|
Baronjutter posted:Little things like investing in static defenses is still weird and doesn't scale well at all (very powerful in the early game, nearly useless late game). now, in terms of, say, multiplayer late game where someone can just hop skip and a jump drive right on over your choke points, then yes, they can be fairly useless one thing I'm not too much of a fan of is the removal of a lot of planetary edicts and such. there's like...two non-crime-related ones in most cases, right? consumer goods and minor artifacts as default. a few others that are highly situational or limited. give me so many options that it'd either be impossible to enable multiple at once or extremely expensive to do so but worth it in the end. the global edicts are great and all but very generic.
|
#
?
Nov 29, 2019 00:55
|
|
|
|
| # ? Apr 25, 2024 22:03 |
|
|
Just complete and total loving lol at this loving game - you cannot claim systems through a wormhole! Wormholes have been in the game since day 1, how is this possible? The sheer quantities of oversights and incomplete features is slowly pushing me away from the game, and I am positive the next DLC will only make the problem worse. I dont understand how, when the game is actively played by the devs in the Dev Clash or whatever it is that they stream, how things like that are still A Thing.Captain Invictus posted:one thing I'm not too much of a fan of is the removal of a lot of planetary edicts and such. there's like...two non-crime-related ones in most cases, right? consumer goods and minor artifacts as default. a few others that are highly situational or limited. give me so many options that it'd either be impossible to enable multiple at once or extremely expensive to do so but worth it in the end. the global edicts are great and all but very generic.
|
|
#
?
Nov 29, 2019 01:44
|
|
|
You also can't gift them to vassals that are in the surrounding territory and own the other end of the wormhole. I wound up spinning it off into its own vassal empire (talking about the special system that only has wormhole access), in the where I nabbed the Galatron recapture achievement (the only game I got the Galatron in was the same one where I conquired and vassalized the entire galaxy, so I reloaded that old save, spun off almost the entire galaxy as a couple dozen vassals, and waited for one of them to get pissed off enough to declare war).
|
|
#
?
Nov 29, 2019 02:13
|
|
|
AAAAA! Real Muenster posted:Just complete and total loving lol at this loving game - you cannot claim systems through a wormhole! Wormholes have been in the game since day 1, how is this possible? The sheer quantities of oversights and incomplete features is slowly pushing me away from the game, and I am positive the next DLC will only make the problem worse. I dont understand how, when the game is actively played by the devs in the Dev Clash or whatever it is that they stream, how things like that are still A Thing.
|
|
#
?
Nov 29, 2019 03:05
|
|
|
I like the jobs system and resource chains added by 2.2, but Housing and Unemployment are just complete fun sucks. The housing thing in particular seems stupid. Why can't that just be abstracted on a per-planet basis? Living space should only be an issue once the planetary population reaches some limit based on planet size, causing stability and pop happiness to drop when you exceed it. Then you have to use building slots for arcologies or something. Just make city districts offer some job you'd actually want to have a pop working (or just make clerks worth it). As for unemployed pops, I just want to be able to ignore them until they're too big a drain on my economy by not producing anything, and/or cause stability issues because there's just so many of them compared to working pops. I mean, I guess you can do that now, but that drat little icon in the outliner... I'm sure I'm going to be told dumping this stuff would break the game, or make it too easy. I'm not a game designer or even very good at Stellaris, but these things are just tedious as hell to me, and I'm not sure how their presence in the game makes it more fun or interesting.
|
|
#
?
Nov 29, 2019 07:38
|
|
|
There are a lot of odd things in the current system, for sure. I still don't know what prompted them to make planet size affect max number of districts but not the max number of buildings, for example. If you can just cram in enough housing and pops, a size 13 planet and a size 25 planet can both fit the exact same number of buildings even though the district numbers are vastly different. Or why a shrinking population doesn't cause any problems for built districts but shuts down building slots (and instantly destroys buildings) if you dip below certain thresholds.
|
|
#
?
Nov 29, 2019 09:20
|
|
|
Lasting Damage posted:I like the jobs system and resource chains added by 2.2, but Housing and Unemployment are just complete fun sucks. The housing thing in particular seems stupid. Why can't that just be abstracted on a per-planet basis? Living space should only be an issue once the planetary population reaches some limit based on planet size, causing stability and pop happiness to drop when you exceed it. Then you have to use building slots for arcologies or something. Just make city districts offer some job you'd actually want to have a pop working (or just make clerks worth it). And this worked pretty good... On my first few planets in my first couple of games. But now once I pass initial expansion I'm doing the same dance on a dozen planets simultaneously, I've settled on a standard build order of planet uniques for this run and there's minimal mechanical reasons to deviate, but despite the build order being intensely formulaic there's no way to get automate the formula I have settled on. So I either spend most of the rest of the game mindlessly repeating a bunch of rote actions that were locked in several decades before, or I hand it off to an AI and don't get to make the decisions at all. And even if the AI's was perfectly weighted toward my preferences then that would only mean it was good for me, and it would be useless for you the reader because e.g. you like culture workers and consider robot factories a sometimes food. I like the concept of slowly growing planets that evolve over the game, and I like the concept of the housing/unemployment tango, but the game needs to either scale you attention requirements better or provide an automation system that's got more going for it than "the lesser of two evils, maybe, depending on the player". Splicer fucked around with this message at 10:11 on Nov 29, 2019 |
|
#
?
