|
turn off the TV posted:I don't get complaints about the current war system being terrible and the new one being so much better, because it doesn't seem all that different on a very surface level than a current hyperspace only game. The way that empires control space and FTL rework seem like much more meaningful systems changes, but the stuff that's being added in Apocalypse doesn't seem like it necessarily needs those mechanics in order to exist. What's the point of building defensive systems if 2/3 of your opponents can ignore them?
|
#
?
Feb 7, 2018 21:44
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 30, 2024 06:33 |
|
|
Hellioning posted:What's the point of building defensive systems if 2/3 of your opponents can ignore them? Presumably a hyperdrive only game would be a hyperdrive only game, so your opponents are not able to ignore space forts unless they are FE's or monsters, which are not 2/3 of the entities in Stellaris. As far as I know space forts are also not an expansion pack feature. turn off the TV fucked around with this message at 21:51 on Feb 7, 2018 |
|
#
?
Feb 7, 2018 21:49
|
|
|
The critical war difference between old and new hyperspace is that new hyperspace requires you to traverse systems to reach the next jump point, so defenses based in the system can block things on the strategic level without having to be forced into the dumb 'edge of system spitting distance' fights like the current hyperspace does. Being hyperspace only also makes the new system claims system work much more smoothly, because you can cleanly & intuitively define which systems you should be getting by following the paths. With open FTL the ideal is to squint at your FTL ranges so you can cherry pick valuable systems, which is kinda how wars go right now and it makes for some real ugly border gore.
|
|
#
?
Feb 7, 2018 21:51
|
|
|
Hellioning posted:What's the point of building defensive systems if 2/3 of your opponents can ignore them? If you play hyperlane only you could not ignore them. war system improves over the war score system, which sucked and made actually winning wars extremely unfun and disconnected from the objectives makes it so a lost battle is not 100% fleet losses with no possibility of recovery makes it so a smaller fleet can at least potentially hurt a larger one instead of just getting obliterated makes the micromanagement better. auto invasion and fleet manager are enormous qol improvements makes advancing through systems take time, so depth of defense and strategic positioning actually matter, particularly if you are the enormous space ottomans There's other stuff but thats the biggest for me. The changes matter significantly. Vastly improved map game diplo layer is of course also needed and will come so I don't see what the problem is or is it just complaining because the order of the changes is Wrong™? Nuclearmonkee fucked around with this message at 21:54 on Feb 7, 2018 |
|
#
?
Feb 7, 2018 21:52
|
|
|
turn off the TV posted:Sometimes you lose the video game, such is life. In a grand strategy game designed to include combat as an important component from the get-go, war should not be a failure state because it is unfun. turn off the TV posted:I don't get complaints about the current war system being terrible and the new one being so much better, because it doesn't seem all that different on a very surface level than a current hyperspace only game. The way that empires control space and FTL rework seem like much more meaningful systems changes, but the stuff that's being added in Apocalypse doesn't seem like it necessarily needs those mechanics in order to exist. Why are you fixated on what's in Apocalypse and what's part of the patch? They're being designed together as part of the whole in order to focus on making war more interesting, and surprise surprise, the most fundamental changes are being made part of the free patch so as not to gently caress over those who don't get the DLC. Is it not all part of the war update, designed to make war more interesting?
|
|
#
?
Feb 7, 2018 21:56
|
|
|
Aethernet posted:I'm pretty sure Wiz had already decided to do war at that point, hence the body pillow option. It also makes sense to do it in this order, trying to rework diplomacy is probably incompatible with the current way system ownership is defined. How would a human know which systems the AI really wanted without a claims system? How can you negotiate borders with a script when focus trees and ascension perks can shift control of whole systems arbitrarily?
|
|
#
?
Feb 7, 2018 21:57
|
|
|
Nuclearmonkee posted:Didn't they actually do a poll too and asked which one the community wanted first? It wasn't really a seriously meant poll though, as I thought was evident by option 3 :P We've been planning to do Apocalypse/Cherryh since before Utopia came out
|
|
#
?
Feb 7, 2018 21:59
|
|
|
Wiz posted:It wasn't really a seriously meant poll though, as I thought was evident by option 3 :P Little did you know how deadly serious body pillows can be
|
|
#
?
