|
Pharnakes posted:I refuse to believe I can be the only sperg lord who find's it supremely frustrating when a game dangles a cool potential thing infront of your nose then goes nope, gently caress you, you rolled the dice wrong and takes it away again. Yes, I could start a different game and maybe I'd get lucky in that one, but I want to make meaningful decisions not rely on luck. Obviously games like these are making huge use of die rolls, but it needs to be kept far down under the hood, if you shove it in the players face that they are just rolling dice what's the point of playing the game? I might as well just go sit in the corner and roll physical die: "6! that means I discovered the death star and wiped out the umpa bumpa planet!" You're not but failure and disappointment are actually vital to a game experience.
|
#
?
Nov 2, 2015 20:38
|
|
|
|
| # ? Apr 16, 2024 21:26 |
|
|
The important thing is that failure to roll well on the dice should reward you differently. Hell, it would be awesome if each anomaly had different interpretations, and each interpretation gave you a different bonus. One person says it's a death laser, so your space combat goes up. One person says it's their instant planet-wide teakettle warmer, so your consumer goods tech goes up. Another person might use it as a particle collider and advance theoretical physics. I really like the faction stuff mentioned above. It would be amazing if different scientists had traits that made them more or less likely to join a given faction of interpretation, which would let you be more likely to unlock space lasers if you hadn't already or increase tea production if you've already unlocked it. It'd also be neat to have tons of anomalies/projects at once so that you have to pick and choose who goes where to unlock what.
|
|
#
?
Nov 2, 2015 20:45
|
|
|
Pharnakes posted:Ok that's fine, but why should that mean that no one else can come along and tinker with the tea set and wipe out a planet? Time pressure against using just one scientist is precisely what I mean when I say I hate the mechanics that are usually implemented to try and balance this, it just makes it feel like the game is taunting you with the possibilities of what you could discover, then punishing you when you try to do so. Either by using one scientist and falling behind or else by using many scientists and loving up your future research potential. It's just not a fun or rewarding mechanic at all. At best you just feel like you've gamed it the objectively correct way/got lucky, never that you have been rewarded for an actual plausible approach to discovering alien artefacts. The Sharmat posted:You're not but failure and disappointment are actually vital to a game experience. e. We probably won't get any detail on it till we get a hold of the event files on release but it also sounds like anomalies are non-deterministic. So a success doesn't even mean the same thing every time, its just pulling from the big file of this entity's events, weighted by the probabilities dictated by your scientist traits, empire tech level and ethics, and CYOA choices. So its less about "losing the roll on the one and only death ray on the map" and more about stacking probabilities to eventually succeed on the death ray roll by stacking death ray focused ethics and science. If you stacked the tea set ethics instead you could count on the probabilities stacking up to get your tea set instead. zedprime fucked around with this message at 21:03 on Nov 2, 2015 |
|
#
?
Nov 2, 2015 20:50
|
|
|
zedprime posted:You know what? I'm with you, IRL even. You see, noone wants to give me a grant to prove the pyramids are actually space bases for ancient astronauts. I am almost sure they are the key to jump starting Stellaris in real life. Like if I could just get some expedition funding and the correct visas, we could be visiting Alpha Centauri before Stellaris even comes out with the inevitable delays to balance an event driven research system. I'm pretty sure the History Channel would fund this research.
|
|
#
?
Nov 2, 2015 21:11
|
|
|
I think it would definitely be more fun for continued research on an anomaly or object to be possible, with some kind of system in place to encourage exploring and researching new poo poo over sitting at home with your old junk, but making it so that you will always eventually be able to find out everything about an anomaly and get the best result would also be silly. As long as the sorts of bonuses we're talking about aren't huge, unique empire-wide modifiers then missing out on things seems OK to me and I would be satisfied with only having one shot at every anomaly if there are enough around that I don't feel like the occasional failure is hugely damaging, especially as it sounds like most of them will be along the lines of "a thing happens but less good than the best thing" - hopefully blowing up a ship or destroying planets will be rare in the same way that popping a goody hut in a Civ game and getting a loving assload of barbarians is an unlucky but rare and usually game-defining event.
|
|
#
?
