|
Xae posted:Stellaris: To Serve Man This is good.
|
#
¿
Jan 20, 2017 20:46
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ Apr 26, 2024 09:45 |
|
|
Stellaris: We Have Met the Enemy and He is Delicious
|
|
#
¿
Jan 21, 2017 01:27
|
|
|
It'd be neat if you could keep some of the flavor of it all with a broad-based "army doctorine" setting. Like, even though the micro is a bit much I really like the whole Jedi Knights fighting xenomorphs conceptual slugfest that can go on. I really want to keep the flavor of being able to say "My armies are filled with robotic warriors" even if I don't want to care about the robotic warriors on an army by army basis.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 23, 2017 20:21
|
|
|
Wiz posted:Yeah, I'm honestly not sure exactly how removing an active volcano is supposed to work. The way the mechanic is portrayed adds to a complaint I have about the planet-level Stellaris experience: when you get enough tech, the whole appearance and feel of planets get very homogeneous. Geological features are (or appear to be) bulldozed away, and planetary climates / graphics get standardized via terraforming. I'd love to have a reason to keep some visual diversity and show some geological features in my planets.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 23, 2017 22:36
|
|
|
Majestic posted:While I'm sure you're working on other fixes to this, having some form of cultural imperialism would stir up the mid/late game when things start to stagnate. Cultural pressure putting your worlds at risk of flipping (though hopefully through a more involved mechanic than the Civ4 style) could be an impetus to go to war (both for the player and for the AI). The game currently frequently reaches a point where you sit there with not a lot happening, and adding this means of interaction could go a long way to addressing that. I wonder what would happen if the stakes were a bit lower than flipping planets over. Like, you have a cultural influence and if a planet that isn't your becomes swayed by it you get a portion of their energy and research output. Sovereignty isn't threatened unless something much more dramatic goes on.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 2, 2017 23:02
|
|
|
Roland Jones posted:I'm liking it a lot too. One thing I find particularly interesting is them being easier to get for smaller empires; larger ones have more resources and such, but smaller ones get these bonuses and consequently Ascension Perks much faster. It seems like a way to try to make playing smaller, or at least not always rapidly expanding, more viable and powerful, and I hope it works out. I appreciate that a lot, since if all else is even I'd rather intensely cultivate a relatively small amount of space than to have a sprawling empire.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 5, 2017 20:04
|
|
|
Squiggle posted:It's like Shadowrun. The more cybernetic you become, the less able you are to tap into....whatever shaman use. Shadowrun is a hard example to use, since part of its charm is that it has a magic-as-science tradition. What Wiz stated is somewhere between the Sheep Goat effect (Psi hits and Psi misses correlate with Psi belief) and phenomenology (a branch of philosophy that argues that your sensory experience is predicated on your intentionality or expectations of what you will perceive).
|
|
#
¿
Feb 10, 2017 00:23
|
|
|
Truga posted:I mean, science isn't exactly a belief system, is it? Provide solid evidence, and enough people will take you seriously. Don't, and they'll laugh you out of the room, as they should. Unless there's some other agenda on the table I spoke with one parapsychologist that lamented that there were statistically valid results for Psi, but that just invited incredulous insistence that their methods were flawed to have gotten that result. Note, I am not familiar enough with parapsychological literature to judge that as truthful or not, but there are people IRL who really do research and claim these things.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 10, 2017 02:07
|
|
|
Truga posted:I'm personally acquainted with the (anti)vaccine science due to it being a very popular topic recently, and there's "doctors" or "scientists" who call themselves that but are really just plain old propagandists. Dunno how para-scientists do their work, but if it's anything like that, I can understand the aversion. So, story time. So, the place where I did my doctoral studies has an in-house parapsychologist. They have a rather tame view of Psi (understanding it as a psychological experience to be studied, rather than a force of nature to quantify), but still, experiments and all. I personally got to experience a ganzfield experiment, and it's actually kinda wild but no insight into the future. I got walked through a few other Psi experiments, which to no one's great surprise produced a lot of misses. Anyway, they were going to do an experiment on whether the experience of magnetic fields intersecting the brain produces the Psi experience. They got as far as getting the hardware to do this, when the person who invented the machine found out it was for parapsychological research and shat a brick. Far as I know the experiment had to be cancelled, because they never got access to the software to run the machine. Scientists are people too, warts and all.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 10, 2017 02:38
