|
Deceitful Penguin posted:You know, it's kinda baffling how overpopulation isn't a problem in the Stellaris universe, apparently overpopulation being a motivator for expansion isn't the worst idea. It could at least bring conflict to the late game scenarios where everyone is either friends or in such huge alliance pacts that wars seemingly only happen when the player initiates them. Finding the balance between having a large enough work force and not being overcrowded could be interesting, but it is also entirely possible that a mechanic which forces you to expand in such a manner wouldn't actually be fun at all
|
#
?
Mar 6, 2017 21:13
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 13, 2024 16:55 |
|
|
I feel like overpopulation would imply a level of simulation that we don't actually have. The whole pop mechanic is incredibly abstracted to the point that I'm not sure how to really get to something like population numbers and environmental impact out of it. Like, Earth is 16 tiles which means 16 pops and 16 buildings, but clearly that's nonsense in terms of what's actually supposed to go into keeping a planetary population alive and kicking. Armies come from nowhere, colony ships are loaded without disrupting your pops, etc.
|
|
#
?
Mar 6, 2017 21:54
|
|
|
managing pops is pretty grim as it is, I can't imagine an overpopulation mechanic being fun at all
|
|
#
?
Mar 6, 2017 22:02
|
|
|
If they want to go that route with a future DLC it will require revamping the entire pop/planet development structure. Which I would welcome, but I haven't seen anything to suggest they want to focus on that aspect of the game. Besides, fixing the fleet and army stuff has to be a way higher priority.
|
|
#
?
Mar 6, 2017 22:10
|
|
|
Aethernet posted:TIME TO SPERG Definitely don't disagree with you here. Though sadly I find that outside the early game (say, pre-cruisers) what limits my expansion isn't actually fleet power so much as it is truce timers. 
|
|
#
?
Mar 6, 2017 22:14
|
|
Yes, it's like a lava lamp.
|
Litany Unheard posted:If they want to go that route with a future DLC it will require revamping the entire pop/planet development structure. Which I would welcome, but I haven't seen anything to suggest they want to focus on that aspect of the game. It's the sort of thing I'd want to see in a space 4x game that's all about really digging into the thematic guts of the age of colonialism, and had every system built around the assumption of starting off in a bloated, resource-deprived hive world full of teeming masses that need to have their energies directed elsewhere just as new discoveries and horizons are reshaping the way people think. That's not Stellaris and Stellaris doesn't have to be that... although I would also welcome a huge rework of the pop/tile system.
|
|
#
?
Mar 6, 2017 22:18
|
|
|
I suppose it is inevitable that it will happen if the game lives as long as Crusader Kings. Diplomacy and war need love first though.
|
|
#
?
Mar 6, 2017 22:18
|
|
|
Conskill posted:colony ships are loaded without disrupting your pops, etc.
|
|
#
?
Mar 6, 2017 22:32
|
|
|
How useful is flak? When should/shouldn't I mount it, and on what ships?
|
|
#
?
Mar 6, 2017 22:34
|
|
|
GotLag posted:How useful is flak? When should/shouldn't I mount it, and on what ships? Flak is hands down the best PD/Antifighter in the game, with the best range and hit rate. I always have some Flak in my fleets, just in case.
|
|
#
?
Mar 6, 2017 23:04
|
|
|
Once you get flak PD mounts are obsolete in my experience. Flak can also do decent damage to small craft as well.
|
|
#
?
Mar 6, 2017 23:07
|
|
|
GotLag posted:How useful is flak? When should/shouldn't I mount it, and on what ships? Flak good. I put 2 on my destroyers once I unlock it.
|
|
#
?
