|
Wiz posted:It'll come at some point for sure, but we kind of have to rework the war system for it to work balance-wise. Warscore system and free exploding of planets do not mesh well together. In my head I really like the idea of treating devouring swarm and fanatical purifiers as galactic menaces that bypass the war system entirely. They'd always be at war with everyone and planets would change hands instantly, maybe speed up the rate on extermination if they pick that option rather than processing.
|
#
?
Jul 7, 2017 13:19
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 8, 2024 20:05 |
|
|
Demiurge4 posted:In my head I really like the idea of treating devouring swarm and fanatical purifiers as galactic menaces that bypass the war system entirely. They'd always be at war with everyone and planets would change hands instantly, maybe speed up the rate on extermination if they pick that option rather than processing. yes reintroduce horde mechanics
|
|
#
?
Jul 7, 2017 13:38
|
|
|
Demiurge4 posted:In my head I really like the idea of treating devouring swarm and fanatical purifiers as galactic menaces that bypass the war system entirely. They'd always be at war with everyone and planets would change hands instantly, maybe speed up the rate on extermination if they pick that option rather than processing. Always-war mechanics have been completely awful every time we put them in our games. I'm not keen to repeat that mistake.
|
|
#
?
Jul 7, 2017 14:19
|
|
|
Their AI attitude towards you (indifferent, hostile, etc) should be renamed to be about how hungry they are.
|
|
#
?
Jul 7, 2017 14:24
|
|
|
I wish there was an option to set a system for all fleets to avoid, no matter what their combat stance. I keep accidentally sending ships in war through a system with a leviathan and have to keep save scumming cause the stupid pathing takes it through there every time if I don't micro it off.
|
|
#
?
Jul 7, 2017 14:58
|
|
|
Anticheese posted:Their AI attitude towards you (indifferent, hostile, etc) should be renamed to be about how hungry they are.
|
|
#
?
Jul 7, 2017 15:53
|
|
Yes, it's like a lava lamp.
|
Anticheese posted:Their AI attitude towards you (indifferent, hostile, etc) should be renamed to be about how hungry they are.
|
|
#
?
Jul 7, 2017 16:02
|
|
|
Wiz posted:Always-war mechanics have been completely awful every time we put them in our games. I'm not keen to repeat that mistake. I reckon you somehow limit how many times you can blow up a planet during a war with some techno babble about resources or whatever. E.g. enemy has 10 planets, you can blow up 10% of them (to a minimum of 1), you declare war and you fire your death laser BOOM planet dead, but then it says the laser is recharging. If the enemy had 50 planets you blow up one planet, then a couple of months later it says the laser is recharged and you do it again etc. This is obviously really powerful but that's sort of the point right? There was a great mechanic the devs at EVE online were talking about where basically there would be some sort of super ship but only X could exist at any one time (let's say 2) because they need a super ultra rare component. When the ship blows up you are guaranteed to be able to salvage that component, at which point you can use it to build your own super ship. If for whatever reason the ship component is destroyed, it would respawn at some point. I know that is probably super difficult to implement, but I think it would be an awesome balancing factor, and it's also a conflict driver because if some weaker empire gets hold of one of the only two doomsday modules in the entire galaxy, you may decide to take it from them before it falls into the hands of an enemy.
|
|
#
?
Jul 7, 2017 16:16
|
|
|
Anticheese posted:Their AI attitude towards you (indifferent, hostile, etc) should be renamed to be about how hungry they are. This idea reminds me of that space management game, The Last Federation. There's an insectoid hive race that changes its behavior based on the temperment/mood of their hive queen. The idea of hivemind civs being fickle and arbitrary based on their current ruler sounds quite appealing.
|
|
#
?
Jul 7, 2017 17:46
|
|
|
Anticheese posted:Their AI attitude towards you (indifferent, hostile, etc) should be renamed to be about how hungry they are.  So glad I decided to check this thread for the first time in months
|
|
#
?
Jul 7, 2017 20:25
|
|
|
Anticheese posted:Their AI attitude towards you (indifferent, hostile, etc) should be renamed to be about how hungry they are.
|
|
#
?
Jul 7, 2017 21:56
|
|
|
Anticheese posted:Their AI attitude towards you (indifferent, hostile, etc) should be renamed to be about how hungry they are. Yes please.
|
|
#
?
