|
Tuxedo Catfish posted:I have objectively incorrect opinions about this cool and good game I fixed it for you
|
#
¿
Jan 20, 2017 21:38
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ May 3, 2024 16:17 |
|
|
Why in the hell would you ever want to remove the ship designer? Wiz, if you ever feel the need to mess with the designer, do the opposite. Go apeshit. Turn this into SoTS. Do not listen to these bads. Planetary combat is pretty lame though.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 22, 2017 04:25
|
|
|
GotLag posted:I haven't even played a game yet and I've already made a lovely mod: Homeworld emblem pack. This is a good mod. RabidWeasel posted:
I would argue that planet tiles are a simple optimization problem that I totally ignore until I unlock the next power plant upgrade and that ship designs are interesting to work with now. Funny how that works. My actual belief is that both systems are cool and good, though in need of some polish and expansion, and that anything that allows personalization and player input is good in Stellaris, noted space empire roleplaying game.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 22, 2017 12:37
|
|
but it's literally just a simple optimisation problem you totally ignore except when you unlock new tech. As someone else said planetary tiles are similar but I feel like that has more potential to actually be interesting to work with in future (though there is an annoyingly high level of micromanagement required if you want to be optimal) and in any case removing it would require a total rework of pops while removing the ship designer would only require a few small changes to techs
|
Yes but they'll tend to close to shorter ranges so they can fire more of their weapons, meaning they're more vulnerable to being swarmed by smaller ships, tend to lose tracking on the spinal gun more easily in larger fights, especially if said gun has a charge time (which is a thing I think needs to be looked at, as it renders Lances and Emitters kind of terrible in endgame fights), are just generally eclipsed by a pair of large mounts. Carriers, meanwhile, are lacking in decent offensive options already so you want them as far back as possible, and so they'll close to max range and stop if most of their other guns are support oriented. This keeps the carrier safe because not only is it screened by the melee, if you start losing that it's also screened by your combat battleships, and since it has a wider cone of fire it's more likely to get off shots with the energy-based spinal mounts. Test it out, spinal mounts on carriers is actually pretty legit.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 22, 2017 21:47
|
|
|
Coolguye posted:this went from funny observation to weird goony conspiracy theory really fast Are you really surprised, given where you're posting?
|
|
#
¿
Jan 24, 2017 09:08
|
|
|
That was one thing Endless Space did well - terrain features had both negative and positive effects. The research you did to exploit them simply removed the negative effect while keeping the positive, IE building a protected city on a volcanic world so you could have higher population and still maintain your cool geothermal plants, poo poo like that.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 24, 2017 11:29
|
|
|
Truga posted:Well, the thing in stellaris kinda works like that. Blocked tiles are blocked until researched and removed, and then their resources can be exploited better and the land populated more efficiently. Yeah, the point of that post is that, in ES, terrain features (if you could call them that) on worlds always had fixed bonuses that were always useful and fixed negatives that always made sense. They were more like planetary traits than anything. Stellaris has nothing like this, and it might not be a bad thing to look at for flavor, though it's a pretty minor thing in the first place and not currently worth the time in the face of the other expansion the game hopefully gets. Though holy poo poo it feels weird comparing Endless Space favorably to anything.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 24, 2017 12:23
|
|
|
Afterburners are never good.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 4, 2017 06:56
|
|
|
Yeah, thanks to the way combat mechanics in this game work, all afterburners on corvettes does is make sure your corvettes get ripped apart by those missiles you're all convinced are useless even faster than normal because none of your anti missile ships can keep up. And if you put afterburners on everything to counteract this, then the guy with shield capacitors curbstomps your fleet. You could sorta make a case for afterburners in the early game before PD is a thing, except that then you're researching afterburners when you have vastly more important things to research and you are gimping yourself. In short: Afterburners are bad, like this thread.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 4, 2017 07:16
|
|
|
Yeah, armored cruisers is likely the only thing available to you at that stage of the game that isn't going to result in a near even trade of fleet strength when you go at him, so long as he keeps all those corvettes in one fleet. That's probably your best bet. The only reason I'd use any corvettes when you do commit is to draw fire off the cruisers for a few precious days, but depending on your armor tech you may not need any.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 4, 2017 11:00