Nov 2, 2015 21:11
|
|
|
 Fear the premature rise of Canad(i)a.
|
|
#
?
Nov 2, 2015 21:52
|
|
|
It does seem like you guys are complaining that it might be possible to miss content or for it to be possible for not everything to turn up good for you. I've got no problem with stuff sometimes giving no bonus, personally. Sometimes poo poo just doesn't
|
|
#
?
Nov 2, 2015 22:31
|
|
|
nothing to seehere posted:It does seem like you guys are complaining that it might be possible to miss content or for it to be possible for not everything to turn up good for you. I've got no problem with stuff sometimes giving no bonus, personally. Sometimes poo poo just doesn't But it doesnt. It says that if you research something once it is gone forever. Which just sounds dumb. Now I may be misinterpreting what is said in the DD or maybe I just need to wait for more information, but as it is presented at this point in time I think it sounds like an odd and obtuse mechanic.
|
|
#
?
Nov 2, 2015 23:19
|
|
|
Westminster System posted:
Depending on when Canada is released, they're usually a GP by the 1880s or 90s. Mostly boat building and prestige. Slime Bro Helpdesk posted:I didn't think you could re-name ships in 3? Yeah, you can 
Tuskin38 fucked around with this message at 23:54 on Nov 2, 2015 |
|
#
?
Nov 2, 2015 23:33
|
|
|
Pretty sure you can rename ships, and any other unit too.
|
|
#
?
Nov 2, 2015 23:54
|
|
|
Bort Bortles posted:To me, its less about that and more about the irrationality of "your scientist failed once you now forever cannot look or think about this fantastic anomaly/ancient artifact". If the dev diary said that you would get options like "intensive research: anomaly/ancient artifact is consumed, chance of success or breakthrough +x%" or "basic research: anomaly/ancient artifact is preserved, chance of success or breakthrough +y%" then I wouldnt have anything or as much to say. Sure, you are losing out on this research roll, like every month a tech doesn't fire in Vicky 2 you are losing on that research roll. Grasping your hair at every month it doesn't fire is losing the forest for the trees though. Not that getting angry at the months ticking doesn't happen, but getting mad your art tech was swiped at the last second was always a good-angry for me as opposed to a gently caress-you-game angry. I could be wrong at which point I will admit defeat to everybody worried about "oh no we're losing tech forever" crowd.
|
|
#
?
Nov 2, 2015 23:55
|
|
|
Yeah but in vicky if someone else researches machine guns first, it doesn't mean you don't get machine guns. It just means you loose out on any prestige the tech might carry.
|
|
#
?
Nov 2, 2015 23:58
|
|
|
Pharnakes posted:Yeah but in vicky if someone else researches machine guns first, it doesn't mean you don't get machine guns. It just means you loose out on any prestige the tech might carry. Based on the original Gamescom talk, anomaly's are sort of indeterminate beyond an initial flavor. Based on the flavor and a bunch of other inputs like ethics, your scientist, and so on, you could get any number of results. If you've really stacked the deck for machine guns, odds are you will get machine guns eventually. And if not, you probably found a pretty decent alternative instead.
|
|
#
?
Nov 3, 2015 00:06
|
|
|
I lost Cubism in an ancient space ruin. Life's a bitch, I tell ya.
|
|
#
?
Nov 3, 2015 00:07
|
|
|
Research has been described as a core gameplay feature and the driving impetus of the first gameplay phase of Stellaris, and an important conflict trigger mechanism in the middle and final phases. Therefore I am forced to assume an absent minded scientist can accidentally flush the next level of warp drives down the toilet forever. There is only one ancient warp manuscript left in the universe, and Dr. Magoo just used it to wipe his rear end because he misunderstood the intern when he said it was the "key to TP technology!" and the silly old doctor thought that meant toiletpaper instead of teleportation.
|
|
#
?
