Stellaris - To Serve Man - The Something Awful Forums

The Something Awful Forums > Discussion > Video Games > Stellaris - To Serve Man

Splicer: Oct 16, 2006; from hell's heart I cast at thee
🧙🐀🧹🌙🪄🐸

Bloodly posted:

That means nothing till we know what that means. For all we know they'll just be a modifier to Spaceports, which are already these vast construtions that can take giant farms, specialised shipyards, mind-control lasers, massive defensive batteries, and so on(Yet still get popped instantly vs mid-late game stuff). Don't get over-hyped.

Yeah. I'm hoping they're pop-fueled space stations you can stick around uninhabitable planets, but we know nothing yet.

# ¿ Jan 20, 2017 21:42

Adbot: ADBOT LOVES YOU

# ¿ Apr 28, 2024 15:53

Splicer: Oct 16, 2006; from hell's heart I cast at thee
🧙🐀🧹🌙🪄🐸

Gobblecoque posted:

The thread title must be good because haha it's triggering the hell out of people.

The Stellaris dudes made the joke back in June (with hats) and ditched the joke when Trump actually got elected, so it's it's kind of a dumb title for a thread made two months later.

# ¿ Jan 21, 2017 01:07

Splicer: Oct 16, 2006; from hell's heart I cast at thee
🧙🐀🧹🌙🪄🐸

FLIPSIXTHREEHOLE posted:

So, Wiz, will Paradox ever release the pre-order species portraits as a paid DLC, or must I adapt to a cold, hollow future without space spiders?

Same question, including will there ever be a way to get the Nova Edition race via some form of upgrade option?

# ¿ Jan 21, 2017 11:01

Splicer: Oct 16, 2006; from hell's heart I cast at thee
🧙🐀🧹🌙🪄🐸

Baronjutter posted:

Yeah, army management and ground combat and the warscore/peace system are the 2 things that really stick that are outright bad and not working. Everything else is pretty good, could have more content or be fleshed out more of course, but those two things are outright bad and make me not want to play.

I'd be OK with the warscore system if war itself wasn't so annoying. I find multiple miniwars frustrating because the wars aren't fun. If there was some kind of incentive not to doomstack, auto-fleet refilling, and less kludgey invasions then it would be a whole different experience.

Dwesa posted:

Replacing specialized armies and transport ships with ship modules would do (as was suggested plenty of times already). If your planet has clone vats (for example), you can produce ships with clone armies at the starport and you could tick that option in starport menu to add clone army module to ships, otherwise you use some more generic armies (xenomorph farms at the planet surface could even guarantee some nice events).

Yes please :allears:

Are there any events linked to clone vats? Never built them.

# ¿ Jan 21, 2017 23:47

Splicer: Oct 16, 2006; from hell's heart I cast at thee
🧙🐀🧹🌙🪄🐸

Jeb Bush 2012 posted:

IMO it's pretty telling that arguments for unit designers never involve a remotely compelling argument about why/how they add to the game and instead end up being "more choice = better" and "everyone does them".

I'm not remotely surprised that it's not going to happen but these systems are a large part of why combat in space 4X games tends to be so bland.

They're fun. They're space Lego. My problem with Stellaris ship design is that I get very little visceral feedback on my ship building. In SotS1 when you go to a fight using a ship covered in giant cannons that hucks asteroids it feels very different to the same fight but with a ship covered in lasers and a giant frontal laser cannon. In Stellaris it's just a bunch of dots running at other dots while the numbers go down. I feel a big part of this is just the sheer number of ships in play in any fight.

My other problem is that a lot of the armour/shields/energy stuff is just busywork. Power/armour/shields would work better as side slots like the engines, along with a significantly reduced number of utility slots that you can add additional power/shields/armour into. Having only three or four utility slots on a battleship to play around with may feel like less choice, but realistically it's the same amount of viable choice but with less busywork.

Wiz posted:

The planet grid is... alright. It works but it's too micro-intensive, especially when you're upgrading a lot of buildings. I also don't like how it makes your planets feel like giant mines/farms rather than places people live. Reworking it is not out of the question but it'd be a pretty huge investment of time.

