|
You can shield primitives in your empire, but you can't crack their planet 
|
#
?
Feb 26, 2018 23:02
|
|
|
|
| # ? Apr 20, 2024 03:45 |
|
|
GotLag posted:You can shield primitives in your empire, but you can't crack their planet Invade, free them, redeclare war, crack.
|
|
#
?
Feb 26, 2018 23:03
|
|
|
I'm still new to this game and havent had any proper wars yet. This game, I seem to be penned in between a dimensional horror and a whole bunch of mining drones and void clouds so I dont think I'll be seeing any neighbours for awhile.
|
|
#
?
Feb 26, 2018 23:13
|
|
|
Only being able to "Impose Ideology" on a rival is bullshit. First case: My enemy was on the far side of a federation member. I needed to kill 6k worth of void clouds and spend about 800 influence to settle a black hole between them so I could declare them my rival and liberate their slaves. That was silly. Second case: The great khan rose up, ate my fanatical purifier neighbor from the inside (which was cool and terrifying), but after battering himself on my fortifications for a while, he croaked and left a bunch of successor states on my doorstep. Great, I'll go in and replace the diadochi one by one with nice democratic leaders. You can't rival someone whose power is inferior compared to yours. I'm too powerful to impose my ideology on these fuckers. This is incredibly frustrating! I have a neat tidy little empire and I don't want to have to straight up conquer these people.
|
|
#
?
Feb 26, 2018 23:16
|
|
|
Synthbuttrange posted:I'm still new to this game and havent had any proper wars yet. If you're pinned in, go "tall" for a while. Focus on research and unity and know that while you can't expand out, people most likely can't mess with you either. The horror will have to wait, but you'll be able to fight through those drones pretty easily. Bide your time then expand with a bang.
|
|
#
?
Feb 26, 2018 23:22
|
|
|
Also if you're starved for planets really don't be afraid to just overrule your tile resources, fill them with labs for whatever you need researching and push tech that way. If you're not expanding you don't need as many minerals.
|
|
#
?
Feb 26, 2018 23:33
|
|
|
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. here's how I view the AI roles: swarm: it's for gun and laser corvettes. they should use this because it keeps them in autocannon range. picket: missile corvettes, because they don't need to be right up on the battle but still should be close, and carrier cruisers so they can intercept missiles headed for the rear with their PD. line: anything with medium weapons. usually your destroyers are the main component of the line. artillery: battleships and large-focused cruisers so they can sit at range and pick things off without taking fire.
|
|
#
?
Feb 26, 2018 23:49
|
|
|
Demiurge4 posted: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. I find myself actually using two fleet designs now. One is a heavy hitter fleet, containing cruisers, battleships, and titans. They will be armed with things like targeting computers and regenerative hull. This fleet is meant to bring the pain against the big tough targets. Cruisers will be taking point here, while the battleships and titan take potshots. The second fleet design is cruisers with double afterburners and corvettes. Cruisers are actually the second fastest ship behind corvettes now. Destroyers may have the same speed as cruisers, but cruisers have two aux slots for more afterburning. This is the rapid response fleet, meant to quickly respond to threats and to do cleanup. Corvettes take point here, while the cruisers take the potshots. Honestly, destroyers are in an awkward spot right now when it comes to speed. They probably need a small speed buff, so that an afterburnered destroyer can keep up with a double afterburnered cruiser. Right now, I find it tough to find a place for them in either fleet. Cruisers are very versatile, and easily make their way into both fleets. Filthy Monkey fucked around with this message at 00:06 on Feb 27, 2018 |
|
#
?
Feb 26, 2018 23:51
|
|
|
Jazerus posted:here's how I view the AI roles: I still like swarm for missile corvettes because the close distance allows them to bypass *some* PD.
|
|
#
?
Feb 26, 2018 23:53
|
|
|
Goddammit Paradox I just want to be space Ireland for a while and figure things out but I keep getting my balls chewed off. 
|
|
#
?
Feb 26, 2018 23:56
|
|
|
Pylons posted:I still like swarm for missile corvettes because the close distance allows them to bypass *some* PD. picket gives a huge tracking bonus, which is the weak stat for missiles either has its advantages
|
|
#
?