Nov 3, 2015 00:21
|
|
|
Tuskin38 posted:
Oh cool- I never would have thought to look for renaming on that screen.
|
|
#
?
Nov 3, 2015 00:27
|
|
|
zedprime posted:Research has been described as a core gameplay feature and the driving impetus of the first gameplay phase of Stellaris, and an important conflict trigger mechanism in the middle and final phases. Therefore I am forced to assume an absent minded scientist can accidentally flush the next level of warp drives down the toilet forever. There is only one ancient warp manuscript left in the universe, and Dr. Magoo just used it to wipe his rear end because he misunderstood the intern when he said it was the "key to TP technology!" and the silly old doctor thought that meant toiletpaper instead of teleportation. Fish it out before he flushes it, we can probably still use it! So, the Federation's special ability will be that all vessels count as science ships. Kirk doesn't seem like a Scientist captain, but as long as Archaeology counts we can fit Picard in just fine...
|
|
#
?
Nov 3, 2015 00:32
|
|
|
Perhaps having different types of anomalies would make sense? Like, you could have ones which are unstable/unpredictable, where you'd generally have to just use your closest science ship to explore it because waiting for a more qualified scientist could run the risk of the anomaly just disappearing or exploding, even without interference. Basically weird natural phenomena or ghost ships and poo poo, where you might not have that great a chance of actually discovering something major (though it'd still be possible), but your scientist would at least have an excellent chance of learning something from the experience which could make them more successful in the future. (Or could unlock the ability to recognize other anomalies, allowing for more poo poo to explore.) At the other end you could have ancient ruins, which would basically only stop being available for exploration if you decided on a really aggressive approach to exploring them, or possible if an enemy bombarded them. Having ephemeral anomalies which gets the player used to the idea of failure always being an option, and the perfect setup a luxury you often can't afford, might make them less irritated with the failure of other research projects too, on top of adding variety. Kavak posted:Fish it out before he flushes it, we can probably still use it!
|
|
#
?
Nov 3, 2015 00:47
|
|
|
A Buttery Pastry posted:Kirk is clearly a sexologist. That's obviously a diplomatic talent  .
|
|
#
?
Nov 3, 2015 00:53
|
|
|
A Buttery Pastry posted:
But then you're going to need other scientists focusing on curing his sexlexia.
|
|
#
?
Nov 3, 2015 00:55
|
|
|
If we're spitballing here, CYOA influencing research is fairly safe territory following CK2 and is bound to get lost in the map game shuffle. I would say lets make research success truly skill based and contract a hidden object game developer to create some sci fi HOGs that guarantee research success. it could even tie in with some of the late game research catastrophes that have been teased; you get so into the HOG you don't even realize you are summoning the Chaos Gods into the warp, or inadvertently programming psycho AI.
|
|
#
?
Nov 3, 2015 02:02
|
|
|
The Sharmat posted:You're not but failure and disappointment are actually vital to a game experience. Will someone PLEASE tell my parents this
|
|
#
?
Nov 3, 2015 05:38
|
|
|
Turn research into a SHMUP bullet hell minigame.
|
|
#
?
Nov 3, 2015 06:18
|
|
|
Pimpmust posted:Turn research into a SHMUP bullet hell minigame. The Undertale of 4x games.
|
|
#
?
Nov 3, 2015 06:23
|
|
|
if paradox ever makes victoria 3, one thing i'd genuinely want to see is the ability to make your own provinces. europeans basically just reorganized everything into their own spheres of influence in the victorian period, which would be cool to do in victoria 3. you could make your own sykes-picot and ruin everything for the next 100 years in whatever region you choose
|
|
#
?
Nov 3, 2015 06:51
|
|
|
With whatever engine they create after Clausewitz, maybe. It would also solve the problem of West Virginia- states aren't supposed to spring into existence in the middle of the game, but it does.
|
|
#
?
