|
Darkrenown posted:I mean, you could play the tutorial
|
#
?
Nov 20, 2019 11:40
|
|
|
|
| # ? Apr 25, 2024 14:44 |
|
|
Funny since hive minds have simplified gameplay.
|
|
#
?
Nov 20, 2019 21:54
|
|
|
Huh got outplayed by the AI for once. Only potential allies close to me joins in a federation with a dude who do not want me in it. Lost an early war against my aggresive neighbour since I was expecting an attack from the other side and my fleet was out of position from my bastion. Nevermind, only got humiliated. Ten years later, I am prepared and we attack, winning the war with a status quo, only loosing a bordersystem and taking 2 planets, including their homeworld, leaving them with 2. This, predictably, wrecks their economy and they are far weaker than me now. Ten years later, after the truce, they declare war. Me, thinking it was a desperation move, easily crush their offensive and occupies the third planet. Then I notice 2 fleets aproaching, equaling about 3x my total firepower  They had invited their southern neighbour, who hates my guts due to opposing ethics and rivalry. Said AI have spent the game punching a determined exterminator and are solidly overwhelming to me. Now they have caught my fleet out of position and cut off from my bastion. Gonna be fun to try and turn this around 
|
|
#
?
Nov 21, 2019 00:53
|
|
|
It looks like Paradox is taking some extra time to address the playerbase's concerns with performance and the AI's ability in general. Releasing over the holidays didn't go so well last year, so I'm glad the team is avoiding that potential disaster.grekulf posted:Moving on to Federations: During PDXCON 2019 we said that we would give more information on the expansion later during the year – and today we want to share some news that Federations is targeted for release in early 2020. Although we understand that some of you might be disappointed that Federations will not be released in December, we want you to know that we are taking more time to make sure that the next update is going to be amazing. Full Dev Diary: https://forum.paradoxplaza.com/forum/index.php?threads/stellaris-dev-diary-161-development-update.1285424
|
|
#
?
Nov 21, 2019 17:57
|
|
|
Maybe they'll find one weird trick for performance, but I think the entire economy system needs another redo but this time actually designed around the AI and performance. I don't believe a word paradox says anymore. Even if their genuine intent is to try to improve things, I literally don't think they have the skill or budget to do what's needed.
|
|
#
?
Nov 21, 2019 18:07
|
|
|
ded engine
|
|
#
?
Nov 21, 2019 18:20
|
|
|
Gyshall posted:ded engine Honestly yeah a lot of it stems back to this, not just terrible game design. Just make Stellaris 2 on a new engine, give it a few years and do it right.
|
|
#
?
Nov 21, 2019 18:32
|
|
|
Glad they're getting a little bit more serious about the accumulated problems Stellaris has picked up. I don't have late-game performance issues, but everyone else I know seems pretty angry about it. Ok, another thought about the game from a rando: what if jobs and housing were completely decoupled? Right now you have districts that provide mis-matched numbers of jobs and homes, and buildings that provide either homes or jobs. We've all seen the AI screw this part of the game up completely, and (I assume) we've all felt some level of frustration at having to build too many homes or jobs in the early stages of building up every planet in order to make it fit. Would it be better if housing and jobs were built separately? Could the AI handle that better? Maybe the size of the planet determines the number of housing units you can build, with different options for buildings that provide more housing, or higher-quality housing (that would tie in with the class system in the game- high-tier pops demand better housing, and are acutely unhappy if they don't have it, whereas middle and lower tier pops get a happiness bonus from occupying nicer housing that you'd have to build at a premium). So you can have everyone living in slums that they build themselves and distract the masses with holotheaters, or you can have fancy pops living in fancy homes while everyone else lives in whatever's available, or you could do the space socialist thing and provide everyone with adequate homes. Personally I'd also have the number of free housing units have an impact on the growth rate, but even without doing that, this system might lead to fewer strange choices. PS: I'd also have the first upgrade tier of production buildings just require a (large-ish) lump sum of the strategic resources instead of the monthly upkeep, which might help the AI budget for it, but that's neither here nor there I guess.
|
|
#
?
