|
I get mad at the bad bits because they get in the way of the good bits. If there weren't any good bits I wouldn't care enough to get mad  My only literally unplayable complaint is the mid/late game slowdown, which also gives me too much time to dwell on the mid/late game annoyances.
|
#
?
Jan 27, 2020 10:20
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 25, 2024 15:08 |
|
|
I've not played much since release, so I haven't experienced much of the base game, but i'll go back and have a look.
|
|
#
?
Jan 27, 2020 12:37
|
|
|
Oh yeah Stellaris has given me like 700+ hours of mostly fun, even if I don't play much any more and bitch constantly that's just because I've played so much the flaws are impossible to miss and I want them gone so I can play more. The flaws don't really show until hour 350 or so, though, so yeah more than worth the money.
|
|
#
?
Jan 27, 2020 13:26
|
|
|
Burrrr? Space combat happens soon enough on your first playthrough, and how long does it take until a person asks the thread about how pop growth/migration works? It takes a lot less than 350 hours for the cracks to show
|
|
#
?
Jan 27, 2020 14:17
|
|
|
The space combat's cracks don't really show if all you have are corvettes
|
|
#
?
Jan 27, 2020 14:53
|
|
|
Gort posted:Yeah, I'd say people wouldn't bitch so hard about the flaws in this game if they didn't like the game as a whole. If it was just poo poo all the way down the thread would've died years ago. It's pretty much this. It could be so much more if it wasn't for... Paradox dlc policy, really. It's poison is really showing, imo.
|
|
#
?
Jan 27, 2020 17:54
|
|
|
Splicer posted:My only literally unplayable complaint is the mid/late game slowdown, which also gives me too much time to dwell on the mid/late game annoyances. I haven't finished a game since 2.2 because of how slow it gets now.
|
|
#
?
Jan 27, 2020 18:03
|
|
|
Splicer posted:I get mad at the bad bits because they get in the way of the good bits. If there weren't any good bits I wouldn't care enough to get mad Granted I have a powerful rig, but the only slowdown I experience is a hiccup at the start of every month, probably due to some migration mod I'm running checking for jobs / housing once a month.
|
|
#
?
Jan 27, 2020 18:21
|
|
|
All that said a number of recent non-game developments have really depleted my general optimism about paradox as a company and the stellaris brand in particular. I'd say I'm not alone and that's helped fuel the general shift in this thread from "X is bad but they'll fix it" to "X is poo poo and will stay so forever"
|
|
#
?
Jan 27, 2020 18:31
|
|
|
I think CK3 will really show where Paradox is heading. Have they been focusing entirely on CK3 to the detriment of their other franchises, or are they actually on a downward spiral?
|
|
#
?
Jan 27, 2020 18:40
|
|
|
Vengarr posted:I think CK3 will really show where Paradox is heading. Have they been focusing entirely on CK3 to the detriment of their other franchises, or are they actually on a downward spiral? I think PDX's decision to hold off on the Stellaris Federations DLC till after the holidays was really smart and I hope it pays off for them (despite the DLC looking like poo poo, so badly that I will not be buying it). I think their decision to spend over a year enhancing EU4 without releasing a new DLC is also a great sign, because the decision to do something like that probably has to be cleared by someone upon high. Imperator having yet to release a paid DLC (I think?) because it obviously started off so poorly is a great sign, too. None of these things would be happening, at least not on this scale, if the company was in full-on "MAKE MONEY THIS QUARTER OR ELSE" mode. I think the continued state of jank in Stellaris is a bad sign and if some if it is not addressed with the Federations DLC then that is a bad sign. The "Stellaris" mobile game is a horrible sign. So its mixed results but I still have hope. AAAAA! Real Muenster fucked around with this message at 18:59 on Jan 27, 2020 |
|
#
?
Jan 27, 2020 18:56
|
|
|
QuarkJets posted:The space combat's cracks don't really show if all you have are corvettes What's the story here?
|
|
#
?
Jan 27, 2020 19:00
|
|
|
Carcer posted:What's the story here?
|
|
#
?
Jan 27, 2020 19:02
|
|
|
Splicer posted:All that said a number of recent non-game developments have really depleted my general optimism about paradox as a company and the stellaris brand in particular. I'd say I'm not alone and that's helped fuel the general shift in this thread from "X is bad but they'll fix it" to "X is poo poo and will stay so forever" ceci n'est pas une emptypost
|
|
#
?
Jan 27, 2020 19:24
|
|
|
Carcer posted:What's the story here? Most of the complaints that I'm aware of have to do with mixed role fleets winding up as a short range death ball and corvettes not dealing with enemies at different ranges properly, but in the very early game you don't even have combat roles, just corvettes that always death ball by design
|
|
#
?