Nov 3, 2015 06:57
|
|
|
Bort Bortles posted:To me, its less about that and more about the irrationality of "your scientist failed once you now forever cannot look or think about this fantastic anomaly/ancient artifact". If the dev diary said that you would get options like "intensive research: anomaly/ancient artifact is consumed, chance of success or breakthrough +x%" or "basic research: anomaly/ancient artifact is preserved, chance of success or breakthrough +y%" then I wouldnt have anything or as much to say. Something Sword of the Stars did that I really really liked was that the tech tree was randomized, so based on your race you'd have different odds of getting access to different techs, weighted in flavor-appropriate paths. Even if you missed out on a tech though you had the possibility of unlocking it later from enemies that did get it through salvage and expensive research projects so you were rarely locked out completely.
|
|
#
?
Nov 3, 2015 07:31
|
|
|
zedprime posted:make research success truly skill based and contract a hidden object game developer to create some sci fi HOGs that guarantee research success I'll pitch this to the team ty
|
|
#
?
Nov 3, 2015 08:22
|
|
|
ThePutty posted:if paradox ever makes victoria 3, one thing i'd genuinely want to see is the ability to make your own provinces. europeans basically just reorganized everything into their own spheres of influence in the victorian period, which would be cool to do in victoria 3. you could make your own sykes-picot and ruin everything for the next 100 years in whatever region you choose It'd require either a tile-based system of which provinces are made or god forbid some sort of vector system. Both of which are well outside of the abilities of clauswitz, I assume, which means Victoria 4 or later.
|
|
#
?
Nov 3, 2015 08:49
|
|
|
Kulkasha posted:It'd require either a tile-based system of which provinces are made or god forbid some sort of vector system. Both of which are well outside of the abilities of clauswitz, I assume, which means Victoria 4 or later.
|
|
#
?
Nov 3, 2015 09:02
|
|
|
ThePutty posted:if paradox ever makes victoria 3, one thing i'd genuinely want to see is the ability to make your own provinces. europeans basically just reorganized everything into their own spheres of influence in the victorian period, which would be cool to do in victoria 3. you could make your own sykes-picot and ruin everything for the next 100 years in whatever region you choose I would rather see you be able to create your own client/puppet states out of friendly local pop groups kind of like a more in-depth version of the EU4 mechanic. Choose the primary culture, government type and corresponding pop class (Soldiers for Military Juntas, Capitalists for Banana Republics, etc.) and of course their flag and map color. Then you release them and they get cores on all the land you gave them and any other provinces with a majority of their primary culture.
|
|
#
?
Nov 3, 2015 09:12
|
|
|
ArchRanger posted:Something Sword of the Stars did that I really really liked was that the tech tree was randomized, so based on your race you'd have different odds of getting access to different techs, weighted in flavor-appropriate paths. Even if you missed out on a tech though you had the possibility of unlocking it later from enemies that did get it through salvage and expensive research projects so you were rarely locked out completely. It isn't like the anomalies here are presented as the main way to advance technologically or anything, they are there to give you a huge boost in something in case you succeed. That's what I got from the dev diary anyway.
|
|
#
?
Nov 3, 2015 10:46
|
|
|
YF-23 posted:It isn't like the anomalies here are presented as the main way to advance technologically or anything, they are there to give you a huge boost in something in case you succeed. That's what I got from the dev diary anyway. Yeah, I was mostly commenting on a similar-ish system that operated in a way I like. SoTS2 might've been a horrific mess but the first game had a lot of cool ideas that I wouldn't mind if Paradox stole (don't they own Kerberos now anyway? Wouldn't exactly be stealing).
|
|
#
?
Nov 3, 2015 11:08
|
|
|
Pharnakes posted:I refuse to believe I can be the only sperg lord who find's it supremely frustrating when a game dangles a cool potential thing infront of your nose then goes nope, gently caress you, you rolled the dice wrong and takes it away again. Yes, I could start a different game and maybe I'd get lucky in that one, but I want to make meaningful decisions not rely on luck. Obviously games like these are making huge use of die rolls, but it needs to be kept far down under the hood, if you shove it in the players face that they are just rolling dice what's the point of playing the game? I might as well just go sit in the corner and roll physical die: "6! that means I discovered the death star and wiped out the umpa bumpa planet!" Actually I would rather literally see the die roll so I can see what went into it and what I can do differently to make it better if I fail. People who go on about "immersion" are basically idiots who hate the thought of getting good at a game.
|
|
#
?
