|
Excellent thread title.
|
#
¿
Feb 22, 2018 20:04
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ May 11, 2024 12:03 |
|
|
Captain Oblivious posted:The only thing bugging me right now is the fact that I can't right click poo poo to queue up surveys or mining stations anymore, otherwise life is good What do you mean? You can still shift-click orders to queue them.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 22, 2018 20:48
|
|
|
Baronjutter posted:How do you get subjugation or tributary CB? I have the domination tree but every empire I try to declare war on just says I don't have the right CB, but there's no explanation how to get it. Demand vassalisation or tribute. It should say how to get it if you select the greyed out wargoal during wardec.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 22, 2018 22:45
|
|
|
Baronjutter posted:Thanks! Occupy more systems to get their acceptance up.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 22, 2018 22:54
|
|
|
Shadowlyger posted:Fully upgraded fully stocked starbase: 12k This is either a straight up lie or you haven't found the 'Defenses' tab yet. EDIT: Hell, even without defensive platforms a Citadel with all turrets will be significantly more than 12k. I honestly think you're just making poo poo up. Wiz fucked around with this message at 10:28 on Feb 23, 2018 |
|
#
¿
Feb 23, 2018 10:24
|
|
|
SSJ_naruto_2003 posted:When adding claims, there's a box to add more than one claim to the same system. What does this do? Used to trump the claims of allies.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 23, 2018 12:09
|
|
|
Baronjutter posted:I really hope the map scripts are given another look, or modders open up more advanced behavior because anything lower than 1.0 for lane density ends up looking bad. Instead of clumps and clusters the map looks like an intestinal tract of long snaking chains of lanes. I want more choke points, but for those points to between more dense interconnected clusters. We're going to look into iterating more on the algorithm in the future. It's not just a matter of tweaking numbers, we have to add logic to make secondary passes to create constellations and such.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 23, 2018 18:02
|
|
|
Kaza42 posted:War exhaustion is ridiculous right now. I was playing as a dominant power rolling over a mid-sized empire to vassalize it. I never lost a single ship, and the closest fight was something like 3:1 in my favor. And yet I still got forced into a white peace due to war exhaustion before I could complete the wargoal. I'm playing a machine empire, I don't *want* to conquer their land and why are my robots getting tired of war anyway? Realism is not a meaningful argument. Without war exhaustion and forced status quo peaces, every single war would be to the death. That said, it might be ticking up too fast right now.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 23, 2018 18:07
|
|
|
DatonKallandor posted:The problem with non-abstracted trade is performance. You can certainly abstract it less than it currently is, but trying to put individual trade ships on the map would be a nightmare for performance. Not really. There's a big difference between having trade ships be some kind of graphical entity that just moves from point to point and having them as full-fledged ships/fleets with all the ship/fleet mechanics. The latter is far, far, far, far (imagine me writing far for a while here) more performance intensive than the former. A single trade ship would be less performance intensive than a single strike craft if you did it right.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 8, 2018 13:48
|
|
|
Eiba posted:I don't know if the random gifts from strangers is working the way it's supposed to, but in practice it has been for me. Every time someone I don't know gives me a gift like that I call them back up and give them a nonagression pact, and going forward I take more of an interest in the wellbeing of that country. There is in fact special gift dialogue (I just tested it and it works fine). Are you sure that they used the standard dialog when gifting?
|
|
#
¿
May 29, 2018 11:55
|
|
|
CrazyTolradi posted:I noticed that Stimsis (of Fourth Stimpire fame) was removed from the name list file. I feel grief. No, it's still there. Are you looking in the right place? Are you sure a mod didn't remove it?
|
|
#
¿
May 29, 2018 12:15
|
|
|
Aethernet posted:Wiz, a lot of people who otherwise hate me have been giving me large amounts of energy. Should I take gifts from strangers or report it as a bug? There's a bit of AI weirdness in 2.1 with it being too friendly in general. Should be sorted in 2.1.1.
|
|
#
¿
May 29, 2018 13:33
|
|
|
Chalks posted:Hey Wiz, since you're around I was wondering what strength you expect players to be at when they unlock the L-Gate stuff? I had a couple of 5k fleets and was equivalent or stronger than all my neighbours when I activated it and I was surprised at how completely outmatched I was. The L-Gate chain is being completed a lot quicker than intended. We're going to make some tweaks.
|
|
#
¿
May 29, 2018 13:33
|
|
|
Eiba posted:Okay, now I'm a little bit worried. I've never been that enthralled by fleet stuff, and having to source multiple materials to make a basic almost-naked corvette is not something that immediately sounds engaging. Psst, a super-early screenshot with values altered to be used as a teaser will not give you an accurate idea of what those values will look like on release. Of course we're not going to make a basic starting ship require you to have resources you can't produce in your home system.
