|
Are robots barred from getting the tech required to uplift pre-sentients? My driven assimilators wanted to expand their diversity...
|
#
?
Oct 6, 2017 16:19
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 31, 2024 01:51 |
|
|
Libluini posted:
When you think about it, we're just a self-perpetuating chemical reaction. Naturally occurring machine life is much the same, except it's more like a rock rolled down a hill one day and then never stopped. I'm still not getting achievements and it's a bummer. I've got no mods and according to the game I should have a valid iron man save--but I still haven't gotten a single achievement.
|
|
#
?
Oct 6, 2017 16:26
|
|
Oh. My. God. Instead of going with silicium-based lifeforms, nanomachines or whatever else, they went with loving gears?!
|
Aleth posted:No, OwlFancier's endgame thing. No I was asking the other people who have used it because I don't know if it's broken or just stupid.
|
|
#
?
Oct 6, 2017 16:36
|
|
|
ulmont posted:Are robots barred from getting the tech required to uplift pre-sentients? Pretty sure they are, my Rogue Servitors are likewise unable to enlighten primitives to pamper them.
|
|
#
?
Oct 6, 2017 16:37
|
|
|
OwlFancier posted:No I was asking the other people who have used it because I don't know if it's broken or just stupid. That would be an incredible title for the awesome/awful mods thread
|
|
#
?
Oct 6, 2017 16:38
|
|
|
Splicer posted:So it's not "scale based on how well the player is doing", it's "not have a huge component of the player's ability to participate in the endgame be based on whether the virtual dart bullseyes you". This can be done by not aiming at them, by putting the dart in the player's hands, by allowing the player to dodge, or allowing the player to meaningfully participate with a dart in their face. Yes wholly concur this is my point. It's silly if whether or not you have to prepare for a crisis is primarily indicated by whether it RNGs on top of you. Spending the whole game preparing for a dice roll is daft. Though I do also think that there's excellent scope for crises that aren't a big blob of monsters that kill everything. If I had to design a new one I'd probably go with a mysterious force that contacts and empire, and offers them power at a price, sort of like the shroud pacts but subtler, more dangerous, and the trick becomes spotting it. Effects it would have would include productivity bonuses, and the ability to basically force through diplomatic actions, so vassalizing and allying with other empires even if they wouldn't normally accept. This appears to outside observers as a power bloc forming and you might not notice it's being caused by a malign force until it's too late. Ways to find it could be by looking for a structure that has to be built somewhere in the empire that's getting the bonuses, as well as being suspicious about this weird persuasiveness that the new bloc seems to have when it comes to allies. When under threat they might pull out more fleets than you expect or be able to maneuver really well outside your sensor range because they have secret hyperlanes only they can use between their systems and a bigger fleet cap than their stations normally allow. Once the empire gets big enough it starts to go overt and summon in monsters to bulk out their fleets, or they start using tech that just ruins the galaxy for anyone but the invaders by blasting planets into tomb worlds rather than conquering them, and then it starts to get really threatening but by then you've probably formed power blocs in response to the new bloc so it ties in well with the existing diplo game. And if you're sharp you might have caught it early. It rewards things like sensor treaties to monitor other empires and gives empires a reason to get up in each other's business, you could introduce diplo modifiers where you can get denounced as a collaborator based on whether you contribute to the war effort or whether you try to stay out of it so you get this great paranoia element, which you could potentially use to your advantage to take out bothersome neighbors. And maybe as a possible modifier, there could be multiple entities trying to form blocs and they fight each other, so you join the "kick the monster bloc out of the galaxy" faction and it turns out they also are being controlled by mindworms. There's a lot of cool stuff already possible with the diplomacy it's just that there's not a lot of events that give diplomatic relations a real shove and create conflict. It's really easy to get into a stable system where you're safe and don't have to engage with things outside of your comfort zone so galactic events that have major diplomatic effects, like AEs, are something I would really like more of. Someone earlier suggested galactic climate change which would also be cool, if it included like, migratory civilization options as a result, if your part of the galaxy starts to become uninhabitable you get tech options to research mobile habitats, and that puts you in conflict with your neighbors who might not want to let you retreat through or into their space, then the displaced empire becomes the threat but if it's you then it also offers the chance at a cool new playstyle like the AI rebellion currently does. OwlFancier fucked around with this message at 16:56 on Oct 6, 2017 |
|
#
?
