Bay 12 Games Forum

Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
Advanced search  
Pages: 1 ... 355 356 [357] 358 359 ... 632

Author Topic: Stellaris: Paradox Interactive IN SPACE  (Read 1739906 times)

Criptfeind

  • Bay Watcher
    • View Profile
Re: Stellaris: Paradox Interactive IN SPACE
« Reply #5340 on: November 04, 2017, 04:02:47 pm »

Um. Yeah, a 25x1 planet would be mechanically identical to a 5x5 planet, but that doesn't mean it's the same as just having slots like MOO2. Since you can customize each tile with individual buildings and workers you can't have them just piled up on top of each other like you do in those games. You have to have individual slots on the planet UI for each potential pop on the planet. And each slot needs to have the ability to graphically represent the building, the worker, and the random bonuses. So... You'd have to have tiles to place all these graphical representations on. And a 5x5 obviously looks a lot better and is easier to work with then a 1x25.

Like, yes, it's not a very robust system, but that doesn't mean that they might as well have made it even less robust.
« Last Edit: November 04, 2017, 04:20:04 pm by Criptfeind »
Logged

Dunamisdeos

  • Bay Watcher
  • Duggin was the hero we needed.
    • View Profile
Re: Stellaris: Paradox Interactive IN SPACE
« Reply #5341 on: November 04, 2017, 04:48:20 pm »

Don't the stone-age civs in their little enclaves add society research to adjacent science?

I like having a graphical representation for the planet rather than a list or some such. Also, no, it isn't complex, you plop a capital next to some resources and then you are done with adjacency bonuses on that planet.
Logged
FACT I: Post note art is best art.
FACT II: Dunamisdeos is a forum-certified wordsmith.
FACT III: "All life begins with Post-it notes and ends with Post-it notes. This is the truth! This is my belief!...At least for now."
FACT IV: SPEECHO THE TRUSTWORM IS YOUR FRIEND or BEHOLD: THE FRUIT ENGINE 3.0

forsaken1111

  • Bay Watcher
    • View Profile
    • TTB Twitch
Re: Stellaris: Paradox Interactive IN SPACE
« Reply #5342 on: November 04, 2017, 05:38:16 pm »

Um. Yeah, a 25x1 planet would be mechanically identical to a 5x5 planet,
Not really... 25x1 means maximum adjacency bonus from any tile is affecting 2 other tiles while in a 5x5 grid you could potentially affect four surrounding tiles.
Logged

USEC_OFFICER

  • Bay Watcher
  • Pulls the strings and makes them ring.
    • View Profile
Re: Stellaris: Paradox Interactive IN SPACE
« Reply #5343 on: November 04, 2017, 05:50:35 pm »

That's the point they're trying to make. Without adjacency bonuses then the arrangement of tiles doesn't matter at all. With them then the two cases are different, though not majorly so.
Logged

Cruxador

  • Bay Watcher
    • View Profile
Re: Stellaris: Paradox Interactive IN SPACE
« Reply #5344 on: November 04, 2017, 08:45:04 pm »

I think the current adjacency mechanics (only on a few specific buildings) are a good compromise. With adjacency on everything, like in Supreme Commander, it would become tedious trying to squeeze the most out of your planets. Without it, the game would be slightly less deep.

And I think the tiles could matter more if they re-do combat to take place on the map, which would be fine if they don't necessitate that the player actually micro-manage that conquest and instead do it a bit like HoI4 where it's mostly automated.
Logged

Sean Mirrsen

  • Bay Watcher
  • Bearer of the Psionic Flame
    • View Profile
Re: Stellaris: Paradox Interactive IN SPACE
« Reply #5345 on: November 04, 2017, 11:49:05 pm »

I really dislike where this game is going. :(

Between "galactic terrain", forced hyperlanes, and an emphasis on static defenses, they're turning what used to be a "realtime space 4X grand strategy game", into a "realtime 'space-themed' 4X grand strategy game". Stellaris post-1.9 is going to turn into a reskin of a boring old land-bound grand strategy game, literally taking away the thing that best differentiated it from other similar games. :|

So what is it that you think makes Master of Orion 2 and/or Endless Space 2 so different from Civilization and/or Endless Legend?
I never played Endless Space, so I can't say how different it is from Endless Legend. But I never managed to become interested in Master of Orion.