An "Upgrade all (type)" button would be a big help. Pressing one button to upgrade all your (energy/minerals/farms/research buildings/special buildings) would cut a planet down to four clicks (plus individual research buildings) instead of up to 25. Also adjacency bonuses are in a weird middle ground where they're just enough to make me feel like I should be doing something with them but not enough that I actually do, apart from colony placement.

Actually the most fun I have with adjacency bonuses are tomb worlds. Maybe giving adjacency bonuses to more tile blockers would make planets feel more like planets.

# ¿ Jan 22, 2017 14:52

Splicer: Oct 16, 2006; from hell's heart I cast at thee
🧙🐀🧹🌙🪄🐸

oddium posted:

make some funny posts about it and we'll see where it goes from there

You first.

poverty goat posted:

We have 3 weapons systems (guns, lasers, missiles) and 3 defensive systems (evasion, shields, armor) so it seems like we've just got a broken rock/paper/scissors arrangement. They all need to be more distinct and fitting the best tank and damage type for your threats/targets should be what happens in the ship designer, rather than mundane incremental upgrades.

Yup. I don't find fiddling power requirements to get to use thing-I-had-but-marginally-better to be fun ship design. I find choosing between AoE energy vs single target energy vs short range ballistic vs long range ballistic vs ditching half your weaponry to mount an asteroid launcher to be fun ship design.

# ¿ Jan 22, 2017 16:39

Splicer: Oct 16, 2006; from hell's heart I cast at thee
🧙🐀🧹🌙🪄🐸

That's a fleet designer and yes is desperately needed. Along with autobuilding to refill emptied slots.

# ¿ Jan 22, 2017 16:43

Splicer: Oct 16, 2006; from hell's heart I cast at thee
🧙🐀🧹🌙🪄🐸

Kitchner posted:

Well it was mentioned in the dev diary refugees may even colonise uncolonised planets, so if we assume this means "if there is no empire to flee to they flee to a habitable planet" then there's only two option really. Either they only colonise planets already within borders, in which case they are part of that empire, or they can colonise a planet totally seperate from an empire in which case it would make sense to be their own entity.

I suspect it's the former though.

Third option: Space Snails colonize a planet in your borders and form a new (empire/side/whatever) messing up your pretty colours and you either deal, vasselize, or murder.

# ¿ Jan 23, 2017 12:20

Splicer: Oct 16, 2006; from hell's heart I cast at thee
🧙🐀🧹🌙🪄🐸

Kitchner posted:

That's the equivalent of a load of refugees turning up in like 1800s America, setting up a new town just outside of New York, and then declaring independence.

What I'm saying is if this is a thing that can happen, they are asking to be murdered.

It's more like landing on an uninhabited island but yes :murder:

would still be the probable result. I'd like all possible options to happen because more things mean more fun.

# ¿ Jan 23, 2017 13:15

Splicer: Oct 16, 2006; from hell's heart I cast at thee
🧙🐀🧹🌙🪄🐸

Arglebargle III posted:

Volcano Removal -> Deep Crust Engineering
Advances in material technology and deep-shaft mining techniques allow geo-engineering at previously unthinkable depths and temperatures. Magma hotspots can now be exploited, suppressed, or even relocated.

Toxic Kelp Removal -> Ocean Ecology Management
Given enough processing power, networked sensors and distributed stations, even the ocean currents can be managed to a fine level of control.

Glacier Removal -> Climate Control Network
Orbital systems of mirrors and shades can effect dramatic changes in planetary climates, when managed properly.

Mountain Removal -> Planetary Resurfacing
With the advent of clean fusion, automation, and matter compression technologies, it was only a matter of time before mountain top removal became mountain range removal.

Dense Jungle Removal: Selective Defoliants
Thorough cataloging, gene sequencing, and computer modeling of exobotanical ecosystems, coupled with gene editing and dispersal mechanisms, will allow us to reshape alien plant communities to our liking.