Feb 26, 2018 23:59
|
|
|
Dick Trauma posted:Goddammit Paradox I just want to be space Ireland for a while and figure things out but I keep getting my balls chewed off. Just like real Ireland!
|
|
#
?
Feb 27, 2018 00:00
|
|
|
I played a run of this last summer (shortly before Synthetic Dawn dropped) and was quite enjoying it for a while, but things petered out towards the end of the first in-game century when my Federation had crushed pretty much any remaining military opposition in the galaxy, most of my economic and fleet development was on autopilot, and I realized that I'd likely just be coasting along for another 100 years or so until an Endgame Crisis came along. The thing that felt most disappointing was the lack of ability to project non-military foreign influence - I could be part of a Federation and make some basic trade deals, but it never really felt like I could coerce other empires into living by my culture's ethical standards without tossing a huge fleet their way. Has the game added options around that stuff yet, or is diplomacy with AIs still almost exclusively in the military sphere?
|
|
#
?
Feb 27, 2018 00:13
|
|
|
Jenny Angel posted:I played a run of this last summer (shortly before Synthetic Dawn dropped) and was quite enjoying it for a while, but things petered out towards the end of the first in-game century when my Federation had crushed pretty much any remaining military opposition in the galaxy, most of my economic and fleet development was on autopilot, and I realized that I'd likely just be coasting along for another 100 years or so until an Endgame Crisis came along. The thing that felt most disappointing was the lack of ability to project non-military foreign influence - I could be part of a Federation and make some basic trade deals, but it never really felt like I could coerce other empires into living by my culture's ethical standards without tossing a huge fleet their way. Has the game added options around that stuff yet, or is diplomacy with AIs still almost exclusively in the military sphere? Military is still the primary way you interact with other empires, but the initial land race is completely different now. There are also some interesting ways to shake things up now, like you can pay Mauraders to go gently caress someone up for you. There's also a Colossus that converts entire planets to your ethics.
|
|
#
?
Feb 27, 2018 00:22
|
|
|
I appreciate that in addition to the option to offer tribute to marauders, you can also just insult them.
|
|
#
?
Feb 27, 2018 00:23
|
|
|
I mistakenly let my chosen one super admiral get elected president and now that I got him back he seems to have regained his psychic trait so now he's an aggressive psychic chosen one logistician who is doomed to a rendezvous Attaching him to a fleet makes a 50% difference in fleet power
|
|
#
?
Feb 27, 2018 00:27
|
|
|
 Slaving is so gooooooood.
|
|
#
?
Feb 27, 2018 00:30
|
|
|
Fair warning: if you skip a tier in progression of a weapon due to salvaging, your starbases will not adjust   I have researched Marauder missiles but never got around to Fusion Missiles because I salvaged Antimatter Missiles from pirates. So, my stations still use Nuclear Missiles.
|
|
#
?