|
|
|
JuniperCake posted:Anyways, I'm absolutely psyched for this update and can't wait for it to come out. I think we can all agree that 1.5 sounds awesome. And that we'll eat the ones who don't agree.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 10, 2017 03:49
|
|
|
Rincewinds posted:It's not cannibalism when they are aliens, it's sensible conservation to avoid overpopulation. Clearly we need a new term for this.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 11, 2017 19:57
|
|
|
Truga posted:Yeah, it's not like xenophile specifies what they like about aliens. We are one with the Alien. Because we are what we eat.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 11, 2017 22:20
|
|
|
GunnerJ posted:Well, I doubt you can ever escape that because this change was met with a lot of salty tears from internet libertarians about how now there is only fascism and communism in Stellaris. I'm okay with pretending internet libertarians don't exist. Alternatively, I would be okay with eating internet libertarians. So I guess I could go either way on the issue.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 12, 2017 01:46
|
|
|
VirtualStranger posted:I have a great mod for you then: Probably not going to play like this often, but it's a cool concept. Pity the Stellaris engine doesn't seem to be able to handle super-long travel times robustly, because the wind up / wind down hack the modder uses makes me afraid I'm going to mis-click and end up wasting most of a multi-year windup .
|
|
#
¿
Feb 15, 2017 17:49
|
|
|
Hot Dog Day #82 posted:So are you shooting yourself in the foot if you play as a moral democracy? I like the idea of being a Commonwealth of races who aren't total space dicks, but is being a pacifist just generally unadvised in the game's current state? I have a soft spot for Pacifism in game, but yes, you are shooting yourself in the foot in the current build. Among other things, 1.5 promises to have considerably more build tall options so that pacifist empires can invest inward much more than they can now, but in the game as it currently stands anything other than full on military conquest is challenging yourself.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 24, 2017 22:08
|
|
|
Hot Dog Day #82 posted:That is good to hear, and thanks to everyone who answered my question! I like the idea of roleplaying and building a narrative more than actually winning, so I guess I'll blaze ahead with my moral democracy! I have one last question, though: if I wanted to build a race/government that does its best to maximize migration into my republic which ethics and traits should I take to min/max that? I want my civilization to be seen as the great city on the hill which the teeming masses flock into. Keep in mind liberation and pacifism aren't the same thing. Unless I've been horribly mistaken this whole time, the pacifism war malus applies to all wars? At Fanatic Pacifism that's a -30% swing in Happiness (from a standing +15 to a sudden -15). Though in the end it's all about the narrative and if you want to do a pacifist-ethos liberator-of-the-xenos it's a cool thing to do.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 24, 2017 22:59
|
|
|
Poil posted:Or possibly, get home from work and have an exciting new game breaking bug that won't be hotfixed until tuesday. All bugs should be redefined as gameplay enhancements brought about by the Shroud. The CTD ones are just more meta than we're used to.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 27, 2017 15:41
|
|
|
Arglebargle III posted:The real question that still needs to be answered in Utopia is: Someone needs to come up with a name list where colonies are just increments of #th Rome.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 28, 2017 02:33
|
|
|
Penultimatum posted:Also, I really hope there's more to the synthetic ascension tree than we're seeing, as just turning everyone into robots feels like kind of a crappy version of the technological singularity. If you can't fuse everyone's consciousnesses together and become god like in The Last Question then what's the point? I think there's a much deeper challenge in trying to translate something like The Last Question to Stellaris, because Stellaris as a story has way more moving parts. A lot of the isolated parts of The Last Question's tech singularity is already in the game or planned to be in Utopia, but they're a better fit in different places than the materialist ethos and ascension system. Like, if you want to do a 'screwing with another universe to become like onto God' in the context of Stellaris my brain goes somewhere else entirely.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 4, 2017 00:26
|
|
|
Heartcatch posted:I think it's fine for people seeking to play thematically, rather than straight mechanically. On the other hand, with regards to balance and unique mechanics you are entirely correct that Psionic Ascension doesn't seem to do all that much compared to the other two. The cautious part of my brain reminds me that it's still way too early to pass judgment on the playability of any of the Utopia content. The less cautious part of my brain mostly agrees with you. Synthetic and Bio Ascension seem much more like sure things where the Shroud comes across as a galactic slot machine.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 4, 2017 20:38
