Print

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

[SOLDIER First]

There's a seemingly-universal glitch with xenophobes allowing robots to have rights where, as you discovered, doing so hard-locks them to being purged with no way to stop it.

You should be able to prevent it by outlawing purges and then granting robots rights after. You can then turn allow purges again after the ten years are up with no problems, but you'll have to do that over again any subsequent time you want to modify robot rights.

[Karnewarrior]

I feel like the game's gotten significantly more laggy with this last update. I used to be able to run galaxies of 1500 stars or more without noticable lag for at least a hundred years or so, but now I have to go for less than 1000 to have the game be actually playable. I just want to play a big map! 

[Telgin]

That's been my experience too, which is weird since they supposedly improved performance a lot for most people.  To be fair, on my desktop the game runs great, and always has, even late game with 1000 star maps, but on my laptop it lags worse early on than it used to.

There's a seemingly-universal glitch with xenophobes allowing robots to have rights where, as you discovered, doing so hard-locks them to being purged with no way to stop it.

You should be able to prevent it by outlawing purges and then granting robots rights after. You can then turn allow purges again after the ten years are up with no problems, but you'll have to do that over again any subsequent time you want to modify robot rights.

Outlawing purges preventing this must be why I've never seen the bug, since I usually play materialist inward perfectionist xenophobes who give robots rights, and I've never seen the bug.  I always outlaw purges as one of the first things I do in a new game.

[Karnewarrior]

It lags from day one for me, which is supremely irritating. I wish I knew what was eating my memory like that - I don't play with many AI empires at game start anyway since I like to play a lighter version of the Fermi Paradox, where most aliens are primitives while Humans/whatever developed.

But the lag on any galaxy size I actually care about playing on is egregious in the extreme. It takes half a second at the end of every day! Very, very noticable.
I know bannerlord had an update that for some reason switched the game to playing on the CPU graphics card and caused a similar problem, but if there's a way to check if that's happening with Stellaris I don't know where to find it.

It seems like it might be a problem to do non-CB wars from an AI perspective. Having clear at-war/at-peace lets the AI behave more cleanly, I suspect, and we've had plenty of problems with AI as is...

I wonder when it will become economical to put a learning AI algorithm behind the wheel of a bunch of AI civs in a game like this and then just run it for several thousand cycles. Neural Networks are surprisingly CPU-light once the learning bits are stripped away, and it'd probably produce several varieties of AI that could be swapped out to allow for different playstyles from the computer.
Plus, they'd be able to handle resources much better than static AI. They wouldn't *need* the bonuses to keep up with the majority of players, and they'd be a lot more reactive to new strategies from the player, even after the lobotomization for release.
I guess the big issue right now is nobody wants to pay for the server farm needed to train up relatively complicated networks like that in a reasonable timeframe, especially since they'd need to get trained on fairly late-in-dev gameplay.

[ZeroGravitas]

There is basically no market for that, so it will never be economical to do it.

[Culise]

Though, it is worth noting that it was tried for Superpower.  It wasn't all that impressive, as I recall.

[IronyOwl]

The problem with a lot of sophisticated solutions is that they tend to resemble very, very blunt solutions in practice. If you're not calculating an empire's mineral output by hand, whether they're running a successful economy or being handed minerals is largely opaque. If you're not privy to internal decisionmaking processes, whether they're holding intense war councils or wandering their fleet into the closest enemy territory is largely opaque.

Hell, even a lot of the complexity we do have kinda blends into the background most of the time. When was the last time you looked at two fleets closing for battle and thought to yourself "Aha, but that's only part of the story! There are fifty ships in this battle, each with their own loadouts, AI, and fortune! Hundreds or thousands of actions and decisions and turns of fate will decide the fine nuances of this engagement!"

Yeah, probably never. Bigger fleet power wins. Winner takes some casualties and ship damage, loser takes more. They could have abstracted that even further and it wouldn't have mattered a great deal. Likewise, "better AI" sounds great on paper, but it's not really the point most of the time, and without the infrastructure to make those results meaningful AND apparent, doesn't really do anything you can't gain by dumping numbers somewhere.

[MrRoboto75]

Though, it is worth noting that it was tried for Superpower.  It wasn't all that impressive, as I recall.

...other people remember that game?

[Dunamisdeos]

I am enjoying the galactic community immensely, it gives something to do outside of wait in between event stuff.

[SOLDIER First]

My problem with the galactic community is how astronomically _HEH slow everything is. It feels like an eternity between sessions.

[Dunamisdeos]

It would be great if you could, say, spend influence to begin a session.

[SOLDIER First]

Yeah, that would be convenient.

Unrelated: I noticed about last week in a Determined Exterminators game that armageddon bombardment does not, in fact, create tomb worlds upon killing the last pop on a planet. _{it also takes absolutely fucking forever to kill anyone despite being the bombardment stance explicitly designed to maximize casualties, so i modded it to not suck incredibly hard} Some forum diving has informed me that not only is this not a recent issue, it has definitely persisted since version 2.3 and quite possibly 2.2, which was released in December of 2018, despite being a very simple coding mistake (the event to turn the planet into a tomb world is told to fire after the last pop dies and the planet becomes unowned, but because the planet is unowned the event doesn't fire properly and nothing happens).

[Telgin]

It would be great if you could, say, spend influence to begin a session.

Isn't this how emergency measures work?  There's a cooldown on it though, and you have to be in the council.

[ZeroGravitas]

It would be great if you could, say, spend influence to begin a session.

Isn't this how emergency measures work?  There's a cooldown on it though, and you have to be in the council.

yep, that's exactly how it works. but yeah, it gives some incentive to be on the council.

[Sindain]

That requires the council to actually be formed thou.

I've got two games well past 2300 right now and neither of them have had the council form. One of those games has two of the midgame crisis's active right now and we've got the "respond to crisis" resolutions buried behind like 15 years of random votes.