Nov 29, 2019 09:40
|
|
|
I'm not sure there needs to be a feeling of growth on individual planets in the first place. I can see that being nice in a citybuilder game like Simcity where you even see buildings being constructed on the appropriately zoned land, but I'm fine with just feeling like my 4X empire is growing.
|
|
#
?
Nov 29, 2019 10:07
|
|
|
Actually, a lot of things in the current version of Stellaris feel like they could have used someone on the team whose main task was simply to keep asking "Why?" over and over whenever they came up with an idea, just to make sure that it would either work and make sense to include or be skipped entirely.
|
|
#
?
Nov 29, 2019 10:13
|
|
|
Bofast posted:I'm not sure there needs to be a feeling of growth on individual planets in the first place. I can see that being nice in a citybuilder game like Simcity where you even see buildings being constructed on the appropriately zoned land, but I'm fine with just feeling like my 4X empire is growing.
|
|
#
?
Nov 29, 2019 10:19
|
|
|
I didn't realise the goon hive mind had turned in the game this hard. For me Stellaris has been about fun and dumb roleplaying through gameplay and I still have a lot of fun with it. I'm looking forward to the next DLC quite eagerly. The performance issues are definitely real but usually by the time I get to 2400 I've gotten what I want out of that game and have moved on to another, or am taking a break. So it has not affected me too badly except on one or two occasions. Maybe my play style is different to a lot of people's?
|
|
#
?
Nov 29, 2019 10:33
|
|
|
HiKaizer posted:The performance issues are definitely real but usually by the time I get to 2400 I've gotten what I want out of that game and have moved on to another, or am taking a break. So it has not affected me too badly except on one or two occasions. Maybe my play style is different to a lot of people's? Don't the performance problems become an issue long before 2400? At least on high difficulties, since it depends on how big the AIs have gotten.
|
|
#
?
Nov 29, 2019 10:53
|
|
|
HiKaizer posted:I didn't realise the goon hive mind had turned in the game this hard. For me Stellaris has been about fun and dumb roleplaying through gameplay and I still have a lot of fun with it. I'm looking forward to the next DLC quite eagerly. I'm looking forward to the next DLC in part because I think the thread's tone will shift dramatically when there's something new and cool to play with.
|
|
#
?
Nov 29, 2019 10:56
|
|
|
Splicer posted:I like the concept of slowly growing planets that evolve over the game, and I like the concept of the housing/unemployment tango, but the game needs to either scale you attention requirements better or provide an automation system that's got more going for it than "the lesser of two evils, maybe, depending on the player". Yeah, I agree. I just think the early game is already interesting enough with exploration and expansion, so I think once you get to the middle and late game these systems just eat up the fun. HiKaizer posted:I didn't realise the goon hive mind had turned in the game this hard. For me Stellaris has been about fun and dumb roleplaying through gameplay and I still have a lot of fun with it. I'm looking forward to the next DLC quite eagerly. I like the dumb roleplaying too, it just feels like the game gets in the way of doing that a lot. A lot of my games peter out now before I get far because it feels annoying to play. I stopped playing for months thinking I'd just burned out on it, but coming back just makes the issues all the more glaring. Gonna look into some mods.
|
|
#
?
Nov 29, 2019 11:13
|
|
|
HiKaizer posted:I didn't realise the goon hive mind had turned in the game this hard. For me Stellaris has been about fun and dumb roleplaying through gameplay and I still have a lot of fun with it. I'm looking forward to the next DLC quite eagerly. I feel like stellaris has suffered from them trying to give a poo poo about multiplayer and they should instead throw in a bunch of completely unbalanced bullshit so that people can roleplay whatever hosed up space society they want. If they did that and then fixed performance I'd be happy enough with it.
|
|
#
?
Nov 29, 2019 11:41
|
|
|
cock hero flux posted:I feel like stellaris has suffered from them trying to give a poo poo about multiplayer and they should instead throw in a bunch of completely unbalanced bullshit so that people can roleplay whatever hosed up space society they want. If they did that and then fixed performance I'd be happy enough with it. The late game in general needs some work. I cannot be bothered to manage fifty planets, and the performance is cripplingly bad. Fixing that would be fine for both multi and single players. I think my threshold for, "I will micromanage my planets and nobody will be unemployed or homeless" is about six planets. After that it's all slapdash.
|
|
#
?