Quicksand Basin Removal -> Soil Remediation
The process of soil deposition normally takes millions of years. With advanced fracking, chemical engineering, and hydraulic management technologies even the poorest substrate can be turned into fertile topsoil.

Noxious Swamp Removal -> Xeno-Hydraulic Mastery
Sentient races have been reclaiming swampland for thousands of years. A coordinated system of modular aquaducts, pump stations, chemical remediation crawlers and automated soil compactors can reclaim land at unprecedented speeds.

Deep Sinkhole Removal -> Subterranean Colonization
Many planets exhibit extensive subsurface voids. Subterranean exploration, exploitation, and construction techniques can greatly increase the habitable area of some worlds.

Milky Moor posted:

I think it would be really cool if tile blockers gave some kind of bonus to the tile once they were 'fixed', like someone said earlier. Kelp gives extra food, volcanoes give extra energy, mountains = minerals?

This how Endless Space did it and it was one of the good things about the game. Dirt tier planets early game became god planets late game because e.g. Kessler Syndrome went from "Can't build orbitals" to "Automated space robots mining for minerals and old tech".

Splicer fucked around with this message at 15:03 on Jan 24, 2017

# ¿ Jan 24, 2017 14:56

Splicer: Oct 16, 2006; from hell's heart I cast at thee
🧙🐀🧹🌙🪄🐸

Don't smash the mountain

Hollow it out and turn it into a giant city covered in vertical farms!

Splicer fucked around with this message at 17:06 on Jan 24, 2017

# ¿ Jan 24, 2017 17:02

Splicer: Oct 16, 2006; from hell's heart I cast at thee
🧙🐀🧹🌙🪄🐸

RabidWeasel posted:

Tile blockers being things you actually build directly on top of (giving unique building options, or beneficial modifiers to the base terrain) instead of removing and then building on the empty space is such a good and fairly obvious idea I don't know why I haven't seen anyone suggest it yet.

Reasons it's good:

Planets feel less homogenous as a whole

Individual planets are more distinct from one another

Blockers feel like less of a 'gently caress you' because you know that they will pay off and give you bonuses later on

Due to the above, blocker removal tech (which I guess would be 'permit building on blocker tile' tech now) is a more attractive choice even if you don't actively need it

It's also sci fi as gently caress, I'm basically imagining volcanoes being turned into a SMAC Thermal Borehole and it owns and I want that to be a thing.

It could be a mix of both. Volcanoes you build on, dangerous animals you just murder for a once off food boost (or build a nature reserve on)

# ¿ Jan 24, 2017 21:29

Splicer: Oct 16, 2006; from hell's heart I cast at thee
🧙🐀🧹🌙🪄🐸

Next week's dev blog just a shot of various Developer Dillz

# ¿ Jan 26, 2017 13:14

Splicer: Oct 16, 2006; from hell's heart I cast at thee
🧙🐀🧹🌙🪄🐸

Morrow posted:

Energy storage is, in fact, a massive RL issue. Not being able to save up a ton of energy is pretty realistic.

The odd bit is that it also seems synonymous with currency in the game, of sorts, which is a bad currency, but meh.

Beyond Earth did the same. Take previous non-space game's resource system, Ctrl-R Money -> Energy seems to be A Thing.

# ¿ Jan 26, 2017 19:11

Splicer: Oct 16, 2006; from hell's heart I cast at thee
🧙🐀🧹🌙🪄🐸

Purge the xeno scum.

# ¿ Jan 27, 2017 13:39

Splicer: Oct 16, 2006; from hell's heart I cast at thee
🧙🐀🧹🌙🪄🐸

Forcibly resettle the biggest troublemakers onto you shitholiest planet, release that planet as a vassal.
Which my autocorrect changed to "hassle" which also works.

# ¿ Jan 27, 2017 13:46

Splicer: Oct 16, 2006; from hell's heart I cast at thee
🧙🐀🧹🌙🪄🐸

GlyphGryph posted:

Is this... bad?

I have found a bit of neutral unclaimed territory can often be a good thing.

I had a game where there was a chasm of worthless systems between myself and another somewhat unfriendly empire for ages. After a while of us basically ignoring each other they apparently warmed up to me and we federationed up. It was a neat change to the usual.

