Register a SA Forums Account here!
JOINING THE SA FORUMS WILL REMOVE THIS BIG AD, THE ANNOYING UNDERLINED ADS, AND STUPID INTERSTITIAL ADS!!!

You can: log in, read the tech support FAQ, or request your lost password. This dumb message (and those ads) will appear on every screen until you register! Get rid of this crap by registering your own SA Forums Account and joining roughly 150,000 Goons, for the one-time price of $9.95! We charge money because it costs us money per month for bills, and since we don't believe in showing ads to our users, we try to make the money back through forum registrations.
 
  • Post
  • Reply
QuarkJets
Sep 8, 2008

It's a handshake in progress


I'm some way through my first attempt at playing stellaris and I have some questions. I'm playing as xenophile humans on ironman

I have a sense that you claim territory by building starbases everywhere, but once you start exceeding administrative capacity then you'll suffer penalties to various things like research and unity costs. But I just keep building outposts and new districts like crazy and don't seem to really notice these penalties; leaders cost double what they normally would but my economy is nuts with all of these owned systems/colonies. Does this seem right or should I try to restrain myself to just the best clusters of systems?

Is there a travel time advantage to using Experimental Subspace Navigation, or does it only eliminate the need to actually travel along hyperlanes? What I mean is, say you had 2 planets separated by 100 hyperlane jumps but on the map they're practically next to each other, is the travel time with ESN going to be 100 hyperlane jumps regardless of how physically close the two systems may be?

What's the threshold of habitability where you consider colonizing a world? I've been assuming that like 50%+ is where the benefits probably outweigh the penalties but I didn't do any math to determine this. If you had 30% habitability would you colonize anyway and just try to use robots as the main workforce there?

I've paid mercenaries a few times to go attack rivals. I get a message when they're heading back home, but it's hard to tell what kind of effect these groups really have. Does anyone have an idea of whether this is worth doing? If these groups have particularly good systems is it worth taking them out later?

I have an urge to go conquer some dudes, but what's the best strategy here? Go after high-value systems? Try to conquer planets? Take everything? I come from EU4 where you're usually making claims against border provinces, but here you can make claims on practically anything. Yet I don't think that I'd want to own a system surrounded by a rival's system so I guess one strategy would be to carve a path toward a desirable objective, like a high-habitability world or maybe a hyperlane chokepoint, using claims?

I went through the First League event chain and now I have colonized their old homeworld. This place seems insanely good. My strategy so far has been to just let planets grow naturally with a gene clinic and occasionally pumping their growth rate with the food decision. Should I be moving population from my other systems onto this planet to take advantage of those powerful arcology districts?

Adbot
ADBOT LOVES YOU

QuarkJets
Sep 8, 2008

It's a handshake in progress


I basically want to play as the Reapers from the Mass Effect series

QuarkJets
Sep 8, 2008

It's a handshake in progress


Raenir Salazar posted:

Because basically, a Hive Mind with Deviant Drones just means they might assume other sentient races are just other hive mind with some deviant drones? That they've actually encountered an alien race where *every* member is just as sentient as the hive mind is isn't something we can easily assume to be something they would know. These are still large differences in kinds.


I think your argument presupposes that an alien hive mind race has to come from a planet where all of the species are also hive minds, and I don't think that's a reasonable assumption.

QuarkJets
Sep 8, 2008

It's a handshake in progress


You're conflating two different things: people would get their minds blown by the existence of any kind of alien intelligent life, whether it's a hive mind or silicon-based or whatever is practically a footnote, on the scale of belief-shattering revelations that's like a 2/10. Once we got over alien life existing I don't think that the existence of an alien hive mind would be a big deal to most people, we've already created popular media depicting those based on the relatively unintelligent hive mind species that we already have on Earth

So I assume that the opposite would also be true: an alien hive mind may be shocked to discover intelligent alien life, but whether that life is also a hive mind may be interesting but probably not mind-blowing

QuarkJets
Sep 8, 2008

It's a handshake in progress


Zurai posted:

No, it's far more likely to be mind-blowing to a hive mind because said hive mind, assuming it was the only sapient life on its world of origin, hasn't evolved and grown in a situation where it has billions of other viewpoints to consider. If there had only ever been a single sapient human, we wouldn't have even a tiny percentage of the cultural richness we have now, including all the hundreds of different sci-fi species we've dreamed up.