Jan 27, 2020 21:38
|
|
|
So until I got legal the other day I don't think I had played a more recent version than like 1.9 and that was a couple years ago. Assuming no mods and that I'm on whatever version Steam defaults to: 1. Which of the weapon paths is the current correct one? I think nuclear missiles used to be a good early-game option because of their range or something? 2. Is there still no way to actually decide to specialize and get only upgrades for your chosen weapon tree in the research options?
|
|
#
?
Jan 28, 2020 18:14
|
|
|
Schadenboner posted:So until I got legal the other day I don't think I had played a more recent version than like 1.9 and that was a couple years ago. Assuming no mods and that I'm on whatever version Steam defaults to: 2. lol, no, I'm sorry, this is Stellaris, we cant have nice things like that
|
|
#
?
Jan 28, 2020 18:25
|
|
|
Schadenboner posted:1. Which of the weapon paths is the current correct one? I think nuclear missiles used to be a good early-game option because of their range or something? 1. Kinetics all the way up, adding Kinetic Artillery and Batteries for your L mounts. Lasers will need to be researched up to Tier 3 (X-Ray Lasers) to unlock Proton/Neutron launchers, but for much of the game you'll want to be using Plasma instead (which are unlocked by the T1 Blue Laser tech). Ship designs are 1/3 kinetics 2/3 energy. 2. No, which outside of the early game is secretly a good thing. Use the cheap weapon techs you've skipped to reshuffle the tech deck when you don't see any tech you want. Works especially well if you scan some debris and pick up a lot of guaranteed options that way.
|
|
#
?
Jan 28, 2020 18:56
|
|
Yes, it's like a lava lamp.
|
Schadenboner posted:So until I got legal the other day I don't think I had played a more recent version than like 1.9 and that was a couple years ago. Assuming no mods and that I'm on whatever version Steam defaults to: There really is no bad option as long as you don't aggressively equip your ships to hit an enemy's strengths. I had tons of success by using mainly lasers and other energy weapons. Heavy on armor, low on shields. Heavy on lasers, low on anti-shield weapons. Then some missiles, because that causes the AI to waste tons of resources on PD-designs that then get lasered in half by your fleet. The only thing stopping you is the late game lag.
|
|
#
?
Jan 28, 2020 19:38
|
|
|
The most extreme example I've seen of fleets getting hosed over by being poorly specced was one game when the Materialist FE went galaxy defender against Unbidden. Their loadouts are preset and poo poo against shields which did not help them against what seemed like the most shield-heavy crisis fleets, they just got repeatedly owned over and over. I felt kinda bad, like drat they put their big boy pants back on to come help out only to eat poo poo every single time.
|
|
#
?
Jan 28, 2020 19:43
|
|
|
Yeah the end game crises are the only enemies specialized enough to really be counterable, but man can they be countered. Closest I ever game to losing to them I was getting ground down by the unbidden, before I moved to 100% Kinetic Artillery BB fleet. But against the regular AI they have such a mix of random poo poo (seriously check their designs, they make no sense at all) there's no point.
|
|
#
?
Jan 28, 2020 22:00
|
|
|
So in my experience, this mod helped a lot with lag: https://steamcommunity.com/sharedfiles/filedetails/?id=1566822652 Even with this many pops it runs smoothly up until the annual autosave https://imgur.com/a/y6YaTV9
|
|
#
?
Jan 30, 2020 03:08
|
|
|
Stellaris Dev Diary #167 - Galactic Community Q&A Seems less "No, you can't do that" this time. Edit: Truth be told, I didn't mind the previous Q&A so much, it was a surprisingly honest response to everything. And I'm really digging what I'm seeing here with the Galactic Community. Especially because it can have a role for everyone involved, not just those in a Federation.
|
|
#
?
Jan 30, 2020 13:36
|
|
|
quote:The system behind pops changing ethics has been updated, and your empire is more likely to see a much wider spread of beliefs. This could be good! ...or very, very bad!!
|
|
#
?
Jan 30, 2020 14:09
|
|
|
You can also pass a resolution to make unemployed pops resettle themselves. This and all the stuff about starting dumb diplo fights between galactic blocks is just the best. I'm now back on the hypetrain for this DLC. 
|
|
#
?
Jan 30, 2020 14:30
|
|
|
It seems that the Federations DLC was a bit misnamed. Looks like nearly all the focus of development has been on the Galactic Community and basically none on Federations. Any of you Paradox devs reading the thread (is there even anyone left?) pls help, one thing desperately needed is for vassalised empires to stop losing their AI difficulty bonuses. Right now a vassalised AI empire is basically removed from the game because they are permanently crippled by the removal of said difficulty bonuses.
|
|
#
?
