|
Grandpa Palpatine posted:There's no shame in using the tutorial, folks! I did! I think? The tutorial directed me to those arrows, maybe? This was years ago, before Utopia came out. Epicurius posted:I kind of like the game.  Been getting my spacefix from KSP and Surviving Mars lately, though.
|
#
?
Dec 18, 2019 20:58
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 2, 2024 20:19 |
|
|
I always found defense platforms a complete waste of resources & upkeep because unless the system is connected to another hyperlane directly across from the entry lane enemy fleets will simply go around it.
|
|
#
?
Dec 18, 2019 21:01
|
|
|
And Tyler Too! posted:I always found defense platforms a complete waste of resources & upkeep because unless the system is connected to another hyperlane directly across from the entry lane enemy fleets will simply go around it. Put some long-range weapons on them. If an enemy fleet gets shot at, they'll be stuck in combat with that station until they can beat it. Of course, defense platforms work best if you put your station somewhere the enemy has to go, and then send an additional fleet to block him. The AI often misjudges their chances in those situations and will go down in flames when fighting both your fleet and the station.
|
|
#
?
Dec 18, 2019 21:06
|
|
|
And Tyler Too! posted:I always found defense platforms a complete waste of resources & upkeep because unless the system is connected to another hyperlane directly across from the entry lane enemy fleets will simply go around it. That stops being a problem once jump inhibitors get researched (quite early in the game, like the first forty years early), then enemy fleets have to leave the same way they come in. Although, it does have to be a proper starport to get an inhibitor, not just a standard outpost, but that's just 150 alloys or so to make the upgrade.
|
|
#
?
Dec 18, 2019 21:18
|
|
|
Baronjutter posted:Getting rid of in-system movement would have been good. A fleet is simply in a system, and if two fleets are in a system they fight or interact in some way. Keep the system view but get rid of planet view, have the system view the place you manage systems which are now the lowest level of economic detail. This is basically how Endless Space does it, and I'm all for it.
|
|
#
?
Dec 18, 2019 21:23
|
|
|
Gort posted:That stops being a problem once jump inhibitors get researched (quite early in the game, like the first forty years early), then enemy fleets have to leave the same way they come in. its probably a terrible idea but I hate the starbase cap.
|
|
#
?
Dec 18, 2019 21:23
|
|
|
AAAAA! Real Muenster posted:and to help balance it, make defense stuff way more expensive to upkeep so you cannot just spam them everywhere, or limit the number of defense stations by needing a building tied to it on a planet or something like that. that's exactly how it is right now though... so get rid of the cap, but add the same cap???
|
|
#
?
Dec 18, 2019 21:25
|
|
|
Baronjutter posted:There is no saving Stellaris through DLC at this point This game has had an average 10k/day players for almost 4 years with bumps only occurring with new expansion releases, I don't think it's as doomed as you're implying
|
|
#
?
Dec 18, 2019 21:29
|
|
|
Also "systems need terrain" wait, what? Are you kidding me? Is this a joke?
|
|
#
?
Dec 18, 2019 21:31
|
|
|
fleets should work like Hearts of Iron armies and systems should work like provinces, with the system view existing but mostly being a cosmetic thing for immersion because it's a much more visually interesting way of representing that information
|
|
#
?
Dec 18, 2019 21:32
|
|
|
QuarkJets posted:Also "systems need terrain" wait, what? Are you kidding me? Is this a joke? Posting bad ideas on how to "fix" games is a time honored forum's tradition.
|
|
#
?
Dec 18, 2019 21:33
|
|
|
QuarkJets posted:This game has had an average 10k/day players for almost 4 years with bumps only occurring with new expansion releases, I don't think it's as doomed as you're implying Nonsensically equating player counts to a game being "good" is a time honored forums tradition.
|
|
#
?
Dec 18, 2019 21:34
|
|
|
I think system view should stay like it is right now. I also think fleet combat should stay like it is right now. Because I actually really like playing Stellaris and none of the other games you people are talking about!
|
|
#
?
Dec 18, 2019 21:35
|
|
|
Chomp8645 posted:Nonsensically equating player counts to a game being "good" is a time honored forums tradition. Well maybe quantify what "saving" the game means, then. I would have thought that a game is only doomed if its player count is slipping into the 100s regardless of whether it's "good"
|
|
#
?
Dec 18, 2019 21:36
|
|
|
Chomp8645 posted:Posting bad ideas on how to "fix" games is a time honored forum's tradition. Ok, get rid of all advisor voices and replace them with Gilbert Gottfried
|
|
#
?