The ability to extrapolate doesn't come from our autonomy, it's something that any intelligent being can do. You're saying that an immortal hive intelligence couldn't connect the dots between "alien life exists" and "not all life is hive minded" to "not all alien life is hive minded"?

QuarkJets
Sep 8, 2008

It's a handshake in progress


Jabor posted:

We already know for a fact that humans, who are used to thinking about numbers on the order of tens or hundreds or low thousands, have their intuition break down entirely when you start talking about millions.

Extrapolation would tell us that a species that's used to thinking about numbers on the order of approximately one, would have a much bigger issues with intuitively grasping the concept of billions of individual sapient beings on a single planet.

But that assumes that there are only hive minds on their homeworld. If they have a species similar to something like Dogs for instance then they have already witnessed the existence of billions (or trillions) of independent sentient individuals in a species. Imagining that maybe a species like that could even develop sapience without developing as a hive mind is not a big leap. That is the kind of extrapolation to which I am referring, similar to how humans can imagine sapient hive minds existing

QuarkJets
Sep 8, 2008

It's a handshake in progress


Jabor posted:

Why would an entity that is literally the only sapient thing in the known universe compare itself to beasts?

The better question is: why wouldn't it?

quote:

What would cause it to think that sapient thought is even possible in something that small?

Because probably it observes and learns from its environment and is able to encounter species that exhibit some form of intelligent thought even when not part of a hive mind. "Oh look that glip-glorp is using tools and deductive reasoning but isn't part of a hive mind, that's interesting"

QuarkJets
Sep 8, 2008

It's a handshake in progress


Jabarto posted:

Negative leader traits need to be removed completely, or at least be far less common. It's almost impossible to get a leader over level 5 or 6 without him getting addicted to drugs or slowing/halting his experience gain, to the point that I've given up on leader-centric builds altogether.

So it's too realistic, you're saying

QuarkJets
Sep 8, 2008

It's a handshake in progress


ZypherIM posted:

What do you find broken? Just listing that as a generic problem doesn't do much to help us identify issues and suggest solutions.

I would like to know the answer to this question as well. As a week-old player I don't really know any better but the game seems good and quite addictive to me.

What are tiles BTW? An older iteration of planetary management?

QuarkJets
Sep 8, 2008

It's a handshake in progress


I don't understand sectors either. I have an extreme example where 3 planets are each in an adjacent system creating a little triangle, and each one is in its own sector. They must be predefined based on how the map was generated, but they're only accounting for system layout I guess. It's too bad that these aren't generated on the fly (which they totally can be, blobbing algorithms are a common-enough thing).

But Starbase power is approximately fine, and it's easy enough to set a group or two of corvettes to patrol through your trade routes. I've had a 5k starbase go up against a 5k fleet and just barely win. I've also gone up against a 2k starbase with a 2k fleet and completely trounced it but I think my ship composition was just well-suited for doing that

QuarkJets fucked around with this message at 03:01 on Feb 3, 2019

QuarkJets
Sep 8, 2008

It's a handshake in progress


Staltran posted:

Yes, but it's not really that long a time to do those things. I can't find any hard numbers on repair speed, but I'm pretty sure repairing for 2-3 months would get most ships to decent shape. 3 months is about 3 fleet size per starbase (assuming they have the alloys on hand) or maybe two systems travel. And sure, they might have rebuilt some ships during the repairs or flanked you, but that's far less serious than getting your combined navies massacred because they were at half health.

And I know what the context is, thanks. The post you quoted was three posts above mine. But you might notice it was in response to


and saying that someone might need to repair after fighting starbases and that takes time actually fits "little more than a speed bump" pretty well.