I personally think it's both necessary and should have been totally expected.

The rule for Paradox games, since CK2 (and somewhat before that), is, "ship the game incomplete and finish it later via DLC."

By "incomplete" I don't mean it doesn't work, or that it isn't a recognizable game. It's more like "prove that you can make a working game with this premise, and worry about the details later."

With Stellaris you can easily see where that happened: the FTL system never really made sense. The fact FTL type was just a customization choice, with no implications for balance or anything else, also suggests they were more worried about simply showing off a bunch of methods with no idea what system they'd eventually end up with.

I mean, cmon: a single patch where they're going to revamp from the ground up: 1) borders 2) space stations 3) movement on the map 4) the wargoals system 5) apparently something about combat as well? Stellaris 2.0 is the game they should have released.

The building/tile/economy system is another one that's ripe to be rewritten from the ground up. Just watch, in another year it'll be "sooooooo it turns out that Tiles don't actually add anything to the game because adjacency bonuses are too tedious to work with..."
FTL selection is not a "customization choice", not if it's touted as the reason why moving forward with more changes is 'impossible'.

If it were just a 'customization choice', we'd be having a way to have all three transit modes in equal capacity, not be forced to use only one. The weapon choice is far more meaningless, but it's kept because every empire can research the two options not picked.

We could have had Warp as the best drive system for exploration and construction, with Warp wind-up and wind-down being longer not just with distance, but with the size of fleet moving through. Those who choose Warp at startup gain that freedom of exploration and expansion, but have to research Hyperdrive and convert any existing military to it later on so that their fleets aren't reduced to one jump per season later on.

We could have had Hyperdrive as a primary drive system for outgoing military fleets, being fast to engage and disengage on entry and emergence, regardless of distance or fleet size, but limited to its travel lanes - lanes that could be seen by anyone with hyperdrive technology, and subject to blockades and chokepoints, and galactic topography. Those who choose Hyperdrive at startup can immediately start building up their navy, with no cost for later upgrades, but would end up limited in expansion and movement of their own science and constructor ships until they can research Warp drive.

And we could have had Wormhole stations reworked to be more akin to Hiver jumpgates, providing instant travel to connected stations only, letting your ships be anywhere within your empire within a matter of days, an ultimate choice for defensive fleets. Those who would choose Wormhole stations as their starting tech, would have the ability to expand their Wormhole network from the outset, at the cost of tremendously slowing down their own expansion. A Wormhole fleet would not be able to move out of a system without a Wormhole station, only into it - a Wormhole-using empire would have to send a constructor ship through to any new system they have, before being able to expand further from there.

Just like that, all three choices are viable starting technologies, and all three exist at the same time. Hyperlanes are still the best choice for large-scale military action, making chokepoints and fortifications matter. Warp is still there to provide the freedom of expansion and exploration. Wormholes are still OP as a defensive tech, but severely limit those who choose to start with them. And since one ship can only ever have one drivesystem installed, you would not have a situation where a fleet Warps into your space and can suddenly freely move around with hyperlanes. With no one drive tech being the sole choice for an empire anymore, each of the techs can afford to have actually crippling flaws, such as Warp fleets being locked out of movement and combat power for months, if not years, or Wormhole fleets being able to get stuck in a system until a Constructor ship arrives to rebuild a destroyed wormhole station, without it being such a necessarily big problem in the long run.
Logged
Multiworld Madness Archive:
Game One, Discontinued at World 3.
Game Two, Discontinued at World 1.

"Europe has to grow out of the mindset that Europe's problems are the world's problems, but the world's problems are not Europe's problems."
- Subrahmanyam Jaishankar, Minister of External Affairs, India

Karnewarrior

  • Bay Watcher
  • That guy who used to be here all the time
    • View Profile
Re: Stellaris: Paradox Interactive IN SPACE
« Reply #5346 on: November 05, 2017, 10:05:43 am »

That's really what I suggested a while back in the thread, although I cut out Hyperlanes and made Warp the "normal" movement.

You'd be able to warp any ship anywhere, but it would take, at best, a year for it to reach it's destination. Or you could send constructors out and build Wormhole/Warpgates, and these would act like "roads" that would allow very fast movement between any two systems.