Oct 6, 2017 16:49
|
|
|
Red Bones posted:I think it would be nice to have the game go a little further in reflecting the history of the empire you create. Like a list of five or six preset backstories like 'uplifted by alien speces', 'exiles from a space war', 'naturally evolved', 'stranded pre-FTL colony', etc, that would add some slight changes to flavour text and add some event chains and goals that could spice up the midgame. A Background option to round out Civics and Government sounds really interesting actually. More roleplaying is always good in this game.
|
|
#
?
Oct 6, 2017 16:50
|
|
|
Magil Zeal posted:Pretty sure they are, my Rogue Servitors are likewise unable to enlighten primitives to pamper them. I think this was fixed for the 1.8.1 beta but if not then robot empires were being given access to more of the genetics branch in the next patch. Captain Oblivious posted:A Background option to round out Civics and Government sounds really interesting actually. More roleplaying is always good in this game. You know you can add whatever background story you want to custom made civs already, right? If you leave it blank it just generates whatever default story matches the ethics you picked earlier.
|
|
#
?
Oct 6, 2017 16:55
|
|
|
Psychotic Weasel posted:You know you can add whatever background story you want to custom made civs already, right? If you leave it blank it just generates whatever default story matches the ethics you picked earlier. I don't think that's what they're talking about.
|
|
#
?
Oct 6, 2017 16:59
|
|
|
OwlFancier posted:Though I do also think that there's excellent scope for crises that aren't a big blob of monsters that kill everything. If I had to design a new one I'd probably go with a mysterious force that contacts and empire, and offers them power at a price, sort of like the shroud pacts but subtler, more dangerous, and the trick becomes spotting it. Bonus points if the emissary is named Morden. "What do you want?"
|
|
#
?
Oct 6, 2017 17:27
|
|
|
Magil Zeal posted:Wiki says it's available for robo-modding but not for a machine intelligence-based empire. Which makes sense, I suppose. Weird, I'm trying to add them on droids as a normal ol' human like I did before. Robots and robomodding seems pretty lacking. My "digbots" with the +10% minerals and droid cores still produce LESS minerals than a human with no special bonus on the same tile, because my humans are at 90% happiness. Robots should at base produce more than a happy organic with no special mods since they are lovely at everything else, and an upgraded robot specializing in mining should be even better. I think it's fun to create this utopia where humans only need to worry about intellectual pursuits like research and managing power plants and all menial labour is done by robots, but to do this in-game requires a lot of micro and it ends up not even working out that great. And the trait system just feels lacking which makes it hard to really specialize. It also feels like these sort of race-based specialities should be more of a policy with the game carrying out the rest automatically. God help sectors figuring it out either.
|
|
#
?
Oct 6, 2017 17:33
|
|
|
Psychotic Weasel posted:I think this was fixed for the 1.8.1 beta but if not then robot empires were being given access to more of the genetics branch in the next patch. It wasn't; I waited until the 1.8.1 beta to start this game. Maybe in the 1.8.2 beta.
|
|
#
?
Oct 6, 2017 17:34
|
|
|
Baronjutter posted:Weird, I'm trying to add them on droids as a normal ol' human like I did before. Robots and robomodding seems pretty lacking. My "digbots" with the +10% minerals and droid cores still produce LESS minerals than a human with no special bonus on the same tile, because my humans are at 90% happiness. Robots should at base produce more than a happy organic with no special mods since they are lovely at everything else, and an upgraded robot specializing in mining should be even better. It would be nice if we could expand the caste system to define specific jobs for specific species in their species settings, which means that they are automatically placed on certain types of production tile. For robots the option is replaced by "function" which just tells sectors what to do with them and highlights them in the list when building a pop on a tile with that resource.
|
|
#
?
