|
Woof, so I've been playing more again, and found the 'Pending turn' thing is prevaliant without DLC too, but seems to go away if I clear my notification list to the right. Weird. Few things: The AI cannot play this game at all, I wonder what the heck ever challenged me before. Even on endless, they refuse to actually wage war, and can't built a death stack worth poo poo. Behemoths are crap. Not that they're weak, but just everything about them. From the massive opportunity cost in their techs (which also cost more than similar tier items, just to trick you), to wildly variable power level issues, to buggy issues, just... everything. Hissu are actually kinda fun/different, but a shame they're so bound to Behemoths in plot etc. Hacking is awful, people weren't kidding. There is So. Much. Clutter. in the tech tree with everything enabled. Still doesn't matter at all as most stuff is useless, especially teir5 stuff. The game would dramatically benefit from a sandbox combat mode, there's so much going on in that combat sim and it's all wasted due to the above point. I still love the game and it has a lot of strong points, but 4X games are really week this (/previous?) generation and it shows.
|
#
?
Sep 14, 2020 15:19
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 20, 2024 22:22 |
|
|
Serephina posted:The AI cannot play this game at all, I wonder what the heck ever challenged me before. Even on endless, they refuse to actually wage war, and can't built a death stack worth poo poo. Welcome to the club. The game is beautiful and the mechanics seem so interesting up to the point you realise that basic grasp on the mechanics is enough to obliterate max difficulty AI. Really makes me wonder about developers priorities. They make expansion after expansion and now there are stabilization finishing patches or whatever. So you'd think they're addressing problems of players who played the game several times. But nope. Stellaris has problems with AI too but in that game you can crank up the difficulty so that even passive AI poses a challenge.
|
|
#
?
Sep 14, 2020 16:04
|
|
|
ilitarist posted:Stellaris has problems with AI too but in that game you can crank up the difficulty so that even passive AI poses a challenge. Stellaris also has two really good AI mods, fwiw. Starnet will wreck your poo poo if you don't know what you're doing, even without cheats. Which just makes ES2 so much more unforgivable -- it could absolutely have better AI, the devs just never made it a priority.
|
|
#
?
Sep 14, 2020 17:08
|
|
|
ilitarist posted:Welcome to the club. "A bunch of interesting mechanics interacting with an AI that keels over to a stiff breeze" is really the 4x paradigm of at least the last two decades (for games older than Alpha Centauri I don't have that much insight). Civilization has released multiple games that are more or less solved puzzles in a row, and gets rewarded for it quite a lot. I think at heart here is that the stated values of players and the things they actually enjoy in practice are not well connected, and game designers have known this for some time. An example that was particularly striking outside of 4X was FEAR, a game lauded for having good enemy AI. In interviews with developers, they started with a more challenging AI, and the players found this frustrating, so they deliberately hamstrung that AI (notably by having the AI loudly announce to the player its next intended set of moves) and this caused player enjoyment to go up and, importantly, player estimation of how smart the AI was to go up. Back to strategy games - the player type that gets frustrated with a weak AI not being challenging enough is a small demographic that is more likely to be poached by games that involve human opponents: chess, diplomacy, social deception games, poker, fighting games, etc. The demographic that 4Xs have gone for, for as long as I've played, are the people who like a game that provokes some thought as a prelude to painting a map a color. Really the core seems to be people who like board games but don't like that in most board games you win (1/n)% of the time. I don't really know if there's something to be done about this? I've played probably about half my time with the Endless games in casual MP and that's cool and all, but as cool as it is to have a plan come together (or get countered) over several nights, it's just kind of a pain in the rear end compared to playing TTRPGs or Fall Guys with the same people. The real core of the fanbase doesn't really mind the AIs being easy and would probably really mind the AIs being more challenging.
|
|
#
?