|
|
#
¿
Jul 12, 2018 16:55
|
|
|
OwlFancier posted:Hella hype for true fully automated luxury space communism where we kill all the noblebots and expropriate their components to build more workerbots to produce more luxuries to sell for more minerals. Let's just say Utopian Abundance has much more significant implications and effects in the new system than it previously had.
|
|
#
¿
Jul 19, 2018 23:14
|
|
|
Baronjutter posted:I'm so pumped about these changes, but I really hope there's some mechanics for playing a less class-based civilization that doesn't have that whole class-pyramid thing going on. Now that Stellaris is the true Victoria 3 please give me full communism now. I need my Fully Automated Luxury Gay Space Communism and it looks like we finally have the class mechanics to represent that. You won't be able to remove the categories entirely (as they also exist to organize the jobs interface-wise) but you *will* be able to eliminate all meaningful differences between them and give workers the same living standards and political power as rulers, etc.
|
|
#
¿
Jul 20, 2018 09:00
|
|
|
Aethernet posted:'Political power' now a thing pops can have, then, unless it's equivalent to their ability to participate in factions? Yeah, it's how much power they contribute to factions and how much their happiness is counted towards planetary stability. Having a single angry ruler pop is a much bigger deal than even several worker pops under more stratified conditions.
|
|
#
¿
Jul 20, 2018 09:15
|
|
|
Splicer posted:I don't think it needs to be locked behind ethics or civics. Authoritarianism where the ruling caste pointedly does not waste resources on frippery, bread and circuses is for the weak minded, our asceticism is what makes us fit to lead. Ruling is not a privilege, it is a duty. I'm sorry, but some things are just too unrealistic even for Stellaris. An early game egalitarian living standard where rulers have to give some stuff up and are mad about it is totes doable tho.
|
|
#
¿
Jul 23, 2018 17:05
|
|
|
Splicer posted:Just realised there's no way to make a species who do not care about creature comforts outside hive minds. You can reduce the cost of consumer goods, but not demand. No concept of knowledge for knowledge's sake or "For the good of the species"; all across the Stellaris universe there is no motivator but greed. This is a searing hot but very silly take on 'those with power tend to allocate more resources to themselves'
|
|
#
¿
Jul 23, 2018 17:55
|
|
|
Captain Invictus posted:nooooope! it booted a third of the organic pops off somewhere else and the rest of the tiles converted into sanctuaries. So Celestial Throne has like 4 fabricators, 6 dark matter power plants and 2 foodmakers and the rest turned into sanctuaries. super sucks! This can't really be fixed with the tile system in place but will automatically be fixed with the planet rework.
|
|
#
¿
Jul 24, 2018 10:54
|
|
|
Aethernet posted:Has it been clarified how the Infrastructure value is calculated yet? It mainly comes from districts. City districs give more infra than resource extracting ones do.
|
|
#
¿
Aug 6, 2018 11:02
|
|
|
Eiba posted:I love this. It is indeed, as well as a reference to her general tendency to create diverse and interesting fictional civilizations.
|
|
#
¿
Aug 9, 2018 18:59
|
|
|
OwlFancier posted:The only le guin thing I've ever read was the earthsea stuff and I thought it was utterly terrible so it's always weird when I hear people talking about her writing good things. You may be suffering from a severe case of Bad Taste. Condolences.
|
|
#
¿
Aug 9, 2018 19:39
|
|
|
Splicer posted:I'd prefer three sliders over discrete settings but I'm accepting that I'm the weird guy here. Seems like you'd need a slider to decide how many sliders there should be. Maybe also a slider to determine how many sliders are used to determine the number of sliders.
|
|
#
¿
Aug 13, 2018 14:53
|
|
|
Just gonna leave this here.
|
|
#
¿
Aug 13, 2018 17:51
|
|
|
Baronjutter posted:Obviously we're just getting little peeks, but I don't like that shared burden is a pre-set living standard. What if my empire is doing really well and I want to globally increase luxuries for everyone to make them happier? Hope there will be a way to put the luxury into fully automated luxury space communism. It still enables you to switch to Utopian Abundance (it requires Egalitarian, so it'll always be an option). It just disables the more stratified living conditions.
|
|
#
¿
Aug 13, 2018 19:56
|
|
|
Baronjutter posted:I really hope we can do a lot more with the new pop and planet system, and do a lot more easily with little to no micro-management. I also hope we'll see improvements to robots, and allow empires to have various "species" of robots together. This is not going to happen because how you deal with sapient robots is supposed to be a choice/trade-off and if you could just keep most of your robots non-sapient there would be one obviously best choice for every play-through.
