|
So I’m playing as a machine empire (generic type) for the first time and I’m in a Cold War with a nearby fanatic purifier civilization that is likely going to go hot soon. My machine civilization is normally kind of live and let live rather than being Borg/Terminators, so I was hoping for clarification on what happens if I seize a purifier planet? Specifically, will I wind up automatically purging or displacing the population? I don’t want to develop a reputation as genocidal maniacs so I would prefer to conquer their systems and scatter their population to the stars if possible. Barring that, how do I avoid accidentally murdering tons of these maniacs after the war if I win?
|
#
?
Feb 26, 2018 20:05
|
|
|
|
| # ? Apr 25, 2024 20:55 |
|
|
There is a displacement purge type you can use. It takes a while though, there need to be open tiles in empires accepting refugees.
|
|
#
?
Feb 26, 2018 20:08
|
|
|
Shugojin posted:There is a displacement purge type you can use. It takes a while though, there need to be open tiles in empires accepting refugees. Should totally be a mini crisis where you displace an empire-worth of purifiers, and a century or so later the refugees mass attempt to take over other empires, forming a bunch of new purifier nations. I mean, really, no that would be awful, but I'm picturing the well-meaning robbits doing the galactic equivalent of stomping on a purifier spider egg sack, only to lift up their foot to realize they just unleashed thousands of baby purifiers. (Note: I do not condone smashing spider-friend egg sacks!)
|
|
#
?
Feb 26, 2018 20:19
|
|
|
hobbesmaster posted:Anyone else a bit disappointed with the Gaian creation perk? It takes so long (same as before, was always too long) and doesn't improve things THAT much compared to teraforming to the correct habitability or gene modding. I feel like taking the ascension perk and becoming master terraformers it should take the same time as the other options. Teraforming in general is kind of weak IMO. I feel like if you've gone down the route of specializing in it (which pretty much requires you to forgo the other 3 ascension types), it should be a hell of a lot faster and cheaper than it is. And for that matter if it's smaller than size 20 the size should be increased to 20 when teraforming if you've taken the capstone perk.
|
|
#
?
Feb 26, 2018 20:20
|
|
|
So if I go ahead and purge them in the usual way will everyone hate me as a genocidal maniac, despite them being FPs? I don’t want to just neuter them and wait 60 years for them all to die off. Is it possible to break them up into multiple polities, some of which may be vassals or otherwise less psychotic in terms of their approach to the rest of the world?
|
|
#
?
Feb 26, 2018 20:35
|
|
|
I played a really awesome game of stellaris 2.0 after some false starts for like 12 hours straight yesterday. I was on the edge of my seat from literally 2200 to 2380 fighting one menace after another. It was maybe the most fun I had playing a paradox game in years. Some general thoughts that I am drilling down into points for efficiency: 1) Adding mineral upkeep for fleets, nerfing their speed, and making stations viable, adds enormous strategic depth to your decision making. In the early-to-mid game there is now a real and important choice to make between 'war-footing' and 'peace-footing.' Do you risk a small fleet for early boost to economic infrastructure? Or do you build a big fleet to dissuade your enemies and to take more territory? Then there is the geographical complexity added by the speed nerf and the station buff. If you are sandwiched between two enemies: Do you create static defenses at viable chokepoints? Do you split your fleet to help hold these chokepoints? Or are there too many hyperlanes? Should you instead focus on a single fleet and hope to win one war before fighting another? These choices were all real and important and well-balanced in my game and it greatly owned. I felt very much like an empire with enormous countervailing commitments and pressures and limited resources to deal with them -- which is how I should feel and never have until now. When these changes are well tuned and working properly Stellaris is a game with real legs rather than a game you can imagine you might like in the future. 2) But this strategic depth is not always apparent on default map settings. AI empires grow too slowly. They will grab 5 or 6 planets and stop territorial expansion. Normal aggression AI is too peaceful. They still bungle invasions more often than not. This is exacerbated by high war exhaustion which makes war gains for AI very small. The galaxy too often becomes a big NAP-fest. A good player on normal will expand to 10 or 15 planets and invade one or two AIs and become the most powerful empire in the galaxy by 2280. 