|
turn off the TV posted:Aren't star bases going to largely specialize towards ship production or defense? I mean I haven't played it but I would assume that you can put combat or construction modules on the starbase itself but platforms, one would hope, would be linked to the development level of the base itself. So a combat base would be much much tougher and carry more combat auras/interdictors/system range weaponry, but a production base could still build a bunch of platforms around itself. Or failing that any sane player is going to make sure that their centralized production base has a fleet or two stationed next to it, being able to centralize ship production like that means that you can centralize defence of it too in a way that you could not when you had one production line per planet. OwlFancier fucked around with this message at 23:34 on Feb 7, 2018 |
#
?
Feb 7, 2018 23:31
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 20, 2024 04:23 |
|
|
Also, turn off the TV, I really don't mean to be offensive or anything because you're not being rude or nasty but I can only imagine someone being either purposefully disingenuous or being on the spectrum to so miss the point of what 2.0 is changing and how it's so significant. I know some very nice people who happen to be somewhere on the autism spectrum and they will often get quite hung up on issues like this, where they can only hyper-focus on the individual parts of something (and only from a very personal angle) but fail to see the significance of how they fit together into a greater whole and will relentlessly argue or miss the point over it. Have you actually read all the dev diaries? They lay out in fairly digestible detail all the changes, why the changes were made, and how they all tie together into what will practically be a whole new game.
|
|
#
?
Feb 7, 2018 23:31
|
|
|
Pigbuster posted:That only becomes available long after all of your corvettes/destroyers are dead. Or, if you're outnumbered enough by trying to do anything remotely more interesting than a single doomstack, after everything is dead. I can't say that I've had many issues with my fleets not holding out long enough to get my most valuable assets out because it's pretty easy to just rebuild lots of trash corvettes and destroyers, but that change is going to at the very least make wars more interesting. Baronjutter posted:Also, turn off the TV, I really don't mean to be offensive or anything because you're not being rude or nasty but I can only imagine someone being either purposefully disingenuous or being on the spectrum to so miss the point of what 2.0 is changing and how it's so significant. I know some very nice people who happen to be somewhere on the autism spectrum and they will often get quite hung up on issues like this, where they can only hyper-focus on the individual parts of something (and only from a very personal angle) but fail to see the significance of how they fit together into a greater whole and will relentlessly argue or miss the point over it. I just don't think that it makes sense to frame a massive FTL and border system rework as major changes to warfare. Those two systems are fundamental enough to the rest of the game's systems and content that it's probably easier to call Cherryh a FTL update that by consequence has changes to warfare included.
|
|
#
?
Feb 7, 2018 23:42
|
|
|
Ass_Burgerer posted:Empire splitting and rebellions (done RIGHT, not random event bullshit) is a fun and good idea.
|
|
#
?
Feb 7, 2018 23:45
|
|
|
turn off the TV posted:I just don't think that it makes sense to frame a massive FTL and border system rework as major changes to warfare. Those two systems are fundamental enough to the rest of the game's systems and content that it's probably easier to call Cherryh a FTL update that by consequence has changes to warfare included. They primarily affect warfare, though, and as has been pointed out repeatedly, there are a number of other specific changes to warfare by changing how strategic assets are located, attacked, defended, constructed, as well as sweeping mechanical changes to combat itself as well as literally the way that wars are decided. #allmechanicsmatter is a weird criticism against the suggestion that the update is a major change to warfare...
|
|
#
?
Feb 7, 2018 23:50
|
|
|
turn off the TV posted:I just don't think that it makes sense to frame a massive FTL and border system rework as major changes to warfare. Those two systems are fundamental enough to the rest of the game's systems and content that it's probably easier to call Cherryh a FTL update that by consequence has changes to warfare included. https://forum.paradoxplaza.com/forum/index.php?threads/stellaris-dev-diary-93-war-peace-and-claims.1054054/ https://forum.paradoxplaza.com/forum/index.php?threads/stellaris-dev-diary-96-doomstacks-and-ship-design.1058152/ Also the change to Hyperlanes Only was to facilitate and leverage the new system ownership and outpost systems, which are there to facilitate and be leveraged by the new war systems. Splicer fucked around with this message at 23:53 on Feb 7, 2018 |
|
#
?