Sep 14, 2020 17:11
|
|
|
Yes, but Stellaris literally has no win conditions, so it's a sandbox game that's misery to play. I need to get off my arse and install that EL community patch, if it made the AI more competitive I'd be in heaven, EL is such a joy to play. edit: that's a big post I missed. While I think we all agree most people play computer 4x games for the pleasure of experiencing and winning it, it can also be done in such a way that's mildly challenging if the player so desires by turning up the difficulty slider. That Civ4 dev who gave a great postmortem talk about where he feels the player base is and what they expect was bang on; an AI that's not a perfect player drop-in, but rather a foil to overcome. Having the opponents natter away at you with their personalities is good, and they can gracefully be outplayed to let the player finish their game arc. ES2 does the personality thing wonderfully, as dpoes Civ5/6, with Stellaris failing miserably. But once you see that the opponents aren't really resisting you, but rather just shuffling things around waiting for you to come be bothered with them, it really ruins the experience. Vanilla EL and ES2 suffer badly from that and they really shouldn't; if the player gives the AI enough free stuff via handicaps, why on earth can't they just grab all their stuff and go win? It's frustrating. Sorry if that's unintelligible, it's very late. Serephina fucked around with this message at 17:41 on Sep 14, 2020 |
|
#
?
Sep 14, 2020 17:30
|
|
|
What Serephina said. Plus we aren't just talking about complexity of AI computations. Stellaris modless AI is notoriously bad, but then you get a crisis which is an enemy with no economy or diplomacy. Plus you have intermidiate threats like Fallen empires and Leviathans who are very strong and just sit there. You basically get a horde mode added to the game and you can make crisis harder. So it doesn't matter as much if other "players" are bad or predictable. They're there to be subjugated, annexed or allied. Plus as I understand if you turn up the difficulty higher they can still pose some danger, you'll just see that their planets are underdeveloped and they only beat you with magical free economy of theirs. Still you get some challenge. With ES2 there's no challenge, that's the point. It's not about AI not being human-like or smart. If the game would decide that it's turn 130 so no everyone who hates the player should move huge fleets against me it'd be dumb cheap move but it would still be a more interesting game posing some challenge. Maybe you can get something like that if you play with custom debuffed faction and turn off alliances or something. But I'd expect such measures to be necessary only when I've mastered the game and seek the highest challenge. As it is now I barely understand any expansion features (never interacted with pirates, only use hacking cause the game pesters me with it, don't build behemoths) or endgame features (only use terraforming when the system begs to be all-cold research center, always forget about improved laws or fleet tactics) and I still chose which victory I win. It's not AI, it's about difficulty balance.
|
|
#
?
Sep 14, 2020 20:52
|
|
|
Install ELCP. It is good. It not only tunes stuff, but actually enables the AI to use entire mechanics it never engaged with before.
|
|
#
?
Sep 14, 2020 22:27
|
|
|
Meridian posted:Install ELCP. It is good. It not only tunes stuff, but actually enables the AI to use entire mechanics it never engaged with before. Started as Cravers right next to the Scottish Trees. This'll be a fun one.
|
|
#
?
Sep 15, 2020 01:07
|
|
|
Tulip posted:"A bunch of interesting mechanics interacting with an AI that keels over to a stiff breeze" is really the 4x paradigm of at least the last two decades (for games older than Alpha Centauri I don't have that much insight). Civilization has released multiple games that are more or less solved puzzles in a row, and gets rewarded for it quite a lot. Agree with all of this. Civ 4 is the exception that proves the rule. A game made for strategy gamers. The rest are, well, role playing games
|
|
#
?
Sep 15, 2020 01:51
|
|
|
I remember reading somewhere (sorry) that the Civ developers worked out that for the vast majority of players would quit the instant they lost a city. Ideally what we'd have is an AI that can and will take your cities/systems, combined with a game mechanic that makes the loss of a city an interesting (albeit still painful) decision point. Like, you've lost your system, choose an option: fund resistance fighters, evacuate civilians or ramp up propaganda, that sort of thing.
|
|
#
?