3) This can be somewhat fixed atm with the right map settings and game modifications, which will constrain the player, and make the AIs viable mid-game threats, without giving too many bullshit bonuses. Best map settings are: max number of ais, high aggression, hard difficulty, normal size, and a few more ais with advanced starts. High aggression was recently changed to create almost all slavers, exterminators, and imperialists, and it is real good. Then the following modifications to hard difficulty in static_modifiers to make it less bullshit: remove the bonus to fleet cap, remove the bonus to damage, remove the bonus to research, keep the bonus to resources (~25%). Then the following mods: Glavius' Ultimate AI Megamod; ReducedWarExhaustion. 4) My great game was as follows. I was sandwiched between two assholes. I defense pact'd with a third. I managed to fight both to a stalemate while marauders were running through my territory destroying all my infrastructure. Then a driven exterminator gobbled up one of the assholes as well as another. I took advantage of the chaos to take some territory. But now the driven exterminators were the greatest power in the region and everyone was scared shitless. Then I join with two other militant spiritualists in a three-front war against the exterminators (killer robots) and split the territory three ways. Now I am in a cold war--it is 3380--with one of the original assholes and one of the spiritualists (huge border friction malus). I can take one enemy easily at this point. But if the spiritualists team up--one hates me, one is ambivalent--I will be in big trouble. Soon there will be an end game crisis. In my territory there is a forgotten empire to the south who can only go through me. There is also another forgotten empire to the north who has a wormhole straight between the FE and myself. I am hoping for the best and preparing for the worst. Guilliman posted:I'm keeping an eye on comments like this Zane fucked around with this message at 20:55 on Feb 26, 2018 |
|
#
?
Feb 26, 2018 20:41
|
|
It's hard to get balance right. Overall with my mod resources are a bit more abundant throughout the galaxy. My last update doubled or trippled the habitability malus from negative modifiers, so some planets end up being a bit harder to colonise. This to somewhat compensate for the resources in the galaxy.
|
HappyKitty posted:So what are some of y'all nerds naming conventions for ship designs and sectors and stuff? My own naming schemes are less of a convention and more of a weak guideline, but it goes mostly like this: Corvettes: Get names like "Reaver" or "Ripper" for interceptors, or "Whirlwind" and "Firestorm" for missile/torpedo boats. Destroyers: "Shield" or "Paladin" for PD-ships, "Defiant" or "Reliant" for combat destroyers (medium-weapons mostly) Cruisers: Escort cruisers (Strike craft, medium and small guns) get names like "Escort" and here the naming scheme basically stops Battleships: "Normal" ships (guns, but no huge guns, sometimes some fighters) tend to get names like "Leviathan", while ships with XL-guns get stuff like "-hammer" suffixed to their name. Titans: Didn't have one yet, but I plan on giving them really pretentious names like "X of Y". Like for example "Scepter of Unrelenting Pain" Defense platforms: Don't get names. I give them designations, like for example "Anti-Capital A01" for a platform meant to shoot at big ships, or "Shield S01" for PD-platforms Starbases: Get names from my favorite SF, or names that sound like them. I have Starbases called "Valdor Industrial" and "Sagittarius Unlimited", for example.
|
|
#
?
Feb 26, 2018 20:42
|
|
|
I just name my stuff for what’s on it. Missile corvette. Plasma defense station. Mixed laser/kinetic Etc
|
|
#
?
Feb 26, 2018 20:52
|
|
|
Shugojin posted:There is a displacement purge type you can use. It takes a while though, there need to be open tiles in empires accepting refugees. Technically it doesn't NEED that to be the case, there's another event that just "displaces" them to unknown space (deletes the pop rather than moving it somewhere) but both of those events take a fairly long time to happen. But yeah, a regular non-displacement purge will still get you hated for genocide. FP is a civic, after all - its their government that's the problem, without it they would just be billions of generic mostly-xenophobic assholes. Maybe the
|
|
#
?
Feb 26, 2018 20:54
|
|
|
I usually go with something dumb and tangentially related to the portrait set I used. So Lizards get Skink class- Corvettes Terradon class- Destroyers Saurus class- Cruisers Kroxigor class- Battleships Slann class- Titans Machines get Astromech class- Corvettes Protocol class- Destroyers Hunter Killer class- Cruisers Interrogation class- Battleships Battle class- Titans etc
|
|
#
?
Feb 26, 2018 20:57
|
|
|
Does anyone else find their titan is always the first ship to die? I'll go into a battle with 10 battleships and 20 cruisers and lose 4 cruisers. I'll go into a battle with a Titan, 5 battleships, and 10 cruisers and lose just the titan and maybe a cruiser every time. It seems like enemies focus-fire on the titan.
|
|
#
?
