 00:34
|
|
|
Jazerus posted:you are taking his exact wording too literally. the paradox equivalent of the "e-sports" type exists, they're just super groggy instead of twitchy Jeb Bush 2012 posted:balanced mechanics are very important if you want interesting decisions! unless your idea of "interesting" is "I feel really smart for not choosing the trap choice"
|
|
#
?
Feb 25, 2017 00:35
|
|
|
As any conversation approaches infinity the chance of any topic whatsoever occurring approaches one
|
|
#
?
Feb 25, 2017 00:35
|
|
|
Still blown away by the amount of content coming. Mega-structures alone would have been a nice dlc, but the government rework/civics/traditions/factions poo poo is amazing.
|
|
#
?
Feb 25, 2017 00:42
|
|
|
What exactly is the appeal of Extremely Adaptive builds? That bonus would only take you to 40% habitability I think, which would lead to some pretty loving grumpy pops, especially in the beginning when being able to settle any planet type would be the most helpful. Do you just settle some world with 40% habitability and assume that a bunch of actually suitable pops will rush-migrate to it, while your original relatively maladapted pops will eventually move away?
|
|
#
?
Feb 25, 2017 00:50
|
|
Yes, it's like a lava lamp.
|
40% happiness seems manageable, and you can probably get it to 50% pretty early (say, frontier clinic and visitor centre, since we were talking about xenophiles). But I imagine the idea is mostly to get migration treaties going, yes.
|
|
#
?
Feb 25, 2017 00:59
|
|
|
Jeb Bush 2012 posted:balanced mechanics are very important if you want interesting decisions! unless your idea of "interesting" is "I feel really smart for not choosing the trap choice" Balanced mechanics and interesting decisions are almost completely tangential concerns. Its perfectly possible to have boring balance and exciting imbalance. Also we know of exactly one guaranteed trap choice in Utopia and we are all probably gonna end up picking it because come on who wouldnt. You can make bad and suboptimal options fun and desireable while still leaving them bad and suboptimal.
|
|
#
?
Feb 25, 2017 01:03
|
|
|
For me anyways, a good paradox game finds a balance between giving the player a cool narrative experience that generates stories and gives the player the freedom to imagine "what would I do if I was a medieval king/victorian king/space king", but also has proper gameplay mechanics to give believable enough results to those actions and make your accomplishments (and failures) feel meaningful and earned. No one complains france is unbalanced compared to Huron or the game is unbalanced because rationally to win you should always pick france, but they will rightfully complain that one idea set or another is unbalanced. Even with idea sets they don't all have to be perfectly equal, some are going to be more applicable to more situations than others, but they should all have their potential roles and none should be an "always pick" or "never pick". Stellaris with its perfectly symmetrical starts forces everything in the game to be competitively balanced, which I think eliminates a lot of interesting options and play styles. Why not start as a larger but decaying empire filled with unhappy factions? Why not start as a pre-space civ on the cusp of interstellar travel? Why not start as a member of a dense group of related-race empires that exist in a sort of HRE-like structure? Because that wouldn't be balanced? In situations like that, an obsession with balance (in absolute score/power sense) isn't so great. It's fine to have objectively "worse" starts or choices, so long as they all lead to potentially enjoyable games. I guess I just think the symmetrical starts in stellaris close so many interesting gameplay doors and force a need for perfect balance. But it's not really the idea of "balance" that's bad, but the symmetrical starts and singular focus of the game on military expansion as the only path to victory that force this sort of balance.
|
|
#
?
Feb 25, 2017 01:32
|
|
|
PittTheElder posted:What exactly is the appeal of Extremely Adaptive builds? That bonus would only take you to 40% habitability I think, which would lead to some pretty loving grumpy pops, especially in the beginning when being able to settle any planet type would be the most helpful. 1) It takes you to 40% for every world type, other than tomb and -habitability worlds. This means you can settle practically the entire galaxy immediately. 2) Frontier Clinics and Atmospheric Filtering (first +5% hab tech) are both pretty early in the tree, which gets you to the 50% no penalties zone. PittTheElder posted:Do you just settle some world with 40% habitability and assume that a bunch of actually suitable pops will rush-migrate to it, while your original relatively maladapted pops will eventually move away? 1) You settle all the worlds, period. I generally don't build any frontier outposts with this build strategy. 2) You also build robots. ulmont fucked around with this message at 01:59 on Feb 25, 2017 |
|
#
?
Feb 25, 2017 01:38
|
|
|
Is there any way to suppress the development of primitives? These loincloth-wearing rock-bashers are sitting in a kinda useful location and I don't want the bother of having to raise, integrate, and then find a place for them.
|
|
#
?