Then it would play similar to a Civ game, where your forts are likely along your roads because any smart enemy is going to be using them, and if not then there's a damn good chance for you to spot them moving in and intercept them. They could even then do the warp interdiction thing: It only effects warp drives, not warpgates, but it does suck into one system any given fleet.
Logged
Thou art I, I art Thou.
The trust you have bestowed upon thy comrade is now reciprocated in turn.
Thou shall be blessed when calling upon personae of the Hangman Arcana.
May this tie bind thee to a brighter future!​
Ikusaba Quest! - Fistfighting space robots for the benefit of your familial bonds to Satan is passe, so you call Sherlock Holmes and ask her to pop by.

Cruxador

  • Bay Watcher
    • View Profile
Re: Stellaris: Paradox Interactive IN SPACE
« Reply #5347 on: November 05, 2017, 10:17:43 am »

I'd like to point out that the gates they'll be adding work just like the wormholes you've described. I'm more annoyed about losing wormholes simply because their mechanics were the only ones in the whole game making doomstacks less viable. And of course because the new focus on choke points makes them even more necessary...
Logged

Karnewarrior

  • Bay Watcher
  • That guy who used to be here all the time
    • View Profile
Re: Stellaris: Paradox Interactive IN SPACE
« Reply #5348 on: November 05, 2017, 10:20:15 am »

They'll work the same way but you won't be able to build them for most of the game, unfortunately.

I'd prefer if there was a smaller version that worked similar. Oh well...
Logged
Thou art I, I art Thou.
The trust you have bestowed upon thy comrade is now reciprocated in turn.
Thou shall be blessed when calling upon personae of the Hangman Arcana.
May this tie bind thee to a brighter future!​
Ikusaba Quest! - Fistfighting space robots for the benefit of your familial bonds to Satan is passe, so you call Sherlock Holmes and ask her to pop by.

Sean Mirrsen

  • Bay Watcher
  • Bearer of the Psionic Flame
    • View Profile
Re: Stellaris: Paradox Interactive IN SPACE
« Reply #5349 on: November 05, 2017, 11:48:48 am »

I've written out this comparison on Reddit already, but seriously, Dominions is going to end up having more strategic variety than Stellaris at this rate. Dominions already has all the things that post-1.9 Stellaris will, provinces with fixed neighbors as lane-linked "star systems", mountains and rivers as gaps in the "spiral arms" to create chokepoints, different terrain types and per-province effects as the new "galactic terrain", caves on some maps that connect different sides of the world the same way new "natural wormholes" will, spells to move your armies between laboratories you own, fortifications to hold chokepoints, and much more. It also includes nations that are natively amphibious, or flying - thus able to cross rivers, seas, fortifications, and sometimes even mountains with utter disregard for terrain.

A land strategy with more movement freedom than a space strategy. How in the hell.
Logged
Multiworld Madness Archive:
Game One, Discontinued at World 3.
Game Two, Discontinued at World 1.

"Europe has to grow out of the mindset that Europe's problems are the world's problems, but the world's problems are not Europe's problems."
- Subrahmanyam Jaishankar, Minister of External Affairs, India

Ultimuh

  • Bay Watcher
  • BOOM! Avatar gone! (for now)
    • View Profile
Re: Stellaris: Paradox Interactive IN SPACE
« Reply #5350 on: November 05, 2017, 01:39:09 pm »

Not sure if I have asked this before, but any ways..
I wish to create an empire with as much naval capacity as possible, firepower is also good.
But I do not want play as a Fanatical Purifier, or any hivemind/machine equivalent thereof.

Any suggestions on government, civic, and trait combinations?
Also, any particular strategy to achieve naval superiority once I started a game?
« Last Edit: November 05, 2017, 01:44:19 pm by Ultimuh »
Logged

GiglameshDespair

  • Bay Watcher
  • Beware! Once I have posted, your thread is doomed!
    • View Profile
Re: Stellaris: Paradox Interactive IN SPACE
« Reply #5351 on: November 05, 2017, 03:20:36 pm »

Not sure if I have asked this before, but any ways..
I wish to create an empire with as much naval capacity as possible, firepower is also good.
But I do not want play as a Fanatical Purifier, or any hivemind/machine equivalent thereof.