Nov 22, 2019 02:07
|
|
|
Blorange posted:It looks like Paradox is taking some extra time to address the playerbase's concerns with performance and the AI's ability in general. Releasing over the holidays didn't go so well last year, so I'm glad the team is avoiding that potential disaster. Well at least they learned from last year's holiday shitshow.
|
|
#
?
Nov 22, 2019 02:17
|
|
|
Blorange posted:It looks like Paradox is taking some extra time to address the playerbase's concerns with performance and the AI's ability in general. Releasing over the holidays didn't go so well last year, so I'm glad the team is avoiding that potential disaster. I’ve been complaining about AI since I bought this drat game, which was post-2.0. Maybe it’ll finally be fixed in 2020. I’ll wait on putting any more money in until then. 
|
|
#
?
Nov 22, 2019 02:39
|
|
|
Baronjutter posted:Maybe they'll find one weird trick for performance, but I think the entire economy system needs another redo but this time actually designed around the AI and performance. I don't believe a word paradox says anymore. Even if their genuine intent is to try to improve things, I literally don't think they have the skill or budget to do what's needed. This is where I'm starting to lean. Hope I'm wrong though.
|
|
#
?
Nov 22, 2019 02:55
|
|
|
This game would be genuinely amazing if the lategame performance issues were gone even if nothing else changed. If they somehow manage to fix the AI while they're at it, I'd play it forever.
|
|
#
?
Nov 22, 2019 03:34
|
|
|
Mystery Prize posted:This game would be genuinely amazing if the lategame performance issues were gone even if nothing else changed. If they somehow manage to fix the AI while they're at it, I'd play it forever. That and make it so mega-structures are something you build to get ahead, and not just a victory lap where you leave it on speed 5 and walk away for an hour.
|
|
#
?
Nov 22, 2019 05:50
|
|
|
I've been trying a mod called Stellaris Immortal which has these goals: 1. Increase game performance. 2. Decrease micromanagement 3. Increase strategic decision making Performance is mostly handled by decreasing pop numbers a lot. There are a bunch of other things going on, like unemployed pops automatically migrating to planets with open jobs and housing after 90 days. Bigger notes here. One thing that had me stumped for a bit was how trade worked - you have to build a starbase in any system you want to collect trade from, and link it up. There's no "distant trade accumulation" with starbases now, but also far fewer sources of trade.
|
|
#
?
Nov 22, 2019 10:12
|
|
|
What if planetary features (all of them) were able to be developed in some way. You click the feature and pick from a list of improvements that modify its bonuses. So if you put an arcology on your grasslands you give up a few farming districts slots but gain massive housing capacity. Underground caves can be turned into an underground fortress or stabilised for more mining district slots.
|
|
#
?
Nov 22, 2019 10:39
|
|
|
Oh, that reminds me, in Stellaris Immortal there's a planetary pollution mechanic (reduces stability, basically all jobs add to pollution except for a few that specifically tackle it) and clearing some blockers like kelp or forests free up space for districts, but increase your planetary pollution. Basically means blockers aren't just something you clear every time after the early game.
|
|
#
?
Nov 22, 2019 10:54
|
|
|
Demiurge4 posted:What if planetary features (all of them) were able to be developed in some way. You click the feature and pick from a list of improvements that modify its bonuses. So if you put an arcology on your grasslands you give up a few farming districts slots but gain massive housing capacity. Underground caves can be turned into an underground fortress or stabilised for more mining district slots. Oh yeah, and then maybe update the UI to display the features in a grid with a list of upgrade options for each one. I'm on to you.
|
|
#
?
Nov 22, 2019 10:56
|
|
|
Xik posted:Oh yeah, and then maybe update the UI to display the features in a grid with a list of upgrade options for each one. I was gonna say, that sounds familiar. I dont like the idea of more "building" management while the current building mechanic is tedious as it is. I still think turning science, consumer goods and alloys in their own districts is the way to go (so 6 districts per planet) and using the building slots only for things like:
I think it would be a LOT easier for the AI to manage more districts than building slots and such a variety of buildings that are locked based on pop numbers. The ai wouldn't cripple itself that much if it loses buildings or "forgets" to build them. Guilliman fucked around with this message at 11:18 on Nov 22, 2019 |
|
#
?