Feb 25, 2017 01:44
|
|
|
Other than max happiness what does habitability even do? influence growth too? Unless you've built your society to max out happiness I never found habitability to be the weak link. That 60% planet is fine because 60% is a perfectly fine level of happiness, and you'll be upping it to 70% after your hospital anyways. I recently fell in love the "unadaptive" trait because it gives so many points and all it does it lower your preferred planet type from 90 to 70 which you'll easily get to 100% with techs before you get your happiness that high anyways. The same planets I'd never settle until terraforming I'd still never settle. For my playstyle it's just 2 free trait points and who's pushing past 70% happiness in the early game anyways?
|
|
#
?
Feb 25, 2017 02:01
|
|
|
Baronjutter posted:Other than max happiness what does habitability even do? influence growth too. Yes - it drags down monthly growth for every % below 90.
|
|
#
?
Feb 25, 2017 02:10
|
|
|
PittTheElder posted:What exactly is the appeal of Extremely Adaptive builds? That bonus would only take you to 40% habitability I think, which would lead to some pretty loving grumpy pops, especially in the beginning when being able to settle any planet type would be the most helpful. Do you just settle some world with 40% habitability and assume that a bunch of actually suitable pops will rush-migrate to it, while your original relatively maladapted pops will eventually move away?
|
|
#
?
Feb 25, 2017 02:38
|
|
|
Baronjutter posted:For me anyways, a good paradox game finds a balance between giving the player a cool narrative experience that generates stories and gives the player the freedom to imagine "what would I do if I was a medieval king/victorian king/space king", but also has proper gameplay mechanics to give believable enough results to those actions and make your accomplishments (and failures) feel meaningful and earned. No one complains france is unbalanced compared to Huron or the game is unbalanced because rationally to win you should always pick france, but they will rightfully complain that one idea set or another is unbalanced. Even with idea sets they don't all have to be perfectly equal, some are going to be more applicable to more situations than others, but they should all have their potential roles and none should be an "always pick" or "never pick". Stellaris with its perfectly symmetrical starts forces everything in the game to be competitively balanced, which I think eliminates a lot of interesting options and play styles. Why not start as a larger but decaying empire filled with unhappy factions? Why not start as a pre-space civ on the cusp of interstellar travel? Why not start as a member of a dense group of related-race empires that exist in a sort of HRE-like structure? Because that wouldn't be balanced? In situations like that, an obsession with balance (in absolute score/power sense) isn't so great. It's fine to have objectively "worse" starts or choices, so long as they all lead to potentially enjoyable games. I guess I just think the symmetrical starts in stellaris close so many interesting gameplay doors and force a need for perfect balance. But it's not really the idea of "balance" that's bad, but the symmetrical starts and singular focus of the game on military expansion as the only path to victory that force this sort of balance. Well, given their goals are to give players more options to roleplay the space empires they want to, I imagine it'll come later. Ideally you'd be able to have a lot of starting options, like playing the remnants left behind after the majority of your Empire ascended.
|
|
#
?
Feb 25, 2017 03:31
|
|
|
Man, I'm really confused why there's only like, 3 galaxy shapes in game. why aren't there clusters? Completely random? Some more interesting forms? I'd really also like it if there were more resources and that you could actually, yanno, use them in interesting ways. I guess it's mod time for both of those?
|
|
#
?
Feb 25, 2017 03:54
|
|
|
Deceitful Penguin posted:Man, I'm really confused why there's only like, 3 galaxy shapes in game. why aren't there clusters? Completely random? Some more interesting forms? Resources have gotten a lot better since launch, they generally just give a little flat empire-wide bonus now. Before they almost all let you build a building or station module that did a single minor thing to things only at that one place. And yeah I'd love to see more diverse maps. Like clusters + hyperlanes. Little clumps of starts with only a few ways in and out of the clump. The galaxy divided into a few big chunks, just cool stuff that adds different "terrain" to the game. Also a total re-do of engines/movement.
|
|
#
?
Feb 25, 2017 04:04
|
|
|
It's probably never going to happen because of performance issues/AI freaking out, but being able to have multiple galaxies would be cool. Have a natural wormhole that lets you travel back and forth.
|
|
#
?
Feb 25, 2017 04:19
|
|
|
Looking forward to the next dev diary on perks and poo poo. Would love to get a list of all the civics too.
|
|
#
?
Feb 25, 2017 04:25
|
|
|
Just found out about Unity and I've been making some species to fill up my galaxy with. I'm wondering how you do formatting in the species description, ie. how do I insert breaks so it's not just a giant block of text, like the sample species do? Right now, all I seem to be able to do is hold space to create makeshift breaks and it doesn't always turn out all that good.
|
|
#
?