Mar 6, 2017 23:10
|
|
|
Going back a bit to the doomstack issue, interesting new mod popped up: https://steamcommunity.com/sharedfiles/filedetails/?id=877873698 "Borders are defined by your military's position and move with your fleets." I dunno about the implementation but the concept is cool. You can punt fleets around to take up space but you can only hold onto it if no one is willing to blow them up. So there's an incentive to station lots of decently sized fleets around. Seems like it would make actually using your fleets to attack feel a bit awkward though. I guess you'd take over whatever your fleet is near while in enemy territory? Then again, how does this interact with allied fleets...? These issue aside, I do really like the idea of border projection being tied at least in part to force projection.
|
|
#
?
Mar 6, 2017 23:12
|
|
|
I don't know if it's actually optimal but my battleships end up being an XL weapon mount, a mid-section filled with flak batteries, and a large weapon (often kinetic) in the rear. And I only make battleships come endgame; I don't see any real advantage from mixed fleets.
|
|
#
?
Mar 6, 2017 23:13
|
|
|
Litany Unheard posted:If they want to go that route with a future DLC it will require revamping the entire pop/planet development structure. Which I would welcome, but I haven't seen anything to suggest they want to focus on that aspect of the game. Replace these chump mode collections of postage stamps with a geodesic grid that is directly visible on the surface of the planet itself. Bam, one to one representation of pops and buildings all up on the globe, including local climate.  Better get ready for fighting on planets with actual armies 
|
|
#
?
Mar 6, 2017 23:47
|
|
|
Only if the armies use counters!!!
|
|
#
?
Mar 6, 2017 23:51
|
|
|
I mean, it's not as terrible as some other solutions I've heard.
|
|
#
?
Mar 7, 2017 00:05
|
|
|
Litany Unheard posted:I don't know if it's actually optimal but my battleships end up being an XL weapon mount, a mid-section filled with flak batteries, and a large weapon (often kinetic) in the rear. After having fought a few Fallen Empires, I'm very skeptical of the value of XL weapon mounts, at least as long as you're fighting an AI. In a fight with an AI peer competitor (read: Fallen/Awakened Empire using XL mounts), you're better off manoeuvring so you can start the battle at close range, and on a vector where they can't bring their large mounts to bear.
|
|
#
?
Mar 7, 2017 00:19
|
|
|
On the pop front I want space Victoria 2, with militancy, education and fuckit, even religions or some poo poo Give me my drat space communists
|
|
#
?
Mar 7, 2017 03:59
|
|
|
SniperWoreConverse posted:Replace these chump mode collections of postage stamps with a geodesic grid that is directly visible on the surface of the planet itself. Bam, one to one representation of pops and buildings all up on the globe, including local climate. Of course, that leads to more questions/problems. "Why the gently caress can't we exploit the water tiles!" Or some such.
|
|
#
?
Mar 7, 2017 04:13
|
|
|
Ocean preference gives 80 habitability on water tiles no prob. The real brain buster to figure out how to implement under this would be gaia worlds. You want those to be generic gaia tiles, or some kinda exotic mix of tiles that looks like the cover of a yes album? I know what I'd do. E: tell me you wouldn't be filled with joy living on this planet: 
SniperWoreConverse fucked around with this message at 04:34 on Mar 7, 2017 |
|
#
?
Mar 7, 2017 04:29
|
|
|
Deceitful Penguin posted:On the pop front I want space Victoria 2, with militancy, education and fuckit, even religions or some poo poo Yeah I'd love for pops to get more Victoria level details while planets become a bit more abstracted like a victoria province/state. Also way more pie graphs.
|
|
#
?
Mar 7, 2017 04:34
|
|
|
Just wait until we get Victoria III and then mush them together. That's how coding works, right?
|
|
#
?
Mar 7, 2017 04:37
|
|
|
Crazycryodude posted:Just wait until we get Victoria III and then mush them together. That's how coding works, right? It's called hybridization and yes, that's how it works. You copy paste the parts you like and run it through a "compiler" which then sorts the junk code out and gives you a new version. For instance, copy and paste the sections from EU4's diplomacy model and Victoria's pop's into Stellaris, hit compile, and enjoy.
|
|
#
?