And that's assuming your enemies don't just reroll for engineer admirals.

The additional context is that someone was complaining about starbases not having any impact on enemy fleets at all. If that were true then it shouldn't be necessary to make a bunch of repair pit stops.

QuarkJets
Sep 8, 2008

It's a handshake in progress


Does the AI not get to do quest chains? That kind of sucks. EU4 allowed that kind of thing to happen and it sometimes turned out super awesome

QuarkJets
Sep 8, 2008

It's a handshake in progress


ded posted:






With tiles you can make planets like this useful. But this?

Even without terraforming that planet looks pretty good. Oh no your huge agricultural world is slightly less than perfect, how sad

QuarkJets
Sep 8, 2008

It's a handshake in progress


tithin posted:

How do I delete it? Can't replace / downgrade / disable or repair them?

Are you still in the war?

QuarkJets
Sep 8, 2008

It's a handshake in progress


Electro-Boogie Jack posted:

Sometimes I don't want growth on every planet though, towards the end game when some of them are filled out but pops (all with 0% habitability for whatever planet they're on) keep appearing and refuse to move even though they're homeless and unemployed and there's a ecumenopolis world right next to them with hundreds of jobs and endless oceans of free housing... argh. The edict solution might be better once they've made pops behave less weirdly.

edit: actually they might not be totally refusing to move, but maybe moving takes longer than it takes for a new pop to grow? either way, i designed this goddamn socialist space utopia so everyone would be cool, not so that a bunch of polar bears would set up shop in Death Valley and suffer in slums without any work even though there are free shuttles 24/7 offering to take them to a custom-built polar arcology on Cool Planet Prime.

They just need to add an edict that is Encourage Growth for the whole empire but that also disables the Encourage Growth decision on all of your planets.

QuarkJets
Sep 8, 2008

It's a handshake in progress


Baronjutter posted:

Egalitarians still being unable to select robot construction as its for some reason tied to population controls was complained about since 2.2 came out and still not even officially addressed.

I think because that's working as intended, and for the most part I agree with robots being a type of population

QuarkJets
Sep 8, 2008

It's a handshake in progress


appropriatemetaphor posted:

I usually do .25 planets because I like the planets being kinda rare instead of just dozens and dozens everywhere.

Is there a setting with fewer habitable planets and more barren worlds that can be terraformed? That seems like it'd be more representative of what the average galaxy probably contains, I feel like the default settings is producing way too many nice worlds

QuarkJets
Sep 8, 2008

It's a handshake in progress


Preston Waters posted:

Is it just me or is the early game now a giant piece of poo poo? I keep exiting to desktop but it just isn't fun anymore. Takes forever to get going. Maybe it's because I'm playing as the same ole thing all the time and idk?

Maybe it's because you keep exiting to desktop?

QuarkJets
Sep 8, 2008

It's a handshake in progress


ZypherIM posted:

I mean, how many planets do you even have, and what percentage of your empire production is from them?

Perk wise, let's say you take executive vigor, ascension path A, ascension path B, galactic wonders, master builders. That leaves you 3 to play with. Collosus project is something you mentioned, and is always fun. The endgame crisis is going to be a legit threat, so defender of the galaxy seems good as well. I'd argue that in terms of usefulness for this build, that galactic force projection (bunch of free cap), eternal vigilance (starbases buffed a lot), or grasp the void (5 starbases is more cap than GFP but is expensive, or can be defense in depth setup) all are much better choices than gaia worlds.

I think I'd rather have gaia worlds than 5 extra starbases or eternal vigilance

QuarkJets
Sep 8, 2008

It's a handshake in progress


That seems like a broader issue with being unsatisfied that races with specialist traits prefer those jobs over others. Like if you're running an energy deficit then you probably want more technicians, not miners, but new pops may become miners regardless. And generally if you have a bunch of Industrious pops, you do actually want them in the miner jobs and not randomly jumping over to become technicians just because you're running an energy deficit right now.