# ¿ Jan 27, 2017 16:29

Splicer: Oct 16, 2006; from hell's heart I cast at thee
🧙🐀🧹🌙🪄🐸

GlyphGryph posted:

Communal and Solitary should work based on adjacent pops. +2%/-3% per pop.

For xenophobes, alien pops don't count for communal and count double for solitary unless enslaved. For any pops, robots and droids don't count for either and synths depend on policy.

This would be cool because it gives you a playstyle with a reduced incentive to remove tile blockers, since your guys are actually super happy about being surrounded by giant carnivorous life forms instead of their friends or family. More importantly, a bunch of decadent solitary humans only happy when they're living on planets with a minimum 2:1 enslaved robot:utopian human ratio is basically Asimov's Spacers.

# ¿ Jan 27, 2017 23:00

Splicer: Oct 16, 2006; from hell's heart I cast at thee
🧙🐀🧹🌙🪄🐸

LogisticEarth posted:

Magic gravity is fine in sci-fi, but poo poo like the 2001 space station and O'Neill Cylinders just look rad though. My favorite station in the game is the little pre-FTL Early Space Age station. All the rest just seem kinda static.

It would probably be too low a return for the graphical work needed but having multiple space habitat types would be baller. Start with your old spire-in-the-middle-of-a-wheel with middling habitability and pops. A later Massive Construction engineering research tech lets you build O'Neill cylinders (big pop good habitability), or researching Artificial Gravity in physics lets you build flat stations like the ones in the screenshots(low pop Gaia world).

# ¿ Jan 30, 2017 16:44

Splicer: Oct 16, 2006; from hell's heart I cast at thee
🧙🐀🧹🌙🪄🐸

The Cheshire Cat posted:

I know this post is from like 20 pages ago, but I was catching up on the thread and this reminded me of something I found weird with the game ever since release - why don't pops die of old age? It would add a natural churning of pops to your planets (so you'd see more diversity in species even one your oldest planets), and it would make the various age traits more meaningful, since they would apply to all pops rather than just leaders. It might be annoying to lose production in a tile when a pop dies, sure, but maybe the game could handle that by having new pops grow outside the planetary grid, and if someone dies while they're still growing, they will move to that tile to replace them (if they finish growing before anyone dies, they'd just occupy a new tile).

A pop represents a few hundred million people.

# ¿ Jan 30, 2017 19:45

Splicer: Oct 16, 2006; from hell's heart I cast at thee
🧙🐀🧹🌙🪄🐸

ChrisBTY posted:

A war against my allies would be ugly, as they surround me. And my federation probably consists of 3 of the 4 most powerful non-fallen empires on the map at this point, including myself. I thought I could just turn enough of the map into a federation that I could win that way. But that doesn't look like it is about to happen.
Maybe I will leave the federation and start by erasing the (now significantly less) massive Fanatical purifier empire I've been beating up for the last 50 years or so. I initially joined the federation back when I couldn't take them on my own. But now I can. Easily.

Thanks.

"Liberation" is used in the American sense. Pick a random empire, "liberate" as many planets as you can under a puppet government, vassalise, repeat.

# ¿ Jan 31, 2017 09:43

Splicer: Oct 16, 2006; from hell's heart I cast at thee
🧙🐀🧹🌙🪄🐸

ProfessorCirno posted:

Note that war costs are absolutely absurd, so most of the time you can't just force an entire empire to be your vassal, even if you literally could - and likely will have to - manually conquer every single planet on your own.

Yeah, that's why I said as many planets as you can. In my experience that's usually about 3 tops, but I play on smallish maps so I don't know if that scales.

Heartcatch posted:

Been sick the last couple of days, so I haven't kept up with the thread as closely.

Espionage/sabotage/assassinations would go a very long way in making the diplomatic game far less stale. For example, assassinating leaders of certain government types would be more effective in certain cases, whereas culturally co-opting other societies could work in other cases. As it stands, the only real use of the diplomacy panel at the moment is to decide whether or not you wish to crush another empire at that particular point in time. Perhaps if interstellar trade were a thing as well.