|
|
#
¿
Aug 15, 2018 21:29
|
|
|
Baronjutter posted:The idea of a nearly fully automated luxury society that also has "strong AI" with full rights is a pretty common one in scifi too. If the balance doesn't allow it, fix the balance. It seems like a weirdly restrictive choice to choose between "we know how to make robots be people, thus all robots are suddenly now people and thus enslaved" and "Our robots are just tools with no sapiance so obviously they are not slaves." Why not "We have a vast array of robots and automation technology along with a spectrum of rights and protections based on the levels of sapiance of the intelligence in question" There is a perfectly good gameplay choice present already that captures the themes of AI rights and rebellion (with even more significance to its effects under the new system). 'It's weird' is not a good enough reason to tear that up, and 'fix the balance' doesn't even mean anything. More options does not always make for better gameplay or more interesting choices.
|
|
#
¿
Aug 15, 2018 22:35
|
|
|
Crazycryodude posted:The good thing is that Stellaris is already a highly moddable game, and if I understand last week's dev diary correctly the economic overhaul is gonna be so fundamentally moddable that you can do basically anything you want with it relating to the economy and popuation, including modding it so you can have sapient brainbots and non-sapient workerbots. Which, like Wiz said, is an objectively best choice so I probably wouldn't download that mod because that would be boring, but to each their own. It will absolutely be possible to mod in.
|
|
#
¿
Aug 15, 2018 22:58
|
|
|
A_Spec posted:Ye, this is a pretty massive dev diary. I find this little bit interesting. I've been wanting to change it since before the game came out. There were other things that were more important to do first, though. What I personally want the most doesn't always correspond to what's best for the game!
|
|
#
¿
Aug 16, 2018 13:10
|
|
|
Aethernet posted:Surely you noticed that all adjacency bonuses were gradually being removed to eliminate any lingering game in the tilegame? Honestly adjacency bonuses tended to, if anything, make the tile system even less interesting since it mostly just promoted monoresource planets.
|
|
#
¿
Aug 16, 2018 13:23
|
|
|
Nuclearmonkee posted:Looks great. Hoping that there are not Farming District I - V upgrades or if there are that the process of upgrading anything is entirely automatic. There is no manual upgrading of districts.
|
|
#
¿
Aug 16, 2018 15:04
|
|
|
Gyshall posted:How are the performance gains on the new system? This really isn't something we can properly measure until we're further along in development but I'm hoping for some substantial late-game improvements.
|
|
#
¿
Aug 16, 2018 15:17
|
|
|
Staltran posted:Okay, I definitely didn't expect a console version of Stellaris. How the hell is the UI going to work? It's a completely separate version with a full console port made by an external studio.
|
|
#
¿
Aug 20, 2018 14:44
|
|
|
Erev posted:Does it look significantly different from the other peace offers because I didn't see it? In EU4 there's this huge red flag and I think even a sound notification when an unconditional surrender has been offered. I mean, even then I think the status quo mechanic really sucks when its forced through from war exhaustion. I'd much rather see a different set of penalties instead. Putting a timer on war is the only way to make a whole lot of war mechanics meaningful. We tried replacing it with penalties and it just meant all wars were to the death and there was no reason to fight delaying actions or otherwise do anything but throw up your hands and surrender when outmatched.
|
|
#
¿
Aug 23, 2018 09:46
|
|
|
canepazzo posted:Migration: Habitability is a major factor, yeah.
|
|
#
¿
Aug 23, 2018 13:15
|
|
|
Aethernet posted:https://twitter.com/Martin_Anward/status/1032644533132165120?s=19 So would I, but I honestly don't think we can do it with our current art budget. Maybe in a limited fashion, or sometime in a later update. Wiz fucked around with this message at 16:11 on Aug 23, 2018 |
|
#
¿
Aug 23, 2018 16:09
|
|
|
Eiba posted:Yeah, it seems a bit odd to me as well. As a xenophile, I think it's great to have a multi-species planet, but I kind of want that to happen more naturally. It's a game. There is no "naturally". If you want the majority species to be the preferred one growing you will keep having homogenous home planets forever.
|
|
#
¿
Aug 23, 2018 20:35
|
|
|
Dallan Invictus posted:One would think that "ensuring heterogeneous home/capital planets, or not" should be a choice for players and AI to make based on practicalities or ethics or the diplomatic situation, rather than a baseline goal of the simulation. It's not like you will inevitably get a ton of alien immigrants on your home planet. It depends on your policies, and I can only assume that an empire that grants full citizenship to every species and signs a ton of migration treaties wants a diverse population.
|
|
#
¿
Aug 23, 2018 20:49
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ May 11, 2024 12:03 |
|
|
Strudel Man posted:Come on, 'naturally' obviously means 'in accordance with one's intuitive expectations.' Nothing about pop growth in Stellaris makes sense to begin with. Growing your population in such a way that you can have 100x the population you had at the start of the game in just a century or two is utterly and completely unrealistic, but we have it that way because otherwise building your space empire would suck. I really don't see why that particular part of the system needs to make sense 'realistically' when the rest of it really does not.
|
|
#
¿
Aug 23, 2018 20:55
|
|