Feb 26, 2018 21:00
|
|
|
ConfusedUs posted:I just name my stuff for what’s on it. When playing SEV, I combine both schemes, yours and mine. This results in crap like "OMS-1 Mjöllnir" for "Orbital Missile Satellite Typ 1 Mjöllnir" I'm kind of torn if I should do this for Stellaris too, or if it would be overkill.
|
|
#
?
Feb 26, 2018 21:00
|
|
|
How are folks finding carriers now? I've got a soft spot for them in SciFi and really want them to work well.
|
|
#
?
Feb 26, 2018 21:11
|
|
|
People who've successfully played tall in 2.0, how have you been doing it? I've seen it work once in a multiplayer game over the weekend, but it relied on some choices (pacifist, mechanist) I'm not thrilled about making. I'd love to get a good Inward Perfection --> megastructures tall run going, but my last experiment didn't go well (Ethics: Xenophobe, Pacifist, Materialist, Civics: Inward Perfection, Technocracy, Traits: Intelligent, Natural Engineers, Thrifty). Two smaller questions: 1) Are Fanatical Purifiers bugged in the same way as Determined Assimilators and Devourers are? 2) Do broken Gateways count as Megastructures for the purposes of getting a bonus to Megaengineering appearing as a tech choice?
|
|
#
?
Feb 26, 2018 21:12
|
|
|
How did I not notice we got a bunch of new name lists???
|
|
#
?
Feb 26, 2018 21:16
|
|
|
Nitrousoxide posted:How are folks finding carriers now? I've got a soft spot for them in SciFi and really want them to work well. I have them, because I absolutely love carriers too, but I still don't think they're really worth using. I think it'd take a significant revamp to the way they work to make them worth it.
|
|
#
?
Feb 26, 2018 21:20
|
|
|
HappyKitty posted:Anyone else have very specific naming conventions in your playthroughs? I just hit the auto name for the name list then stick a classification abbreviation in front of it. Corvettes = FF, FFG (Missiles), DDA (Arty destroyer), CA (line cruiser), CVL (carrier cruiser) etc etc
|
|
#
?
Feb 26, 2018 21:23
|
|
|
Hey I came up with a harebrained idea while sitting on he toilet: would it be worthwhile to get Voidborne, identify choke points, and then put a habitat in those systems and build nothing on them but strongholds? It would basically stop an invasion force cold until they go through 11 bombardment cycles to knock out the FTL inhibitors, or force them to commit a huge gently caress-off army to occupy the habitat. Plus, that sweet, sweet unity.
|
|
#
?
Feb 26, 2018 21:23
|
|
|
Turns out, being an AI and being limited to gaia worlds only is not a great combination. Who would have thought?
|
|
#
?
Feb 26, 2018 21:25
|
|
|
HappyKitty posted:Hey I came up with a harebrained idea while sitting on he toilet: would it be worthwhile to get Voidborne, identify choke points, and then put a habitat in those systems and build nothing on them but strongholds? It would basically stop an invasion force cold until they go through 11 bombardment cycles to knock out the FTL inhibitors, or force them to commit a huge gently caress-off army to occupy the habitat. I did that recently, and then I staffed it with Strong pops, but you could conceivably do it with Strong Resilient pops too 
|
|
#
?
Feb 26, 2018 21:29
|
|
|
I'm really glad they are changing the auto white peace at 100% war exhaustion, I've been playing a fanatic purifier tomb world start and been dominating my local neighbors who banded together but every time I get to start bombarding their planets down to tomb worlds I'm at 80% war exhaustion and forced to peace out after destroying a couple buildings. Not exactly the scourge of the galaxy I was imagining. The changes to make stellar geography matter and chokepoints defensible are incredible, 2.0 is really good.
|
|
#
?
Feb 26, 2018 21:33
|
|
|
The only reason I have carriers is that they seem to be the only way to get point defense for your fleets. I have no clue what the new meta is and I'm not really enjoying the ship design changes so much because the feedback is still mostly useless. Great, weapon options have more defined functions, but I have no clue how to translate my battle reports (when I even get them, so many end with nothing coming up at all) into meaningful fleet composition or design changes. Did I lose that battle against an evenly match enemy because I had too many small ships? Too many big ships? Not enough anti-shield weapons? Wasted fleet power on carriers? Need more long range weapons? Need more short ranged accurate weapons? I have no idea. I can get a general sense that I need more anti-shield or anti-armour weapons, but I have no idea how to weigh if I should be swarming with smaller ships or if my big ships will do better with more of a screen. I'm not even sure how to judge which AI to give ships. What's the pro/con of swarm vrs line?
|
|
#
?