Sep 15, 2020 05:46
|
|
|
I guess I want (as a 4x player) some AI that loosely matches a human-level challenge without the humans -- because of logistical reasons; I have no time, just an hour or three spent here or there on a SP playthru -- and this doesn't seem that unobtainable with existing technology, so why not? Civ 4 has it. It requires some AI mods, but it's there. If you want to see it (baked-in) try the DUNE mod -- I've lost a game due to the "Madhi Steamroller" and loved every turn of it. Civ 4 + AI mods is peak 4x, with only SMAC and maybe GalCiv2 challenging that experience. Many, many players of 4x games would love to have a time-constrained single-player option that approximates the multiplayer level of challenge -- but we gots nothing in ~14 years of game dev. It's enough to make one say "gently caress AAA". Shameful. On the surface, it would seem that the "Endless" games might be savvy enough to make a breakthrough here, but that sadly doesn't seem to be the case. Oh well. I do love the pretty portraits. I give credit to Stellaris because at least it has AI robust enough to fix. Tweaked AI in this context makes singleplayer games so so much more enjoyable, and that's worth a hell of a lot to me. ES2 has been little but a beautiful disappointment, in contrast. The wonderful ship-to-ship combat seems such a waste.
|
|
#
?
Sep 15, 2020 07:02
|
|
|
mmmm posted:Many, many players of 4x games would love to have a time-constrained single-player option that approximates the multiplayer level of challenge -- but we gots nothing in ~14 years of game dev. It's enough to make one say "gently caress AAA". Shameful. Age of Wonders 3, Thea, Stars in Shadows. Plenty of others can give you all the challenge you need. True, only AoW3 can be considered AAA. And you rarely see *symmetric* challenge, as in AI wins by playing the same game as you do. But I'd argue in a game as complex as any 4X the only way AI can win by playing the same rules as you do is not playing the same rules as you do and never got caught. Civ4 more or less did that brushing over some systems like terrain improvements (AI cities performed as if they were managed perfectly even if the terrain wasn't improved optimally).
|
|
#
?
Sep 15, 2020 09:09
|
|
|
I really like Thea but I wouldn't describe it as being the same type of game as ES or Civ. It's an adventure game that has a 4X wrapper at the end, and it's cool but you're not like, competing with peers in any strategic way.mmmm posted:
This is the part that I doubt. A pretty large percentage of my social circles play Civilization, and the nigh-universal consensus is that it Civilization 5 is the perfect level of challenge. Y'know, the game that has about the same level of challenge as Solitaire. This includes some guys who are big into the whole "git gud" culture around Dark Souls and PUBG, but when they fire up a 4X they want something more akin to Stardew Valley or Islanders. I don't really blame them and I don't really blame devs for responding to that demand. Plus the trend for the last decade or so has been to basically not make AIs and instead use humans as the intelligence for challenge games. Even Fall Guys doesn't have bots, and Fall Guys does not exactly have a high skill floor.
|
|
#
?
Sep 15, 2020 13:31
|
|
|
I think most people stop playing these games after they beat them a few times and few even try the hardest difficulties. So designing a really smart AI would really be for the benefit of a minority. Perhaps that is why we seldom see it Or maybe "designing smart AI" is just very hard
|
|
#
?
Sep 15, 2020 13:38
|
|
|
Also I just discovered Endless Space 2. Never had heard of any endless games ever and I'm not a huge fan of 4X games But this sci-fi game really grabbed me. It's REALLY GOOD. I still suck at invasions though, it feels like it takes forever to delete an enemy empire because they can keep drafting populations to defend their stupid planets. In my last game I just got tired of it and got a fleet of planetcrackers to delete entire starsystems every few rounds. Was much faster... I did it as the Umbral Choir though which felt really out of character
|
|
#
?
Sep 15, 2020 13:44
|
|
|
The best way to deal with that is to design a version of the small support ship to be a sieger.. Strip the design of everything except engines and as many siege modules you can fit. Then build a full fleet or two of them and siege the enemy systems with them while protecting them with your actual military ships. They will reduce enemy defense to 0 quick. When it reaches 0 invade and then chose blitz to overwhelm the manpower of the 1 pop they will draft. This will end the invasion after 1 turn unless the enemy has insanely better troop quality than you. If that happens I would upgrade your troops in the military tab and maybe research a tech or two that gives bonuses to ground combat. This happening is rare though.