Oct 6, 2017 17:40
|
|
|
OwlFancier posted:It would be nice if we could expand the caste system to define specific jobs for specific species in their species settings, which means that they are automatically placed on certain types of production tile. Although really the game should do this on its own anyways. It should see that pop who has -10% minerals due to being weak and prioritize them last for mining jobs. It should see the robot with +15% mineral production and place them on mines as first priority. In the last few civs there is worker-placement and tiles, every city is like a 20+ tile map with various improvements that give bonuses, very much like Stellaris. Where civ does things right is that it generally auto-optimizes very well and gives you some quick buttons to sort that way. Stellaris should have this too. Every planet is set by default to auto-sort pops for general efficiency, plus some buttons to prioritize for minerals, science, energy, unity and so on. It would just check every month or two if it needs to re-shuffle pops to better take advantage of bonuses, or just check every time a new pop grows or a new building is built. Like right now my planet has 3 mines, a farm, and 2 science labs. By default it's putting the planet's 2 robots on the mines, 2 humans with science bonuses on the labs, a robot with a farming bonus on the farm, and some random alien immigrant with a unity bonus on the other mine. By default it's looked at the situation and assigned the pops based on maximum total output. Now I build a monument, but the game doesn't move the alien onto it because I have mineral focus turned on since the unity bonus alien would have an applicable bonus, but it means the mine would be unstaffed. I build another mining robot, doesn't matter where, and the game automatically moves the robot onto the mine, and the unity bonus alien onto the monument. If I had unity focus on though, that alien would have left the mine and gone onto the monument as soon as it was built. Something like that would be 90% fine to just leave on "balanced" autosort, maybe not even clutter things with buttons for other focuses, which would become moot the moment the planet was maxed out. But it would mean never having to micro your pops again, you could always have the confidence that those +15 engineering guys you just gene-modded will be correctly shuffled onto engineering labs where applicable. You'll never look at a planet and see a droid working a lab while a weak alien works a mine.
|
|
#
?
Oct 6, 2017 17:54
|
|
|
True the game could do a much better job just by looking at the modifiers a species has, it seems to deliberately ignore them currently.
|
|
#
?
Oct 6, 2017 17:59
|
|
|
Do all of these people talking about playing "tall" not use habitats or something? Even if you only had 3-5 systems you should have a pile of habitats and things by the time you are 150-200 years in. If I'm some lame peacenik, turning on engineering focus (plus taking engineering+ trait or the general research+) and leaving it on until I have voidborne prereqs is pretty much standard. You need those habitats ASAP particularly if you are fanatic pacifist, or there is literally no way for you to manage the resources required to build endgame scale fleets. Hopefully those hinted things being added to allow you to further develop "full" planets will be good but for now it's really get habs, spam them, or be heavily outclassed even if you do manage to get a decent federation together.
|
|
#
?
Oct 6, 2017 18:04
|
|
|
Nuclearmonkee posted:Do all of these people talking about playing "tall" not use habitats or something? Even if you only had 3-5 systems you should have a pile of habitats and things by the time you are 150-200 years in. If I'm some lame peacenik, turning on engineering focus (plus taking engineering+ trait or the general research+) and leaving it on until I have voidborne prereqs is pretty much standard. You need those habitats ASAP particularly if you are fanatic pacifist, or there is literally no way for you to manage the resources required to build endgame scale fleets. The problem is if a crisis lands on your doorstep you're losing those habitats and with them your economy.
|
|
#
?
Oct 6, 2017 18:08
|
|
|
hobbesmaster posted:The problem is if a crisis lands on your doorstep you're losing those habitats and with them your economy. You don't have to put the habs in your home system, and you generally shouldn't if you are on the galactic edge.
|
|
#
?
Oct 6, 2017 18:11
|
|
|
Habitats aren't really very good for general use, they have no ship production capacity and minimal fleet cap contribution. They can make a lot of energy and quite good research if you don't mind spending a lot of energy, but that's about it. Also they require a rather large resource investment.
|
|
#
?
Oct 6, 2017 18:11
|
|
|
When it was called Turtling people understood that wanting to have 2 planets or 1 army because it's easier / new player and timid / they are being defensive - it wasn't much of a discussion. Turtling was bad, you made fun of people for doing it, it was a sign of a noob But then some Civ smart guys decided that what it really is is that Tall vs Wide is a FUNDAMENTAL DILEMMA OF ALL VIDEO GAMES and both playstyles have to be supported and strategy / expansion video games have been worse ever since Tall is just a rebrand of Turtle without the negative connotations and lets them act as some kind of oppressed minority for not having their playstyle supported it's great
|
|
#
?
Oct 6, 2017 18:12
|
|
|
OwlFancier posted:It would be nice if we could expand the caste system to define specific jobs for specific species in their species settings, which means that they are automatically placed on certain types of production tile. This. My assimilators playthrough is presently being ruined by the fact that I have a mineral species and recently absorbed an energy species. I keep compulsively blowing through influence (and dealing with the resettle UI, which isn't great) to resettle them both on optimal tiles.
|
|
#
?