|
|
|
Aethernet posted:I am always energy constrained, because I can store minerals as ships but I need to ensure I always have enough energy to run them. 2 minerals for 1 energy is not worth it when colonies give you better options (again, outside the early game), plus it's literally the ratio you get from trading for energy with the cost of the mining station on top. 3 minerals and above is worth it. Of course, with consumer goods, this could all change in 1.5. Yeah, I suspect consumer goods (and orbital habitats, which have been said to be mineral poor) is going to change the mineral game up pretty heavily. It'll be interesting to see how it plays out, since the value of minerals already fluctuates pretty dramatically from early to late game.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 6, 2017 17:29
|
|
|
I feel like overpopulation would imply a level of simulation that we don't actually have. The whole pop mechanic is incredibly abstracted to the point that I'm not sure how to really get to something like population numbers and environmental impact out of it. Like, Earth is 16 tiles which means 16 pops and 16 buildings, but clearly that's nonsense in terms of what's actually supposed to go into keeping a planetary population alive and kicking. Armies come from nowhere, colony ships are loaded without disrupting your pops, etc.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 6, 2017 21:54
|
|
|
Splicer posted:That's a really good point. That 4ish year delay has a big impact on how the early game plays out. That pre-FTL start up mod someone posted earlier affects the early game in ways I generally like, related to that. More focus on internal development and getting a strong research base before the "real game" begins. It's not flawless, but it does make me wish there could be an official pre-FTL start.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 15, 2017 00:20
|
|
|
Strategic Tea posted:I really like the idea - but how does it work when you're 95% bound to your starting system? Do the in system (plus anything the mod adds) mechanics have enough depth to support the new early game? The mod includes a STL drive for getting from system to system on a scale of multiple years, so there is still some limited build up during the pre-FTL era. The pre-FTL era lasts about 20 years typically. Beyond that? It's part of what I meant when I said it's not flawless. You're very much at the mercy of the RNG to give you a good starting system/planet, or else your disadvantage is magnified enormously. The AI doesn't handle being pre-FTL very well either.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 15, 2017 00:41
|
|
|
PittTheElder posted:I've tried Hyperlane a couple times and find it unbearable, just because everything feels like it's moving so slowly. Hyperspace lost a lot of its charm with the patch that forced them to the solar system's edge like every other kind of FTL. Earlier than that you could enter the hyperlanes from where ever in the system and saved days/weeks doing it. I still think hyperspace only games have a fun element to them, but I'd never choose hyperspace in a game where warp or wormholes are an option.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 21, 2017 22:40
|
|
|
Jeb Bush 2012 posted:it's a tech you can get if you're (fanatic?) individualist that lets you build cheaper colony ships at the cost of scrambling the ethics of the pop you send in it It costs energy instead of minerals, and as far as I can tell it only draws from valid ethos combinations on the planet. You're right that it's not very relevant later on, but it can come up very early and I view it as a godsend when it does.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 25, 2017 03:28
|
|
|
Ainsley McTree posted:So, what features are everybody looking forward to most in the utopia expansion Megastructures. And in general the ability to do more tall gameplay / build my pretty little space empire.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 3, 2017 20:31
|
|
|
I'm not sure where the conceptual space is for allowing players to take out other players early at all, and making it so that this isn't preferable to giving their opponents time to get more powerful.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 5, 2017 03:37
|
|
|
I recently pitched Stellaris to a friend, and when we talked about DLC I described Leviathans as "Totally worth it if you find you like Stellaris and want more stuff in it, but it isn't going to change whether you like the game or not." That said, enclaves alone can be game-changing and the leviathans themselves are all pretty neat.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 6, 2017 02:49
|
|
|
I went for my standby Fanatical Spiritualist / Pacifist cthulhuoids. Took Oligarchy, Exalted Priesthood and Meritocracy. Kind of regret Meritocracy, but not enough to start over. Ended up starting on the rear end end of the galaxy, will probably spend my days playing sand castles.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 6, 2017 18:24
|
|
|
Pro: The game now chooses an active mandate for your oligarchy at the start of the game, no need to reform or wait 40 years to get one. Con: The game seems to be drawing mandates randomly with no regard to the ethics/laws of the empire. My Spiritualist/Xenophobe/Pacifist inward perfection build was starting with various fun things like slavery bonuses and in one case a xeno attraction bonus.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 7, 2017 03:14