Feb 7, 2018 23:50
|
|
|
Wiz posted:It wasn't really a seriously meant poll though, as I thought was evident by option 3 :P I direly need to know what the Cherryh patch would have been like if Body Pillows won.
|
|
#
?
Feb 8, 2018 00:02
|
|
|
I don't understand the recent badposting going on about ideas and poo poo all I know is I'm stoked for the 2.0 jesus patch it's just too bad this still won't make stellaris live up to star citizen's standards
|
|
#
?
Feb 8, 2018 00:07
|
|
|
Shadowlyger posted:I direly need to know what the Cherryh patch would have been like if Body Pillows won.
|
|
#
?
Feb 8, 2018 00:22
|
|
|
Hopefully 2.0 will give Stellaris a solid foundation to build up other stuff. More internal politics stuff would be interesting, I dunno how doable it is without the game losing some focus, loving up some systems, or demanding too much of the AI, though.
|
|
#
?
Feb 8, 2018 01:09
|
|
|
I'd be fine with fudging stuff for the AI honestly, the point of AI is to make a fun enemy, not to follow all the rules.
|
|
#
?
Feb 8, 2018 01:15
|
|
|
OwlFancier posted:I'd be fine with fudging stuff for the AI honestly, the point of AI is to make a fun enemy, not to follow all the rules. This, so much, but other people rage so hard if you have a "cheating" AI that I think developers are understandably reluctant to do it.
|
|
#
?
Feb 8, 2018 03:25
|
|
|
I started a Rogue Servitor run and was doing just fine, finishing my dyson sphere and sentinel array and gradually connecting all my little islands of claimed space by building habitats to house my bio-trophies. Had a bunch of small vassal states from species I uplifted or upteched with a fleet cap around 800, but I only had a 20K fleet since I had a few defensive pacts and enough vassal fleets to deal with two simultaneous wars. Then the Contingency happened. Two nodes spawned in my empire and, in my haste to defeat them, I accepted peace offers from the empires I was at war with... losing the three big 50-80K fleets from my defensive pact pals who've left my good robits to fight the bad robits on my own. Now I'm trying my best to raise a fleet big enough to fight back before all my resources are destroyed. This is frustrating but fun. If I had kept myself at anywhere near my fleet cap, which I could have easily done, I wouldn't be in this situation.
|
|
#
?
Feb 8, 2018 03:59
|
|
|
Reveilled posted:This, so much, but other people rage so hard if you have a "cheating" AI that I think developers are understandably reluctant to do it. I mean, blatantly cheating AI can often be a rather unenjoyable gameplay experience because it can make a bunch of stuff you do unimportant, like territory if the AI just gets a bunch of free money magically, but for stuff that the AI can't quite manage the specifics of you could gloss over a bit. The AI can't complain if you modelled its empire splitting with events rather than in depth sector mechanics.
|
|
#
?
Feb 8, 2018 04:02
|
|
|
turn off the TV posted:You... you move an army to the spot that another army is at. The two armies fight on their own and you can kind of watch and hope for the best. Am I thinking of the wrong EU4? Is that game actually a moba or RTS? I mean, yes, on the surface, but you've got an awful lot of differences in the details? And by the same token, 2.0 is still going to involve spaceships mashing together and firing pewpews at each other, but there are going to be a lot of changes to the details of how that plays out that are the basis of what everyone is saying regarding your anticipation that 2.0 won't change much? e; Yeah nothing wrong with an AI that cheats, but if players can see when and how it cheats, they will get incredibly mad incredibly quickly. (The top level of players are always going to be able to figure it out of course, but they're the kind of people who play Civ on Deity difficulty anyway so they know what they're getting into)
|
|
#
?
Feb 8, 2018 04:05
|
|
|
I can see the idea that making Stellaris more like CK2 where the combat sucks but it's part of the diplomatic and social game. Thing is there's not much to build upon for a deeper diplomatic gameplay, while the combat is clunky, it is functional and enjoyable. In fact most of Stellaris mid and lategame revolves around combat so there's already something we can base the improvements. But that's probably a bad way to look at it. The big FTL rework was long coming, it was talked about how there needed to be more terrain more varied maps and with it a different ways to handle borders and ownership. So if we are getting the big FTL and map remake it's logical that the system that will be most effected by it need to be touched upon as well. But while we are talking about politics, the biggest change is actually a diplomatic one, how wars are now require claims and/or Casus Belli rather than just randomly deciding to take half of their empire. I can already see this system being built upon in the future with some diplomatic events, a possible espionage system. Actually for me the feature I look forward the most are the new wormholes because it actually gives me options to take part of conflicts in the other side of the galaxy. Or you can just wait for next year/ next DLC when the obviously hinted at diplomacy remake is coming with Space UNs.
|
|
#
?