Hryme fucked around with this message at 14:10 on Sep 15, 2020 |
|
#
?
Sep 15, 2020 14:04
|
|
|
Collapsing Farts posted:Also I just discovered Endless Space 2. Never had heard of any endless games ever and I'm not a huge fan of 4X games Can't talk about Umbral, I've not had to stomach for their hacking stuff yet. Invasions are actually quite well balanced/designed in ES2, but not properly presented to new players so they run afoul of a few things. There's a few ways of going about invasions: 1) The dumb way. Take your random naval fleet with it's pathetic seige power, hit the invade button. Find out that the amount of manpower you can kill with your tiny landing force is less than they can reinforce with the 'draft' option, think game is dumb, rage quit. 2) The safe way. There's a teir2 tech that lets you equip a titanium module that gives 7 siege/turn/module. This stacks, and is affected by module multiplication for medium/large ships. You can create a flock of support vessels laden with the thing, and siege at over 200/turn, taking all systems essentially intact. 3) The awesome way. There's a series of techs that allow you to field more manpower in the ships, and also more manpower on the attack step. The teir3 one is where it gets good, 'OpEx Gear". You'll end up fielding 3k+ manpower vs their puny 800 in defense, obliterating everything in a single turn. Both 2&3 require special fleets following the navy boom-booms around, #2 needs a few turns to siege, and ultimately they'll defend with 170 manpower in draft so you need to deal with that also. #3 will empty your manpower coffers in a comical fashion as you build the "dropships", you might need some +manpower/food conversion techs beforehand. Also don't expect anything to be left of the system after using technique #3. Also keep an eye out for tank/aircraft techs, you can upgrade things in the ship designer tab to get better ground forces, if you didn't know already.
|
|
#
?
Sep 15, 2020 14:05
|
|
|
I would argue #3 is the safest and most sure-fire way of taking a system, as well as being the fastest. With sieging, if you focus everything on the siege modules, then oftentimes you won't have enough manpower deployment to overcome the draft option. This means you'll sitting there for a couple turns sieging them down to 0, then a bunch more turns having to destroy all their population one by one. This in theory saves some improvements, but ultimately reaches a similar conclusion to #3, just wasting turns in the process. It's also worth noting some factions can just pull manpower for defense effectively infinitely, like the Vodyani. You don't really need to have multiple fleets either, one fleet can both fight other fleets and invade systems as well. I exclusively play Vaulters, and this setup routinely crushes the AI with little effort:   MP would be a different beast, however. Ultimately, when it comes to invasions, deployment limit is the actual important factor. When attacking, you want it as high as possible, and ideally, high enough that you overwhelm the defense in one turn.
|
|
#
?
Sep 15, 2020 15:46
|
|
|
Tree Bucket posted:I remember reading somewhere (sorry) that the Civ developers worked out that for the vast majority of players would quit the instant they lost a city. This is one of the things I'm excited about for Humankind's approach to victory; its about doing stuff that includes the bouncing back after getting your poo poo wrecked. As long as 4Xs prefigure some distant goal that's about collecting a certain amount of [variously flavoured points] to reach it, and stuff like that is tied to population which is hard tied to the city/planet/whatever, loosing cities is a huge blow to your goals. How people frame their condemnation of certain mechanics is a big tell of what I think Tulip is right about here; very often conversations about difficulty and desiring good AI lean hardtowards raised hackles at the AI providing some sort've of active resistance to the player's stated ingame aims. I think this problem also exists in tension with the fact people want their 4X AI to fight each other and/or be pliable on a diplomatic level.
|
|
#
?