Nov 3, 2015 12:25
|
|
|
YF-23 posted:It isn't like the anomalies here are presented as the main way to advance technologically or anything, they are there to give you a huge boost in something in case you succeed. That's what I got from the dev diary anyway.
|
|
#
?
Nov 3, 2015 14:02
|
|
|
The Sharmat posted:You're not but failure and disappointment are actually vital to a game experience. This is objectively wrong.
|
|
#
?
Nov 3, 2015 14:31
|
|
|
Just starting a NNM campaign as Russia in Victoria 2. Given that I played the USA last time which is essentially auto pilot mode, I have a few questions: 1. Should I be rushing to build factories right away or should I hold on. If so, when do I know it is time to actually start construction? 2. Is it a good idea to AI manage all my trade but stockpile certain key resources like canned food and small arms? 3. I heard if the opportunity arises it can be a good idea to snag East Prussia to get educated POPS. Is this actually beneficial. 4. Should I keep to the starting Russia Academia and hoover up starting techs? 5. Finally, what hould I do with my army, it is a bit overwhelming and I am not sure if it needsa composition change or not.
|
|
#
?
Nov 3, 2015 15:16
|
|
|
SkySteak posted:Just starting a NNM campaign as Russia in Victoria 2. Given that I played the USA last time which is essentially auto pilot mode, I have a few questions: 1) I think you want to wait, and it's dependent on getting a few factory-efficency techs and getting your literacy up. Russia starts in single digits, right? I'm assuming as long as the literacy of the states you're putting factories in is good then you're ok. I think usually people say 30% literacy as a threshold? And I'd wait until you're at the second level of factory throughput efficency. 2) I've always left all stockpiles to the AI, but it's because I'm dumb. I think you'd also want to try and keep an eye out for price drops in cement for basic factory building eventually. 3) In terms of getting industrialized and keeping your techs up to date it helps, but I'm assuming there's a penalty because they're not an accepted culture
|
|
#
?
Nov 3, 2015 15:24
|
|
|
SkySteak posted:Just starting a NNM campaign as Russia in Victoria 2. Given that I played the USA last time which is essentially auto pilot mode, I have a few questions: 1. I would wait, like the poster above said, until you've gotten literacy up and some factory efficiency techs under your belt. Otherwise your factories are going to be churning out expensive products that nobody will buy and you'll be paying more in factory subsidies than you should be. 2. To be honest I always let the AI handle all trade and stockpiles because gently caress trying to figure out if/how that whole system works, even if I have 300 hours in the game. 3. Educated pops will increase your total overall literacy, but honestly with a country as massive as Russia, I don't think it's going to make anything but a negligible difference given the population of East Prussia is only going to be a fraction of your overall population. 4. Not sure here, I never really mess with the academia types. 5. I'm bad at army stuff in V2 but I always do stacks of 6 inf/2 cav/2 art. Later on when supply limits are large enough to do big armies and I'm at war, I double that, but I generally keep stacks of 30,000 troops.
|
|
#
?
Nov 3, 2015 16:09
|
|
|
|
| # ? Apr 16, 2024 21:26 |
|
|
zedprime posted:Tech has been described as a collecting card game,and anomalies as the only source of cards so we should definitely be concerned if the anomaly system sucks. Anomalies can occasionally give you access to techs you have not yet researched, or perhaps allow you to research techs you otherwise would never have been able to develop, but those instances are going to be comparatively rare. Your government form and your species' ethics and even individual scientist traits are all likely to have an equal-or-greater impact on your technological development. EDIT: All of this is still subject to change, obviously. But anomalies are unlikely to be the primary source of technological advancement, was my point. LordMune fucked around with this message at 17:25 on Nov 3, 2015 |
|
#
?
Nov 3, 2015 16:32
|
|