Feb 8, 2018 04:31
|
|
|
OwlFancier posted:I mean, blatantly cheating AI can often be a rather unenjoyable gameplay experience because it can make a bunch of stuff you do unimportant, like territory if the AI just gets a bunch of free money magically, but for stuff that the AI can't quite manage the specifics of you could gloss over a bit. The AI can't complain if you modelled its empire splitting with events rather than in depth sector mechanics. and events can really be quite in-depth in and of themselves in the clausewitz engine. wiz was able to pull off a very complicated faction system in ck2+ with just event scripting. an AI-friendly version of a complex mechanic doesn't have to be predictable or strictly inferior to the player version
|
|
#
?
Feb 8, 2018 04:41
|
|
|
Isn't every game just clicking a mouse and moving a hand around? I don't get what this update will change.
|
|
#
?
Feb 8, 2018 04:56
|
|
|
appropriatemetaphor posted:Isn't every game just clicking a mouse and moving a hand around? I don't get what this update will change. Buddy let me tell you about Ecclesiastes.
|
|
#
?
Feb 8, 2018 05:00
|
|
|
appropriatemetaphor posted:Isn't every game just clicking a mouse and moving a hand around? I don't get what this update will change. Lol if you're still using a mouse in the year of our lord 2018
|
|
#
?
Feb 8, 2018 05:15
|
|
|
I don't think I know a single keyboard shortcut for Stellaris except enter to close dialogues.
|
|
#
?
Feb 8, 2018 05:18
|
|
|
Yandat posted:I don't think I know a single keyboard shortcut for Stellaris except enter to close dialogues. Q zooms to the event/ship/whatever, B sends your fleet back to base, and E toggles between system and galaxy view. I forget the others, but those three I hammer all day long.
|
|
#
?
Feb 8, 2018 07:33
|
|
|
The worst is that R resets the system view to default zoom and angle, UNLESS you are looking at a plant's army panel, in which case it launches all space capable armies. I have long since lost count of the number of invasions I have inadvertently aborted, which is an especially painful experience when you just paid 231 influence to invade some primitives, and are playing Ironman 
|
|
#
?
Feb 8, 2018 08:12
|
|
|
Wiz posted:It wasn't really a seriously meant poll though, as I thought was evident by option 3 :P Man gently caress you Wiz where's my Blorg waifu body pillow 
|
|
#
?
Feb 8, 2018 08:15
|
|
|
My ideal diplomacy rework is to implement HRE mechanics from EU4 into the federation and vassal system. Every type of multi-empire administration starts out at a very basic level that morphs and changes as you pass reforms, reforms won't just be a straight line but something that will branch off and can be quite dynamic so no democratic federation will ever be the same. This is also how I'd like to see the early colonization game implemented. Remove direct player control and instead pass stimulus programs for your colonies through your senate or what have you. But again I don't think it really meshes well with tile mechanics.
|
|
#
?
Feb 8, 2018 08:25
|
|
|
Ms Adequate posted:playing Ironman Why?
|
|
#
?
Feb 8, 2018 08:42
|
|
|
turn off the TV posted:It's not what they're doing with the war update because, again, more diplomatic and political options would prevent the outcome of your game from being directly tied to the outcome of a war. Yeah that's the way to improve a game. Let people Slander Merchants, Justify Trade Conflicts, and Infiltrate Administrations.
|
|
#
?
Feb 8, 2018 09:11
|
|
|
Yandat posted:I don't think I know a single keyboard shortcut for Stellaris except enter to close dialogues. Selecting something and then hitting ctrl+number creates a group you can then select with number. Very useful to just go through your core worlds really fast and queue up some ships.
|
|
#
?