There's so much stuff you could mess with in other empires. There's the standard spying on/stealing/sabotaging research, spying on fleet composition, sabotaging buildings etc, but also sowing dissent to create factions, starting rumours to affect empires' opinions of each other, murdering/kidnapping/defecting leaders, and that's not including the potential for all of these to trigger story events. There's so much cool existing stuff for espionage to hook into.

Splicer fucked around with this message at 13:49 on Jan 31, 2017

# ¿ Jan 31, 2017 13:45

Splicer: Oct 16, 2006; from hell's heart I cast at thee
🧙🐀🧹🌙🪄🐸

GunnerJ posted:

So, I started a new game, tried out using warp drive, playing on a spiral galaxy (I knew what this combination would mean and kinda liked the idea of the challenge), finally got to send a fleet to the other spiral arm to kill off some space bugs, on the way there I made contact with a new empire that promptly closed its border to me, trapping my fleet on the other arm. In the middle of a war I had going on elsewhere.

Uh. What do you do about this besides reload?? I tried war declaring just to get my fleet back but its independence was guaranteed by an advanced start empire that kicked my teeth in, making the maneuver counterproductive.

There's a little circley arrow in the top left of each fleet menu. Click that, and it will try to send your guys back to your nearest port. If they can't get there they will (I think) go MIA for a bit and then re-appear at a spaceport.

# ¿ Jan 31, 2017 21:16

Splicer: Oct 16, 2006; from hell's heart I cast at thee
🧙🐀🧹🌙🪄🐸

StrixNebulosa posted:

Listen, I didn't buy this game to play it, I bought it so I could complain about it.

This but all games. Actually playing anything would take away from valuable complaining time.

# ¿ Feb 2, 2017 09:54

Splicer: Oct 16, 2006; from hell's heart I cast at thee
🧙🐀🧹🌙🪄🐸

Psychotic Weasel posted:

Hardly suprising but I can't quite see what's so utopian about that launch trailer...

It's the digital consciousness ascension. Those data banks are full of happy people doing happy things.

# ¿ Feb 2, 2017 15:16

Splicer: Oct 16, 2006; from hell's heart I cast at thee
🧙🐀🧹🌙🪄🐸

BabyFur Denny posted:

once you are in that data bank, the sys admin just updates your happiness value to Integer.MAX_VALUE. Instant utopia! Just for gods sake don't get any happier than that.

I ticked the ironman checkbox when I ascended and let me tell you, I am regretting it.

# ¿ Feb 2, 2017 15:51

Splicer: Oct 16, 2006; from hell's heart I cast at thee
🧙🐀🧹🌙🪄🐸

Archonex posted:

Do we know if you can build more than one ring world?

Because if it's feasible to do so then yeah, i'd pick the ring world over the Sentry. You could literally just huddle up in one corner of the galaxy with a dozen ring worlds producing tech, minerals, and energy and watch the rest of the galaxy burn until it was time to intervene. Why squabble over worlds and resources when you can just build most of them?

Y'know, things that a Fallen Empire does.

I really like the ever increasing "He who fights monsters" nature of this game.

# ¿ Feb 2, 2017 17:49

Splicer: Oct 16, 2006; from hell's heart I cast at thee
🧙🐀🧹🌙🪄🐸

Wiz posted:

People are a lot less willing to accept losing planets when they didn't have a chance to fight back. It's the same with say losing territory through espionage/sabotage, things that you can only fight back against 'indirectly' tend to be very frustrating when they have a large impact on the player's experience.

Right so I missed the stream due to being gainfully employed, someone tell me if factions that want independence are still a thing. If so couldn't this kind of thing be a faction thing? Instead of wanting independence they want to join another empire because you're a pile of dicks/bunch of annoying peaceniks? Or wanting to join your empire because their current empire is a pile of dicks/a bunch of annoying peaceniks? If I'm just tootling along and suddenly random planets decide to join up with some other guy out of nowhere that would suck, but if I've had a faction clamouring to leave for several decades and getting stronger and stronger then I've had a chance to "fight" for it and chosen not to/failed.

e:Oh wait I missed this.

