Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[Teneb]

Any advice on how to find a machine rebellion homeworld? A neighboring empire just got hit with it, and I'd like to end it fast.

EDIT: Nevermind, it eventually popped up on the map.

[IronyOwl]

I'm wondering why it is a negative modifier, though. You'd think a weak subject would want to keep in line, while a strong one would not.

It would make sense if the modifier was applied based off of pop ethos

So fanatic militiarists for example would only respect their overlord so long as they had a superior strength, whilst adding xenophobic to their roster would make them chafe for independence against any weak overlord not of their species, stacking with opinion maluses from opposite ethos alignment
The inverse would then be true for pacifists who only respect an overlord actually capable of fighting their wars for them, whilst with xenophilic I think it would be cool upon the addition of better federation mechanics for xenophilic vassals to attempt to gain equal standing in their overlord's federation if their overlord joins one.

I feel like this conversation could be a lot shorter (or at least more interestingly lengthy) if your relationship with your vassals could be expressed in any way but relative ethos and fleet size. A pacifist empire could like you a ton as a personal or galactic protector, have mixed feelings about you in various ways, or hate your guts as a bloodthirsty tyrant depending on circumstance, for example. But since we don't really have any circumstance, we're stuck debating the same simple factors every other social calculation uses, which is not terribly immersive or useful.

[Cruxador]

I'm wondering why it is a negative modifier, though. You'd think a weak subject would want to keep in line, while a strong one would not.

It would make sense if the modifier was applied based off of pop ethos

So fanatic militiarists for example would only respect their overlord so long as they had a superior strength, whilst adding xenophobic to their roster would make them chafe for independence against any weak overlord not of their species, stacking with opinion maluses from opposite ethos alignment
The inverse would then be true for pacifists who only respect an overlord actually capable of fighting their wars for them, whilst with xenophilic I think it would be cool upon the addition of better federation mechanics for xenophilic vassals to attempt to gain equal standing in their overlord's federation if their overlord joins one.

I feel like this conversation could be a lot shorter (or at least more interestingly lengthy) if your relationship with your vassals could be expressed in any way but relative ethos and fleet size. A pacifist empire could like you a ton as a personal or galactic protector, have mixed feelings about you in various ways, or hate your guts as a bloodthirsty tyrant depending on circumstance, for example. But since we don't really have any circumstance, we're stuck debating the same simple factors every other social calculation uses, which is not terribly immersive or useful.

I bet there'll be a DLC about it.

[Teneb]

Before I get the reason I made this post out of the way, there's been a dev diary about ship balancing.

But the first DLC, Leviathans, has been announced.

[Retropunch]

Before I get the reason I made this post out of the way, there's been a dev diary about ship balancing.

But the first DLC, Leviathans, has been announced.

Seems like such a strange first DLC. It sort of worries me, as there are loads (LOADS) of things that could do with expanding on and improving on rather than them putting time into that - and I have to wonder why they decided to do this first.

Being optomistic, I'm hoping that they've decided to do this as a DLC because it doesn't effect non-DLC players much, but the more cynical side thinks they may have backed themselves into a development corner and can't make the big changes needed so will instead just pump out loads of 'story' DLC.

[Putnam]

They've said outright why they're making that DLC: they wanted to include those features in the free patch, but those parts in particular would require too many developer resources (time etc.), so if they wanted to make that stuff it'd have to be DLC.

Basically: still a business, yo. Can't go off on a Toady-esque tangent adding molar mass to everything without some reason that isn't simply "because the game should have it".

[Teneb]

In the comments for the DLC announcement, Wiz (the lead dev) said they want to add trade and it will not be DLC content. So there's some good news there.

[Shadowlord]

But the first DLC, Leviathans, has been announced.

Reapers when?

[Neonivek]

But the first DLC, Leviathans, has been announced.

Reapers when?

My feelings with this is...

!!!SNORE!!!

[Retropunch]

They've said outright why they're making that DLC: they wanted to include those features in the free patch, but those parts in particular would require too many developer resources (time etc.), so if they wanted to make that stuff it'd have to be DLC.

Basically: still a business, yo. Can't go off on a Toady-esque tangent adding molar mass to everything without some reason that isn't simply "because the game should have it".

