|
THE loving MOON posted:I just started a new game the other day on Ensign difficulty because I never did take the time to properly relearn things after Claims/etc. I even set down the number of advanced start AI's. So of course I spawn immediately next to advanced start fanatic purifiers. This can actually be a good thing; the AI actually tends to be less aggressive about fleet building than they should, particularly as purifiers where a fleet is so critical in the early game. You can use the End Threat CB to take their systems without the need for claims, so if you can get any sort of fleet edge, use it immediately. It's also easy to find allies to fight them of course. Advanced start makes it trickier, but not impossible by any means.
|
#
?
Aug 21, 2018 17:10
|
|
Yes, it's like a lava lamp.
|
|
| # ? May 26, 2024 04:05 |
|
|
PittTheElder posted:This can actually be a good thing; the AI actually tends to be less aggressive about fleet building than they should, particularly as purifiers where a fleet is so critical in the early game. You can use the End Threat CB to take their systems without the need for claims, so if you can get any sort of fleet edge, use it immediately. It's also easy to find allies to fight them of course. Yeah I'm gonna see if I can ride it out. I'm playing as a servitors, and I'm just starting to hit a point where I can crank out robots and ships without too much trouble.
|
|
#
?
Aug 21, 2018 17:15
|
|
|
Had a fun feature the other day. Me, as servitors in a defensive pact with some Assimilators, they get Total-Warred upon so I rush to their defense. Now obviously if I take over a system bordering them it flips to their control, fine, but if I do the same with a planet it only flips after shoving all the population into zoos then instantly lets them out. So the end result of me taking over a planet for my ally is that I murder half the population and destroy all their buildings, whoops.
|
|
#
?
Aug 21, 2018 17:21
|
|
|
Nevets posted:Now that we will have scientist / ruler / soldier pops a soft cap system would work great. The cap for each type of leader could be determined by the number of their respective pop types in your empire. That would be quite cool though you'd need some hefty scaling I think to ensure you started with enough scientists. Or I guess, start out with some basic caps for each type.
|
|
#
?
Aug 21, 2018 17:40
|
|
|
Add Ryan Church for the badass starship DLC.
|
|
#
?
Aug 21, 2018 18:26
|
|
|
THE BAR posted:Yeah, but now you're in an AI federation. That's part of the fun of the game to me.
|
|
#
?
Aug 21, 2018 18:36
|
|
|
Shadowlyger posted:gently caress you say
|
|
#
?
Aug 21, 2018 19:27
|
|
|
Taear posted:That's part of the fun of the game to me. what the gently caress
|
|
#
?
Aug 21, 2018 20:03
|
|
|
Staltran posted:what the gently caress He likes being a sub to the AI dom. "Master please either prohibit wars or embroil us in an infinite useless one. Oh and gently caress up the federation fleet before you hand it back to me." Don't kinkshame
|
|
#
?
Aug 21, 2018 20:07
|
|
|
I wish federations in base Stellaris were like the STNH UFOP one wherein you can incorporate your 'allies' (burdens) into your Actually after this economic update can diplomacy get a similar overhaul? Just a partial one, even? Complications fucked around with this message at 20:30 on Aug 21, 2018 |
|
#
?
Aug 21, 2018 20:28
|
|
|
There was a bunch of diplomacy stuff in Wiz's original Stellaris roadmap he hasn't gotten to yet so it's probably next.
|
|
#
?
Aug 21, 2018 20:34
|
|
|
Complications posted:I wish federations in base Stellaris were like the STNH UFOP one wherein you can incorporate your 'allies' (burdens) into your Diplomacy is like the one remaining thing that hasn't been drastically changed from 1.0, so I think it's pretty much guaranteed.
|
|
#
?
Aug 21, 2018 20:35
|
|
|
On the one hand, the way federations can't poach from each other leads to a neat emergent behaviour where Federation A tends to consolidate around one or two particular ethics and Federation B ends up being everyone else. I tend to have either one "good" federation beating up on a bunch of dicks, or one "bad" federation opposed by a ragtag band of empires that don't like each other very much. On the other hand, it's annoying as gently caress when you end up with two tiny federations full of people who would get along fine if there was just a goddamned "propose merger" button.
|
|
#
?
Aug 21, 2018 22:20
|
|
|
Splicer posted:if there was just a goddamned "propose merger" button. This would be a really nice option for the player to be able to do. Although it would have to change all the federation unity picks to be something else afterwards, since there wouldn't be any federation to get a bonus on. Maybe have it change to a new democratic government type that is hard coded to have one choice of ruler from every species in the empire?
|
|
#
?
Aug 21, 2018 23:46
|
|
|
I just wish there was a benefit to joining a Federation, or it opened up some kind of new game play.
|
|
#
?