Feb 8, 2018 09:19
|
|
|
Bold Robot posted:You’re totally right, but I think what it comes down to for me and a lot of players is that while diplomacy/politics are fairly bland, war has just been terrible. Seems like the right call to fix broken stuff before improving stuff that works, even if it may not be very interesting. e: which is why I hope the next update includes a pass over the tile system. Splicer fucked around with this message at 09:34 on Feb 8, 2018 |
|
#
?
Feb 8, 2018 09:29
|
|
|
I use z/x/c/v a lot to choose a different planet tab. x and v being the most common obviously (tiles and spaceport). Might even use them more often than control groups.
|
|
#
?
Feb 8, 2018 09:29
|
|
|
Splicer posted:e: which is why I hope the next update includes a pass over the tile system. fix economy plz wiz also make tiles isometric and laid out in a round shape you know, like a planet.
|
|
#
?
Feb 8, 2018 09:36
|
|
|
Aethernet posted:fix economy plz wiz Also add a climate simulation that makes the planet barren if you have too many mineral extractors.
|
|
#
?
Feb 8, 2018 09:49
|
|
|
GotLag posted:Why? reloads are haram
|
|
#
?
Feb 8, 2018 09:54
|
|
|
Aethernet posted:fix economy plz wiz What would be fun is if the planet tiles got sorted in a way that connected to a procedural map, or pulled one from a bunch of pre-fabricated options.
|
|
#
?
Feb 8, 2018 11:12
|
|
|
Nessus posted:I think the big problem here is that now you gotta gently caress around with a rolly ball to see the entire planet, which is going to be a pain in the rear end and complicate the interface. If you were probably only going to have a few planets, ever, this would be less of a big deal. Serious suggestion: the left and right hand edge tiles should wrap around for adjacency for planets, but not stations or ringworld segments.
|
|
#
?
Feb 8, 2018 12:09
|
|
|
Splicer posted:I think the just meant a circle, not a sphere. Like how it's currently a square, not a cube.
|
|
#
?
Feb 8, 2018 12:18
|
|
|
Nessus posted:It's a colony cylinder not a colony PLATE.
|
|
#
?
Feb 8, 2018 12:20
|
|
|
Nessus posted:I think the big problem here is that now you gotta gently caress around with a rolly ball to see the entire planet, which is going to be a pain in the rear end and complicate the interface. If you were probably only going to have a few planets, ever, this would be less of a big deal. As Splicer said, I just meant a direct rip-off of Ascendancy. I agree on having some better sense of planet geography - it would be cool to have different levels of habitability based on the climate of a given square.
|
|
#
?
Feb 8, 2018 12:21
|
|
|
I honestly don't agree that war is fundamentally broken and terrible and tbh the fact that a diplo game practically doesn't even exist makes providing one a higher priority. ...but I am also really in favor of everything coming down the pipe in the next update so I'm not complaining at all.
|
|
#
?
Feb 8, 2018 13:14
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 20, 2024 04:23 |
|
|
I still don't like that warp is going away completely, I still think you could have made warp-type FTL compatible to the new system by just making it slower and massively slashing down the range. It's still possible to have strongholds if your enemy can't reach anything besides your border-systems, after all. Also, even with higher ranges, a warp-game would just need adjustment from the player: With the AI playing by the new rules, it won't try to just throw giant fleetstacks at your most important systems in an attempt to head-cap you and a player wouldn't be forced to do this, either. You still would be able to use multiple fleets in an attempt to fight closer to your enemies' core worlds. Risking everything in an all-or-nothing attack would be the player's choice, not like currently the only option anyway. Of course, after 6 months of work spend on this new patch, I realize Paradox won't suddenly reverse course, but I'm still hoping for mods to save warp after 2.0 hits us. And like you probably now after reading my many posts on this, I'll do my best to make FTL-mods myself if possible. Lastly, I'm currently running two massive warp-only games as some sort of send-off to this type of FTL. I'm well set to finish those games before 2.0 arrives, so even if modding in warp will turn out to be impossible, at the very least I will have extracted the most amount of fun possible from Stellaris. That said, obviously I won't stop playing since I like hyperlane, too! I'll just play it a lot less, since I have several other 4x with hyperlane-type gameplay, and I like them enough to just shelve Stellaris for the time being. (Not that I expect this to actually happen, I'm just saying.)
|
|
#
?
Feb 8, 2018 14:06
|
|