|
Honestly I thought the amount of friendliness was kind of refreshing. I had a neighbor empire that was pathetic to me that was constantly claiming my worlds and threatening to wipe me off the map, that made WAY less sense than an inferior second place empire that was controlling the northwest quadrant trying to stay on my good side.
|
#
?
May 29, 2018 13:44
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 26, 2024 00:55 |
|
|
Bloodly posted:There's nothing wrong with an AI player actually being nice for once. Makes a change from the standard KILL KILL KILL you usually get out of these things. I actually liked that xenophile or friendly empires would help you out a bit, while other nations that either feared you or wanted to bribe their way into a NAP when they had bigger problems elsewhere would be proactive in their diplomacy. It's also nice that they're a lot less deceitful.
|
|
#
?
May 29, 2018 13:49
|
|
|
Wiz posted:The L-Gate chain is being completed a lot quicker than intended. We're going to make some tweaks. Cool, thanks for answering. It's a really fun event now that I'm tackling it with two 30k stacks. Loving the distant stars content, I'd honestly pay £5 for smaller anomaly/event packs in future in the same way you sell portrait packs packs for the other games. It's great to genuinely find new things when you're exploring the galaxy!
|
|
#
?
May 29, 2018 14:04
|
|
|
'Mutual threat' opinion modifier is weird. I'm playing pacifist materialists this go around and I've got all these Fanatic Spiritualists around me that love me because something's giving them a +170 mutual threat modifier. I agree that fighting wars while an endgame crisis is going on is stupid but there's nothing really going on other than a Fanatic Purifier getting kinda ruined by a neighbor. Edit: I guess it could be the nanites. I kinda forgot about them because after opening the L-gates the nanites came through but never left the systems the gates are in. Black Pants fucked around with this message at 14:14 on May 29, 2018 |
|
#
?
May 29, 2018 14:12
|
|
|
Spanish Matlock posted:Honestly I thought the amount of friendliness was kind of refreshing. I had a neighbor empire that was pathetic to me that was constantly claiming my worlds and threatening to wipe me off the map, that made WAY less sense than an inferior second place empire that was controlling the northwest quadrant trying to stay on my good side. Yeah I liked it a lot more than some pathetic dinguses trying to claim all of the AE worlds I took over in the war in heaven. Hey idiots! Maybe if you spent that influence on edicts you would suck less!!
|
|
#
?
May 29, 2018 14:39
|
|
|
I too appreciate the option for AIs to not hate the player, even though they tend to get into federations with the AIs that DO hate the player and then hamstring them from actually declaring war. Also I kind of wish that the two AIs that spent the last century claiming my territory instead of trying to bribe me, while sitting on "Superior" and higher relative power ratings based entirely on a huge naval capacity they weren't using, had bothered to actually conduct a military buildup to pursue those goals - well really they would probably STILL have gotten wrecked by my technologically superior fleets that went on to singlehandedly murder two endgame crises, but it's the thought that counts right? Maybe naval cap factors too much into "relative power" but I get that the sleeping giant strategy is a thing that needs to be accounted for in these calculations. Do we know if the way the Unbidden crisis works since 2.0 is intended? Has anyone seen them actually build anchors now that military stations aren't built separately? I notice that their system-claiming starbases are "Dimensional Anchor-class", but they don't seem to have the effect that pre-2.0 anchors did, and I can still headshot the portal even if it's the first system of theirs I kill (yes, this doesn't end the crisis anymore like it did before the Unbidden rework, but being able to cut off reinforcements so quickly does really speed up fighting them compared to the Prethoryn or the Contingency.) Dallan Invictus fucked around with this message at 14:57 on May 29, 2018 |
|
#
?
May 29, 2018 14:48
|
|
|
I'm doing a game where I want to go down the synth path. Problem is, I haven't drawn Synths to research. I've had a spare Ascension slot since my third choice, and I'm now with only two slots left, and I still haven't drawn Synths. I've got Titans and I'm about to finish Mega-Engineering. I have the pre-requisites for the tech, too. It has just never given me the chance. Perhaps The Flesh Is Weak should give you a higher chance of drawing Synths?
|
|
|
#
?
May 29, 2018 14:50
|
|
|
I've found the Synth research to at least be much more common than that goddamn Synthetic Personality Matrix tech. That one's a real pain in the rear end. But yeah both of them could stand to be more common.
|
|
#
?