Office Sheep posted:

You could use the faction system. If the neighbouring system has great happiness a faction that wants to make the planet change emipres emerges. If the faction is strong enough on a planet liberation only wars only empires can annex that specific planet.

Edit: You could also make the pops on the planet happy about the annexation instead of upset.

Wiz posted:

Yes, that is a fine enough idea, or the planet rebelling and defecting if the rebellion isn't put down. The planet defecting because you built a galactic rock concert stage though, ehh....

Yes this.

Also let me fund enemy factions to increase their influence please.

Splicer fucked around with this message at 22:26 on Feb 2, 2017

# ¿ Feb 2, 2017 22:19

Splicer: Oct 16, 2006; from hell's heart I cast at thee
🧙🐀🧹🌙🪄🐸

Wiz posted:

When I say 'fight back' I literally mean 'fight back' as in shoot lasers at it.

Historically 4Xs have very few satisfying non-laser based options. This one has a neat faction system that could potentially be a satisfying solution.

Also having non laser based options is more grand strategyery than just laser based options.

# ¿ Feb 3, 2017 19:58

Splicer: Oct 16, 2006; from hell's heart I cast at thee
🧙🐀🧹🌙🪄🐸

How does fanaticism work with the new pops? Can a pop be fanatical or does that still count as two dots?

# ¿ Feb 4, 2017 18:16

Splicer: Oct 16, 2006; from hell's heart I cast at thee
🧙🐀🧹🌙🪄🐸

GlyphGryph posted:

with the faction rework i hope they remove that mechanic because it was super dumb.

Why is it super dumb?

# ¿ Feb 5, 2017 23:12

Splicer: Oct 16, 2006; from hell's heart I cast at thee
🧙🐀🧹🌙🪄🐸

GlyphGryph posted:

Happiness based events. Faction stuff that is influenced in and based on happiness. Getting treated differently by other Empires, having aliens breaking down your doors to get in (not for the mechanical benefit, either, but just because it would make me happy to know that my people are so happy everyone else wants a piece of it). I don't want happiness to be powerful, I want it to be engaging. Completely different.

I don't know how you got what you wrote from my posts, but I think you completely missed my point.

Ah, your original posts read as the bonuses being actively detrimental and should be removed, rather than being insufficiently interesting and should be added too. All the interesting stuff happens with low happiness (factions getting pissy etc), the bonus for extra happiness is just so that the overflow isn't completely wasted. All of your post would be cool additions.

GlyphGryph posted:

Based on the Wiz comment that players dont like problems with counters that arent shooty laser based, combined with him not liking victories that arent military based, combined with him not liking the idea of victory being applied in a non zero sum way... I do have a lot of hope for this game, but satisfying pacifist themed gameplay is definitely not among them. I sort of get the feeling that Wiz basically doesnt believe players who like non military solutions and goals exist, or least in numbers significant enough to try and cater to. (I base this on him actually questoning whether people who like economic and tech victories in other games are real)

Even if he was convinced they were worth appealing too I am not sure he grasps the mindset well enough to design as well for it as he does for the rest, but hey, I would love to be pleasantly surprised here!

Yeah, I've been most enjoying this game as a procedurally generated Space Empire RPG, which is why it starts to drag at the end where it becomes a not very engaging wargame. I was hoping for better endgame RPG options where I win because I am the best at government, but I get the impression best at government is only going to be a game winner in the sense that it's a potential route to being best at wargame.

# ¿ Feb 6, 2017 09:46

Splicer: Oct 16, 2006; from hell's heart I cast at thee
🧙🐀🧹🌙🪄🐸

Sperglord Firecock posted:

drat I was hoping someone would get my Zardoz reference.

I did and nodded approvingly.