Feb 26, 2018 21:36
|
|
|
OwlFancier posted:I did that recently, and then I staffed it with Strong pops, but you could conceivably do it with Strong Resilient pops too Also, what would happen if you were to, I dunno, assign the habitat to its own sector, and just not care about energy shortage? 
|
|
#
?
Feb 26, 2018 21:36
|
|
|
Xenaero posted:I've spent the last few hours making sixteen empires instead of doing a 2.0 run. You can't say this and not share, you jerk.
|
|
#
?
Feb 26, 2018 21:39
|
|
|
Baronjutter posted:The only reason I have carriers is that they seem to be the only way to get point defense for your fleets. I have no clue what the new meta is and I'm not really enjoying the ship design changes so much because the feedback is still mostly useless. Great, weapon options have more defined functions, but I have no clue how to translate my battle reports (when I even get them, so many end with nothing coming up at all) into meaningful fleet composition or design changes. It gives you efficiency readouts for each damage type, look at the ships you're fighting and see how they're built and look at your guns and see what they do best at. Also your hit rate is generally indicative of whether your guns are too inaccurate. Each of the AIs has different stats too, you decide based on that primarily.
|
|
#
?
Feb 26, 2018 21:39
|
|
|
OwlFancier posted:It gives you efficiency readouts for each damage type, look at the ships you're fighting and see how they're built and look at your guns and see what they do best at. Also your hit rate is generally indicative of whether your guns are too inaccurate. Since each weapon now specializes in doing one thing, or is super bad at doing one thing, is there any reason to not just have a balance of weapons? Kinetics to kill shields, plasma to kill armour and hull? Some small mount lasers for targeting smaller ships? Outside of some space monsters that are 100% hull or some threats that focus super heavily on shields how much design tweaking is really needed? What do you look for in enemy fleets to know what to respond with? Say I click on a potential enemy's main fleet and I see they have a ton of destroyers, some corvettes, and a couple cruisers. They all look like they have an even mix of low level armour and shields and they are armed mostly with lasers and the odd missile. What would the correct "counter" to a fleet like this be? Or the materialist fallen empire who just absolutely obliterated me taking almost no losses when my 90k fleet smashed into their 80k fleet. Knowing the materialist FE's ships, what's the correct counter?
|
|
#
?
Feb 26, 2018 21:50
|
|
|
Baronjutter posted:Since each weapon now specializes in doing one thing, or is super bad at doing one thing, is there any reason to not just have a balance of weapons? Kinetics to kill shields, plasma to kill armour and hull? Some small mount lasers for targeting smaller ships? Outside of some space monsters that are 100% hull or some threats that focus super heavily on shields how much design tweaking is really needed? What do you look for in enemy fleets to know what to respond with? A balanced weapon loadout is counter to a balanced fleet, yes, but more often than not an AI will focus (even if only by one module) on either shields or armor.
|
|
#
?
Feb 26, 2018 21:52
|
|
|
 I don't think I've ever seen a galaxy so friendly before. There is literally two rivalries in the whole galaxy, between the UNE and COM and the southern Fanatic Egalitarians and their authoritarian neighbour. Everyone just sits around and trades a lot. Also, goddamn it can be painful expanding with 0.75 lanes. There's an artisan troupe two stars northwest of my easternmost outpost but getting it in my borders will take twenty-three outposts, yeesh.
|
|
#
?
Feb 26, 2018 21:53
|
|
|
Baronjutter posted:Since each weapon now specializes in doing one thing, or is super bad at doing one thing, is there any reason to not just have a balance of weapons? Well, yeah. If you hit the enemy's weakness you're much better off using specialised weapons. An example I ran into in my game was a big pack of Crystals in a system that nullified shields. Crystals have nothing but a shitload of hull points, and shields are obviously out. I refit my whole fleet with autocannons and armour, and went to town. You're right that a mix of stuff is unlikely to run into an enemy that's specialised against it, but it also won't be as efficient as going all-in on something can be. It's a strategic choice.
|
|
#
?
Feb 26, 2018 21:54
|
|
|
Reveilled posted:
I remember someone making a mod that just added more slider-steps to some of the options in the game. I find 1.0 lanes a tiny bit too much and .75 lanes too snakey, would anyone know if it would be simple to just mod more options into the interface, like 0.8, 0.9, or the steps are hard-coded into the map script?
|
|
#
?