May 29, 2018 14:58
|
|
|
Has anyone done a break down of what civics and traits are good, bad, and traps? Some of them are obvious (more Unity, more minerals) but sometimes even those can be less than ideal when combined with other traits. If you take Syncretic or that slave one, for example, you probably don't need +minerals on your main species.
|
|
#
?
May 29, 2018 15:01
|
|
|
Milky Moor posted:I'm doing a game where I want to go down the synth path. Problem is, I haven't drawn Synths to research. I've had a spare Ascension slot since my third choice, and I'm now with only two slots left, and I still haven't drawn Synths. I've got Titans and I'm about to finish Mega-Engineering. I have the pre-requisites for the tech, too. It has just never given me the chance. The flesh is weak gives you a 4x modifier to your draw weight. Most likely your problem is your leader not having one of the following as their specialty, which gives a 0.2x modifier to draw weight: Industry, Curator, Maniacal, Spark of Genius. If you're spiritualist you get another 0.5x, but if you're materialist its a 2x bonus, and if you have the mechanist civic another 2x.
|
|
#
?
May 29, 2018 15:04
|
|
|
Admiral Joeslop posted:Has anyone done a break down of what civics and traits are good, bad, and traps? Some of them are obvious (more Unity, more minerals) but sometimes even those can be less than ideal when combined with other traits. If you take Syncretic or that slave one, for example, you probably don't need +minerals on your main species. The Wiki is pretty good, but doesn't really go into pluses/minuses. Will write something on it later. On that subject, Wiz, if you're still reading, you probably shouldn't be able to pick Mining Guilds and Slaving Guilds. That plus Fanatic Authoritarian and Caste System is obscene.
|
|
#
?
May 29, 2018 15:06
|
|
|
I can't believe I didn't realise I could spend all my energy on art monuments from the artisan troupe. I thought it was a one off (although there does seem to be some limit)
|
|
#
?
May 29, 2018 15:10
|
|
|
2.1.1 Beta is out.code:
|
|
#
?
May 29, 2018 15:11
|
|
|
Admiral Joeslop posted:Has anyone done a break down of what civics and traits are good, bad, and traps? Some of them are obvious (more Unity, more minerals) but sometimes even those can be less than ideal when combined with other traits. If you take Syncretic or that slave one, for example, you probably don't need +minerals on your main species. Most civics have a place where they're at least good, even if some are always great. The ones that are bad tend to involve unimportant systems. My list of "Bad, never take": Normal Civics: Corvee System (-50% resettlement cost) Efficient Bureaucracy (+2 core systems) Exalted Priesthood (+20% governing ethics attraction) Police State (-25% unrest, -25% pirate chance) Warrior Culture (+20% army dmg, -20% army upkeep) My list of "Situational, don't take without a good plan or swap to it later": Aristocratic Elite (+2 governor level cap, +2 leader capacity) Barbaric Despoilers (raiding stuff, no experience with it personally) Distinguished Admiralty (+2 admiral level cap, +2 leader capacity) Efficient Bureaucracy (-15% consumer goods) Feudal Society (-50% subject power penalty, vassals can build starbases) Free Haven (+50% alien migration) Functional Architecture (-15% building cost) Idealistic Foundation (+5% happiness) Meritocracy (+1 leader levels, +1 leader capacity) Philosopher King (+2 empire leader levels) Shadow Council (-75% cost to influence elections) Technocracy (+1 research alternatives) "Good, take if it fits with your plan": Agrarian Idyll (+1 unity/farm) Inward Perfection (bunch of poo poo) Nationalistic Zeal (-10% claim cost, -10% war exhaustion) Slaver Guilds (+10% slave food/mineral production) Fanatic Purifiers (bunch of poo poo) Mechanist (-5% robot upkeep, 2 robot pops, the early tech that gives you +5% minerals) Syncreatic Evolution (4 pops of second race, strong mineral/food/troops) Life-Seeded/Post-Apoc (special homeworld start) "Not sure, these are good defaults": Beacon of Liberty (+15% unity) Citizen Service (+1 unity from fortress, +15% naval cap) Corporate Dominion (+1 energy per starbase trading hub, start with the tech for trading company, can build colony ships with energy) Cutthroat Politics (-20% edict cost) Imperial Cult (+25% edict length) Mining Guilds (+10% minerals) Parliamentary System (+25% faction influence gain)
|
|
#
?
May 29, 2018 15:35
|
|
|
Wiz posted:There's a bit of AI weirdness in 2.1 with it being too friendly in general. Should be sorted in 2.1.1. Slider? 
|
|
#
?
