|
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. I hate to say this, but MOO3 did this in an alright way. Planets have zones of various terrain types and you built administrative, production and mining/farming developments on those zones with various upgrades possible as well. Population was automatically assigned by the system. Maybe the way to go is to just remove planetary tiles and have the number of pops impact the overall efficiency of all developments. Densely populated worlds will be able to support massive factories and lab developments while sparsely populated worlds with good environments can be used as bread baskets.
|
#
¿
Jan 22, 2017 13:30
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ May 5, 2024 22:32 |
|
|
Honestly Wiz just needs to take a page from Aurora 4X when it comes to ship design. You can't half rear end this stuff.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 22, 2017 17:25
|
|
|
I'd rather if tile blockers had some other use besides 'remove'. Alphamod does this by giving all the tile blockers adjacency bonuses but I'd rather if you had special buildings you could build on top of them instead (and only on top of them). Giant geothermal generators on volcano's. Xeno Zoo's on dangerous wildlife. Defensive fortifications on mountain ranges and so on.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 24, 2017 07:58
|
|
|
Wiz posted:Do I have your permission to steal this? While you're at it can you group tile removal tech together so it's not an entire tech for 1 tile type? Or at least reduce their cost significantly.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 24, 2017 12:51
|
|
|
Space habitats under the current requirement (research level 5 spaceports) is just going to be a mineral inflation mechanic in the mid game that translates into broken levels of economic dominance in the lategame. We already rush up that particular tech tree to get battleships and there is literally no reason not to spam habitats everywhere you can because the research multiplier changed to settled systems rather than individual planets so you'll always be rewarded for filling out systems you've already colonized. I'm going to liken it to the trade system in Sword of the Stars because Wiz himself made a mod to reduce that tedium but now he's putting it into Stellaris. The argument is basically this. You can ignore orbitals if you want but it means you lose to someone who doesn't because it gives you an immediately effective and cascading economic advantage.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 26, 2017 15:30
|
|
|
Wiz posted:You're right, if you make multiple logical leaps and assumptions then things will turn out exactly as those logical leaps and assumptions predicted. I am right because so far you haven't implied a strategic resource cost to limit the number of orbitals an empire can support. If they are spammable 12 pop planets then they are effectively no different from SotS broken trade system. I'd love to be wrong of course.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 26, 2017 15:36
|
|
|
Wiz posted:We do dev diaries on features long before balancing/iteration on those features are done. We're going to be testing, evaluating, and if needed, putting limits in place. It's fine to be concerned about the balance of a feature, it's just tiring when people make 100% certain predictions about how something is going to turn out when that something isn't even done yet. That's fair. I didn't consider consumer goods. And I'll try to moderate my tone in the future, I didn't mean to sound like a Paradox forums poster. Demiurge4 fucked around with this message at 16:07 on Jan 26, 2017 |
|
#
¿
Jan 26, 2017 15:57
|
|
|
3 DONG HORSE posted:Ordering a glass of milk is going to be a risky game in Stellaris I only drink sapient-free milk.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 30, 2017 10:05
|
|
|
LordMune posted:Personally I'm not a huge fan of letting the player do things they've explicitly opted out of being able to do because reasons, but implementing anything like that would be Wiz' call anyway. It seems like there's a lot of bugs with events in Stellaris, have you done a full overhaul or can we expect a bunch of weird ones to remain? The precursor questlines have all been broken forever. Also for 1.5 have you done anything with the drone/crystal policies? The drone bounty one is especially dumb and an obvious layover from a very early iteration.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 30, 2017 10:29
|
|
|
canepazzo posted:https://twitter.com/StellarisGame/status/827075033356959744 Quit stalling 
|
|
#
¿
Feb 2, 2017 10:13
|
|
|
Lol if they just release the DLC during the stream.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 2, 2017 12:38
|
|
|
Trogdos! posted:They'll just announce the name and theme of the expansion, what features it has and then throw some cinematic youtube trailer at us. No release date. Ascension is a poor name for your first expansion DLC. What are you gonna call the next one? Federations? It's like starting a TV show by resolving a galactic threat in the first season, where are you gonna go from there?