Nov 22, 2019 11:15
|
|
|
Meh. Combining both 'Current job system, tiles for blockers' is both vaguely interesting as a thought, but also messy. Both systems suffer from processing problems with the AI checking EVERYTHING that cause slowdown. A third giant rework would seem pretty ridiculous, though.
|
|
#
?
Nov 22, 2019 11:15
|
|
|
Riffing off something I read in there: what if the amount of buildings was based off your colony capital building upgrade level (as per that mod), but upgrading past planetary administration cost influence? e: instead of population obviously, not as well Splicer fucked around with this message at 12:30 on Nov 22, 2019 |
|
#
?
Nov 22, 2019 11:29
|
|
|
Gort posted:Oh, that reminds me, in Stellaris Immortal there's a planetary pollution mechanic (reduces stability, basically all jobs add to pollution except for a few that specifically tackle it) and clearing some blockers like kelp or forests free up space for districts, but increase your planetary pollution. Your mod sounds interesting, I'll definitely check it out over the weekend. I assume the special anti-pollution jobs are attached to special new buildings? And how does this feature interact with Machines and Lithoids? I assume they still suffer from pollution, since getting intake valves and exhaust ports gunked up with toxic sludge will also end badly eventually, but they should probably suffer less from the effects. (50% reduction for Machines and 75% reduction for Lithoids because I couldn't think of what the hell pollution can even do to a rock besides causing more erosion sounds reasonable) How far off am I?
|
|
#
?
Nov 22, 2019 11:35
|
|
|
I wonder how (in)compatible my planet modifier mod is with Stellaris Immortal. I dread finding out 
|
|
#
?
Nov 22, 2019 12:09
|
|
|
Oh...oh boy, I can see what people mean by slowdown later on now. Back a few expansions in the real late game when everything is controlled and everyone has massive fleets and there's a simultaneous war in heaven and crisis, it'd simply slow down to normal speed when set to fastest. Now it's considerably slower than that as soon as the scourge and war in heaven started. I see. Might just start a new game at this point, actually, on a smaller scale if a large scale game is this bad now.
|
|
#
?
Nov 22, 2019 12:13
|
|
|
Libluini posted:Your mod sounds interesting, I'll definitely check it out over the weekend. Just to be clear, it's not my mod, I just found it on a recommendation in the Performance thread on the official forum. The anti-pollution jobs I've seen are called "custodians" and are attached to the heritage site (???) and recycling centre, which is an early building. Haven't tried machines and I don't have the lithoid DLC, but I don't think it's different for them. There's a bit more info on pollution here in the non-obvious things info. It's a replacement for the amenities system.
|
|
#
?
Nov 22, 2019 12:19
|
|
|
Gort posted:Just to be clear, it's not my mod, I just found it on a recommendation in the Performance thread on the official forum. Oh. Oh! Well pollution being amenities just with the prefix flipped from plus to minus is absolutely not what I had in mind. To be honest, now I'm not sure if losing such a huge chunk of the game is worth it for some minor improvements to game speed. Will have to take a closer look after work, though.
|
|
#
?
Nov 22, 2019 12:32
|
|
|
Libluini posted:Oh. Oh! Well pollution being amenities just with the prefix flipped from plus to minus is absolutely not what I had in mind.
|
|
#
?
Nov 22, 2019 12:49
|
|
|
Turns out nine women working together can have a baby in a month As long as they're on different planets
|
|
#
?
Nov 22, 2019 12:55
|
|
|
Gort posted:Turns out nine women working together can have a baby in a month
|
|
#
?
Nov 22, 2019 13:29
|
|
|
Xik posted:Oh yeah, and then maybe update the UI to display the features in a grid with a list of upgrade options for each one. Hey that's pretty good. Maybe if we add some orbital slots too so we can plonk down planet specific space stations and defenses!
|
|
#
?