May 29, 2018 15:40
|
|
|
ulmont posted:2.1.1 Beta is out. Neat. Hope the bug fixes/chanhes to galaxy generation and performance help tidy things up a bit. Guess I'll be starting yet another new game to try them out.
|
|
#
?
May 29, 2018 15:50
|
|
|
KingLemming posted:Slider? I think it depends on what he means by friendly. If he's saying the AI is giving too many gifts, then sure that's something that should probably be tweaked. But boy howdy I just did my first game and it felt very sensible. Other Egalitarian empires and I got along very well. Empires that practiced Xenophile diplomacy and I could generally agree on a few things, and had some good trade deals going. I had ok friendships with a few Materialists/Militarists who also leaned Egalitarian/Xenophile which eventually lead to a pretty solid Grand Alliance of sorts ( that theoretically would have ended with a Victory/Crisis beat had it not bugged out and my endgame just completely broke. ). Meanwhile I still struggled with a few Spiritualist Empires even though I was Spiritualist, and I still had issues with Slavers/Empires. I think the only bit of weirdness I had in the game was our Materialist/Egalitarian Fed buddy managed to invite both the Spiritualist Empire that really hated me and the Inward Perfection Empire that liked nobody into Federation Associate status, which eventually brought both up to pretty friendly levels with the rest of us. That probably shouldn't have happened.
|
|
#
?
May 29, 2018 16:16
|
|
|
ulmont posted:2.1.1 Beta is out. Oh, I think I saw the Leviathan bug, and was wondering what the question marks we're about. Maybe they'll fix the observation station ownership one next :p
|
|
#
?
May 29, 2018 16:19
|
|
ZypherIM posted:The flesh is weak gives you a 4x modifier to your draw weight. Most likely your problem is your leader not having one of the following as their specialty, which gives a 0.2x modifier to draw weight: Industry, Curator, Maniacal, Spark of Genius. If you're spiritualist you get another 0.5x, but if you're materialist its a 2x bonus, and if you have the mechanist civic another 2x. I've had Spark of Genius for the entire run on my Engineering lead but nothing else of those (I've managed to get a whole bunch of life extension perks + the option from the RGB event, so this guy is extremely old at this point -- my first head of state is still alive!) Not Spiritualist or Materialist but I'm working on embracing the latter faction just to increase my chances. My luck must be abysmal.
|
|
|
#
?
May 29, 2018 16:20
|
|
|
Rookersh posted:I think it depends on what he means by friendly. I agree - if it's just too high in general, then by all means it should be fixed. I just think a galaxy-wide friendliness slider would be an interesting option to have. Obviously, ideological differences should still matter, and it definitely isn't applicable to genocidal empires or crisis things.
|
|
#
?
May 29, 2018 16:40
|
|
|
The 'looking ahead for Stellaris' presentation has made a comeback so those of us who missed it can watch it again in its entirety. https://twitter.com/StellarisGame/status/1001380171537113088?s=20 Some if the changes sound like they're way off into the future but every aspect of the game is being looked at to some degree.
|
|
#
?
May 29, 2018 16:55
|
|
|
ulmont posted:2.1.1 Beta is out. Loving this OP
|
|
#
?
May 29, 2018 17:18
|
|
|
When is embracing / supressing factions worth it?
|
|
#
?
May 29, 2018 17:30
|
|
|
VikingofRock posted:When is embracing / supressing factions worth it? If you like the results?
|
|
#
?
May 29, 2018 17:33
|
|
|
I have a destroyed ringworld in a black hole system called Hells Maw. I colonized a tomb world there and the ring world notice went away but there's still clearly a destroyed ring around the system. Can you not have a ring world and a planet in the same system? What would I need to rebuild the ring world?
|
|
#
?
May 29, 2018 17:41
|
|
|
Embracing a faction will change your governing ethics, so if you want to do that you embrace them. Suppressing them is good if you don't want too many people joining one that's going to just be unhappy about everything, and can spare the influence.
|
|
#
?
May 29, 2018 17:44
|
|
|
Gay Horney posted:I have a destroyed ringworld in a black hole system called Hells Maw. I colonized a tomb world there and the ring world notice went away but there's still clearly a destroyed ring around the system. Can you not have a ring world and a planet in the same system? What would I need to rebuild the ring world? You just need mega-engineering, once you've got that the ringworld should work. Ive never seen a planet in the same system though, that's neat.
|
|
#
?
May 29, 2018 17:45
|
|
|
Can't wait to crack open the 2.1.1 beta, had two games this weekend where performance during mid game turned to dog poo poo, locking up every 30/40 seconds. Also wiz your game owns hard.
|
|
#
?