Sep 15, 2020 16:21
|
|
|
Hryme posted:The best way to deal with that is to design a version of the small support ship to be a sieger.. Strip the design of everything except engines and as many siege modules you can fit. Then build a full fleet or two of them and siege the enemy systems with them while protecting them with your actual military ships. They will reduce enemy defense to 0 quick. When it reaches 0 invade and then chose blitz to overwhelm the manpower of the 1 pop they will draft. This will end the invasion after 1 turn unless the enemy has insanely better troop quality than you. If that happens I would upgrade your troops in the military tab and maybe research a tech or two that gives bonuses to ground combat. This happening is rare though. Serephina posted:Can't talk about Umbral, I've not had to stomach for their hacking stuff yet. Invasions are actually quite well balanced/designed in ES2, but not properly presented to new players so they run afoul of a few things. Thanks, I had missed that there were siege modules that improved the speed/effectiveness to such an extent. That makes sense and will make a huge difference to the game for me. Maybe now I can defeat my opponents without having to annihilate all their planets Though I do feel like cackling like a maniac villain when I blow up a planet 
Collapsing Farts fucked around with this message at 16:57 on Sep 15, 2020 |
|
#
?
Sep 15, 2020 16:53
|
|
|
Gonna reinstall Civ4 for that Dune mod. Love me some Dune. I do wish ES2 had something like the ai patch for EL, tho.
|
|
#
?
Sep 15, 2020 18:10
|
|
|
Rimusutera posted:How people frame their condemnation of certain mechanics is a big tell of what I think Tulip is right about here; very often conversations about difficulty and desiring good AI lean hardtowards raised hackles at the AI providing some sort've of active resistance to the player's stated ingame aims. I think this problem also exists in tension with the fact people want their 4X AI to fight each other and/or be pliable on a diplomatic level. There is certainly a gap between what players claim to want, and what they actually want. Civ6 took the right approach in one instance by having ai cities planted right on your borders flip to your control. They took an aggravation and made it an opportunity. I wish developers would take this approach more often, instead of just building comatose ai! I guess what I want from 4x ai is, weirdly enough, what good old Medieval Total War (not a 4x, I know) provided- multiple factions taking over half the map them disintegrating - very dynamic...
|
|
#
?
Sep 15, 2020 22:41
|
|
|
I'm googling around for modern indie 4xs and there are SO MANY of them. All of them have dodgy interfaces and like 50 rabid fans, it seems. One of them must be a good strategy game? Maybe???? RIght? Look at them all https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1CiojwbhZxZ-C0qVN3pOOQEqAJfU2TVlMJA8vH4nXR7Y/edit#gid=2112326043
|
|
#
?
Sep 16, 2020 00:24
|
|
|
Rhjamiz posted:I do wish ES2 had something like the ai patch for EL, tho.  Was Amplitude hoping for more community support re: AI mods from the get-go? https://www.games2gether.com/amplitude-studios/endless-space-2/forums/75-modding/threads/27061-01-how-to-create-an-ai-mod ...this might be more about custom races than overall improvements, though the example mod on the workshop does seem to make everyone an aggressive warmonger. ilitarist posted:Age of Wonders 3, Thea, Stars in Shadows. Plenty of others can give you all the challenge you need. ...yes, AoW does have decent AI! I guess I've come to think of it more as a straight-up strategy title (or maybe a 3X, like Slitherine's Warhamburger:Gladius) but this is a situation where I'm delighted to be proven wrong. Thea seems like such an oddball game that I didn't think of it as a real 4x contender -- that's the one with the big PvE focus, right? Stars in Shadows seems like a genuine attempt to update MOO2, will have to give it a spin. Amethyst posted:I'm googling around for modern indie 4xs and there are SO MANY of them. All of them have dodgy interfaces and like 50 rabid fans, it seems. One of them must be a good strategy game? Maybe???? RIght? Yeah, if anyone's got suggestions like ilitarist's it'd be great to hear 'em, ES2 has not lived up to my time spent in EL (which itself required that mod to really get sizzling in SP -- multiplayer was good out of the box, though) If there's just no mainstream demand for halfway decent AI in 4X titles, then back to the indies I'll go  Just need some help digging thru all the chaff.
|
|
#
?
Sep 16, 2020 03:36
|
|
|
Sins of a Solar Empire also has quite good (as in competitive) AI. Some people dismiss it as being more RTS than 4X, but if Stellaris counts as 4X then SoSE sure as heck does too. It's one greatest weakness is the tech tree is kinda a clusterfudge, but imo it's still a pretty-enough game to be playing in 2020.
|
|
#
?