Jul 7, 2017 22:27
|
|
+ 
= 
|
Wiz posted:It'll come at some point for sure, but we kind of have to rework the war system for it to work balance-wise. Warscore system and free exploding of planets do not mesh well together. Clearly the reason the Empire built the Deathstar is because they couldn't get enough Warscore to beat the Rebellion so they decided to exploit a loophole.
|
|
#
?
Jul 7, 2017 22:31
|
|
|
DatonKallandor posted:Clearly the reason the Empire built the Deathstar is because they couldn't get enough Warscore to beat the Rebellion so they decided to exploit a loophole. I thought it was because they hit their mineral cap? That's the impetus behind all of my ridiculously expensive boondoggle projects.
|
|
#
?
Jul 7, 2017 23:26
|
|
|
Like any sane civilization, you will look up at the sun and think "gently caress that guy" and blow it up.
|
|
#
?
Jul 7, 2017 23:51
|
|
|
Nevets posted:I thought it was because they hit their mineral cap? They shouldn't have pissed off all the Enclaves so they can't trade for energy.
|
|
#
?
Jul 8, 2017 00:02
|
|
|
 in retrospect the galaxy was great all along
|
|
#
?
Jul 8, 2017 02:23
|
|
|
When playing a game recently I only found out a nearby rival was already at war was when I started to notice neutral ships shadowing my fleet and popping down invasion forces before I could. I'm sure the game informed me of this war but I couldn't help but think that most of the diplomatic popups are pointless. Usually there's only one or two empires (normally neighbors) that I care about. But useful popups (an ally/enemy I plan to invade is in a nasty war) are drowned out because every time some turd looking fungus gets pissed at a bunch of birds on the other wide of the galaxy they deluge my screen with popups. One way to combat this would be to designate another empire(s) as "Important." Important empires get a high priority popup if they enter a war, join a federation, or ally someone. That way I could keep tabs on an empire I care about without having to wade through all the poo poo.
|
|
#
?
Jul 8, 2017 02:43
|
|
|
poverty goat posted:
Hawking Believes The Higgs Field Could Wipe Out The Universe Inshallah
|
|
#
?
Jul 8, 2017 02:51
|
|
|
GamingHyena posted:When playing a game recently I only found out a nearby rival was already at war was when I started to notice neutral ships shadowing my fleet and popping down invasion forces before I could. A few days ago I declared war on one of my neighboring empires in order to annex them, only to find out that one of theirs had declared war as well about a second before I did. After a couple of years of fighting more or less by myself the other AI invaded a world that I bombarded before my armies could get to it, and then enforced their war goal dissolving said neighbor and guaranteeing them alongside all of the new states. 
|
|
#
?
Jul 8, 2017 02:52
|
|
|
Wiz posted:Always-war mechanics have been completely awful every time we put them in our games. I'm not keen to repeat that mistake. It's hard to imagine an elegant solution, but it's a real atmosphere problem. Maybe if you add a space UN later you could opt out and not play by the rules, but if you act too egregiously there could be some sort of huge penalties enforced by those in the space UN.
|
|
#
?
Jul 8, 2017 03:09
|
|
|
Crazycryodude posted:
This is a really really great idea.
|
|
#
?
Jul 8, 2017 03:22
|
|
|
But what would the names be?
|
|
#
?
Jul 8, 2017 03:37
|
|
|
Eiba posted:Always-war seems bad, but the setting of this game really demands some way to opt out of the whole diplomatic system. Fanatic purifiers and devouring swarms being forced to obey arbitrary peace treaties just feels wrong. It feels wrong because impermeable barrier borders stretching through empty space feel wrong, and the entire game relies on perfect bright lines drawn through vacuum. It would need a lot of revamping to not work like that.
|
|
#
?
Jul 8, 2017 08:08
|
|
|
hobbesmaster posted:But what would the names be? You look delicious/not delicious
|
|
#
?
Jul 8, 2017 08:12
|
|
|
hobbesmaster posted:But what would the names be? Hostile: Ravenous (obvs) Rival: Adding Salt Unfriendly: Hungry Wary: How do you taste? Neutral: Skipped breakfast Receptive: Peckish Friendly: Satiated Protective: To the larder with you Threatened: Don't eat us! Loyal: Come over for dinner Disloyal: Biting the hand
|
|
#
?