Oct 6, 2017 18:14
|
|
|
Ham Sandwiches posted:When it was called Turtling people understood that wanting to have 2 planets or 1 army because it's easier / new player and timid / they are being defensive - it wasn't much of a discussion. I mean in the context of a game where you play as a country, it's a bit silly to say that only Russia is viable. There might be a historical reason why people playing country simulator games think that playing a small country which has a lot of power, is a thing that can happen.
|
|
#
?
Oct 6, 2017 18:17
|
|
|
When is 1.8.2 being released? I was enjoying my last game as a non-robot empire so of course two Contingency systems spawn in my borders, bracketing my empire on each side. I also got the crisis at ~150 using the 1.8.1 beta patch so maybe Multiple Crisis broke something?
|
|
#
?
Oct 6, 2017 18:18
|
|
|
Got crisis just as I finished popping out my first habitat. Didnt have the spare mins to build more after that. Its pretty weird people are lovely about the idea of more than one playstyle. Its not like you cant spend hours waiting fir the chance to expand only to get locked in by the xenophobes or something, anyway.
|
|
#
?
Oct 6, 2017 18:18
|
|
|
All playstyles suck imo, the best one is not to play
|
|
#
?
Oct 6, 2017 18:19
|
|
|
OwlFancier posted:Habitats aren't really very good for general use, they have no ship production capacity and minimal fleet cap contribution. They can make a lot of energy and quite good research if you don't mind spending a lot of energy, but that's about it. You have +200 fleet cap because you are tall w/ excellent unity growth curve and can afford the pick. Habs are a lot of energy generation once they get rolling and even as a tall empire my limiting factor for making them is usually influence not resources. Ham Sandwiches posted:When it was called Turtling people understood that wanting to have 2 planets or 1 army because it's easier / new player and timid / they are being defensive - it wasn't much of a discussion. Tall in a Stellaris context is small footprint with a large federation and/or vassal states. If you are just tiny and lovely that's just being bad yeah.
|
|
#
?
Oct 6, 2017 18:22
|
|
|
OwlFancier posted:I mean in the context of a game where you play as a country, it's a bit silly to say that only Russia is viable. The problem is that 4X games are traditionally bad at modeling the kinds of soft power where a smaller empire might excel. Stellaris certainly does and will until diplomacy/espionage/things that aren't war get revamped. Civ V only managed it by stacking penalty upon penalty on each city you built until it was frankly stupid, and I should note it took them two expansions to get it right (ICS dominated in vanilla/Gods and Kings). But it didn't really balance them, it made getting wide hurt and while the most experienced players could do so it was for very marginal gains, I wouldn't call the two approaches balanced. Magil Zeal fucked around with this message at 18:25 on Oct 6, 2017 |
|
#
?
Oct 6, 2017 18:23
|
|
|
Nuclearmonkee posted:Tall in a Stellaris context is small footprint with a large federation and/or vassal states. If you are just tiny and lovely that's just being bad yeah. Yeah this is a good summary of the issue, and I'm just saying that a lot of players probably confuse being tiny / turtling with playing tall and that's not super great
|
|
#
?
Oct 6, 2017 18:27
|
|
|
And yeah having a bunch of federation allies you can call on should be more effective than it currently is, I wouldn't deny that. An isolationist empire that stays small should rightly get curb-stomped if it is confronted with a military threat far beyond its scope, but someone who's essentially part of one big empire (in the form of a federation) should be able to coordinate with their allies and even win back and re-establish their empire if they get run over.
|
|
#
?
Oct 6, 2017 18:30
|
|
|
Stellaris does tall relatively well with technology effects and unity. I think it could use more things to spend resources on to develop your empire internally, but I like a lot of its balancing between the two since megastructures were introduced. Sure group warfare is abysmal but diplomacy is good enough to prevent warfare which is works well a lot of the time.
|
|
#
?
Oct 6, 2017 18:34
|
|
|
Nuclearmonkee posted:If you are just tiny and lovely that's just being bad yeah. Magil Zeal posted:An isolationist empire that stays small should rightly get curb-stomped if it is confronted with a military threat far beyond its scope, Nuclearmonkee posted:Tall in a Stellaris context is small footprint with a large federation and/or vassal states. Magil Zeal posted:someone who's essentially part of one big empire (in the form of a federation) should be able to coordinate with their allies and even win back and re-establish their empire if they get run over.
|
|
#
?