Feb 25, 2017 04:52
|
|
|
Mewnie posted:Just found out about Unity and I've been making some species to fill up my galaxy with. Enter the description into a text file and paste it into the game, it'll keep the paragraphs.
|
|
#
?
Feb 25, 2017 05:09
|
|
|
Swedish Horror posted:It's probably never going to happen because of performance issues/AI freaking out, but being able to have multiple galaxies would be cool. Have a natural wormhole that lets you travel back and forth. One right in the center of both galaxies would be cool. Or a tech that unlocks it down the line that basically lets you be unbidden. Wiz, can the engine rapidly generate empires that are established in-game? Opening the wormhole could take some time- like building a gate, and using that time for generating empires that are established instead of keeping track of them from the start, which would help CPU wise. It would also add a level of Russian roulette- do you hit a galaxy with young empires, or do you get a hellscape overrun by the scourge or unbidden. Don't know if it's even possible, but I can hope. 
|
|
#
?
Feb 25, 2017 05:15
|
|
|
GlyphGryph posted:Balanced mechanics and interesting decisions are almost completely tangential concerns. Its perfectly possible to have boring balance and exciting imbalance. none of this beyond the first sentence actually contradicts what I said, which is not surprising given that what I said is obviously true I guess? the fact that you can have interesting decisions in a poorly balanced game is not actually inconsistent with the fact that better balance tends to lead to more interesting decisions
|
|
#
?
Feb 25, 2017 08:02
|
|
|
Well, that was a weird bug. A huge flickering light in the middle of the galaxy which absolutely wrecked my framerate, and persisted through saving and reloading, only to go away when I restarted the game.
|
|
#
?
Feb 25, 2017 10:27
|
|
|
GotLag posted:Well, that was a weird bug. A huge flickering light in the middle of the galaxy which absolutely wrecked my framerate, and persisted through saving and reloading, only to go away when I restarted the game. Sounds like the one where bits of battles stick around on the screen, huge.
|
|
#
?
Feb 25, 2017 10:36
|
|
|
GotLag posted:Well, that was a weird bug. A huge flickering light in the middle of the galaxy which absolutely wrecked my framerate, and persisted through saving and reloading, only to go away when I restarted the game. Taear posted:Sounds like the one where bits of battles stick around on the screen, huge.
|
|
#
?
Feb 25, 2017 11:19
|
|
|
Jeb Bush 2012 posted:none of this beyond the first sentence actually contradicts what I said, which is not surprising given that what I said is obviously true I guess? Maybe we should clarify what you actually mean by balance here GlyphGryph fucked around with this message at 13:29 on Feb 25, 2017 |
|
#
?
Feb 25, 2017 13:27
|
|
|
Neither choice being better or worse mechanically so your roleplaying can't be tainted by mechanical concerns
|
|
#
?
Feb 25, 2017 13:32
|
|
|
Thats the bad definition that actively works to make things less interesting so he cant mean that one
GlyphGryph fucked around with this message at 13:48 on Feb 25, 2017 |
|
#
?
Feb 25, 2017 13:45
|
|
|
I think I missed it, but is there a link to the goon race pack? I thought I saw it was available, but I didn't see it in the OP.
|
|
#
?
Feb 25, 2017 14:01
|
|
|
GlyphGryph posted:Thats the bad definition that actively works to make things less interesting so he cant mean that one No why would it make things less interesting it's not about giving the same advantages just ones that make each decision worthwhile and doesn't waste development time on decisions that only masochistic players take.
|
|
#
?
Feb 25, 2017 14:02
|
|
|
Jeb Bush 2012 posted:I, too, want broken poo poo in the game and also want to get real mad at people for using it In competitive multiplayer it's fine to have a lot of poo poo-tier strategies because nobody's going to take them, but if you've accidentally left in one or two god-tier combos/strategies then all the other strategies are effectively poo poo-tier strategies and most of your game might as well not exist. With single player or social multiplayer having a lot of options that are very RP appealing but absolutely poo poo-tier mechanically is very bad because now the guy who wanted to play a peaceful starfish empire is left bitter and unsatisfied, but having a few god-tier outliers isn't as game breaking since singelplayer is going to be trying out a bunch of combos based on what sounds fun for this game and in casual multiplayer you can social contract Gerry into not playing that one loving combo every goddamn time stop being such a prick/Gerry deliberately plays suboptimally because he likes the aesthetic of the murderfuck combo but doesn't want to mess with his friends' fun. Again, the ideal is that the game is perfectly balanced, but what counts as acceptable compromises changes depending on who your target audience is. Splicer fucked around with this message at 14:13 on Feb 25, 2017 |
|
#
?