I'd rather have specialists preferring to fill the roles that they're better at than a system that like... shuffles pops around to try to optimally balance things for you. Because the system won't be able to predict what you want; maybe you have a bunch of pops that you're about to resettle and take up those extra amenities, for instance.

QuarkJets
Sep 8, 2008

It's a handshake in progress


Splicer posted:

code:
modifier = {
			factor = 1.25
			planet = {
				free_amenities < 5
			}
		}
		modifier = {
			factor = 2
			planet = {
				free_amenities < 10
			}
		}
lol you're right

Why is something called "charismatic" boosting amenities for a group mind's non-sapient drones in the first place? Seems weirdly masturbatory. "Integrated Multitools" or something would seem like a better name, and you could have it boost robot construction too.

Maybe "amenities" in that case are the extra pheromones or psychic energy or whatever that keeps the non-sapient drones non-sapient? So if you run out then those drones start becoming noncompliant

QuarkJets
Sep 8, 2008

It's a handshake in progress


pmchem posted:

I'm playing my first serious game since 2.2 came out. How do you all cope with the alloy shortage early game for fleet building? I'm using the market to sell extra minerals for energy, which I use to buy alloys, but the conversion rate isn't good to start and tanks further quickly.

It's also unclear what buildings/etc I should be prioritizing on my planets. I have some unemployed pops with no immediately obvious way to shift or employ them.

This is very early game, fleet strengths ~1.5k-2k tops.

You're right, selling minerals to buy alloys is super inefficient but you should start with the structure that converts minerals to alloys. Build more of those

Maybe you could post screenshots of some of your planets and people could make suggestions

QuarkJets
Sep 8, 2008

It's a handshake in progress


GamingHyena posted:

I thought Awakened Empires eventually fell apart after enough time had passed but apparently not. My current game has an AE Regulators with about 500k worth of fleet power and is kicking the poo poo out of everyone. They even took out the Scourge in about a year because they landed on the other side of the galaxy from me. About 200+ years after they awakened they're still going strong as I slowly build up enough fleet strength to try and challenge them. Is there any way to stop AEs aside from huge slog wars? I'm thinking of grabbing the Colossus project just so I don't have to claim every drat system in the galaxy.

I think that I'm nearing the end of my first game, but when War in Heaven started I joined up under the AE that was right on my border and then I carved out all of the remaining territory around them for myself. Now they're nice and contained. I then carved a path of destruction to the other AE and took all of their systems.

I was building up and preparing for an independence attempt when extradimensional invaders suddenly showed up on the other end of the galaxy and I felt like I should try to contain that somewhat first.

QuarkJets
Sep 8, 2008

It's a handshake in progress


ZypherIM posted:

I mean, yea you'll make your investment back eventually I guess. I'd still rather produce some extra alloy/tech/rare resources/naval cap though. If you're a trade type of person making GBS threads out some clerks is probably better value as well (you could plop down a resource silo for 1 clerk and 2000 resource cap for example).

PittTheElder posted:

Oh yeah I guess I don't bother building them on specialist heavy worlds either come to think of it. I was more thinking of the sea of rural worlds with excess building slots that you'll be holding in the midgame. Even if it has 0 mineral districts on it, Mineral Purification hubs are still worth building.

Yeah, I'm going to have to disagree with this concept of building mineral purificaiton hubs on planets with no mineral districts, there are so many other buildings that would be better to have than 1 miner, research complexes for instance.

Even if you just build 1 commercial zone that's able to produce more unity or consumer goods than those minerals are worth.

QuarkJets
Sep 8, 2008

It's a handshake in progress



Holy poo poo yes please do this

QuarkJets
Sep 8, 2008

It's a handshake in progress


Aethernet posted:

Xeno-Compatibility - Fat Bottomed Blorgs

You hosed it up I don't want any cutesy names that sound like the title of a queen song, they need to be actual queen song titles

Xeno-Compatibility should obviously be Somebody To Love

QuarkJets
Sep 8, 2008

It's a handshake in progress


Colossus Project - Killer Queen

Voidborne - Princes Of The Universe

World Shaper - Is This The World We Created?