May 29, 2018 18:11
|
|
|
Lots of good stuff in the new beta.  Of course this means now I'll have to restart again
|
|
#
?
May 29, 2018 18:14
|
|
|
Looks like a nerf to torp corvette fleets.
|
|
#
?
May 29, 2018 18:16
|
|
|
Gay Horney posted:I have a destroyed ringworld in a black hole system called Hells Maw. I colonized a tomb world there and the ring world notice went away but there's still clearly a destroyed ring around the system. Can you not have a ring world and a planet in the same system? What would I need to rebuild the ring world? Can’t build a ring world in an inhabited system. Dump the colony and you’ll be able to repair the ring. VikingofRock posted:When is embracing / supressing factions worth it? When you want to add/rank up the ethos of the faction in your empires ethics, and don’t mind losing whatever ethos has the lowest representation in your empire.
|
|
#
?
May 29, 2018 18:36
|
|
|
I have far too strong a sense of fairness and kindness to handle this new gift system. I totally abandoned a juicy war target because they gave me like 9,000 energy, which was pretty impressive for a country of just a few systems. I felt like after taking the gift there was no possible way I could go to war with them. Ended up giving them 10,000 minerals as thanks. They eventually asked me for a protectorate, so it all worked out!
|
|
#
?
May 29, 2018 18:50
|
|
|
Turns out Fallen Empires have access to the Apocalypse DLC even if I don't have it. Wonder if I can get the Colossus achievements by annexing them?
|
|
#
?
May 29, 2018 19:08
|
|
|
Baronjutter posted:I have far too strong a sense of fairness and kindness to handle this new gift system. I totally abandoned a juicy war target because they gave me like 9,000 energy, which was pretty impressive for a country of just a few systems. I felt like after taking the gift there was no possible way I could go to war with them. Ended up giving them 10,000 minerals as thanks. Yeah I have had two countries decide they wanted to be protectorates of me this latest run, I liked it. One of them was all victims of claims from the advanced start machine consciousness I had had good relationships with the whole time (I managed to get a RA with them for a good while  )They're still friendly but they want those systems and they can't have em, they're mine now I already absorbed those dorks into the Mind
|
|
#
?
May 29, 2018 19:09
|
|
|
Is this beta save compatible? I know usually the answer is yes but I see a lot of people saying they need to restart now.
|
|
#
?
May 29, 2018 19:10
|
|
|
I have a save that crashes every time i try to do stuff involving merging troop transports and also at random hopefully this will fix it.
|
|
#
?
May 29, 2018 19:12
|
|
|
Dove back in for Distant Stars, my first empire got a solid start and one by one literally every strategic resource except habitability and food production fit into my initial expansion before any wars were declared and I got a pretty early start to my psionic ascension. Loving this update, best the game has ever been imo
|
|
#
?
May 29, 2018 19:20
|
|
|
I've started this game multiple times but have yet to live through any kinds of wars or crises, I always end up getting ground to paste. Is there a (good) quick start guide or anything online?
|
|
#
?
May 29, 2018 19:22
|
|
|
Southpaugh posted:I've started this game multiple times but have yet to live through any kinds of wars or crises, I always end up getting ground to paste. Is there a (good) quick start guide or anything online? The entire objective of the early game is to make the red gem number go up basically. If you have resources you can afford things like fleets and stations to not die.
|
|
#
?
May 29, 2018 19:28
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 26, 2024 00:55 |
|
|
Wiz posted:There is in fact special gift dialogue (I just tested it and it works fine). Are you sure that they used the standard dialog when gifting? Eltoasto posted:Looks like a nerf to torp corvette fleets. My biggest issue with the system as it is now is that... war specialization isn't really my thing. It's not super compelling to me. Battleships and space carriers are cool, but the overall systems are not what I'm into. It's fine that they're there and that they're important, the game shouldn't cater to my own particular preferences, but all this means I basically just go by fleet power when designing my fleet, assuming bigger numbers are better. If I make a fleet full of torpedo corvettes its number is twice as big as a balanced fleet or one organized around capital ships. Just aesthetically, I think it'd be fun to make a capital ship focused fleet, but the game makes fun of me by giving me a small fleet power number when I do that. I'm beginning to see that maybe torpedo corvettes have inflated numbers, but I'm kind of at a loss for how I should be judging my fleets.
|
|
#
?
May 29, 2018 19:47
|
|