Any suggestions on government, civic, and trait combinations?
Also, any particular strategy to achieve naval superiority once I started a game?
Well, for ship strength you want to go Fanatic Militarist and take the Distingushed Admiralty civic for a starting +25% to fire rate and +5% evasion. Be democratic or oligarchic and take Citizen Service civic for +15% fleet cap.

Species wise... you probably want energy and minerals. So take those traits.

Logged
Old and cringe account. Disregard.

Cruxador

  • Bay Watcher
    • View Profile
Re: Stellaris: Paradox Interactive IN SPACE
« Reply #5352 on: November 05, 2017, 03:31:38 pm »

Well, I wrote a rant. Dunno if you guys care but I just laid out my feelings on the latest changes and why they're bad for strategy overall. That's not to say I don't like anything about them, but they encourage doomstacks which really hobbles strategy.

I've written out this comparison on Reddit already, but seriously, Dominions is going to end up having more strategic variety than Stellaris at this rate. Dominions already has all the things that post-1.9 Stellaris will, provinces with fixed neighbors as lane-linked "star systems", mountains and rivers as gaps in the "spiral arms" to create chokepoints, different terrain types and per-province effects as the new "galactic terrain", caves on some maps that connect different sides of the world the same way new "natural wormholes" will, spells to move your armies between laboratories you own, fortifications to hold chokepoints, and much more. It also includes nations that are natively amphibious, or flying - thus able to cross rivers, seas, fortifications, and sometimes even mountains with utter disregard for terrain.

A land strategy with more movement freedom than a space strategy. How in the hell.
Now, I've been critical of Paradox but comparing Stellaris to Dominions isn't really fair. You wouldn't expect a kid in a wheelchair to dunk on Jordan.
Logged

EnigmaticHat

  • Bay Watcher
  • I vibrate, I die, I vibrate again
    • View Profile
Re: Stellaris: Paradox Interactive IN SPACE
« Reply #5353 on: November 05, 2017, 04:30:00 pm »

They have completely different focuses.  Paradox GSGs are focused on politics with de-emphasized combat.  Dominions is super nitty-gritty focused on combat details.

I actually dislike what little combat strategy Stellaris has.  I wish they would just make it super simplified CK2 combat and stop trying to be like other space 4Xs.  They need to focus on non-military interaction between factions rather than on tactical combat, especially considering the AI will always suck at tactics.  So from that perspective I rather like the changes.  Especially since they allow for specialized groups.  You can design forces explicitly for using jump drive surprise attacks, or defending/attacking into fortified system with an environmental effect.  E.g. a fleet with no shields to defend a pulsar system.  My big problem with Stellaris combat is always going to be that there's no supply limit/frontage mechanic, but i'm not sure how you could justify such a thing in space.  At least now moving the doomstack has some small strategy to it.
Logged
"T-take this non-euclidean geometry, h-humanity-baka. I m-made it, but not because I l-li-l-like you or anything! I just felt s-sorry for you, b-baka."
You misspelled seance.  Are possessing Draignean?  Are you actually a ghost in the shell? You have to tell us if you are, that's the rule

Baffler

  • Bay Watcher
  • Caveat Lector.
    • View Profile
Re: Stellaris: Paradox Interactive IN SPACE
« Reply #5354 on: November 05, 2017, 04:54:09 pm »

I'm not sure I agree that it encourages doomstacks. It seems a bit early to discuss balance at such an early stage (as I throw up a big wall of text) but I get the impression it'll be more strategic, while tactics are changed in nature but not really in complexity.

Spoiler (click to show/hide)

tl;dr: There are more strategically significant targets on the map than you can defend with superfortresses, elastic defense is best.
« Last Edit: November 05, 2017, 04:55:48 pm by Baffler »
Logged
Quote from: Helgoland
Even if you found a suitable opening, I doubt it would prove all too satisfying. And it might leave some nasty wounds, depending on the moral high ground's geology.
Location subject to periodic change.
Baffler likes silver, walnut trees, the color green, tanzanite, and dogs for their loyalty. When possible he prefers to consume beef, iced tea, and cornbread. He absolutely detests ticks.
Pages: 1 ... 355 356 [357] 358 359 ... 632