Executive Vigor - Don't Stop Me Now

Nihilistic Acquisition - Death On Two Legs

QuarkJets
Sep 8, 2008

It's a handshake in progress


Serpentis posted:

Hammer to Fall, surely, given its theme?

That seems fine too but I was thinking of the lines

"Dynamite with a laser beam
Guaranteed to blow your mind"

QuarkJets
Sep 8, 2008

It's a handshake in progress


prefect posted:

I still like the suggestion someone had where there's a list of buildings with counts specified instead of a grid of pictures that all look the same to me.

The upper-right corner of each building is showing what it produces; that's all that really matters to me.

AAAAA! Real Muenster posted:

This is from a few pages ago and there were several replies, but I wanted to add something that I didnt see people say...

You should only have as many jobs as you have workers - if you are building districts and buildings when you dont have have excess workers you will be paying upkeep on the district/building even though it is not being used. More on this later.

They have made some changes to the weighting in the 2.5 beta patch that may help with that if you had problems.

The thing I didnt see people say is - do you always build buildings when you get an open slot? Because that is how buildings can cause you problems. Only build buildings if you need something and have unemployed workers to fill the job slots that you are creating.

Generally for building new districts, I build one of whatever type I need the most once I have workers to fill the jobs. That is how you keep your economy balanced in the early game.

I'm playing on the default setting and have like... at least 50 planets. This has led me to preferring a much less micromanaged style of play, where I accept the cost of paying maintenance on unfilled jobs in exchange for not having to click on and fiddle with my planets as often.

I'm also having trouble with the Reinforce Fleet button sometimes not doing what it's supposed to, it queues up the right number of ships but later I'll sometimes wind up with 2-3 random small fleets with no orders just hanging around in my empire. Does anyone else experienced this? Do I need to stop moving the fleet around while it's being reinforced?

QuarkJets
Sep 8, 2008

It's a handshake in progress


Duelists should be Warrior Poets

QuarkJets
Sep 8, 2008

It's a handshake in progress


Fister Roboto posted:

Third, tech availability doesn't reshuffle like in Stellaris. You can't have +10 terraforming available at one point, not pick it, and then it doesn't show up the next time. It makes no loving sense that Stellaris does that.

Simple flavor explanation: you had a critical mass of researchers who were interested in Terraforming, but you decided they needed to work on some other stupid thing instead. You spent 5-10 years telling everyone to work on the other thing. In the meantime those original researchers spent years working on your research priority, eventually losing knowledge / interest in Terraforming; now they're experts in something else, so you'll have to rely on the new and diverse interests of a new cohort of young researchers for determining your next tech options.

That's approximately how things could play out in real life if research funding was set at a world-wide level by the UN, anyway

quote:

Also "science is gonna science" is a really weak excuse for the system being completely random.

It's not a bad reason at all

QuarkJets
Sep 8, 2008

It's a handshake in progress


Electro-Boogie Jack posted:

Thing I don't understand: Why I have tons of pops that are homeless and jobless when I have multiple planets with open housing and jobs, including two ecumenopolis's's with literally hundreds of units of free housing and jobs. Why are they just sitting there? Even if moving takes time, why aren't they doing it?

Potential solution: Maybe a new edict that lets you spend a bunch of credits to bribe unemployed and homeless pops to move? Call it the 'Leave the Bronx Now- Enjoy Your New Life in Sunny New Mexico' option.

Potential problem with that solution: This feels a lot like the authoritarian thing where you can move pops at will, so that doesn't fit with egalitarian, and honestly it seems better than fiddling with the resettlement screen.

Potential solution: Whatever, I don't care, maybe unemployed homeless pops should just move faster/at all if there's a better life somewhere else. Why is my incredibly prosperous space socialist empire full of people living in squalor when I just spent god knows how much on an ecumenopolis?