Feb 7, 2018 22:06
|
|
|
*Wiz goes home and watches tv while leaning comfortably against his Blorgy-pillow*
|
|
#
?
Feb 7, 2018 22:08
|
|
|
Wiz posted:It wasn't really a seriously meant poll though, as I thought was evident by option 3 :P The level of betrayal I felt when Paradox announced their new DLC was not body pillows tore something from me that I'll never be able to recover. They tore away my ability to respect anything, and they tore away my ability to feel human.
|
|
#
?
Feb 7, 2018 22:09
|
|
|
Aethernet posted:I'm pretty sure Wiz had already decided to do war at that point, hence the body pillow option. Fake news, rigged election. Expose the Shadow Council's lies! #resist
|
|
#
?
Feb 7, 2018 22:11
|
|
|
TheDeadlyShoe posted:The critical war difference between old and new hyperspace is that new hyperspace requires you to traverse systems to reach the next jump point, so defenses based in the system can block things on the strategic level without having to be forced into the dumb 'edge of system spitting distance' fights like the current hyperspace does. Defensive stations have FTL inhibitors that prevent fleets from traveling through systems so in a current hyperspace only game you very much can prevent enemy fleets from moving through your space. Tomn posted:In a grand strategy game designed to include combat as an important component from the get-go, war should not be a failure state because it is unfun. I've seen posts in this thread saying that current war mechanics are unfun and unbearable and then pointing at the FTL and system ownership changes as being a war rework, and I don't see how either of those systems are going to make things more fun or enjoyable for people who already don't even like a hyperspace only game. Changes to FTL drives to make the game a hybrid system focused on hyperdrive is not going to change fleet combat. Making the border system based on space stations is not going to change fleet combat. The basic cycle of blow up fleets and invade planets is still a thing. I just don't see the big difference in how wars work that will make people who don't like them now like them after the patch.
|
|
#
?
Feb 7, 2018 22:16
|
|
|
Turn off your TV and turn on your monitor. There's a slew of interconnected changes coming to not just movement but combat and fleets them selves. Combined, these changes are going to drastically change the game. I think for the better, but we'll of course need to see it all in motion. It's also laying the foundation for future improvements which the previous system was too much of a cluster gently caress to properly keep balanced.
|
|
#
?
Feb 7, 2018 22:22
|
|
|
turn off the TV posted:I've seen posts in this thread saying that current war mechanics are unfun and unbearable and then pointing at the FTL and system ownership changes as being a war rework, and I don't see how either of those systems are going to make things more fun or enjoyable for people who already don't even like a hyperspace only game. Changes to FTL drives to make the game a hybrid system focused on hyperdrive is not going to change fleet combat. Making the border system based on space stations is not going to change fleet combat. The basic cycle of blow up fleets and invade planets is still a thing. I just don't see the big difference in how wars work that will make people who don't like them now like them after the patch. ...have you not read any dev diaries at all? Hell, did you not read Nuclearmonkee's post up there?
|
|
#
?
Feb 7, 2018 22:23
|
|
|
Starbases will be limited in number and quality. The FTL inhibitor mechanic shouldn't be leaned on when you can have a more interesting (and intuitive imo) system that applies to everything. It also means that faster ships will be significantly more mobile strategically. In practice that will probably mean fast response/raider corvette fleets. For the most part though im pretty sure hyperdrive was always meant to work like this, it just didn't because it made what was already the worst FTL even more garbage. quote:I've seen posts in this thread saying that current war mechanics are unfun and unbearable and then pointing at the FTL and system ownership changes as being a war rework, and I don't see how either of those systems are going to make things more fun or enjoyable for people who already don't even like a hyperspace only game. Changes to FTL drives to make the game a hybrid system focused on hyperdrive is not going to change fleet combat. Making the border system based on space stations is not going to change fleet combat. The basic cycle of blow up fleets and invade planets is still a thing. I just don't see how that's making people reconsider war. The changes are holistic. Moving to hyperlanes only ties directly into the war claims system and occupying territory. Both movement of fleets and the shape of empires become tied together and logical, unlike the current borders system which bears little if any logical connection to an empires ability to project power. if you just dont like hyperdrive, well. It's not like anyone here's gonna change your mind on that.
|
|
#
?