|
|
|
A combination of both is what I'd go for. Probably primarily lasers on the cruisers since they'll be out front, and then if you have a group of destroyers with missiles sitting pretty behind them you'll likely clean up pretty handily. Missiles are pretty poo poo against larger fleets in general, but they can absolutely wreck corvette swarms thanks to the range advantage and negation of evasion, combined with the fact that corvettes literally cannot have PD. Missiles are a good choice here. Obviously you'll want the lasers in your small and some of your medium mounts, with the missiles in all the large mounts and whatever mediums are left.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 4, 2017 11:28
|
|
|
Coolguye posted:battle report here: 
|
|
#
¿
Feb 5, 2017 00:05
|
|
|
Nuclearmonkee posted:Space spergs are the worst.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 10, 2017 22:43
|
|
|
Rakthar posted:It's always nice when people drop by threads full of content and engaging in lively discussion only to post crap like this. Thanks for your contribution. I post in here pretty often, is it okay for me to post something like that? Because holy poo poo is he right.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 14, 2017 09:01
|
|
|
Korgan posted:Please check your post history My God It's full of 
|
|
#
¿
Feb 14, 2017 10:10
|
|
|
Rakthar posted:A regular feature of Something Awful for 10+ years running is that every time there's a thread with some detailed discussion (mod stuff, a game that draws grogs, etc) the yospos / ycs superstars come in saying how spergy everyone is. No, it's sperg when all of your ideas and criticisms are universally terrible and your head is too far up your own rear end to understand that or pay attention when multiple people explain to you why this is the case. Talking about cool space poo poo in a cool space game is just being nerdy. Being completely unable to grasp that the game you are discussing is not EU4 while speaking to said game's lead developer on multiple, frequent occasions is sperg. You are sperging. Stop sperging.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 14, 2017 21:05
|
|
|
They are, so that chart is either out of date or incorrect.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 15, 2017 03:16
|
|
|
Yeah, I usually play large spirals and still tend to run into unclaimed territory late game. That said, Glyph's idea about better hyperdrives opening up more and more lanes from stars is actually pretty legit.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 15, 2017 07:21
|
|
|
Chuck Buried Treasure posted:Paradox never announces a release date until like a month at most ahead of the launch. If it's announced this week it must be closer to launch than we realize/expect. QFT Bohemian Nights posted:so when am I getting a legend of galactic heroes ship and/or species mod There already is one for the Alliance floating around the workshop. No Boring Gay German portraits to go with it, though.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 27, 2017 01:57
|
|
|
GotLag posted:How useful is flak? When should/shouldn't I mount it, and on what ships? Flak is hands down the best PD/Antifighter in the game, with the best range and hit rate. I always have some Flak in my fleets, just in case.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 6, 2017 23:04
|
|
|
They mimic breathing in order to put the fleshlings at ease.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 9, 2017 08:51
|
|
|
GotLag posted:ORIGINAL MOD DO NOT STEAL Hahaha, I remember this dude, he used to sperg up Poptarts Ninja's Battletech thread and ended up having a fit and leaving after some people internet-yelled at him about it. Somehow I am not at all surprised by his steam avatar. Psycho Landlord fucked around with this message at 12:32 on Mar 18, 2017 |
|
#
¿
Mar 18, 2017 12:29
|
|
|
How did a loving science pun start this godawful ship design chat again
|
|
#
¿
Mar 21, 2017 04:58
|
|
|
Rakthar posted:This guy comes into the thread about once a month complaining about detailed discussions being too much for him to handle. He can also only manage one line posts. lol
|
|
#
¿
Mar 21, 2017 20:30
|
|
|
Dwesa posted:This reminds me that Sins had actually useful space stations that could even travel around the gravity well (1 faction only though) and minefields Most of Sins was pretty eh, in my opinion, but Entrenchment was a legit good expansion with legit good ideas. I know that fortifications in space is a pretty stupid idea from any realistic standpoint, but if you're gonna do it, might as well go all in.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 21, 2017 23:21
|
|
|
Brb making a race of uplifted forklifts and earthmovers
|
|
#
¿
Mar 22, 2017 01:34
|
|
|
Dongattack posted:Is it possible to mess with fleet formation somehow? I don't want my cruisers to lead the charge. There's a few mods that do it with battle computers, but nothing in the base game. So if you can't/wont mod your save, build your ships accordingly.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 22, 2017 06:46
|
|
|
What happens when there are multiple planets in system but I only want to bombard/invade one, or I want to hit a specific target in the system without engaging the doomstack on the other side of it, both of which are things I can already do with the current implementation?
