|
Not having to micromanage each planet and instead having sectors as vassals seems brilliant, the pop system also seems quite intriguing. The more I hear about Stellaris the better it sounds, I can hardly wait for it and HOI4!
|
#
?
Jan 28, 2016 19:52
|
|
|
|
| # ? Apr 18, 2024 15:01 |
|
|
Rakthar posted:Ah cool throwing in your lot with Larry. Yeah videogames that change are real scary, I wish these developers would stop developing their game. Reverting to a previous patchlevel? Total bullshit. Larry Was Right
|
|
#
?
Jan 28, 2016 19:53
|
|
|
Baronjutter posted:I understood there was going to be some sort of CK2 style system to limit your direct micro over your empire and I'm liking it more and more the more they talk about it. I think this is a very good idea to not only balance micro-management but also "infinite city(colony) sprawl" found in just about every 4X. I do hope though it isn't just a hard limit through the game of "you can only ever directly manage 5 planets" and maybe something you can push a little if you so choose, at some sort of cost. Perhaps I love micro and want to play a very centrally planned empire so I can put points into something that lets me micro 12 planets, while someone else decides to try to make his colonies happier by putting everyone outside his home system in a sector, plus he hates micro managing planets. The way they talk about it makes it sound a lot like CK2's demense limit, which is a good mechanic - makes me feel a bit more comfortable about the planetary tile system, though we'll see. Baronjutter posted:The lack of any sort of espionage doesn't sound great, I hope there's still at least HoI style "intel" funding. I usually hate spying in 4X games, it's either something useless, or you need to micro manage not only your attack but defense or suddenly all your tech is being stolen and key facilities exploding. If they can make it fit and be fun could be a cool DLC. lol (I am perfectly fine with there being no spying system.)
|
|
#
?
Jan 28, 2016 19:54
|
|
|
Not quite as silly as I might have said it. Was trying to say that espionage is an important thing, it's hard to ignore in games like these, but the implementation of espionage in most 4X has generally been really bad. Sometimes it's just sliders you can ignore and stuff happens based on some policies. I found the spy system in the original master of orion fine. Set a slider, pick if you're wanting to steal tech, sabotage facilities, or simply build up your intel network, then forget about it. Moo2's was terrible in that you had to build spy units then drag and drop them on empires. You also had to do the same for spy defense. Spies on both sides would frequently die so you were constantly having to top-up your supply of spies. Forget to top up your defensive spies because you're busy fighting 3 wars and micro-managing 50 planets? Oops there goes your tech. Other 4x games didn't really do much else. It's all either spy units you have to micro-manage for attack and defense, or just some sort of budget slider. But just not having any espionage at all (although better than a terrible system) is a very slight let down. I'd be happy with a MOO style slider system, specially with cool espionage related events that give you cool choices to make.
|
|
#
?
Jan 28, 2016 20:01
|
|
|
I'm happy with spies being something that happen via event, same as small-scale stuff like commando raids. "We have an opportunity to use one of our moles in the Spanish Navy League to gain blueprints for their new destroyer!" Go ahead (-10 resource, 50% chance of gaining blueprint) No way (+2 relations with Spain)
|
|
#
?
Jan 28, 2016 20:03
|
|
|
A sweating fungus boy wearing a trenchcoat with glasses hanging out outside the UN
|
|
#
?
Jan 28, 2016 20:09
|
|
|
The sector stuff is great news and pretty much eliminates my worries about planet management.
|
|
#
?
Jan 28, 2016 20:13
|
|
|
Baronjutter posted:When you colonize you pick a specific pop to use as the base. This lets you of course keep your colonies "pure" and spread certain ideologies. I wonder on the flip side if there will be mechanics to use colonies to also get rid of groups you don't like. Maybe you really want to create a brutal empire based on militaristic jingo and racism, but a minority of your population are pacifist xenophiles so you build a colony ship, select the pop you don't like, and then add certain carrots and sticks (mostly sticks) to get them off your important homeworld and off to some out of the way colony. I'd love to see forced migration as a way to make your homeworld/core systems more "pure", but of course at the cost of upsetting the people forced to move away and really setting your self up for future independence movements. I wonder what tools we'll have to encourage/discourage certain ideologies and groups.
|
|
#
?