Feb 27, 2018 00:37
|
|
|
After playing around a few games I've finally got my opinions settled on what I think needs to be fixed with 2.0. I like most of Cherry's changes, love some of them, but certain key systems feel a bit unfinished and it sorta takes the wind out of a lot of fun race builds. I didn't have major issues with War Exhaustion as implemented, though I think it could have stood to tick up a bit slower, and I don't hate the new version of it either. War exhaustion isn't the real issue. Fact is, non conquest wargoals are utterly broken. If you're playing pacifists and/or don't want to take territory in your war, you're boned. Making liberation an all or nothing goal versus balkanization, and then locking the creation of vassals behind adopting domination traditions to boot, means that unless you're one of the ForeverWar factions or just straight militarists with good ethics attraction and a willingness to tank your unity gains there's just no reason to ever declare on a belligerent neighbor. Taking territory may well be a net loss for you a lot of the time, and you might also not want to deal with having to establish new defensive lines. Imposing ideology on an entire nation should be difficult, sure, but you should be capable of taking small parts of that nation as puppet states or buffers. This is further compounded with making it a rivalry-based CB, meaning that there is no way to deal with smaller, weaker empires that might pop up on your borders and act like assholes to you the entire time. You're just sort of forced to tolerate them for unexplained reasons. Rivalry only being capable of being adopted against equals just sort of messes up a lot of the CB system. The route I might take rivalry is allow it to be declared against anyone, but only allow influence benefits from it if the empire in question is on a rough parity with you. Your government may be saber rattling at the small guy or the Fallen Empire, but the citizens are only really gonna be supportive if they think they can win a scrap and also don't feel like bullies, you know? Likewise, the restrictions on vassalizing are, well, too restrictive. Sure, demanding vassalization from an established empire should be difficult. Having to adopt a whole separate tradition in an already unity-starved game just to release planets you already own is super annoying. Let us release planets as whole new ideologically compatible empires, if not as vassals, then just replace that option with the current vassal button when you have domination or whatever. With how important territory management is in this game right now, the player needs to be able to give up territory as well as take it. That is currently impossible until you drop a load of unity you may not want to spend. Travel time is a pretty common complaint I've been seeing, and I'm going to both agree and disagree on it. Travel time is fine in my opinion - I understand the intent is to break up fleets and force people to defend their entire empire as well as punish over-extension, and I agree with that as a gameplay point. However, I think gateways come waaaaay too late in the tech tree, and are waaaaay too expensive to produce. Producing intra-empire gateways should definitely be a midgame goal for players, not the current post-mega engineering afterthought they currently are. Maybe have the player producible gateways be restricted in range compare to precursor ones your find, and then allow production of unrestricted gateways as a much later option? That would keep the current travel time gameplay challenge in place, but would allow empires to react to invasion much faster, provided they put the resources into creating a network. Overall I super like 2.0 and think a lot of the vitriol PDox is seeing is unwarranted, but there are for sure some standout problems with the mechanics of 2.0 as currently implemented. Hopefully my suggestions aren't utter nonsense, but since a lot of people seem to be arguing that things are broken but then not elaborating or offering ideas, I figured I'd throw my rant up. We already know the team is listening, given the twitter post today, so maybe it'll help.
|
|
#
?
Feb 27, 2018 00:38
|
|
|
Magil Zeal posted:Fair warning: if you skip a tier in progression of a weapon due to salvaging, your starbases will not adjust  that's frankly a pretty horrendous bug you should be able to alter your starbase loadout, or at least it'd be a good bandaid to let you pick whether to use non-tier missiles or top-tier missiles
|
|
#
?
Feb 27, 2018 00:45
|
|
|
One thing I have noticed about the random pirates is that they all seem to really want to attack just one system, so if you fortify that system they'll just break harmlessly against your fortress forever. e: Is there some sort of hard cap on fleet command size or what, because I'm researching this repeatable tech for +10 and it's sitting at 200 e2: Yes, it's 200 and that should probably be set to stop showing up once you are at 200 Shugojin fucked around with this message at 01:01 on Feb 27, 2018 |
|
#
?
Feb 27, 2018 00:51
|
|
|
I finally got my fleet big enough to take on the mining drones and had them sit on the wreckage while a constructor made its way over and waited for the survey ship to finish. A pirate base spawns right under my fleet and is instantly obliterated.
|
|
#
?
Feb 27, 2018 01:09
|
|
|
Yeah, you should be able to tweak starbase layouts. I have a starbase in a good chokepoint, but it's a pulsar. Shields are useless. Why do I need to have the starbase have those extra slots be taken up to be completely useless? Even if it was on a case by case basis, I would still want to have the opportunity to actually use the terrain to my advantage. Since the AI goes "yeah all starbases need shields" even in a pulsar system, I could use those slots for armor. The reason I also have a base there is because there is a curator enclave there (and basically it has 5 exit points that are all leading to things I own). They also have slots for shields that are rendered completely useless. Couldn't the game look at the galactic terrain first for a system and go "oh, there is a pulsar here, so shields are rendered useless so we should pump up the armor instead" in the cases of starbases and enclaves? I can set the defense platforms there to use armor only because I can customize those.
|
|
#
?