Mar 7, 2017 04:48
|
|
|
So people who play the star trek mod... are you guys actually able to run that huge galaxy smoothly? I've got to around mid game and that thing stutters like crazy. How much CPU power does that poo poo take?
|
|
#
?
Mar 7, 2017 07:17
|
|
|
Litany Unheard posted:I don't know if it's actually optimal but my battleships end up being an XL weapon mount, a mid-section filled with flak batteries, and a large weapon (often kinetic) in the rear. Just literally two pages ago we were talking about why mixed fleets are important and how your all battleship fleet would get totally wrecked by any fleet that had decent numbers of torpedo corvettes. I'd suggest you read it. If you are saying you run away with the game so much every time you can deploy suboptimal fleets and just crush your opponents anyway that's fine, I don't really tailor my fleets or anything. However, I'd suggest since you're using XL weapons which suck, and you "don't see the advantage" of building mixed fleets, which is objectively the better tactic, I'd suggest you probably need to read up in the stats and how it all works.
|
|
#
?
Mar 7, 2017 09:01
|
|
|
Well, I mean.. they suck, but you get to shout Giga Cannon whenever they fire. Fair trade, really. Mixed fleets are nice to have and tactically superior, but rebuilding all the dead corvettes after every battle eventually becomes a chore. I personally run 5:2:2:1 for composition. On the other hand, it is much cheaper and efficient to lose smaller ships acting as a buffer for your larger ones than it is to rebuild a fully battleship fleet. Perhaps not endgame where your empire controls a majority of the galaxy, but the physical upkeep of constantly replenishing your fleet(s) to keep them diverse does wear a player down. Fleet auto-fill was mentioned a few pages back in the thread, it would be a lot easier to maintain such a fleet and cut down on busywork.
|
|
#
?
Mar 7, 2017 10:56
|
|
|
That's fine though. If someone tells me they run fleets with big ships because they are lazy and don't care about the optimal way of designing their fleet that's cool. I never tailor my fleets unless I'm really in trouble so that's fine. Its more the "I don't see how it's an advantage even though it was designed specifically to be an advantage" type thing I was taking a bit of an issue with, especially as it was discussed like two pages ago explaining it.
|
|
#
?
Mar 7, 2017 11:06
|
|
|
DatonKallandor posted:The game really needs an auto-construct mode for builders to automate the mining station and research station placement in the end game, because it gets tedious as gently caress when your territory is constantly growing and mining stations keep getting destroyed by the mid-game and late-game wars. I also wouldn't mind if +1 minerals spots didn't exist anymore to make this work better, because +1 minerals is garbage clutter. throw all your systems into a sector. they won't rebuild instantly, but they will rebuild soon enough.
|
|
#
?
Mar 7, 2017 11:31
|
|
|
XL weapons are cool as gently caress and belong on spaceships for being totally sweet.
|
|
#
?
Mar 7, 2017 12:40
|
|
|
GunnerJ posted:XL weapons are cool as gently caress and belong on spaceships for being totally sweet. They would be cool if they actually appeared on your ship as a spinal mount but they don't. So the concept is cool but that's about it.
|
|
#
?
Mar 7, 2017 13:16
|
|
|
I've had literally zero troubles ever with my general fleet of Battleship/Cruiser/Cruiser. First cruiser is the workhorse, second one is my shield; first one goes for half kinetic artillery, half plasma (my battleships do the same, but they also stick an XL Lance on top), the second one is four medium flak and one medium ripper. The shield cruisers remove any possibility of both missiles AND corvettes; they just rip through them. Also, all torpedo corvettes are sincerely the worst idea due to how ship targeting works. You want to mix them up with plasma.
|
|
#
?