Nov 22, 2019 13:33
|
|
|
Turns out I can't joke - I was making fun of how population growth works in vanilla Stellaris
|
|
#
?
Nov 22, 2019 13:33
|
|
|
Gort posted:Turns out I can't joke - I was making fun of how population growth works in vanilla Stellaris Vicky 2 pops, when.
|
|
#
?
Nov 22, 2019 13:34
|
|
|
okay, that's pretty good.
|
|
#
?
Nov 22, 2019 13:54
|
|
|
Gort posted:Turns out I can't joke - I was making fun of how population growth works in vanilla Stellaris
|
|
#
?
Nov 22, 2019 13:56
|
|
|
Captain Invictus posted:okay, that's pretty good.
|
|
#
?
Nov 22, 2019 17:14
|
|
|
AAAAA! Real Muenster posted:Bravo. Is that in a mod or in vanilla? Vanilla
|
|
#
?
Nov 22, 2019 21:13
|
|
|
Splicer posted:I can't word. I meant the opposite, instead of two planets doubling your empire pop growth both planets grow at 90% of the base, if you've three it's at 81% etc So your pop growth is maximized at 10 (or nine) planets? Interesting, but I don't think I really like it. It seems like it would heavily encourage turtling.
|
|
#
?
Nov 23, 2019 11:24
|
|
|
Staltran posted:So your pop growth is maximized at 10 (or nine) planets? Interesting, but I don't think I really like it. It seems like it would heavily encourage turtling. Nah, it caps out eventually, at an 85% penalty when you have thirty planets. So pop growth is maximised at infinity planets, and adding more planets is always better for your growth than staying on fewer planets.  Really if you wanted to make pop growth a bit more sane, empire pop growth should be calculated like this: 1. Each pop in the empire of this species provides 1 growth. This 1 growth is modified by factors such as healthcare, housing, food availability, planet habitability, so an individual pop might be giving 0.8 growth or 1.2 or whatever. All this growth is pooled. 2. The species selects the place with the best conditions for a new pop - basically the place where growth is highest. This represents both growth being higher in that location, and people migrating to where life is best for them. All empire growth for this species goes into growing a pop here. Result would be that population growth scales with the size of the population, not the number of planets you have, and that species would naturally grow into the locations they're best-suited to live in. Gort fucked around with this message at 12:21 on Nov 23, 2019 |
|
#
?
Nov 23, 2019 12:12
|
|
|
Gort posted:Nah, it caps out eventually, at an 85% penalty when you have thirty planets. So pop growth is maximised at infinity planets, and adding more planets is always better for your growth than staying on fewer planets.
|
|
#
?
Nov 23, 2019 15:05
|
|
|
Are there any good LP's of playing a Lithoid/Synthetic Devouring Swarm/Driven Assimilator on a recent version of the game?
|
|
#
?
Nov 23, 2019 15:17
|
|
|
|
| # ? Apr 25, 2024 14:44 |
|
|
Gort posted:Really if you wanted to make pop growth a bit more sane, empire pop growth should be calculated like this: Each major species in your empire has its own Spawning and Deleting slots. One set of slots for "Human", not one for every template and half-etc. Whenever a Spawning slot fills up it spawns a pop and whenever a Deleting slot fills up it deletes a pop. Spawn rate is made up of birth rate, empire immigration, internal resettlement, etc. Delete rate is made up of death rate, empire emigration, internal resettlement etc. The net difference is listed so you can get can easily judge a species' actual growth. Bar a mass emigration or purge scenario your Spawn rate for a species should always be significantly higher than the Delete rate, but each Deleting slot should always in the process of deleting something. This causes your pops to slowly progress toward being your best current set of templates settled into the smartest planets. Enacting a resettlement policy increases the resettlement aspect of Spawn and Delete rate equally, so no additional net growth but a higher degree of pop swapping. Similarly for genetic engineering, increase delete and spawn rates to increase the rate "bad" templated pops get swapped out for "good" templates. Splicer fucked around with this message at 21:20 on Nov 26, 2019 |
|
#
?
Nov 23, 2019 15:30
|
|