Feb 27, 2018 01:10
|
|
|
It also affects your gun loadout because plasma cannons are going to be the only thing worth equipping in a pulsar system. I have pulsar pattern defence platforms for precisely that reason.
|
|
#
?
Feb 27, 2018 01:14
|
|
|
goddamn lazy military contractors, stamping out starbases from their generic starbase press
|
|
#
?
Feb 27, 2018 01:20
|
|
|
So I just won my first major war, my slaver neighbors declared on me and I went and kicked their asses, seizing three colonized border worlds via claims and just sqeaking it in before my war exhaustion hit 100% (the final invasion concluded after exhaustion hit 100). Except now I have no clue what to do with these guys. The worlds are in shambles from the armies fighting/bombardment and the populace is in an uproar. I've started rebuilding the forts and declared martial law on all three worlds, but I'm not even sure if I want to keep these, or why I even claimed them instead of just kicking their asses for funsies. I guess I could split them off into a protectorate? Or maybe just put a couple of my own colonies into a sector and slowly integrate them. Any tips on dealing with newly conquered worlds as relatively benign Egalitarian Xenophiles? I'm half tempted to just reload to the start of the war and not claim all that poo poo, its gonna be a mess, lol.  OwlFancier posted:It also affects your gun loadout because plasma cannons are going to be the only thing worth equipping in a pulsar system. I have pulsar pattern defence platforms for precisely that reason. I think this is why I seized those planets, I kinda wanted that other pulsar system as a chokepoint, Ubreb did great against an enemy fleet supposedly stronger than it (though it did take significant damage).
|
|
#
?
Feb 27, 2018 01:26
|
|
|
I have the tech and the resources to build a dyson sphere, but when I select it from the mega structure menu, nothing highlights to place it. What gives? 
|
|
#
?
Feb 27, 2018 01:27
|
|
|
UltraRed posted:I have the tech and the resources to build a dyson sphere, but when I select it from the mega structure menu, nothing highlights to place it. What gives? Do you have mining stations on your star?
|
|
#
?
Feb 27, 2018 01:29
|
|
|
UltraRed posted:I have the tech and the resources to build a dyson sphere, but when I select it from the mega structure menu, nothing highlights to place it. What gives? Dismantle the mining station on the star.
|
|
#
?
Feb 27, 2018 01:31
|
|
|
What exactly causes a war to get the -100 "demanding surrender" modifier? I'm trying to vassalize a relatively tiny empire, but that loving modifier means that no matter how much I beat up on them, I can't force a surrender. Does it make a difference that they have a defensive pact? Do I have to loving occupy every single system that the defensive pact partner owns as well?
|
|
#
?
Feb 27, 2018 01:33
|
|
|
HappyKitty posted:What exactly causes a war to get the -100 "demanding surrender" modifier? I'm trying to vassalize a relatively tiny empire, but that loving modifier means that no matter how much I beat up on them, I can't force a surrender. Does it make a difference that they have a defensive pact? Do I have to loving occupy every single system that the defensive pact partner owns as well? You do if they're fighting in the war. You haven't won yet. We do need a separate peace system.
|
|
#
?
Feb 27, 2018 01:48
|
|
|
HappyKitty posted:What exactly causes a war to get the -100 "demanding surrender" modifier? I'm trying to vassalize a relatively tiny empire, but that loving modifier means that no matter how much I beat up on them, I can't force a surrender. Does it make a difference that they have a defensive pact? Do I have to loving occupy every single system that the defensive pact partner owns as well? Not every single system, but you do have to also beat up/occupy their ally a bit as well.
|
|
#
?