Feb 7, 2018 22:27
|
|
|
Tomn posted:...have you not read any dev diaries at all? Hell, did you not read Nuclearmonkee's post up there? Uh I mean have you not played the game at all? The new system isn't fundamentally different than stuff which you can already do in the vanilla game. There are a lot of QOL improvements and refinements but the way combat works is, at its core, going to remain the same. Two fleets fly up to each other and shoot things and you hope that your numbers are more biglier than theirs, and if they are you win the fight and if they aren't then you retreat. That isn't going to change. If you actually think that the Stellaris is unplayable because you have to sometimes click buttons in it then I don't know what to tell you other than lol
|
|
#
?
Feb 7, 2018 22:38
|
|
|
turn off the TV posted:Uh I mean have you not played the game at all? The new system isn't fundamentally different than stuff which you can already do in the vanilla game. There are a lot of QOL improvements and refinements but the way combat works is, at its core, going to remain the same. Two fleets fly up to each other and shoot things and you hope that your numbers are more biglier than theirs, and if they are you win the fight and if they aren't then you retreat. That isn't going to change. If you actually think that the Stellaris is unplayable because you have to sometimes click buttons in it then I don't know what to tell you other than lol That is an absurdly reductionist view that focuses on combat, not war. By the same token, you could argue that war in HoI4, CK2, and EU4 are fundamentally the same because they all involve two armies moving into a province and duking it out until the better armies win and the worse armies retreat.
|
|
#
?
Feb 7, 2018 22:46
|
|
|
turn off the TV posted:I've seen posts in this thread saying that current war mechanics are unfun and unbearable and then pointing at the FTL and system ownership changes as being a war rework, and I don't see how either of those systems are going to make things more fun or enjoyable for people who already don't even like a hyperspace only game. Changes to FTL drives to make the game a hybrid system focused on hyperdrive is not going to change fleet combat. Making the border system based on space stations is not going to change fleet combat. The basic cycle of blow up fleets and invade planets is still a thing. I just don't see the big difference in how wars work that will make people who don't like them now like them after the patch. The change of "not losing the entirety of your fleet when you lose a fight" is enormous, it genuinely changes everything. It makes splitting your fleet an actual option, since you no longer guarantee that you'll lose every ship whenever you get into a fight against their doomstack (which, if the AI reacts to the changes well enough, also will no longer exist). Even the "moronic AI ally" issue should be helped by this, since they won't lose every ship in suicide attacks before you can get in position to help. Gateways and wormholes are a big change too, since it'll fix the terrible tedium of moving your fleet across half the galaxy only to find that the enemy is back where you came from.
|
|
#
?
Feb 7, 2018 22:47
|
|
|
Your apparent failure to understand how adding defensible fronts and meaningful terrain to the strategic level of warfare completely changes the game compared to fleets just skipping around as they please suggests that you are either trolling or mind-bogglingly bad at strategy games, so maybe just take the word of people who know what a choke point is that it's a big fuckin' deal.
|
|
#
?
Feb 7, 2018 22:51
|
|
|
The actual banging together of armies might not be changing a huge amount (apart from fleet limits, modifiers favoring smaller fleets, and retreat options which are actually fairly significant changes) but the entire way you decide which fleets you bang together and where is changing as are the methods by which you actually decide who wins wars, which... is a very large change to how war works? I don't at all get how you can argue that nothing substantial is changing about wars? Like literally everything is changing about wars except for the fact that it involves building space ships and having them shoot each other.
|
|
#
?
Feb 7, 2018 22:51
|
|
|
The new system IS fundamentally different to hyperlane-only games. I just finished a hyperlane only game, but the game *still* ended up being a jumpy, warpy mess midgame. You still can get the jumpdrive tech (it still shows up as a random research option, you don't need to salvage FAs). Early game was somewhat interesting, being that I could build a big fort at a major chokepoint to make me feel better. Didn't last long though, as I started to grow like crazy. Hyperlane-only games still have deathball nonsense, still has the terrible warscore system, and you STILL and up with jumpdrives and omnipresent fleets earlier than you think. The cherryh update can't come soon enough. Ass_Burgerer fucked around with this message at 22:58 on Feb 7, 2018 |
|
#
?