|
|
#
¿
Mar 22, 2017 20:09
|
|
|
GotLag posted:Dude if you don't want to play Stellaris, don't play Stellaris.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 22, 2017 23:41
|
|
|
So I guess based on the objectively correct all the time opinions of a few posters in this thread, Utopia should just delete the game and install every other Paradox title you've bought instead, but with Blorg randomly inserted. Better get on that Wiz, the denizens of the Something Awful games board know what's best.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 23, 2017 03:27
|
|
|
It will be very hard for the Axis powers to form in HoI4 with the Blorg handy to befriend Hitler.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 23, 2017 03:36
|
|
|
Wiz posted:We're not going to tear out half the game to satisfy the wishes of one Something Awful poster, relax. But Wiz, according to your retelling of this game's development you already have 
|
|
#
¿
Mar 23, 2017 08:59
|
|
|
The point of the system map is to provide a visual aid for the player with regards to resources and goings-on in said system as opposed to simply a bunch of numbers and pop-ups on a map because Stellaris is a Space4X with an emphasis on being pretty and not a screensaver with spreadsheet elements or cookie clicker. A large number of players enjoy watching spaceships fly around and do things, like fighting that kick rear end space dragon you can also see in your system view. This isn't rocket science.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 23, 2017 20:16
|
|
|
Baronjutter posted:This could so easily be solved by simply adding traits and environment prefs to your primary species representing the more specialized diversity. You're never using more than 1 planet preference at a time so just stack them. Have humans that have continental AND ocean habitability. It's the same species but it's just abstracting the fact that you can at-will gene mod your pops to enjoy those planets. Don't make me make seperate pops with a mineral extraction bonus, a farming bonus, a an engineering bonus and so on, just stack them. A pop is only ever using one of those bonuses at a time, so just de-clutter the list and represent that increased diversity within your species. Your own gene modded pops don't count for xenophobia if they have the same name/portrait anyways. I can't think of anything that would be lost, other than spam on the species list. See, this is actually a good idea.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 24, 2017 01:03
|
|
|
GotLag posted:Why does it take a decade to decommission them? Have you never noticed the lengths people will go to ignore factory recalls on cars and phones and the like? That part's totally believable.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 24, 2017 08:33
|
|
|
On the flip side, let's have an event chain for the more invasion oriented where you send a big robot to subjugate a planet, but there's a chance he'll hit is head and befriend a local child instead.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 24, 2017 15:38
|
|
|
^^^ I was about to mention that. Very few solutions being explained here, but plenty of claims that solutions exist. If we're discussing purely fleet warfare, then I think the real issue is that combat at the moment is all or nothing - you can't retreat individual ships, individual ships aren't terribly robust, and generally if one side is going to win a fleet engagement, they win it overwhelmingly. I feel like making ships tougher, repair times shorter, and adding the possibility for ships lost in combat to maybe survive and regroup elsewhere after some amount of time has passed could go a long way towards encouraging breaking fleets up to fit specific objectives. In the same vein, comparative empire size and tech level should have a much, much greater effect on war goals and the score they cost - a multiple dozen-star empire that engulfs a neighbor shouldn't have to slowly pick apart said neighbor just because there's more than three planets in it, and on the flip side, it should be possible for that smaller empire to fight an effective and short war of humiliation if they can eliminate a fleet or two from that larger empire, or even sneak in and snipe one of their planets. In other words, pretty much this post OGS-Remix posted:Making fights less all or nothing could help alleviate the doomstacking. That I somehow missed until after I finished typing all of this. Psycho Landlord fucked around with this message at 01:21 on Mar 30, 2017 |
|
#
¿
Mar 30, 2017 01:16
|
|
|
I mean, that's all cool, don't get me wrong, but the best part is we'll be able to play ravening carnivorous hiveminds now. The scourge are going to show up only to find that the galaxy already has an alpha predator, and they're lower on the food chain 
|
|
#
¿
Apr 3, 2017 21:06
|
|
|
Edwhirl posted:I don't really care. I'll think you'll find you are not spergy enough for this thread, friend. (Seriously everyone, do this. It makes the game more fun.)
|
|
#
¿
Apr 19, 2017 22:16
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ May 3, 2024 16:17 |
|
|
Making sweeping changes to a world's ecosystem in a very short span of time harms the current inhabitants of that ecosystem? I am truly shocked.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 20, 2017 03:05
|
|