Feb 26, 2018 21:55
|
|
|
Baronjutter posted:Since each weapon now specializes in doing one thing, or is super bad at doing one thing, is there any reason to not just have a balance of weapons? Kinetics to kill shields, plasma to kill armour and hull? Some small mount lasers for targeting smaller ships? Outside of some space monsters that are 100% hull or some threats that focus super heavily on shields how much design tweaking is really needed? What do you look for in enemy fleets to know what to respond with? I've had a lot of success with my corvettes using 1 autocannon to 2 plasma, they have equivalent range and there's generally a lot more health/armour on things than shields, so yes I think you can do very well with a balanced loadout, that generally gives me about 115-125% efficiency overall owing to that preponderance of health distribution. Everything has more health than armour/shields and plasma is good against both armour and health, so it's by far the best finisher option apart from very specifically mining lasers if something has nothing but health and in vast quantities, but mining lasers are pretty inaccurate so they're a very niche weapon compared to plasma. You just need something to crack the shields at that point and you could use either a long range kinetic bombardment before your corvettes close range, or you could stick an autocannon on there which still does good damage to hull. Your issue generally comes when you run into weapon size restrictions because autocannons are only small now, alas. So for medium size mounts you're a lot more varied on what you might want to put in the slot depending on what you want the ship to do. You've got a lot of choice between range and specialization and whether you want to run missiles instead. I don't know what your FE was using but look at their designs and see, if there's lots of big guns then I'd suggest torpedo corvettes, lots of small craft, maybe missiles or S size weapons. Fighters/missiles, use PD destroyers. You really have to look and see. Honestly I'm only bothering with corvettes for much of the game because they're extremely versatile and by far the fastest craft, that response time is very important, so I know more about them than the bigger ships, but the range differences are a lot bigger too now. Basic kinetics are very long ranged now so I can see the appeal in putting them on bigger ships for an opening shield cracker volley to allow your shorter ranged craft to pick unshielded targets when they get into range? I haven't tested it but it might work quite well? OwlFancier fucked around with this message at 22:04 on Feb 26, 2018 |
|
#
?
Feb 26, 2018 21:58
|
|
|
Oh hey someone made a mod that seems to greatly expand the map slider options, haven't tried it out yet but looks to maybe answer my and other people's desire for something between 1 and .75 hyperlane setting. https://steamcommunity.com/sharedfiles/filedetails/?id=1311766166&searchtext=
|
|
#
?
Feb 26, 2018 22:07
|
|
|
Can i make my own automatic naming scheme for planets/fleets/etc?
|
|
#
?
Feb 26, 2018 22:21
|
|
|
Okay I'm starting to understand war exhaustion better. Bit of a pain in the area that status quo is forced, but border wars with the ravaging horde I've got as a neighbour is fun!
|
|
#
?
Feb 26, 2018 22:24
|
|
|
I'm sad that shield capacitors went off the bend and became useless. They were a really good power spike that really gave destroyers the tank needed to take out starports. Regenerative hull is the new meta.
|
|
#
?
Feb 26, 2018 22:26
|
|
|
Dongattack posted:Can i make my own automatic naming scheme for planets/fleets/etc? Yep, I think it's as easy as throwing in a text file and maybe adding the file name to a list somewhere.
|
|
#
?
Feb 26, 2018 22:27
|
|
|
What's better? Guaranteeing the independence of a friendly neighbour to fight the horde? Or giving the friendly neighbour lots and lots of money so they can build ships and fend them off?
|
|
#
?
Feb 26, 2018 22:32
|
|
|
I don't know how people have already completed multiple 2.0 games already. I've put in probably ~8 hours into my current game, which I know is not a lot, but I'm still solidly early game. And I'm already considering starting over. 
|
|
#
?
Feb 26, 2018 22:35
|
|
|
Pylons posted:I have them, because I absolutely love carriers too, but I still don't think they're really worth using. I think it'd take a significant revamp to the way they work to make them worth it. They still seem to succeed at lagging things out at least.
|
|
#
?
Feb 26, 2018 22:54
|
|
|
|
| # ? Apr 25, 2024 20:55 |
|
|
I've done like 30 minutes to poke at all the pretty buttons so far... I'm going on vacation soon, and rather than skiing like my family intends, I shall... uhm... inwardly perfect my perfect empire of lifeseeded pops and shield away all undesirable worlds.
|
|
#
?
Feb 26, 2018 22:57
|
|