Feb 25, 2017 14:07
|
|
|
Nitis posted:I think I missed it, but is there a link to the goon race pack? I thought I saw it was available, but I didn't see it in the OP. Yeah I post the link once a week but I am not at my computer right now so cant post it again. You can check my post history though it should be in there somewete
|
|
#
?
Feb 25, 2017 14:07
|
|
|
Splicer posted:While a perfectly balanced game is the obviously ideal Counterpoint: Dan Hibiki and Pichu were both positive additions to their respective games despite being clearly inferior choices, Super Sonic mode and the invincibility star were positive additions in their respective games despite being clearly superior. Or to the pont made earlier, both France and the other guys whose name I already forgot would not have been better if France was weaker and the other guy stronger even though it would have been more balanced. Edit: Actually regardless of anything else this conversation is dumb so I concede. You guys are right about everything and all your opinions are correct, even the bad ones GlyphGryph fucked around with this message at 14:30 on Feb 25, 2017 |
|
#
?
Feb 25, 2017 14:20
|
|
|
Baronjutter posted:Resources have gotten a lot better since launch, they generally just give a little flat empire-wide bonus now. Before they almost all let you build a building or station module that did a single minor thing to things only at that one place. You could have the pocket dimensions be like the planes in Warlock, and it would mean that warp/hyperlane movement types might be able to reach other more distant parts of the main galaxy quicker if they connected to various different places. GlyphGryph posted:Counterpoint: Dan Hibiki and Pichu were both positive additions to their respective games despite being clearly inferior choices, Super Sonic mode and the invincibility star were positive additions in their respective games despite being clearly superior. Also do all the premade species have events? I never actually played any of them and so I just vaguely remember hearing about it
|
|
#
?
Feb 25, 2017 14:33
|
|
|
The game should add the option of the human player getting an advance start and getting to cruise around a bit before the other empires start popping in So add yourself and two other advanced start dudes and you have your two main enemies and then a bunch of upstarts Would also be cool if you could guarantee each was in at least two steps opposition to at least one ethos of yours and each others.
|
|
#
?
Feb 25, 2017 14:39
|
|
|
GlyphGryph posted:Counterpoint: Dan Hibiki and Pichu were both positive additions to their respective games despite being clearly inferior choices, Super Sonic mode and the invincibility star were positive additions in their respective games despite being clearly superior. What's being discussed isn't whether there should be differently powered stuff within the game, it's whether "character creation" (and the basic strategies) should be balanced. Choices that look equivalent (should I pick lasers or missiles? Pacifist or Militarist? Natural Engineers or Fast Breeders?) should be equivalent. Sonic doesn't have a character creation screen, and the strategy is "go fast". Collecting chaos emeralds and invincibility stars are part of the game, same as not running into the monsters. If you started the game choosing between whether all the boxes contained 10 coin rings or invincibility stars then yeah, that'd be an issue. Dan is a joke character there for flavour (and embarrassing "I even used Dan" beatdowns). The disparity between character tiers would be a better example, though some would argue that knowing what's a "good" character is an important part of the game (I disagree (e: knowing what to pick to counter a particular opponent is different and good though)). But for a game like Stellaris, or a traditional RPG, you shouldn't be able to lose the game at character creation. I haven't played pokemon since red/green so I can't really comment on pichu. Same for paradox france game whose name I forget. GlyphGryph posted:The game should add the option of the human player getting an advance start and getting to cruise around a bit before the other empires start popping in Baronjutter posted:Why not start as a larger but decaying empire filled with unhappy factions? Why not start as a pre-space civ on the cusp of interstellar travel? Why not start as a member of a dense group of related-race empires that exist in a sort of HRE-like structure? Splicer fucked around with this message at 15:40 on Feb 25, 2017 |
|
#
?
Feb 25, 2017 15:34
|
|
|
I really hope that Utopia might let you build poo poo for your vassals/protectorates. I just want you to utilize your goddamn resources! And terraform planets for you! And in Utopia, maybe build you some things!
|
|
#
?
Feb 25, 2017 15:45
|
|
|
Bookmarks à la all the other Paradox games are actually a really good idea, though it's a lot harder because you don't have real history to fall back on. Still, if it ever happens, it would be awesome to have pre-made scenarios.
|
|
#
?
Feb 25, 2017 15:59
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 13, 2024 05:58 |
|
|
Somewhere, in the vast expanse of my interstellar Theocracy, there is a cloning station where I can spam out Clone Soldiers Where? Well, as far as I can tell I'm going to have to go through every single world in every single sector to find out. I think I'm just gonna build a buncha psionic ones on every single planet instead...
|
|
#
?
Feb 25, 2017 16:08
|
|