|
|
#
¿
Feb 2, 2017 13:10
|
|
|
Now I have to build my Dyson sphere in the Sol system inhabited by primitive humans. Don't worry, I'll send them a note that we're going to be paving over their sun so they have time to move.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 2, 2017 19:28
|
|
|
The free colony ship should really be one of the first expansion rewards.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 3, 2017 13:56
|
|
|
So what happens if you purge your psionic pops?
|
|
#
¿
Feb 6, 2017 13:43
|
|
|
Roland Jones posted:Purges are species-targeted now, and I don't think you can purge your primary species, so. I guess any non-primary ones you purge are gone, and that's it? What if the trait distinguishes them as a sub-species?
|
|
#
¿
Feb 6, 2017 14:15
|
|
|
Migration really needs its own overhaul. The attraction mechanic is completely arcane and incomprehensible.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 7, 2017 10:31
|
|
|
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=B4Uf9rsBbhc&t=93s
|
|
#
¿
Feb 7, 2017 18:25
|
|
|
LordMune posted:Fun development fact! I've always subscribed to the Orion Burger definition.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 9, 2017 12:30
|
|
|
I'm a little disappointed that the psychic and cybernetic story tree's seem to locked by materialism/spiritualism, but I can see why as it pertains to the victory condition. I hope it's still possible to see my pops develop psychic traits or cybernetically alter their bodies in defiance of government policy.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 9, 2017 13:13
|
|
|
Wiz posted:No, you can still make robots as non materialist, so long as you're not spiritualist. Androids? Will robot colonies be a materialist only perk?
|
|
#
¿
Feb 10, 2017 09:22
|
|
|
Anticheese posted:By embracing factions, can we get multiple fanatic ethoses? No you just move your 3 points around. If you embrace a faction and gain an ethos point in one type then the one with the least attraction in your empire is removed.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 10, 2017 09:49
|
|
|
I hope individual army units become part of factions, that will make mutinies and rebellions really interesting when your defensive regiments switch sides. It would tie in nicely with battle thralls too.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 14, 2017 10:53
|
|
|
Bloodly posted:That feels overly picky and annoying to deal with. How would you flip them back? COULD you flip them back? I'm easily imagining a case where the randomly-decided faction of the troops which you were asked to recruit all end up not being on-message and only making matters worse, forcing you to recruit more and more till you finally get a decent force, and killing your treasury and wasting your time all the while. And if there is a rebellion thanks to the unrest, then you lose the planet. It's probably too Rome-esque, yeah. What if a percentage of army units on a planet just flip when a faction revolts? So if you have 10 pops on a planet and 6 of them revolt, they'll spawn the regular revolutionary armies but 60% of the armies stationed on the planet that are the same species as the pops flip with them. This makes it so that a subservient species of battle thralls will always be loyal against other rebellions (but you're hosed if they rebel themselves).
|
|
#
¿
Feb 14, 2017 11:57
|
|
|
Stone Age species really didn't make sense before so this is a good change.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 16, 2017 11:10
|
|
|
Kitchner posted:Worth noting left into the screenshots like the tease he is, Wiz has shown there's a new "ethics" type in edition to the 8 that already exist. Since it looks like a honeycomb and the next dev diary will mention hive minds I suspect it's that specifically hive minds don't have ethics of their own, because if youre playing a race of insects that are all drones controlled by a queen, why would they have opinions of their own? Hive minds would be cool if they feature castes. Indoctrination as a xenophobic empire should probably feature something similar. If successful it imparts a trait that can change based on your other ethics. So if you are spiritual the newly indoctrinated pops could view themselves as inherently inferior in gods great design, making them productive and reasonably happy with their circumstance. While if you were materialist or egalitarian they might resent their status in the cold machine of society.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 16, 2017 13:42
|
|
|
Wiz posted:It was a really old system from early development, before pre-sentients and other primitives were made. I had always planned to replace them, just wasn't high enough priority until now. Can you expand on these legacy features? I've complained a lot about the weird policies you get from events (drone bounty stands out) and it just seems so weird things like this made it into release at all when you're cutting it all down now.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 16, 2017 20:59
|
|
|
Kitchner posted:I honestly think this is shaping up to be not only the best Paradox DLC of all time, but the best DLC in any game of all time. Basically Stellaris 2.0 "How it was supposed to be released".