Nov 29, 2019 11:47
|
|
|
Gort posted:The late game in general needs some work. I cannot be bothered to manage fifty planets, and the performance is cripplingly bad. Fixing that would be fine for both multi and single players. the performance does murder my ability to care after a certain point, though, when it takes 30 seconds to get through 1 day and the average month has nothing loving happen in it because mid-late game the galaxy is explored and relations are mostly stable so there's big stretches of not a lot going on that takes 50 times longer because the performance died
|
|
#
?
Nov 29, 2019 12:01
|
|
|
cock hero flux posted:I feel like stellaris has suffered from them trying to give a poo poo about multiplayer and they should instead throw in a bunch of completely unbalanced bullshit so that people can roleplay whatever hosed up space society they want. If they did that and then fixed performance I'd be happy enough with it. Gort posted:The late game in general needs some work. I cannot be bothered to manage fifty planets, and the performance is cripplingly bad. Fixing that would be fine for both multi and single players. I'd love it if by the end of the game I was managing 6 sectors of sub empires or something with managing each sector or whatever as interesting as managing each of my 3 to 6 planets was at the start of the game.
|
|
#
?
Nov 29, 2019 12:33
|
|
|
I agree that I love the idea of playing Stellaris because of my cool space society, but the actual drudge of the gameplay really makes it a chore so I usually end up quitting and go do something else. This makes it hard to look forward to the next expansion even though I love the idea of federations.
|
|
#
?
Nov 29, 2019 12:59
|
|
|
Paradox is having a black Friday sale so you can get some DLC for this  broken game cheap: https://www.paradoxplaza.com/on-sale/
|
|
#
?
Nov 29, 2019 13:12
|
|
|
Eh, throwing out game balance in favour of "wacky horseshit" is bad for singleplayer. You'd just end up with a game with one or two degenerate strategies and utterly incapable AI. I can already play Civ 6 if I want that.
|
|
#
?
Nov 29, 2019 13:44
|
|
|
This game doesn't even have like, a victory condition. Do you seriously play it for the single player challenge?
|
|
#
?
Nov 29, 2019 14:01
|
|
|
Clarste posted:This game doesn't even have like, a victory condition. Do you seriously play it for the single player challenge? Stellaris has a victory date at which point a winner is declared. Usually I play until I'm so far ahead I'll win for sure, or until I beat the crisis though. It's not really a case of "challenge", it's more that I take exception to the argument that only multiplayer games benefit from game balance. Badly balanced games are full of trap options for new players and AI players, and that makes them bad single-player games as well as bad multiplayer games.
|
|
#
?
Nov 29, 2019 14:08
|
|
|
Clarste posted:This game doesn't even have like, a victory condition. Do you seriously play it for the single player challenge?
|
|
#
?
Nov 29, 2019 15:28
|
|
|
Bofast posted:Actually, a lot of things in the current version of Stellaris feel like they could have used someone on the team whose main task was simply to keep asking "Why?" over and over whenever they came up with an idea, just to make sure that it would either work and make sense to include or be skipped entirely. I, for some reason, really enjoy the gameplay loop of establishing new colonies, filling them out into one of my specialized Mineral/Energy/Food + Alloy/CG/R&D worlds and hanging tough long enough to eventually be able to bootstrap my empire ahead of the cheating AIs enough that I can dick punch them to take what I want to continue to grow. The problem is like everyone else is saying, though - after a certain number of planets, I get tired of dealing with it, even with my efficiency-based planet organization/management. Once I get to that tipping point of being way more powerful than the AI I tend to quit the game. I keep saying I want to play through and beat a Crisis but I'm often at that tipping point by 2325 or so and dont feel like waiting another 50 years while managing my now vast empire.
|
|
#
?
Nov 29, 2019 15:47
|
|
|
Gort posted:Eh, throwing out game balance in favour of "wacky horseshit" is bad for singleplayer. You'd just end up with a game with one or two degenerate strategies and utterly incapable AI. The bigger problem for single player is overpowered behaviour, stuff that sucks for single player might be fine for multiplayer due to the attention economy. Splicer fucked around with this message at 16:22 on Nov 29, 2019 |
|
#
?
Nov 29, 2019 16:08
|
|
|
One thing that seems like a clear immediate goal for the devs that would do a lot of good is making the AI better at planetary development because then players could automate that poo poo with confidence.
|
|
#
?