Aug 22, 2018 00:02
|
|
|
Beer4TheBeerGod posted:I just wish there was a benefit to joining a Federation, or it opened up some kind of new game play. Inter-federation conflict would go a long way towards that.
|
|
#
?
Aug 22, 2018 00:07
|
|
|
Splicer posted:On the one hand, the way federations can't poach from each other leads to a neat emergent behaviour where Federation A tends to consolidate around one or two particular ethics and Federation B ends up being everyone else. I tend to have either one "good" federation beating up on a bunch of dicks, or one "bad" federation opposed by a ragtag band of empires that don't like each other very much. This, and the "you now have an unbreakable truce with all of the galaxy for 10 years, have fun with that" effect. I miss the days when completely wiping out the federation member you were at war with left you with no truce at all.
|
|
#
?
Aug 22, 2018 00:34
|
|
|
Pylons posted:Inter-federation conflict would go a long way towards that. Yeah this was the thing from Wiz's talk at PDXCon that made me the most excited. Hopefully 2.2 lays the foundation for like 2.5 to be a massive diplomacy overhaul across the board, both internally and otherwise. And hopefully some of the internal politics are worked on with 2.2 itself now that society is basically changing as Stellaris knows it.
|
|
#
?
Aug 22, 2018 00:36
|
|
|
The factions are a pretty solid baseline that more interesting inner/outer diplomacy could be grown out of by making them more than just an abstract presence. The leaders of the faction have little importance as is, but there’s potential there.
|
|
#
?
Aug 22, 2018 01:59
|
|
|
Complications posted:I wish federations in base Stellaris were like the STNH UFOP one wherein you can incorporate your 'allies' (burdens) into your Sooooooo basically federations are the EU of stellaris.
|
|
#
?
Aug 22, 2018 02:49
|
|
|
Wonder how this will affect ai govenors and if their building/organization will be any good?
|
|
#
?
Aug 22, 2018 06:48
|
|
|
Synthbuttrange posted:Wonder how this will affect ai govenors and if their building/organization will be any good? Depends on what you mean by good. I'm guessing they'll be much less likely to make stupid mistakes, since they don't have as much room to build sub-optimal structures on a big tile grid with varying resources that it may or may not make sense to exploit, but they might not make the same decisions you would have made or make the decisions that would be optimal when viewing your empire as a whole. AG3 fucked around with this message at 07:51 on Aug 22, 2018 |
|
#
?
Aug 22, 2018 07:47
|
|
|
Beer4TheBeerGod posted:I just wish there was a benefit to joining a Federation, or it opened up some kind of new game play. It gives you perma alliances with some AI and more ships to throw into the grinder at times if you need to as well. Seems okay to me. Yea they sometimes do stupid stuff - like that game where I got stuck not being able to declare war with nothing I can do about it - but for me that's rarer than the experience of the federation story. I missed perma-alliances when Civ5 didn't have them any more and this is just the same as that. I'm a story player and don't really care that they're not too advantageous otherwise.
|
|
#
?
Aug 22, 2018 10:09
|
|
|
Federations are great ...
|
|
#
?
Aug 22, 2018 10:15
|
|
|
Federations, despite being painfully in need of a rework, are handy for controlling the aggressive expansion of a Democratic Crusader or similar. If you only agree to go to wars you'll gain more from, you ensure that they aren't too powerful when you finally ditch their asses while giving yourself some protection in the early game, which is especially handy on higher difficulties.
|
|
#
?
Aug 22, 2018 10:53
|
|
|
Aethernet posted:Federations, despite being painfully in need of a rework, are handy for controlling the aggressive expansion of a Democratic Crusader or similar. If you only agree to go to wars you'll gain more from, you ensure that they aren't too powerful when you finally ditch their asses while giving yourself some protection in the early game, which is especially handy on higher difficulties. They also provide a good challenge for a powerful player empire, I always play xenophobic isolationists and it’s interesting to see what federations development to oppose me.
|
|
#
?
Aug 22, 2018 10:57
|
|
|
Nightgull posted:They also provide a good challenge for a powerful player empire, I always play xenophobic isolationists and it’s interesting to see what federations development to oppose me. That is one good point. Always fun having them oppose my empire rather than them staying alone and being snipped up by me or another empire. I always love having one bro empire. I usually uplift and mold them and tag team the coalition that forms against us.
|
|
#
?