|
|
#
¿
Feb 20, 2017 15:54
|
|
|
I'm really ridiculously hyped for Utopia now. I might have to start an events mod just to pass the time.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 21, 2017 08:41
|
|
|
A Craver build (Endless Space) could be a fun campaign with hive minded. Rapid breeders, super aggressive but technologically stunted. You process and eat every species you conquer and must be perpetually at war to feed the hive.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 21, 2017 08:44
|
|
|
The ascetic choice for hive minds is probably just a consumer goods modifier to save you minerals.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 21, 2017 13:46
|
|
|
Make hive mind pops act like the shrimps in District 9 when removed from their hive. If you're an egalitarian xenophile you just gotta live with your bum space hobos that produce nothing. And a question. Does the game recognise different hive mind pops? If I am a hive mind and I conquer pops from another hive mind, do they just integrate or does it only work with my own species?
|
|
#
¿
Feb 23, 2017 10:51
|
|
|
I think an interesting take on Hive minds would be to treat each planet as a separate entity within the greater whole. If you start as a hive mind you get a max size homeworld, but every colonized system is a sector of its own with no direct control.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 23, 2017 14:27
|
|
|
Taear posted:An interesting idea but gameplay wise that'd be boring as gently caress! In fact you'd presume that hives don't have a limit on worlds controlled and can't make sectors at all. Which I'd quite enjoy. Under current mechanics sure, but I hope they don't give you an increased core planets limit if you're a hivemind, planet management is the worst part of the game. Instead they should add some interesting event tables for hive minds. When you create a sector you fracture the whole a little bit to give a part of the hive basic autonomy and there should be an event chain that deals with the consequences of that, possibly as part of an ascension perk tree.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 23, 2017 14:46
|
|
|
It would be cool if you could trait limit certain improvements like labs to require cybernetics. It would also be neat if that event could be a crisis point between 'natural' humans and these freaky cybernetic demons, Miriam would hate that.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 2, 2017 13:06
|
|
|
Can enhancing pops be made less bothersome? What if the project part is just to create a prototype and then you can pay resources to turn pops into this new type on a per pop basis or a planet at a time.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 2, 2017 14:00
|
|
|
GotLag posted:I'm still learning not to put too much trust in threat values. A fallen empire woke up, and I decided to just try attacking them with the intention of reloading after my fleet was destroyed. Imagine my surprise when my 100k 16/16/32/32 blob annihilated their 140k fleet (albeit with only 17 battleships left at the end). Did I just get lucky in that kinetics are the best counter to fallen empires? It depends on the empire in question. Depending on their type they use different designs and I assume you went against a shield heavy AE that your kinetics could eat through in short order.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 6, 2017 08:16
|
|
|
GunnerJ posted:Requiring admirals for significant fleet sizes always seemed like a better way to address this. Fleets without admirals have to be pretty small, size of fleets scales with admiral skill, etc. You can only have as many of anything resembling a deathball as you have admirals, and each fleet is still going to be smaller than the monsters we have now. Make it apply per battle instead or you can just dump multiple tiny fleets into one big battle. If instead the commanding admiral in a battle can only handle 20 or so ship capacity per level (more with tech and traits?) without taking accuracy penalties only then do you create a system that doesn't reward tedious fiddling to bypass it.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 6, 2017 13:08
|
|
|
Splicer posted:Making it apply per system would have a similar effect (Using the best admiral in the system as the commanding admiral for fleet cap purposes). Also allows you to bump up the cap depending on how good your planet or space station or defence station is. That's harder to do because you'd have to treat the entire system as an engagement zone rather than the way it works now. That's not necessarily a bad thing but it would completely change the game if any opposed forces in a system automatically engaged and make bypassing defenses and playing cat and mouse impossible.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 6, 2017 13:31
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ May 5, 2024 22:32 |
|
|
It would be nice if there was some way to keep colonists on new planets. So even if I colonize a lovely 20% habitability planet with my main species they'll stick around until I gene mod them. Call it colonial spirit or something. In fact, just disallow migration offworld while it still has the disassembled colony ship, that'll fix it.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 8, 2017 20:00
|
|