Jan 28, 2016 20:20
|
|
|
Distant Worlds have a horrid spy system based on characters and drop-down menus. Once they complete a ~3 month mission (takes what, 10 minutes IRL? If that) they automatically go back on "defensive" mode, and you have to select the spy, click cancel mission, select the drop down menu to target an empire, another drop down menu to select the mission type and then click "go". Repeat for every agent. And ah, you don't actually steal tech whole-cloth either, just Research Point "parts" of a tech. Easy techs you can get in one try, but the later techs require ~5 successful missions 
|
|
#
?
Jan 28, 2016 20:21
|
|
|
SMAC had really good espionage in the Probe Teams that allowed you to steal techs and units and sabotage cities by releasing nerve toxins into the childrens' creches and then blame it on another faction 
|
|
#
?
Jan 28, 2016 20:27
|
|
|
Oberleutnant posted:SMAC had really good espionage in the Probe Teams that allowed you to steal techs and units and sabotage cities by releasing nerve toxins into the childrens' creches and then blame it on another faction You still have physical units you had to move around and micro-manage and station spies in cities to defend against them, or build a wall of units to stop them and attack them like any other unit. I love smac and I liked the actions you could do via probe teams, but treating them as any other military unit on the map wasn't so great.
|
|
#
?
Jan 28, 2016 20:39
|
|
|
Gwyrgyn Blood posted:Yeah the idea behind it is to reduce micromanagement by building a hierarchy. You tell your generals what to do, and they manage the details. And you get a (presumably large) planning bonus for not trying to micromanage each individual division. It sounds like a win/win to me. I'm very slowly reading through the Stellaris article between interruptions at work but I did quickly want to touch on this, because from what I can tell so far it seems the battle planner is the exact opposite. Its a tool that sorta lets you tell your generals what to aim for and they they'll try to do it by marching straight for the objective. You still need to intervene when you see your units not performing well, or are about to get themselves surrounded or are marching right past a flanking enemy. From the looks of it your troops will happily march into oblivion if you don't step in and stop them. Psychotic Weasel fucked around with this message at 20:58 on Jan 28, 2016 |
|
#
?
Jan 28, 2016 20:48
|
|
|
Oberleutnant posted:SMAC had really good espionage in the Probe Teams that allowed you to steal techs and units and sabotage cities by releasing nerve toxins into the childrens' creches and then blame it on another faction Probe teams were ridiculous in SMAC. Get a unit to an enemy city ONCE in the entire game, and then you can see what that entire enemy civ is building forever, what they have stationed in their cities, everything. The possibilities were nice, but some of the options were pretty game-breaking.
|
|
#
?
Jan 28, 2016 21:01
|
|
|
Psychotic Weasel posted:I'm very slowly reading through the Stellaris article between interruptions at work but I did quickly want to touch on this, because from what I can tell so far it seems the battle planner is the exact opposite. Its a tool that sorta lets you tell your generals what to aim for and they they'll try to do it by marching straight for the objective. You still need to intervene when you see your units not performing well, or are about to get themselves surrounded or are marching right past a flanking enemy. That's not the opposite of what I was saying at all? I guess I wasn't real clear in my post. I'm not saying there's a big AI system that will react to odd things happening and adjust, I'm saying that the planning bonus encourages the player to make better plans and not micromanage individual divisions unless they need to.
|
|
#
?
Jan 28, 2016 21:31
|
|
|
Gort posted:The possibilities were nice, but some of the options were pretty game-breaking. SMAC.txt
|
|
#
?
Jan 28, 2016 23:10
|
|
|
Gwyrgyn Blood posted:That's not the opposite of what I was saying at all? I guess I wasn't real clear in my post. I'm not saying there's a big AI system that will react to odd things happening and adjust, I'm saying that the planning bonus encourages the player to make better plans and not micromanage individual divisions unless they need to. I'm sure the planning bonuses will help, but on the flip side any opponent you face that's also been using the planning bonuses will cancel each other out. My main concern is the haphazard manner in which it seems to utilize units that are assign to the group, even if you're just sending people to defend something you'll still need to look in on them to make sure the AI hasn't done something like station your tanks in a hilly forest or urban area while your non-Mot/Mec infantry have their asses hanging out in an open field next door. And when attacking you're probably still going to need to intervene often to make sure you don't get things like units marching past enemies just outside of the scope of their orders, fruitlessly attacking strongpoints, falling victim to flanking or rear attacks. If you just need to keep up the momentum of an offense while you look in on a spearhead or flank then I'm sure the system will work fine, but if you want to ensure things are being used in the most effective way possible you're probably going to need a more hands-on approach. It would be nice if the AI did take things like take unit composition and the upcoming terrain into account and tried using them in the best way possible but I don't think it does that. At least, it's not been confirmed. Again, I don't mind having to order around my units and I don't think it's unreasonable to have to pay attention to a war in a game that's all about war but I also don't want to have to keep babysitting the AI when I could just do it myself or have to keep coming back to find armies have wandered off somewhere I didn't want them. I don't think it'll be this wonderful fire-and-forget thing where the AI just fights your battles for you.