Jan 30, 2020 14:42
|
|
|
Baron von der Loon posted:Stellaris Dev Diary #167 - Galactic Community Q&A The only good news I saw in there was that they changed how pops ethics changing works, but there is no info on how and with their current track record I have no faith that they made an intelligent change to how it works. Saros posted:
|
|
#
?
Jan 30, 2020 15:01
|
|
|
From follow up dev responses:
|
|
#
?
Jan 30, 2020 15:13
|
|
|
OddObserver posted:From follow up dev responses:
|
|
#
?
Jan 30, 2020 15:17
|
|
|
OddObserver posted:From follow up dev responses: Should just be called "BOOTSTRAPS!" 
|
|
#
?
Jan 30, 2020 15:18
|
|
|
Saros posted:
|
|
#
?
Jan 30, 2020 15:51
|
|
|
Splicer posted:I was thinking a while back that rather than flat AI bonuses it might make more sense for the AI to get generic fuckup fixing resources. So instead of +X% resources, which they build their economy under the assumption of and can still gently caress up with, they get X fuckup points a month that get turned into resources dumped straight into their stockpiles based on need, but isn't accounted for when planning their production. I have no idea if that even makes sense, or if it would work in practice.
|
|
#
?
Jan 30, 2020 16:03
|
|
|
AAAAA! Real Muenster posted:My (uneducated) thought has been that the AI should just get a certain amount of resources per pop, and then a bit more of the resources that they get from the buildings they build. That way they get some of everything for free just by having pops but then if they build a farm they get a little bit more food. This would remove the AI needing to put the pops to work or have to worry as much about the exact buildings they have. They already get poo poo for free so might as well abstract some of it.
|
|
#
?
Jan 30, 2020 16:29
|
|
|
OddObserver posted:From follow up dev responses: Well that's loving huge. I can't see where it was originally mentioned in the dev diary though, is that a council only thing?
|
|
#
?
Jan 30, 2020 17:07
|
|
|
PittTheElder posted:Well that's loving huge. I can't see where it was originally mentioned in the dev diary though, is that a council only thing? It's in screenshot under question that starts with "are there events..." --- so probably a reward for some sort of passed thing?
|
|
#
?
Jan 30, 2020 17:28
|
|
|
OddObserver posted:From follow up dev responses: Later we find out that the game does second by second calculations to determine which planet has the best flavor of yogurt weighted by proximity to the star before doing a call on every population to determine their maximum flavor potential thus bringing the game to a quicker grinding halt. Then it just moves your mining spec-ed pops to the food production planet and calls it a day.
|
|
#
?
Jan 30, 2020 18:27
|
|
|
I wonder if there'll be decisions to shorten the times to debate bills, how long wars peace out for etc.
|
|
#
?
Jan 30, 2020 22:43
|
|
|
 Literally unplayable.
|
|
#
?
Feb 1, 2020 11:00
|
|
|
I've run into the weirdest bug. My empire picked up some random abandoned robots and because they were so lovely, I modded them to be better. But now that they're effectively the same as my normal mining robots, just with a different portrait, all my robot assemblies adamantly refuse to build my own robots anymore. I can click and tank my build progress all day, but the assembly slot never changes. It's like the game got confused and now thinks the alien robots are mine and my own types are the alien ones they're not supposed to build. Or something. Is there some way to prevent a robot assembly from building those alien robots? I have several planets where I was planning to build some non-mining robots, but the way things are going I'll be forced to copy my templates over to the alien bots just so my assemblies stop being dumb. Edit: OK, so I solved this by making exactly the same types of robots with the alien robots as foundation, then aggressively replacing the remaining alien robots with the new ones. Now some of my assemblies have thrown out the alien templates in favor of my own robot designs, and some instead use the "new" alien templates (that are copies of my own). I have no idea what the game thinks it's doing, but gently caress it, problem solved. Luckily I always just give robot types a short ID consisting of two letters describing what they're doing plus a number to keep track of what design I'm looking at, or this sordid affair would have ended very confusing instead of just oddly annoying. I guess I just now have to live with needing two sets of robot templates to prevent my robot assemblies loving me over by selecting the one line of templates that don't have the jobs I want to fill. 
Libluini fucked around with this message at 02:32 on Feb 2, 2020 |
|
#
?
Feb 2, 2020 02:08
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 25, 2024 15:08 |
|
|
Libluini posted:I've run into the weirdest bug. My empire picked up some random abandoned robots and because they were so lovely, I modded them to be better. But now that they're effectively the same as my normal mining robots, just with a different portrait, all my robot assemblies adamantly refuse to build my own robots anymore. Did you try changing their species rights to population controls enabled? What about destroying the mechanist building and rebuilding it?
|
|
#
?
Feb 2, 2020 04:40
|
|