Sep 16, 2020 05:28
|
|
|
Stars in Shadow is a very good MoO clone with a lot of personality, which I like. Definitely worth a buy!
|
|
#
?
Sep 16, 2020 05:44
|
|
|
mmmm posted:Thea seems like such an oddball game that I didn't think of it as a real 4x contender -- that's the one with the big PvE focus, right? I've put Thea there cause you've specifically talked about a challenge, not about a good AI. I know you probably meant good symmetric AI (which doesn't really exists in a pure form, it's always asymmetric AI mimicking as symmetric) but Thea is an example of a game with a varied challenge and no real contenders.
|
|
#
?
Sep 16, 2020 08:07
|
|
|
So I find the hacking system pretty confusing. Started up a new game the other day, and got to the point where I built a trading company, then noticed that I couldn't actually build a subsidiary anywhere. Clicking on the building view for that system shows 0 buildings and just a horatio hero portrait with the money per turn cost. I assume there's some hack that shuts down buildings for a system. How do I actually get rid of that? I already had the basic defensive program running on that system.
|
|
#
?
Sep 22, 2020 18:50
|
|
|
Eschatos posted:So I find the hacking system pretty confusing. Started up a new game the other day, and got to the point where I built a trading company, then noticed that I couldn't actually build a subsidiary anywhere. Clicking on the building view for that system shows 0 buildings and just a horatio hero portrait with the money per turn cost. I assume there's some hack that shuts down buildings for a system. How do I actually get rid of that? I already had the basic defensive program running on that system. That sounds more like an actual glitch; I've never seen that before. That said, I also got rid of that expansion pretty early on. (It was amazing how much I enjoyed my first few hack-free playthroughs; no more worrying about stupid popups arriving to tell me something's gone wrong that cannot be fixed and could not have been prevented.)
|
|
#
?
Sep 23, 2020 01:57
|
|
|
Yea, the Horatio DARTH PAUL thing is a known bug introduced recently. Super annoying.
|
|
#
?
Sep 23, 2020 03:00
|
|
|
Serephina posted:Yea, the Horatio DARTH PAUL thing is a known bug introduced recently. Super annoying. So I finished my first game of Endless Space 2 the other day; set it to fast... 1.) Gossamer as system development gives you 100% of trade (or trade value? Is there a difference?) Of a node as influence. Is there a numerical value for trade value indicated anywhere? I ended up not picking it because I couldn't find it. 2.) What is up with behemoths? I don't mean the super weapons but in general they seem kind of... weird. Bolted on. Citadels in particular are kind of weird. I didn't get the last improvement in the tech line for the buildings but those buildings require a citadel to build, right? I don't have a way to quantify why they seem to stand out since it was my first playthrough but they feel disjointed from the rest of the game. 3.) Also Carriers. Fighters and bombers seemed underwhelming. Afaik the only special module they get (compared to smaller ships) is the tractor beam which is shared by the behemoth. I may have been using them wrong but I'm not sure why I would use them over a command equivalent of say frigates. Other than that the early to mid game was great. I thought the faction quests giving you a better idea of each fiction's culture is a nice touch. I liked the fact that the Lumeris weren't just some sort old trope of traders but basically were The Mob in Las Vegas except on a galactic scale which helps them stand out thematically from other games. I like the combat sim cutscene system; I skip a lot of them after a while but it's nice to see really big dust ups play out. Going to give this another replay soon.
|
|
#
?
Oct 14, 2020 23:55
|
|
|
Trade value is one of the numbers that gets multiplied by a bunch of other numbers to determine the income of a trade route. You might be able to check it in the System Development view (I think that's what it's called, but I almost never use it; it's the one that visualizes things with colors). Behemoths are an addition from the Supremacy DLC. A lot of the endless series DLC is clunky, since it tends to add new systems without re-balancing anything or reworking the game around them. Sometimes this approach turns out ok, sometimes it doesn't. High-cp ships tend to be better than low-cp ships just as a byproduct of the math involved. The name 'carrier' for 4cp ships predates the addition of fighters and bombers to the game: you can lean on other weapons and probably do just fine (I say probably because I've no experience with carriers myself; 2cp ships are enough to conquer the galaxy). HundredBears fucked around with this message at 02:55 on Oct 15, 2020 |
|
#
?