Oct 6, 2017 18:42
|
|
|
Surprise Giraffe posted:Its pretty weird people are lovely about the idea of more than one playstyle. Its not like you cant spend hours waiting fir the chance to expand only to get locked in by the xenophobes or something, anyway. I'm against "make tall better" (I'm largely fine with how it functions in Stellaris as previously said) but I'm not against "make federations and alliances better". I just don't see B as necessarily an extension of A, I think of it as a larger part of the game. I've played Stellaris games where I had an empire that covered roughly a quarter to a third of the galaxy and still been part of a federation; though now that the liberating -> vassalizing trick is less effective I'm not certain how viable this is anymore (threat is now actually a thing I'm seeing). Magil Zeal fucked around with this message at 18:49 on Oct 6, 2017 |
|
#
?
Oct 6, 2017 18:47
|
|
|
If I'm playing, say, Inward Perfection, not only can I not expand since space is limited and expansion requires wars, I also can't put together defensive pacts and federations since I'm an isolationist.
|
|
#
?
Oct 6, 2017 19:05
|
|
|
kujeger posted:Majesty is great and so is this idea fake edit: Holy poo poo steam multiplayer is under active development, that's some serious dedication.
|
|
#
?
Oct 6, 2017 19:13
|
|
|
wiegieman posted:If I'm playing, say, Inward Perfection, not only can I not expand since space is limited and expansion requires wars, I also can't put together defensive pacts and federations since I'm an isolationist. Maybe I'm misunderstanding, but I was under the impression that was the point.
|
|
#
?
Oct 6, 2017 19:16
|
|
|
Playing tall in Stellaris shouldn't be "stick with 3-5 planets"- it should be "Play until you reach your system cap"(no sectors). Even if you are playing tall, you should still get Expansion opener and the influence cost reduction as your first two. Also, unless your government type simply doesn't allow it, you need to still expand into sectors after 100+years. Otherwise you'll just get crushed on fleet capacity and mineral generation. Don't play like the Fallen Empires: they're the definition of tall. Mid/Late game they still get annihilated unless they decide to awaken and start expanding. Edit: and if you're playing as inward perfection, then it's like mandatory to go mulitiple science ships fast off the bat to scout out prime territory ASAP. Open the discovery tree and the first point for more survey speed, then the expansion tree opener and influence cost reduction. Omniblivion fucked around with this message at 19:25 on Oct 6, 2017 |
|
#
?
Oct 6, 2017 19:23
|
|
|
I went to Paradox to bring you the answer of "WHAT KIND OF SHIPS DO I BUILD IN 1.8?" I'm sure there's stuff to nitpick, but it looks like as long as you're building Battleships and Cruisers and avoiding Lasers and Autocannons, it matters less than it used to. In particular, Missiles are decent now.Larnok1@Paradox posted:General Summary of the most important points of "the Meta" as of 1.8.1:
|
|
#
?
Oct 6, 2017 19:24
|
|
|
Omniblivion posted:Edit: and if you're playing as inward perfection, then it's like mandatory to go mulitiple science ships fast off the bat to scout out prime territory ASAP. Open the discovery tree and the first point for more survey speed, then the expansion tree opener and influence cost reduction. I have a Space China government I play sometime /w the new Inward Perfection, and I enjoy it, but I also dial crisis strength way the gently caress down when I do it. I mean, that's why it's a dial now, and people refusing to use the dial confuses me.
|
|
#
?
Oct 6, 2017 19:35
|
|
|
wiegieman posted:If I'm playing, say, Inward Perfection, not only can I not expand since space is limited and expansion requires wars, I also can't put together defensive pacts and federations since I'm an isolationist. Liberate, Vasselize and Integrate. Just peacefully.
|
|
#
?
Oct 6, 2017 19:47
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 31, 2024 01:51 |
|
|
ulmont posted:I went to Paradox to bring you the answer of "WHAT KIND OF SHIPS DO I BUILD IN 1.8?" I'm sure there's stuff to nitpick, but it looks like as long as you're building Battleships and Cruisers and avoiding Lasers and Autocannons, it matters less than it used to. In particular, Missiles are decent now. I wouldn't necessarily dismiss Corvettes and Destroyers. While I'm in no way a top tier player I've found that PD Destroyers and Torpedo Boat Corvettes in a second fleet screening the Cruisers and Battleships to be surprisingly resilient and versatile. Of course this is only really true if the enemy has missiles of some type but that's not exactly uncommon right now. My main fleet is almost never hit by strike craft or missiles thanks to the efforts of my light ships.
|
|
#
?
Oct 6, 2017 19:48
|
|