# ¿ Feb 6, 2017 11:53

Splicer: Oct 16, 2006; from hell's heart I cast at thee
🧙🐀🧹🌙🪄🐸

Aethernet posted:

That Psi event is cool. It looks like they're taking a lot of material out of the tech tree and distributing into other avenues you can pursue. This is good - it avoids the end-game situation where you've got amazing psychic powers, space marines and xenomorphs AND super-robots because you've run out of other techs to research. More empire specialisation is a good thing.

Yes. It also helps avoid the opposite problem of cursing out the research tree for refusing to pop stuff you want for a theme run.

I complain a lot but that's because 99% of everything in the game/announced is awesome and/or makes me hype as hell.

# ¿ Feb 6, 2017 14:32

Splicer: Oct 16, 2006; from hell's heart I cast at thee
🧙🐀🧹🌙🪄🐸

ChickenWing posted:

help goons, I think I may have screwed up

There was a post a while back that said that when starting out, it was a good idea to colonize a minimal number of planets and take advantage of the fact that your research costs didn't go up to out-tech the other empires. How long can you extend this strategy?

As one of the people posting that, not long. The most important thing early game is to grab territory, then you can backfill planets at leisure. The low colonisation strategy's strength is that it spreads you faster than trying to grab territory through colonisation, the tech boost is a bonus. Once you've staked out your empire start colonizing in earnest and removing redundant stations while leveraging that intitial tech boost for all its worth.

1.5 looks like it will have legitimate options for low territory empires though.

# ¿ Feb 6, 2017 15:49

Splicer: Oct 16, 2006; from hell's heart I cast at thee
🧙🐀🧹🌙🪄🐸

What's that fanatical world crushing hand icon there? Is that the new icon for conformist (or whatever not egalitarian is called now)? It looks baller.

Teeheehee, "Montly Influence".

# ¿ Feb 7, 2017 13:01

Splicer: Oct 16, 2006; from hell's heart I cast at thee
🧙🐀🧹🌙🪄🐸

Roland Jones posted:

Authoritarian, yeah. Egalitarian is a set of balanced scales, meanwhile.

Also, another Exploration tweet.
https://twitter.com/dmoregard/status/828936680568651779
I mentioned this one earlier in the thread after seeing it in the stream; it seems necessary, or at least really good, for early anomaly research because the failure rates seem higher.

Its usefulness will drop off rapidly as you run out of unsurveyed systems though. Unless this also increases the number of "Hey we found a thing" events that seem to pop up every so often.

# ¿ Feb 7, 2017 13:36

Splicer: Oct 16, 2006; from hell's heart I cast at thee
🧙🐀🧹🌙🪄🐸

GunnerJ posted:

At this point I kinda feel like if "Purity" failed the test for a tradition tree to be useful to multiple ethos because it's basically "xenophobia, the traditions" then Diplomacy is sort of the same for xenophiles.

Diplomacy is useful for anyone wanting to have any friends at all, but especially useful for anyone who wants to be friends with everyone. Something called purity sounds like it's only useful for someone who explicitly wants to murder everyone, which is a smaller scope.

# ¿ Feb 7, 2017 15:02

Splicer: Oct 16, 2006; from hell's heart I cast at thee
🧙🐀🧹🌙🪄🐸

LordMune posted:

Fun development fact!

Sapience is the more correct term for self-awareness and higher cognition, but "sentience" is an extremely common mis-conflation of the concept in sci-fi works. We had a brief discussion about it within the team a few months before release, and decided to err on the side of tropes.

A strictly literal reading implies that first you create an a conscious, thinking, feeling AI, and then leave it in a dark box cut off all from all input for years if not decades until you finally get around to giving it eyeballs.

No wonder they're pissed.

# ¿ Feb 9, 2017 14:18

Adbot: ADBOT LOVES YOU

# ¿ Apr 28, 2024 15:53

Splicer: Oct 16, 2006; from hell's heart I cast at thee
🧙🐀🧹🌙🪄🐸

Wiz posted:

Eating plantoids is canonically vegan in Stellaris.

I want a "balanced diet" achievement for eating one of every phenotype in the same game.

# ¿ Feb 9, 2017 17:47

The Something Awful Forums > Discussion > Video Games > Stellaris - To Serve Man

«‹›22 »