Aug 22, 2018 11:26
|
|
|
Aethernet posted:Federations, despite being painfully in need of a rework, are handy for controlling the aggressive expansion of a Democratic Crusader or similar. If you only agree to go to wars you'll gain more from, you ensure that they aren't too powerful when you finally ditch their asses while giving yourself some protection in the early game, which is especially handy on higher difficulties. Why ditch them? That's a huge bit of galaxy you don't need to conquer to win. Although federation victories are buggy as poo poo and don't give you the achievement. It always shows every remaining race as "winning" when I get one.
|
|
#
?
Aug 22, 2018 12:16
|
|
|
where the Twitter teasers at
|
|
#
?
Aug 22, 2018 12:29
|
|
|
Gyshall posted:where the Twitter teasers at Release the teasers wiz!!
|
|
#
?
Aug 22, 2018 12:35
|
|
|
THE loving MOON posted:Ditto. Also sorry to keep bringing up the frigging Culture, but I just finished Matter the other day so whatever. The Morthanveld have what is basically a ringworld, but it's a tangle of gigantic transparent water filled tubes encircling it's home star. I thought that was pretty neat, the concept of a ringworld adapted to the needs of a purely aquatic species. Looking this up led me down a wiki-hole which led to reading this: http://theculture.wikia.com/wiki/Recognised_Civilisationary_Levels#Interlevel_relations And now I think the whole Stellaris method of dealing with primitive civs needs to be reworked with this as a model
|
|
#
?
Aug 22, 2018 13:03
|
|
|
I’m gonna pull the trigger and buy the culture books.
|
|
#
?
Aug 22, 2018 13:13
|
|
|
A possibly neat way to do federations would be to make "the federation" an independent agent. Nobody controls the federation fleets, they're AI fleets that consider the federation's members their territory to defend. You can go to war on your own but the federation and its members will only join you if there was a majority vote (and if they don't the defender gets a few decades access to a retaliation casus beli that lets them attack you back later without everyone else joining in). If your federation likes you it gives you nice things like research grants, like a mini-shroud. There'd need to be more in depth politics interactions first though. binge crotching posted:This would be a really nice option for the player to be able to do. Although it would have to change all the federation unity picks to be something else afterwards, since there wouldn't be any federation to get a bonus on.
|
|
#
?
Aug 22, 2018 13:34
|
|
|
Splicer posted:A possibly neat way to do federations would be to make "the federation" an independent agent. Nobody controls the federation fleets, they're AI fleets that consider the federation's members their territory to defend. You can go to war on your own but the federation and its members will only join you if there was a majority vote (and if they don't the defender gets a few decades access to a retaliation casus beli that lets them attack you back later without everyone else joining in). If your federation likes you it gives you nice things like research grants, like a mini-shroud. I don't think I'd want the federation fleet to be AI although for the most part I just ignore the stupid thing anyway. Merging federations would be great though.
|
|
#
?
Aug 22, 2018 13:54
|
|
|
Federations should be set up a lot more like the HRE in EU4. It exists as an entity with independent members that have mutual defence pacts to various degrees. Over time the player or AI can try to centralise and create reforms and more mutual cooperation between members (like fleets or stuff like free trade) but crucially a federation can exist in many different forms. It’d also be a decent framework for certain empire types. Imagine being a single planet empire that controls a vast federation of vassal states either through imperial might or noble privilege. Edit: something I’d like to see is de jure sectors. Galaxy gen has already moved towards tight clusters separated by a few choke points. Imagine your core sector being just your starting cluster and other clusters being a limiter on what you can control directly. Demiurge4 fucked around with this message at 14:39 on Aug 22, 2018 |
|
#
?
Aug 22, 2018 14:36
|
|
|
A thing that always helps me get motivation in games like EU4 and V2 is the various cultural and political unions you can aspire to. While I'm not sure the model of cores/primary/accepted cultures would map 1-1 onto Stellaris, having a static blobbing decision out there for the player to work towards, that is locked for XYZ reasons at the beginning, would really help maintain interest through the midgame, I think.
|
|
#
?
Aug 22, 2018 15:45
|
|
|
I think the above would work well with both the FEs and the Precursor quest chain too - owning their former capitals should give you claims on all the systems they once owned at their greatest extent, and an option to shift to their ethics and name once you've gained all their systems. This would require actually defining the region of space once inhabited by precursors and FEs, which would be cool by itself.
|
|
#
?
Aug 22, 2018 16:15
|
|
|
So, integrating alien empires via royal marriage? 
|
|
#
?
Aug 22, 2018 16:31
|
|
|
I mean if you're both running a xenophillic monarchy there's no reason why that shouldn't work.
|
|
#
?
Aug 22, 2018 16:41
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 26, 2024 04:05 |
|
|
I'd really enjoy more precursor stuff. More empires, more options and etc. Since the quests are actually fixed now, why not!
|
|
#
?
Aug 22, 2018 18:44
|
|