Dec 18, 2019 21:36
|
|
|
Grandpa Palpatine posted:I think system view should stay like it is right now. I also think fleet combat should stay like it is right now. Because I actually really like playing Stellaris and none of the other games you people are talking about! the problem is that fleet combat is a very bad compromise between standard paradox combat and RTS combat, which is that your ships are all actual units actually represented in the game which actually fight each other, but you have no control over them other than grouping them into a big blob and then telling them vaguely where they should be this is, I think, an objectively bad way of doing things
|
|
#
?
Dec 18, 2019 21:37
|
|
|
cock hero flux posted:a very bad compromise between standard paradox A review of Stellaris.
|
|
#
?
Dec 18, 2019 21:38
|
|
|
Grandpa Palpatine posted:I think system view should stay like it is right now. I also think fleet combat should stay like it is right now. Because I actually really like playing Stellaris and none of the other games you people are talking about! Stellaris owns and I am really looking forward to the next DLC.
|
|
#
?
Dec 18, 2019 21:39
|
|
|
cock hero flux posted:the problem is that fleet combat is a very bad compromise between standard paradox combat and RTS combat, which is that your ships are all actual units actually represented in the game which actually fight each other, but you have no control over them other than grouping them into a big blob and then telling them vaguely where they should be Honestly the game doesn't even seem to care what kinds of combat modules I use, I can have corvettes on Swarm and battleships on Artillery but everything just winds up flying into a little clusterfuck sphere. Maybe splitting them up into different fleets would fix this but I don't want to do that. Also I actually prefer the design where you, the President of Space, would not really have control over individual units during combat. That's fine.
|
|
#
?
Dec 18, 2019 21:44
|
|
|
cock hero flux posted:the problem is that fleet combat is a very bad compromise between standard paradox combat and RTS combat, which is that your ships are all actual units actually represented in the game which actually fight each other, but you have no control over them other than grouping them into a big blob and then telling them vaguely where they should be While I do have issues with how fleet combat works, I am very suspicious of the people who seem to want to go full RTS with it; it seems highly unlikely that such a system would be palatable to play in multiplayer.
|
|
#
?
Dec 18, 2019 21:45
|
|
Yes, it's like a lava lamp.
|
Grandpa Palpatine posted:that's exactly how it is right now though...
|
|
#
?
Dec 18, 2019 21:46
|
|
|
QuarkJets posted:Also "systems need terrain" wait, what? Are you kidding me? Is this a joke? In my defense, I was mostly thinking about justifying the system view against the idea that it should go. Like, maybe if the objects in the system mattered in combat more, it would be good?? I know why I found the idea compelling but have realized the problem with it though: What I was thinking about was the first time I faced an endgame crisis in Stellaris and how I had to pull out all the stops and use every trick I could think of to stem the tide and push forward. In that case, I was spending most of my time watching one system where swarms kept coming through and my doomfleet was barely holding them back. Building stations to provide beneficial auras was useful. In that context, thinking about terrain can be very compelling. The problem is that most combat in Stellaris isn't like this, so terrain elements would be overlooked most of the time or become a micromanagement chore. So while I think some of you are being a bit unnecessarily mean about it (  ), I can see why it's getting a negative reaction.
GunnerJ fucked around with this message at 21:56 on Dec 18, 2019 |
|
#
?
Dec 18, 2019 21:53
|
|
|
During one game I had four observation posts above Sanctuary and a fully upgraded fortress because it was a choke point system. Twice in the game I had asteroids heading to sections of the ringworld. The event text always acted as if they were normal planets. I wanted to see what would happen if an asteroid hit but wow that fortress did not gently caress around.
|
|
#
?
Dec 18, 2019 21:56
|
|
|
QuarkJets posted:Honestly the game doesn't even seem to care what kinds of combat modules I use, I can have corvettes on Swarm and battleships on Artillery but everything just winds up flying into a little clusterfuck sphere. This is because combat modules only tell your ships where to stop advancing, as long as the target is inside that range the ship doesn't care even if it's literally about to collide with the target. The result is that ships inevitably end up converging in a big ball in the middle. quote:Maybe splitting them up into different fleets would fix this but I don't want to do that. It doesn't. There are mods that add additional combat computers which DO at least specify different behaviors like hit and run or kiting, but I'm not sure how well those work.
|
|
#
?
Dec 18, 2019 22:06
|
|
|
PittTheElder posted:While I do have issues with how fleet combat works, I am very suspicious of the people who seem to want to go full RTS with it; it seems highly unlikely that such a system would be palatable to play in multiplayer. I don't want to go full RTS with it, I want to go no RTS with it and have them just treat fleets like they treat armies in every other game.
|
|
#
?