Mar 7, 2017 13:26
|
|
|
GunnerJ posted:XL weapons are cool as gently caress and belong on spaceships for being totally sweet. TEC Rebel Ragnarov titan. A giant gun with engines welded to it. Actually, all of the titans and capital ships were pretty cool in Sins. Kitchner posted:They would be cool if they actually appeared on your ship as a spinal mount but they don't. So the concept is cool but that's about it. Yeah.  That said, I agree with your previous post in that it's a bit narrow to not see advantages in a non-unitary fleet composition. There's certainly no wrong way to play, but mechanical advantages do bear out to be deciders in a pitched battle.
|
|
#
?
Mar 7, 2017 13:30
|
|
|
Kitchner posted:They would be cool if they actually appeared on your ship as a spinal mount but they don't. So the concept is cool but that's about it. Was gonna make a joke reply but I actually don't know what you mean by this. 
|
|
#
?
Mar 7, 2017 13:40
|
|
|
Heartcatch posted:TEC Rebel Ragnarov titan. A giant gun with engines welded to it. They really were. I have a soft spot for the Kultorask, the Vasari Rebel's titan, and how great it was for devouring entire fleets while keeping itself and its allies fully repaired.  It helped that the thing itself looked like some kind of cosmic horror, and the rebels were the good guys. The next best thing was the Human designed ultimate(?) kinetics Dreadnoughts in Sword of the Stars, which looked like this:  And yes, the six cylinders rotated as you fired asteroids at your problems. 
Thyrork fucked around with this message at 14:22 on Mar 7, 2017 |
|
#
?
Mar 7, 2017 14:14
|
|
|
Kitchner posted:Just literally two pages ago we were talking about why mixed fleets are important and how your all battleship fleet would get totally wrecked by any fleet that had decent numbers of torpedo corvettes. I'd suggest you read it. Pretty sure what would actually happen with an all torpedo corvette fleet is that they would get popped halfway across a solar system and the few straggling survivors that closed on my battleships would get chewed apart by fighter swarms and flak cannons. At least that's what's been happening with every other fleet I encounter. But unfortunately even if I lost the game does a horrible job imparting any information about what's going on in combat so I wouldn't understand how to address it without blindly redesigning or doing a bunch of online research. For example, apparently the cool endgame super weapons are actually bad! Then why are they in the game and what about them would clue me in that they don't work? And why do I keep winning combats against every enemy fleet I come across even if said fleet is supposedly 50% stronger than my own according to the game's obviously flawed calculations? I want to have cool mixed fleets where my battleships are escorted by corvettes and destroyer screens but the way the game is right now it really doesn't matter. GunnerJ posted:Was gonna make a joke reply but I actually don't know what you mean by this. He means the model of the gun doesn't appear on your ship, so they don't have a cool visual element to make up for their poor mechanics.
|
|
#
?
Mar 7, 2017 14:26
|
|
|
The cool visual element is their giant laser beams tho? 
|
|
#
?
Mar 7, 2017 14:28
|
|
|
GunnerJ posted:The cool visual element is their giant laser beams tho? Agreed.
|
|
#
?
Mar 7, 2017 14:43
|
|
|
GunnerJ posted:The cool visual element is their giant laser beams tho? EDIT: Or, as mentioned a few posts above, in more extreme cases it's just that most of the ship IS the gun. Artillery cruisers in the online game Dreadnought being another example:  EDIT 2: \/ I'll have you know spaceship aesthetics is no joking matter 
Nordick fucked around with this message at 14:53 on Mar 7, 2017 |
|
#
?
Mar 7, 2017 14:49
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 13, 2024 16:55 |
|
|
Nordick posted:Point is, it would be a cooler visual element if that giant laser beam came out of a giant gun barrel in the nose of the ship, instead of a generic turret on top. That's what "spinal mount" means, a giant gun inside the ship sticking out of the front. I know, it's just a joke. Actual serious question though: why are XL mounts bad on a mechanical level? Not a challenge, genuinely curious. eta: Nordick posted:EDIT 2: \/ I'll have you know spaceship aesthetics is no joking matter ...fair point! GunnerJ fucked around with this message at 15:31 on Mar 7, 2017 |
|
#
?
Mar 7, 2017 14:51
|
|