Jul 8, 2017 08:35
|
|
|
Cease to Hope posted:It feels wrong because impermeable barrier borders stretching through empty space feel wrong, and the entire game relies on perfect bright lines drawn through vacuum. It would need a lot of revamping to not work like that. Without impenetrable magic borders, the size of your empire is effectively the range that you can project your military. This is probably fine if you're creating a war game, but you'd lose the ability (or make it really difficult) to flesh out other interesting game systems.
|
|
#
?
Jul 8, 2017 09:10
|
|
|
Are there any specific regimes and focuses that people playing as non-mammals tend to choose? I've finally figured out the first ten years as some human democracy and I want to broaden my horizons.
|
|
#
?
Jul 8, 2017 09:12
|
|
|
Aethernet posted:Hostile: Ravenous (obvs) 
|
|
#
?
Jul 8, 2017 10:24
|
|
|
Is there any indication how long it will be till 1.8 comes out? I'd just started a hive mind game a little bit ago, but these changes are making me want to set it aside and restart anew later.
|
|
#
?
Jul 8, 2017 11:08
|
|
|
"A while." My personal ballpark guess is early to mid September.
Crazycryodude fucked around with this message at 14:00 on Jul 8, 2017 |
|
#
?
Jul 8, 2017 11:16
|
|
|
Bakanogami posted:Is there any indication how long it will be till 1.8 comes out? I'd just started a hive mind game a little bit ago, but these changes are making me want to set it aside and restart anew later. Paradox has said that this one will take a while - the previous release was a bit of a buggy mess initially and they said they'd rather not have that happen again.
|
|
#
?
Jul 8, 2017 11:47
|
|
|
I gotta say though, I'm very impressed that Hive Minds are getting a big look at in the patch. They're a DLC feature, so not everyone even has it. I sort of dreaded all the DLC features not really getting that much support, but they're doing it.
DatonKallandor fucked around with this message at 16:25 on Jul 8, 2017 |
|
#
?
Jul 8, 2017 12:01
|
|
|
To be honest Stellaris is the only Paradox game right now that has a coherent and popular approach to DLC. I suspect Wiz will get some sort of promotion before too long if rumblings persist over how other games handle DLC. Pretty much all the other grand stratgey games haven't managed to wrap their head around the fact what works well is the DLC items really being optional extras, not actually being required to improve the base game. Or they get it but they don't get how to actually do it in practice. HoI is the worst for it but there's elements of it in CKII and EUIV too.
|
|
#
?
Jul 8, 2017 12:38
|
|
|
Yeah when I inevitably start bitching about Paradox games and how everything was better in the bad old days, that's the conclusion I always end up on. Stellaris and its development has been by no means perfect, but that's ok. Everyone makes mistakes. What's important is learning from your screw-ups, fixing them, and not doing it again next time, and Stellaris is the only current PDX game that I think is really doing that. I've bought every single piece of Stellaris DLC at full price on release day, and don't regret a penny of it. I can't say the same for any other Paradox game. What's also important is not loving selling blitz commands that are absolutely critical to making the AI behave even slightly sane and should have been in at release for $15 but that's for another thread E: Oh wait I bought Utopia with one of those discount codes that got Tweeted out, so technically not full price. Still worth it, tho Crazycryodude fucked around with this message at 21:40 on Jul 8, 2017 |
|
#
?
Jul 8, 2017 13:58
|
|
|
Crazycryodude posted:What's also important is not loving selling blitz commands that are absolutely critical to make the AI behave slightly sane and should have been in at release for $15 but that's for another thread That's what made me give up HOI4 and I'm really glad Stellaris has avoided it. Great job Wiz and team and whoever makes those kinds of decisions.
|
|
#
?
Jul 8, 2017 18:22
|
|
|
I have a friend that works at Paradox and he gifted me a copy of Utopia because he's a super nice guy. Despite owning it for free, I still kind of want to buy it just to support the company and game because they're doing good things.
|
|
#
?
Jul 8, 2017 21:27
|
|
|
HonorableTB posted:I have a friend that works at Paradox and he gifted me a copy of Utopia because he's a super nice guy. Despite owning it for free, I still kind of want to buy it just to support the company and game because they're doing good things. You could give the free copy to a poor unemployed goon, maybe?
|
|
#
?
Jul 8, 2017 21:34
|
|
|
Or even a fairly comfortably employed goon. Free DLC for all!
|
|
#
?
Jul 8, 2017 21:47
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 8, 2024 20:05 |
|
|
What would be a good ethos and setting for a Cthulhu-Mollusk race?
|
|
#
?
Jul 8, 2017 23:13
|
|