Oct 15, 2020 01:01
|
|
|
Behemoths are really, really, half-arsed. They are broken in more than a few ways, being alternatively buggy-OP, wildly OP, or totally useless, depending on what you tried to use them for. It's tragic, as the Hisso playstyle is cool and almost orthogonal (but in a good way!) from normal empires. Disable the DLC imo =[ Fighters/Bombers are kind weird. I've actually had a fight where a reluctant vanilla bomber slot (in the mandatory strike craft slot) outperformed five equivalent weapon slots, which had strategic-resource guns. I spent a lot of time poring over the post combat screen, and came to the conclusion that an extraordinary series of events co-aligned to make the bombers actually do what it says on their tin, which has a quite impress dps. In more general practice, they suffer from too many unique disadvantages which inevitably pop up that using just a normal energy gun is the right call for 99% of fights. If the game actually goes that late and you're somehow struggling to win fights still (how?!), higher CP ships grossly outperform smaller ships, both in industry, cp efficiency, and casualty attrition. A vanilla next-size-up hull is marginally better than the hull-you're-using but with more slots unlocked. Mostly however, using the medium size ships with all slots unlocked is *plenty*. Serephina fucked around with this message at 10:18 on Oct 15, 2020 |
|
#
?
Oct 15, 2020 10:02
|
|
|
When you're first starting with the game there is really no reason to have any dlc enabled, apart from maybe the vaulters. The behemoths are only really good for spicing up the game after you've completely explored the base
|
|
#
?
Oct 15, 2020 12:43
|
|
|
Thanks, yeah, going to disable Supremacy and Prenumbra next game.
|
|
#
?
Oct 15, 2020 14:27
|
|
|
Just bought the endless legend collection, what is the most fun and overpowered faction to start as that isn’t elves?
|
|
#
?
Oct 15, 2020 14:34
|
|
|
drat Dirty Ape posted:Just bought the endless legend collection, what is the most fun and overpowered faction to start as that isn’t elves? I think the Broken Lords are pretty nuts, but then a good argument can be made for pretty much all the factions. They are all OP in their own way, except maybe the Allayi and the Forgotten who are both fairly rubbish. Go broken lords and go hard on dust generation. See how you get on. Alternatively Necrophage and eat the world. Edit: I would also turn off the Shadows and possibly Tempest for your first few games. having all the DLC together to start can be a bit overwhelming and these too mainly add espionage (which doesn't add a whole lot except annoyance) or outposts in the ocean to capture (game breaking due to the resources and luxuries they spew out).
|
|
#
?
Oct 15, 2020 14:51
|
|
|
mitochondritom posted:Edit: I would also turn off the Shadows and possibly Tempest for your first few games. having all the DLC together to start can be a bit overwhelming and these too mainly add espionage (which doesn't add a whole lot except annoyance) or outposts in the ocean to capture (game breaking due to the resources and luxuries they spew out). Yea, EL is a pretty complete game with no DLC. Shifters is the only one I'd really consider for a first game as the changes it makes to winter aren't too rough and are very good are polishing off a major rough edge. Drakken and Necrophages I also like for less-experienced play. The 'phage have some serious weaknesses to work around but they're far from overwhelming and the game plan for them is pretty straightforward: eat your neighbors.
|
|
#
?
Oct 15, 2020 17:04
|
|
|
Grab the endless legend community patch.
|
|
#
?
Oct 15, 2020 17:18
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 20, 2024 22:22 |
|
|
Giants expansion also adds wonders, competitive quests as well as, ahem, giants. All important core gameplay additions.
|
|
#
?
Oct 15, 2020 19:29
|
|