Feb 7, 2018 22:56
|
|
|
As an example, one thing I'm excited to try with the new patch is to make a strike team of corvettes that go around causing mischief. Doing something like this in the current game is utterly pointless since A) the speed of corvettes is irrelevant because in hyperlane lightspeed every fleet moves just as fast, and B) every single corvette will be blown up immediately when they get into a fight. Both of those issues are fixed in this patch, so that might be an actual option.
|
|
#
?
Feb 7, 2018 22:56
|
|
|
You know guys, if you think about it, being forced to disseminate duties in the bureaucracy of stellar empire management and then being annoyed when your governors/dukes/moffs don't do things the way you want them to in your sectors is really the most realistic part of the Stellaris space emperor simulator experience  For real though, if there's ever been any part of any Stellaris thread on these forums that made me glad that Wiz/Mune/The team are their own dudes with their own ideas it's these last few pages. Some of you want some real dumb poo poo out of this game and would likely hate it it if it was ever implemented the way you're asking for. I will also reiterate that the jump changes are cool as poo poo and I'm going to have immense fun depositing shock fleets on enemy gateways so I can go full Reapers on them. Psycho Landlord fucked around with this message at 23:19 on Feb 7, 2018 |
|
#
?
Feb 7, 2018 22:59
|
|
|
I'm interested to see how gate technology affects the lategame because allied powers with gates are going to be functionally right next door to each other. If I build a gate in my main fleet base and my ally builds one on their main systems I can jump right to them in the event of a war, gonna have some interesting diplomatic effects.
|
|
#
?
Feb 7, 2018 22:59
|
|
|
Psycho Landlord posted:You know guys, if you think about it, being forced to disseminate duties in the bureaucracy of stellar empire management and then being annoyed when your governors/dukes/moffs don't do things the way you want them to in your sectors is really the most realistic part of the Stellaris space emperor simulator experience I mean I haven't played crusader kings but I kinda gather that's a thing in them? Presumably it's fairly interesting?
|
|
#
?
Feb 7, 2018 23:00
|
|
|
Yep but like someone pointed out earlier - watch out for getting your gates captured by the enemy :X
|
|
#
?
Feb 7, 2018 23:01
|
|
|
OwlFancier posted:I mean I haven't played crusader kings but I kinda gather that's a thing in them? Presumably it's fairly interesting? I was making the joke that we already have this.
|
|
#
?
Feb 7, 2018 23:01
|
|
|
TheDeadlyShoe posted:Yep but like someone pointed out earlier - watch out for getting your gates captured by the enemy :X They're basically railroads in space, ain't they?
|
|
#
?
Feb 7, 2018 23:02
|
|
|
Psycho Landlord posted:I was making the joke that we already have this. In my defense it's very difficult to tell sincere complaints from sarcastic ones sometimes.
|
|
#
?
Feb 7, 2018 23:06
|
|
|
OwlFancier posted:In my defense it's very difficult to tell sincere complaints from sarcastic ones sometimes. Fair enough, that's why I explained myself. In all seriousness, I've just basically stopped worrying about Stellaris gameplay critiques for the time being because Cherryh is likely to have much broader effects on core gameplay than we've really acknowledged and trying to make earnest suggestions in the face of that is sort of pointless a lot of the time. I feel like that's something quite a few posters in here don't really understand yet.
|
|
#
?
Feb 7, 2018 23:12
|
|
|
I don't think it'll affect politics much, except insofar as unrest may actually be a thing now.
|
|
#
?