Dec 18, 2019 22:18
|
|
|
AAAAA! Real Muenster posted:Yes grandpa, remove the starbase cap and instead add a defense station or defense module cap or something in its place, so we can have more stations to do poo poo like put Deep Space Black sites over our planets, collect trade, build fleet cap buildings, ect. So basically you want a starbase cap on only one kind of starbase? Because you want to be able to build a near-infinite number of anchorages and hydroponics farms? I don't think this is a good idea. I think that it's better to have to pick and choose where your starbases go based on what they're needed for (e.g. trade, defense, etc.) while having the ability to try to choose synergistic uses (e.g. it's often good to have a deep space black site so I may as well make a trade station in the same system). You're probably not building a starbase in a nebula exclusively to put a nebula refinery there, but if you're choosing the location of your next anchorage then maybe you'll prefer a nebula system. This works well and rewards players who plan ahead while not punishing players who do not, because none of the unique starbase structures are really essential. Allowing an unlimited number of non-military starbase upgrades would eliminate a degree of strategic choice, since you could build whatever starbase structures wherever you want without limitations. That's not an interesting system that gives a player any choices. You may as well not even have deep space black sites anymore, building them would just be busy work since they'd be an obvious inclusion in any system with population in it.
|
|
#
?
Dec 18, 2019 22:31
|
|
|
QuarkJets posted:Honestly the game doesn't even seem to care what kinds of combat modules I use, I can have corvettes on Swarm and battleships on Artillery but everything just winds up flying into a little clusterfuck sphere. Maybe splitting them up into different fleets would fix this but I don't want to do that.
|
|
#
?
Dec 18, 2019 22:59
|
|
|
Splicer posted:"Focus fire on the planet cracker" seems like something that you, the President of Space, might be allowed to say. Especially if you're on the planet in question. Yeah that's a fair point but possibly it's just the exception that proves the rule, as this would be better regulated to a "target prioritization" setting rather than giving you RTS controls
|
|
#
?
Dec 18, 2019 23:07
|
|
|
QuarkJets posted:So basically you want a starbase cap on only one kind of starbase? Because you want to be able to build a near-infinite number of anchorages and hydroponics farms? AAAAA! Real Muenster posted:its probably a terrible idea but I hate the starbase cap.
|
|
#
?
Dec 18, 2019 23:18
|
|
|
QuarkJets posted:Yeah that's a fair point but possibly it's just the exception that proves the rule, as this would be better regulated to a "target prioritization" setting rather than giving you RTS controls
|
|
#
?
Dec 18, 2019 23:24
|
|
|
PittTheElder posted:While I do have issues with how fleet combat works, I am very suspicious of the people who seem to want to go full RTS with it; it seems highly unlikely that such a system would be palatable to play in multiplayer. Remove multiplayer.
|
|
#
?
Dec 18, 2019 23:39
|
|
|
DatonKallandor posted:Remove multiplayer. Nah.
|
|
#
?
Dec 19, 2019 00:01
|
|
|
Remove singleplayer. Stellaris 2 always online MP. Now that's how you really sell cosmetic DLCs.
|
|
#
?
Dec 19, 2019 00:12
|
|
|
Unironically I would buy an expansion that gave you the power to build a megastructure that allows you to invade other peoples' games, turning you into their interdimensional end-game crisis.
|
|
#
?
Dec 19, 2019 00:15
|
|
|
Countless PC Gaming site writers have had a half written article titled ‘ Stellaris: The Dark Souls of 4x Games’ just waiting for that dlc.
|
|
#
?
Dec 19, 2019 00:19
|
|
|
QuarkJets posted:So basically you want a starbase cap on only one kind of starbase? Because you want to be able to build a near-infinite number of anchorages and hydroponics farms? It's an awful idea. But it does remind me that we need a Food Megastructure. Something fantastically beautiful, with their kilometer long networks of glass framed in grids of metal, and the sunlight shining through jungles of vegetation inside. Life-giving stars above desolate planets... gardens on the wing.
|
|
#
?
Dec 19, 2019 05:05
|
|
|
Grandpa Palpatine posted:I think system view should stay like it is right now. I also think fleet combat should stay like it is right now. Because I actually really like playing Stellaris and none of the other games you people are talking about! Yeah I also genuinely don't like any of the other games people hype about and Stellaris being built and playing the way it does is why I enjoy it.
|
|
#
?
Dec 19, 2019 06:21
|
|
|
literally every other space 4x is unplayably unfun and stellaris was good at launch and better now
|
|
#
?
Dec 19, 2019 06:47
|
|
|
Agreed, I bounce off 4x games but Stellaris is the only one that has held my attention. I get to be Tyranids, and I love that.
|
|
#
?
Dec 19, 2019 07:10
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 2, 2024 20:19 |
|
|
PittTheElder posted:It's an awful idea. You could just build a Ring World for that
|
|
#
?
Dec 19, 2019 07:12
|
|