Nov 29, 2019 16:11
|
|
|
GunnerJ posted:One thing that seems like a clear immediate goal for the devs that would do a lot of good is making the AI better at planetary development because then players could automate that poo poo with confidence. This. Just this. Did you know that Lithoids automation builds food? All the food. See, because they haven't even bothered changing that from standard organic empires. At the very least I ended up with a 500 food surplus while losing 400 minerals as the automation replaced roughly all of my production. It's so bad. Another thing that's bad: The launcher. See, I'm often playing with mods. A lot of mods. But three days ago, it just started automatically disabling one of my mods. No matter what I set it to. So I tried a bunch of things, like resubbing to the mod, deleting the mod files in question, and so on. It just broke it worse.  Now the launcher is ONLY enabling that mod, and automatically disabling all others. Does anyone know how to fix this? I can't seem to find mention of the issue anywhere online.
|
|
#
?
Nov 29, 2019 16:24
|
|
|
GunnerJ posted:One thing that seems like a clear immediate goal for the devs that would do a lot of good is making the AI better at planetary development because then players could automate that poo poo with confidence.
|
|
#
?
Nov 29, 2019 16:44
|
|
|
If you're Egalitarian and have Utopian Abundance living standards nobody will ever care about having a place to live. Technically all of my worlds are energy/agrarian/mineral hellscapes with no place to live but everyone is so happy it doesn't matter.
|
|
#
?
Nov 29, 2019 17:09
|
|
|
Fully automated luxury gay space tents for the homeless
|
|
#
?
Nov 29, 2019 17:16
|
|
|
Bofast posted:Or why a shrinking population doesn't cause any problems for built districts but shuts down building slots (and instantly destroys buildings) if you dip below certain thresholds. This is part of the artificiality of the current system that I really don't like. I think the new econ system is waaaay better than tiles overall, but it needs another serious workover. Looking closely at the distinctions between districts and buildings, and things that provide jobs and housing, or just jobs, or just housing, would be good. Are these meaningful distinctions? By getting rid of them, could we make a game that's more fun to play, and potentially easier for the AI to handle? Why don't I just build a mine if I need a mine, and build some housing if I need some housing, and an alloy foundry if that's what I need? Why does an apartment building take up the same precious slot as the research complex I want to build, and what exactly is stopping me from building both on my 50th planet, which is almost entirely empty? Why can I build all 25 districts as soon as I settle the planet even if there's only one pop, but building two apartment buildings is beyond my abilities?
|
|
#
?
Nov 29, 2019 17:25
|
|
|
Speaking of confidently leaving the AI in charge of development, does anyone else feel like it's extremely annoying to have to manually budget how many resources go towards the AI? I feel like we should just fundamentally be sharing the same resources, with maybe a minimum it won't go under for emergencies. If I'm telling the AI to take over, I want to AI to take over, not to have some weird sub-empire with its own separate budget. Or is that just me?
|
|
#
?
Nov 29, 2019 17:50
|
|
|
I don't really have much experience with the current automation system, so I can't say. Only automation I've used recently is some pop auto migration mod to keep me from having to manually send unemployed pops from my saturated core worlds to my new colonies.
|
|
#
?
Nov 29, 2019 18:01
|
|
|
Would someone explain to me how offworld trading companies work? I build them at most stations that have a trade hub, but they don't seem to add anything
|
|
#
?
Nov 29, 2019 18:05
|
|
|
I think they are still supposed to give you 2 extra trade value for each trade hub on that station, though I have no idea whether or not they work.
|
|
#
?
Nov 29, 2019 18:12
|
|
|
That's what they do and they're extremely good if you're going to be putting six trade hubs on your station.
|
|
#
?
Nov 29, 2019 18:54
|
|
|
DasNeonLicht posted:Would someone explain to me how offworld trading companies work? I build them at most stations that have a trade hub, but they don't seem to add anything It gives you +2 trade value for every trade hub you have built. They work and they're amazing since it's free trade value which means free energy or energy/consumer goods or energy/unity (depends on your trade policy). Make sure to place them somewhere they can vacuum up trade value from surrounding systems since each hub increases the station's reach by 1 jump per hub.
|
|
#
?
Nov 29, 2019 19:07
|
|
|
If I build more than one trade hub at a starbase, does each trade hub increase collection range by +1?
|
|
#
?
Nov 29, 2019 19:09
|
|
|
|
| # ? Apr 25, 2024 22:03 |
|
|
Black Pants posted:I think planets are more interesting now and love what new avenues it's added for modding. I don't like so much the new colony growth penalty or the 'only one species can be growing at a time' thing though. I understand it from a design balance standpoint, but it's a shame that 'whatever is the dominant species' is the one that gets to grow. Agreed 100%
|
|
#
?
Nov 29, 2019 19:24
|
|