Feb 27, 2018 01:49
|
|
|
Libluini posted: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" It is similiar for me, some Type of prefix (PD for Point defense, T for Torp, M for missle, LR-K for long ranged Kinetic) and then some fluffy name. So if I am doing Space Soviets, the Bomber/Missle cruisers I used to run in 1.9 were typically CV-M-Varyag. Dont run those now, the guided cruiser sections simply arent very good because S slots just dont go well with missles. Random hints: I heavily recommend choosing chokepoints also with an eye on eventual local modifiers. I have an Empire connected by a shieldless Neutron Star, and well, heavily fortified it with custom Plasma accellerator defense platforms. Those did unleash some absolutely hilarious damage on the Khan when he showed up, including gibbing his titan very early in the battle. It would also appear that Corvette Spam is the current meta. As armor is now just another type of hitpoints, the best defense is not getting hit and Corvettes and destroyers to that quite well. It also helps that the afterburners make them quicker strategically as well. Unless you are seriously behind in propulsion tech, and Corvette fleet and even most corvette+DD fleets are quite capable of evading bad fights (and can set up fights in knife fight range if they wish). I want to add that there are now point defense corvettes, and a 4 rockets Corvette/2 Torpedo Corvette/1PD Corvette setup (multiply this with 5 for a 4-5K fleet that is pretty cheap and get build quickly) is excellent for quickly flagging systems, can take spaceports without losses and does have quite a punch. I think the nasty thing with these Vette fleets is that enemy large turrets have basically nothing they can effectively shoot at. There are also a bunch of cheap techs which made Corvette hulls better, cheaper or quicker to build, and these techs are iirc cheaper in research terms then their equivalents for heavier ships. The other advantadge of multiple Corvette fleets is that it is far easier to coordinate them. Against the AI, if I have 4 5K Corvette fleets in the midgame (which is around 100-20ish Naval capacity), then it is typically possible to swarm an individual AI fleet of lets say 7 K with 3 of these fleets and quite efficiently wreck it.
|
|
#
?
Feb 27, 2018 02:02
|
|
|
I feel like it would be interesting if larger ship hulls had innate armour, like starbases have. That way you've got an inherent loadout change between fighting big and small ships because bigger ones need more AP guns while smaller ones don't, it would also give you a reason to use the bigger ones cos at the moment I'm not sure I've wanted to use destroyers or cruisers. The ability to add small mounts to large ships would also be good I think, perhaps. OwlFancier fucked around with this message at 02:11 on Feb 27, 2018 |
|
#
?
Feb 27, 2018 02:07
|
|
|
I would loving love it if different hull sections were actually research options instead of automatically granted when you get the ship + whatever slots you currently have an item for. And then loving love it even more if you could get late-game techs to add additional slots to hull sections. Or allow changing the size of a given slot on a section. Or adding special modifiers to a given kind of hull section (i.e. "+X armor" or "+Y% of hull points as armor", or even "+20 energy", etc.).
|
|
#
?
Feb 27, 2018 02:18
|
|
|
Strobe posted:I would loving love it if different hull sections were actually research options instead of automatically granted when you get the ship + whatever slots you currently have an item for. The NSC mod does this, i believe, you can unlock better hull sections with more slots.
|
|
#
?
Feb 27, 2018 02:21
|
|
|
Strobe posted:I would loving love it if different hull sections were actually research options instead of automatically granted when you get the ship + whatever slots you currently have an item for. Yes Sword of the Stars was pretty awesome.
|
|
#
?
Feb 27, 2018 02:29
|
|
|
So question, is there a guide anywhere to how to make a static map? Like the one in New Horizons for example? I'm vaguely toying with the idea of making a mod that tries to fulfill the 'set galaxy' request people often expressed but I'd kind of need to know how2map first. I figure I can reverse engineer it from the Trek mod if needed but a proper guide would be easier.
|
|
#
?
Feb 27, 2018 02:36
|
|
|
Galaga Galaxian posted:So I just won my first major war, my slaver neighbors declared on me and I went and kicked their asses, seizing three colonized border worlds via claims and just sqeaking it in before my war exhaustion hit 100% (the final invasion concluded after exhaustion hit 100). just put them in their own sector and let them stir up trouble for a while. after 5 years they will get over being conquered, and the unrest events will help shift their ethics, which is on balance good when you are conquering opposite-ethic pops.
|
|
#
?
Feb 27, 2018 02:57
|
|
|
|
| # ? Apr 20, 2024 03:45 |
|
|
upgrade all defense platforms button when
|
|
#
?
Feb 27, 2018 03:03
|
|