|
|
#
?
Jan 29, 2016 00:49
|
|
|
 Elisabeth, huh? 
DrSunshine fucked around with this message at 03:55 on Jan 29, 2016 |
|
#
?
Jan 29, 2016 02:21
|
|
|
DrSunshine posted::eyebrow: The first option should clearly be Johan.
|
|
#
?
Jan 29, 2016 02:40
|
|
|
Psychotic Weasel posted:I'm sure the planning bonuses will help, but on the flip side any opponent you face that's also been using the planning bonuses will cancel each other out. My main concern is the haphazard manner in which it seems to utilize units that are assign to the group, even if you're just sending people to defend something you'll still need to look in on them to make sure the AI hasn't done something like station your tanks in a hilly forest or urban area while your non-Mot/Mec infantry have their asses hanging out in an open field next door. And when attacking you're probably still going to need to intervene often to make sure you don't get things like units marching past enemies just outside of the scope of their orders, fruitlessly attacking strongpoints, falling victim to flanking or rear attacks. If you just need to keep up the momentum of an offense while you look in on a spearhead or flank then I'm sure the system will work fine, but if you want to ensure things are being used in the most effective way possible you're probably going to need a more hands-on approach. It would be nice if the AI did take things like take unit composition and the upcoming terrain into account and tried using them in the best way possible but I don't think it does that. At least, it's not been confirmed. 
|
|
#
?
Jan 29, 2016 05:32
|
|
|
Pimpmust posted:Distant Worlds have a horrid spy system based on characters and drop-down menus. Once they complete a ~3 month mission (takes what, 10 minutes IRL? If that) they automatically go back on "defensive" mode, and you have to select the spy, click cancel mission, select the drop down menu to target an empire, another drop down menu to select the mission type and then click "go". The other espionage stuff is merely unwieldy, and having options like "destroy this particular base" or whatever is actually cool and can be useful, but tech espionage completely breaks the game and is in no way fun. I almost always refrain from using it and I wish it could be turned off entirely with a simple option when setting up. e; This is especially galling because you can turn off tech trading with a click. So you can have a game where your best friends for 150 Space Years can't send a delegation of trained experts with diplomatic and linguistic liaisons to help you learn something, but you can send literally one guy into another empire for three months and have him return with the plans for something that rips space a new rear end in a top hat. Ms Adequate fucked around with this message at 07:09 on Jan 29, 2016 |
|
#
?
Jan 29, 2016 07:06
|
|
|
I would really like to see more information on how sectors work. I'm hoping they're a little more complex then just worlds you can't directly build on.
|
|
#
?
Jan 29, 2016 07:29
|
|
|
NewMars posted:I would really like to see more information on how sectors work. I'm hoping they're a little more complex then just worlds you can't directly build on. They're vassals. I assume they'll be using the Liberty Desire mechanics from EU4 to simulate trying to keep them happy.
|
|
#
?
Jan 29, 2016 11:29
|
|
|
Gort posted:They're vassals. I assume they'll be using the Liberty Desire mechanics from EU4 to simulate trying to keep them happy. Step 1: Nerve Stapling Step 2: Profit
|
|
#
?
Jan 29, 2016 11:52
|
|
|
Gort posted:They're vassals. I assume they'll be using the Liberty Desire mechanics from EU4 to simulate trying to keep them happy. Holy Terra is the glorious home of humanity and the only thing that matters. I will gladly burn the Squat sectors to the ground in the name of profit.
|
|
#
?
Jan 29, 2016 11:54
|
|
|
Today's HOI4 DD is now up, it focuses on glorious Nippon and talks about some of their unique issues. Nothing too earth shattering really and they don't talk about how accurately they've modeled their cities turning to ash when I keep dropping atom bombs on them...
|
|
#
?