Feb 7, 2018 23:14
|
|
|
Empire splitting and rebellions (done RIGHT, not random event bullshit) is a fun and good idea. Currently it just sucks, if it's even there at all. Robot uprisings are esspecially depressing; you split the territory, but then you're given a fleet way too massive for you to ever hope to maintain for more than 3 months, and you're locked into a fight-to-the-death with an empire that had more tranition perks, more tech, and still has a bigger fuckfleet than you. The only way I can ever see a robot uprising ever actually work is when I manually sabotage and fracture my empire to pieces and disband the fleet right before the uprising. I was playing one game a while ago where a bunch of the npc empires were having robot uprisings, and all of them were systematically beaten to death like newborn babies despite me trying to help them with massive gifts of minerals and energy.
|
|
#
?
Feb 7, 2018 23:16
|
|
|
Tomn posted:That is an absurdly reductionist view that focuses on combat, not war. By the same token, you could argue that war in HoI4, CK2, and EU4 are fundamentally the same because they all involve two armies moving into a province and duking it out until the better armies win and the worse armies retreat. I mean yes the way the player interacts with wars and combat in CK2 and EU4 are both pretty much identical? Pigbuster posted:The change of "not losing the entirety of your fleet when you lose a fight" is enormous, it genuinely changes everything. It makes splitting your fleet an actual option, since you no longer guarantee that you'll lose every ship whenever you get into a fight against their doomstack (which, if the AI reacts to the changes well enough, also will no longer exist). Even the "moronic AI ally" issue should be helped by this, since they won't lose every ship in suicide attacks before you can get in position to help. Gateways and wormholes are a big change too, since it'll fix the terrible tedium of moving your fleet across half the galaxy only to find that the enemy is back where you came from. There is a retreat button you can press during fleet combat that makes your ships retreat. Voyager I posted:Your apparent failure to understand how adding defensible fronts and meaningful terrain to the strategic level of warfare completely changes the game compared to fleets just skipping around as they please suggests that you are either trolling or mind-bogglingly bad at strategy games, so maybe just take the word of people who know what a choke point is that it's a big fuckin' deal. There is a subspace snare module that you can put on your defense stations that makes hostile ships not FTL anymore when they try to FTL to that system. You can change a setting during galaxy generation to remove warp and wormhole drives from the game. Ass_Burgerer posted:The new system IS fundamentally different to hyperlane-only games. I just finished a hyperlane only game, but the game *still* ended up being a jumpy, warpy mess midgame. You still can get the jumpdrive tech (it still shows up as a random research option, you don't need to salvage FAs). There are still jump drives in Cherryh, and presumably the AI will still jump drive past your front line to shoot at your shipyards.
|
|
#
?
Feb 7, 2018 23:17
|
|
|
I still can't believe this is coming out in a couple weeks. When they first started teasing about it and laid out the massive scope of the changes while warning everyone it was going to be a longer cycle than usual I thought March-April.
|
|
#
?
Feb 7, 2018 23:19
|
|
|
turn off the TV posted:There are still jump drives in Cherryh, and presumably the AI will still jump drive past your front line to shoot at your shipyards. In the late game, about three times a year, with limited fleets and massive combat penalties, and also your shipyards are also going to be some of your most fortified locations due to starport development limits.
|
|
#
?
Feb 7, 2018 23:20
|
|
|
turn off the TV posted:I mean yes the way the player interacts with wars and combat in CK2 and EU4 are both pretty much identical? 
|
|
#
?
Feb 7, 2018 23:22
|
|
|
Hoooookay then.
|
|
#
?
Feb 7, 2018 23:25
|
|
|
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? OwlFancier posted:In the late game, about three times a year, with limited fleets and massive combat penalties, and also your shipyards are also going to be some of your most fortified locations due to starport development limits. Aren't star bases going to largely specialize towards ship production or defense?
|
|
#
?
Feb 7, 2018 23:26
|
|
|
turn off the TV posted:There is a retreat button you can press during fleet combat that makes your ships retreat. 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. E: Especially if the battle started off with one fleet jumping directly on top of another fleet, which coincidentally is another lovely thing the patch will make way less frequent because of mandatory system traversal. Pigbuster fucked around with this message at 23:30 on Feb 7, 2018 |
|
#
?
Feb 7, 2018 23:27
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 30, 2024 06:33 |
|
|
I'm amused that people are failing to have a nuanced argument about how it's hard to have a nuanced disagreement in a video game.
|
|
#
?
Feb 7, 2018 23:30
|
|