It's less about why they made it a DLC, but more why they thought this stuff was important to put dev resources to now. There's tons and tons of things that are vastly more important (in a quite objective way) and they decided to go after something that I didn't hear one person clamoring or asking for.

It's not like it's a big problem, just seems as though it might be a portent of things to come.

[forsaken1111]

It seems like a nice lot of mid to late-game content, the lack of which was one of the biggest complaints I saw.

[Cruxador]

I'm not really getting the dev time complaints. They've been pretty open here: They've pushed back the big DLC that was originally planned for this timeslot and replaced it with a little one in order to address major complaints, particularly that the game is bland and boring, especially as it goes on. Part of the reason for that overarching problem lies in issues of balance and mechanics, and part lies in lack of midgame content. So to solve the issue, they're releasing a massive free patch changing balance and mechanics, and adding some new content, and a small DLC with more new content. This seems like a perfectly reasonable way to address the problems. Of course, it doesn't address all of the problems that Stellaris has. But it does seem like it's going to make some major steps.

As a reminder, here's a copy and pasted list of the stuff done in this dev cycle which you get for free:
- Awakened Fallen Empires
- Fallen Empire quests, tasks and general improvements
- Fleet Roles and new XL weapons
- Weapon Balance rework
- Strategic Resource rework
- Auto-Exploration
- Rally Points
- Expansion Planner
- Habitability system rework
- Better control over sectors
- Federation/Alliance rework and Federation Association Status
- Space Creature rework, including new art and encounters
- Major sound and graphics improvements
- Loads of bug fixes, AI improvements and UI improvements

It sees to me that most of the dev time on the DLC is just artist dev time, which isn't really useful to address mechanics and major gameplay features, but is excellent for exactly this kind of thing - adding color to areas that lack it. This, coupled with the mechanic and balance overhauls, seems to me like exactly where they should be spending dev time.

[Malus]

I'm not really getting the dev time complaints.

A lot of people don't seem to draw a distinction between programmer man-hours, artist man-hours, and writer man-hours. These are usually the same people that complain about face DLCs for CK2. Like when people complained about the Plantoid pack because how dare they work on cosmetic DLC when the base game needs improvement!! you've gotta just roll your eyes.

[Retropunch]

I'm not really getting the dev time complaints.

A lot of people don't seem to draw a distinction between programmer man-hours, artist man-hours, and writer man-hours. These are usually the same people that complain about face DLCs for CK2. Like when people complained about the Plantoid pack because how dare they work on cosmetic DLC when the base game needs improvement!! you've gotta just roll your eyes.

Agreed to a point, but even a cosmetic pack still requires work from programmers/other parts of the business. Not that it slows down other work inordinately, so it shouldn't matter that much. I think the main reason why people are a bit jaded with that kinda thing is the whole 'horse armour' syndrome, especially when it's used to cover up a lack of other progress.

After reading everyone's comments I've changed my mind on the new DLC - I can definitely see why they've done it once it's been put in the light of 'middle game stuff'. My main fear is that we continue to get more 'middle game stuff' without them getting to the bits we really need (espionage, trade, deeper characters etc.). We can live in hopes though.

[Cruxador]

Agreed to a point, but even a cosmetic pack still requires work from programmers/other parts of the business.

It wouldn't surprise me if the programming work on Plantoids was literally zero. That was just adding one more bunch of things to a category already set up for bunches of things.

After reading everyone's comments I've changed my mind on the new DLC - I can definitely see why they've done it once it's been put in the light of 'middle game stuff'. My main fear is that we continue to get more 'middle game stuff' without them getting to the bits we really need (espionage, trade, deeper characters etc.). We can live in hopes though.

I don't see much foundation for that fear. DLC on their previous games has been pretty diverse in the areas of gameplay that it covers. Trade is specifically called out as something the new design head wants to do. Espionage and deeper characters seem like pretty obvious areas for them to expand as well. And the next update is named for Iain Banks, suggesting that it could pertain both to end-game content, but also to internal politics, which would include characters, sectors, and factions. All of them, probably not coincidentally, things that people want to see some manner of rework to.