Jan 29, 2016 13:41
|
|
|
I'm still not sure if strategic bombing and/or naval blockade can make a nation surrender without ground assault.
|
|
#
?
Jan 29, 2016 14:58
|
|
|
Gort posted:I'm still not sure if strategic bombing and/or naval blockade can make a nation surrender without ground assault. Working as intended.
|
|
#
?
Jan 29, 2016 15:33
|
|
|
Do you mean in the game or in real life? I don't think I've ever ended an HOI game with peace before, the war just drags on forever even when the bulk of your opponents have no territory left; the Germans just love withdrawing to the island of Bornholm and forcing you to go after them. The way surrender is supposed to work (in HOI3) is that once a country's national unity gets below the surrender progress for their state they will capitulate. The only way to increase the surrender progress is to occupy their territory and major cities so in theory - unless you bombed and staved them long enough that their national unity was 0% - then you would need to take at least 1 city. The peace process is different this time around though so who knows how it will play out.
|
|
#
?
Jan 29, 2016 15:40
|
|
|
I hope the new peace mechanics have something against Tannu Tuva fighting on bravely after the Soviet Union fell, forcing you to treck all the way through Siberia to finally end the war. Same with the Axis and Manchuko or something. It also seems that you can't create new countries from occupied territory, you can only do so in a peace treaty. Which is a bit strange, given how the postwar political landscape in Europe was created.
|
|
#
?
Jan 29, 2016 15:55
|
|
|
Psychotic Weasel posted:Do you mean in the game or in real life? I think Japan would have surrendered without the two atomic bombings. The incendiary bombings of their cities, the naval blockade, and the fact they had nothing left to fight back with would've been enough.
|
|
#
?
Jan 29, 2016 17:13
|
|
Gort posted:I think Japan would have surrendered without the two atomic bombings. The incendiary bombings of their cities, the naval blockade, and the fact they had nothing left to fight back with would've been enough. You forgot the most important factor: The Soviets declared war and tore up Manchuria.
|
|
|
#
?
Jan 29, 2016 18:36
|
|
|
Do we know if China is getting a national focus tree etc too? Is it the eventual goal for every country to get one?
|
|
#
?
Jan 29, 2016 18:42
|
|
|
Koramei posted:Do we know if China is getting a national focus tree etc too? Is it the eventual goal for every country to get one? Can't wait for the Tibet and Afghanistan National Focuses DLC. Also a full Purple Phoenix-style DLC called "Zog Phoenix".
|
|
#
?
Jan 29, 2016 18:44
|
|
|
Greece should have a focus tree where every option winds up to Restore Byzantium.
|
|
#
?
Jan 29, 2016 18:47
|
|
|
Uh guys, quit distracting the devs from their rightious task of creating the focus tree for Serbia - a tree that will be as long and detailed as all the other major powers at the time combined. It will be Johan's magnum opus.
|
|
#
?
Jan 29, 2016 18:54
|
|
|
Psychotic Weasel posted:Uh guys, quit distracting the devs from their rightious task of creating the focus tree for Serbia - a tree that will be as long and detailed as all the other major powers at the time combined. Don't you mean Bulgaria? As we all know a Bulgarian nation receives many benefits.
|
|
#
?
Jan 29, 2016 19:37
|
|
|
Finally (Every path leads to burning down Denmark and neck deep in russians)
|
|
#
?
Jan 29, 2016 20:21
|
|
|
Koramei posted:Do we know if China is getting a national focus tree etc too? Is it the eventual goal for every country to get one? China won't have a special one in release. Focus trees are certainly a good thing to add in DLCs though!
|
|
#
?
Jan 29, 2016 20:43
|
|
|
Darkrenown posted:China won't have a special one in release. Focus trees are certainly a good thing to add in DLCs though! Confirmed Paradox is withholding features to sell later as DLC. Someone get the pitchforks and torches out. Just kidding - we can't throw our money at you guys fast enough. Just release the game already.
|
|
#
?
Jan 29, 2016 20:47
|
|
|
|
| # ? Apr 18, 2024 15:01 |
|
|
Darkrenown posted:China won't have a special one in release. Focus trees are certainly a good thing to add in DLCs though!
|
|
#
?
Jan 29, 2016 20:51
|
|