|
|
|
TsarZiedonis posted:Wow, this expansion looks substantial! Did they add a new way for happy, peaceful xenophiles to win? I always feel guilty when I play bad guys in video games. Ignore the win conditions, play until you're personally satisfied with the outcome. But yes, I've been having fun with my pacifists. Haven't tried xenophile yet, but pacifist and especially pacifist/xenophobe is really nice now.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 7, 2017 16:49
|
|
|
I managed to make habitats useful. So I decided to toy with an Inward Perfection game, and right after I start I decided to go maximum research. Things went well on that front, and with layering research bonus upon research bonus with the Planetary Survey Corps on the side things were going incredibly fast. Expansion wasn't going great, though. Got hemmed in by a peaceful species I don't feel a desire to conquer, an Advanced Start I cannot conquer, and a xenophobe FE that's wide band of gently caress-you is keeping me out of some excellent systems. All that taken together I got habitats around the 70 year mark and plenty of expansion pressure to relieve using them. I grant this is happening primarily due to the OP-as-gently caress PSC tradition, but still, it's nice to actually start to use habitats in a way they're probably intended.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 9, 2017 19:57
|
|
|
Pellisworth posted:Thanks for the info I think I'll pick the expansion up tonight. What about the Leviathan story pack, is that worthwhile? It's not going to make or break Stellaris for you, but it's worth its price in more stuff if you find you're enjoying the game.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 12, 2017 00:38
|
|
|
My first ascension pick ever was Mastery of Nature, but I've shied away from it in subsequent games because while it's truly awesome at its niche, it's a finite niche which becomes less and less relevant as the game goes on. Most other Ascension picks have better staying power.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 12, 2017 20:46
|
|
|
Magil Zeal posted:I also like this because Prosperity is a good tree in general to invest in early. Harmony, not as much. I almost wish unity trees rewarded spreading out picks instead of going all in, because I love the Harmony adoption bonus and I'd dip one point into the tree for that alone if it didn't screw with my ascension perks. Happy pixelmen are productive pixelmen.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 13, 2017 15:31
|
|
|
spectralent posted:Is "gently caress it all cruisers" actually viable? I'm a galaxy full of assholes and there's a fanatical purifier at the northern arm steadily eating everyone so I need to get to battlestations relatively soon. Last game that went far enough I went all cruiser and it did the job well. I'm unsure if a carefully maintained ship balance might'be done better, but as a basic unit of murdering poo poo the cruiser is fine.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 16, 2017 20:04
|
|
|
Decrepus posted:Is it possible to play with a tiny empire? I have 3 systems and am really happy with them but honestly don't feel like building more colonies. Is there any way around the tiny fleet cap and influence (for frontier posts). I strangled my neighbor to death and made them a vassal but I can't compete with anyone else's fleets. Wide is still going to wreck tall, but you can swing way above your weight with energy-focused habitats. For a tall build, the fleet cap is a funny joke, not an actual limitation to keep.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 16, 2017 20:54
|
|
|
Palleon posted:By the time you can build habitats, every worthwhile planet in the galaxy will be taken. And they're only useful for energy or tech, can't build ships from them. I think ultimately the concept of habitats being megastructures needs to be reevaluated. Sure, we're talking about a big-freaking station, but... A) We're not really talking the same conceptual level as a ring world or dyson sphere. B) We're not really talking about as nearly a far-fetched technological achievement as being high up in the tech tree suggests. C) The window of opportunity to use habitats to meaningfully affect the balance of power in the galaxy is narrow, and even then only really provided by abusing Planetary Survey Corps. I mean, sure, it's entirely possible (and has been) posited that these a huge stations like Star Trek with anti-gravity and highest end internal structures and all manner of tech craziness, but they could just as easily conceptually be something like Eros and Ceres from The Expanse. And I think the argument has been made ITT that it'd serve the game better if it was.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 16, 2017 21:52
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ Apr 26, 2024 09:45 |
|
|
Nuclearmonkee posted:Significant continuous shield regen in combat. It's a big deal. The bigger mystery is why auto-genning designs seem to favor afterburners on cruisers over shield capacitors.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 18, 2017 21:02
|
|