Those billions of people can't afford to move by themselves. Some small fraction of them can and this is represented by emigration pressure increasing due to joblessness and homelessness. Resettlement I think is the "bribe" that you're describing, albeit it is totally forced. The "Discourage Growth" decision is the more egalitarian version of that; not only does it significantly reduce growth, but it also significantly increases emigration pressure, so any new pops that do appear will wind up appearing somewhere else.

And the unemployed probably aren't living in squalor if you're an egalitarian empire with space socialism policies. They're happy just chilling out doing art projects and whatnot. You're paying them to chill out and smoke weed in space utopia and you expect them to volunteer to work in the Space Steel Forge on some city planet? Use Discourage Growth if you don't want this to happen.

QuarkJets fucked around with this message at 06:03 on Feb 19, 2019

QuarkJets
Sep 8, 2008

It's a handshake in progress


Related, in my first-ever game like a month ago I was in a federation and my partner wanted to declare war on a mutual rival. I didn't pay attention to the cassus belli but was down for my first war experience so I voted for war

After awhile of winning we won the war and our opponent was suddenly gone; we kept the few stations that we had claimed, but the rest of their stations disappeared and their planets reverted to being neutral, and I got the message that they were wiped from the map. But we weren't even close to taking all of their stations or planets

QuarkJets
Sep 8, 2008

It's a handshake in progress


Warmachine posted:

I pretty much live in the Rimworld thread, and warcrimes seem to be a common thread among strategy game enthusiasts. I don't get it personally. I was never cruel to my Sims.

Yeah this game has an entire expansion centered around being able to blow up worlds, and it's considered a must-have

QuarkJets
Sep 8, 2008

It's a handshake in progress


Blorange posted:

That sounds like your federation partner claimed the home system of a life-seeded empire.

Well it just happened again last night. The Great Khan came and went, resulting in 2 new empires. I (not in a federation) attacked one of them, won the war while claiming some territory, and then suddenly the rest of their territory went neutral. I don't think that I took their only planet, but I don't have a way of going back to confirm.

QuarkJets
Sep 8, 2008

It's a handshake in progress


Libluini posted:

I don't even understand how people can make themselves play genocidal empires. The first and last time I tried playing one (exterminators), the first event about my robots killing all native life on a planet made me so sad I went back to my xenophile science empires and never looked back.

Evil empires are there so you have interesting enemies to destroy, playing as one is just incredibly boring and tedious

Good empires are there so you have interesting enemies to consume

Although I do actually enjoy the diplomacy system but at the same time I like playing as, like, The Empire, enslaving the lesser races and being Galaxy's Biggest Dick. It's the only thing that prevents me from creating an evil space empire in real life

QuarkJets
Sep 8, 2008

It's a handshake in progress


Mini-CK in space as part of an expansion could be sweet

QuarkJets
Sep 8, 2008

It's a handshake in progress


Zurai posted:

Making resources appear out of thin air? That isn't espionage, that's magic.

Call it Illegal Prospecting. There are shitloads of events that create new resources out of nowhere, because you don't actually have complete knowledge of all of the available resources in the territory you control. If your espionage is detected then the victim ends your benefits and gets a resource bonus

if it's just income, then it's a 1-way commercial pact that has Smuggling in the name

QuarkJets fucked around with this message at 03:31 on Mar 1, 2019

QuarkJets
Sep 8, 2008

It's a handshake in progress


Exterminators and Swarms should be able to make pleasure worlds that keep foreign pops as laborers but also culls them for resources at a lower rate. A big glorious trap world attracting the lesser races.

I haven't given any further thought to this idea but it sounds cool

Adbot
ADBOT LOVES YOU

QuarkJets
Sep 8, 2008

It's a handshake in progress


Maybe that doesn't work so well for Swarms but certainly Exterminators could be like "well we'll exterminate them faster if we trick them into coming to us"

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
  • Post
  • Reply