|
So are the complaints in a Apocalypse actually worthwhile or are people just whining, given that the rating is currently lingering at 65%? Is it just the new changes or is there actually some severe issues with the game currently?
|
#
¿
Feb 28, 2018 18:05
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ Apr 27, 2024 13:10 |
|
|
I read the guide on combat computers in the OP but is there any general rule for ratios of ship types (particularly early-mid game)? I used to follow the old rule of 1 BB-2 CA-2DD-3 Corv but I am not sure if that is actually relevant to modern Stellaris anymore!
|
|
#
¿
Dec 11, 2018 20:15
|
|
|
Speaking of Branch Offices, is there any change in rules regarding the Admin Cap when it comes to Megacorps; their added 50% penalty modifier seemingly giving a little more teeth to it all? I am unsure if it that extra penalty means you want to be slightly more careful about spreading outward, mid game and onwards, of if you want to keep relatively compact.
|
|
#
¿
Dec 26, 2018 14:25
|
|
|
Is there any prevailing meta on fleet compositions, including any videos on it? For example I am not sure if I should be building Swarms of Corvettes early game, or if I should merely build Destroyers as soon as I get them. General rules of thumb would be helpful I suppose.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 14, 2019 05:38
|
|
|
Jabarto posted:I stick with corvette swarms until I can build cruisers, then swap out the cruisers for battleships when those come online. Destroyers are an uncomfortable middle ground of not-quite-high enough evasion with not-quite-high enough hull points, so they tend to just die and aren't worth using. Cruisers are great when you get them but if you already have a screen of small ships battleships tend to outperform cruisers. Alright, I'll keep that in mind! I did hear that Destroyers are useful for mulching smaller ships and acting as point defence, but that was in the context of them in Battleship heavy fleets. It was always Cruisers which were made out to be the ships which lost out overall (after Battleships are unlocked, that is). SkySteak fucked around with this message at 07:15 on Mar 14, 2019 |
|
#
¿
Mar 14, 2019 07:11
|
|
|
Speaking of task forces, that does make me wonder what as good standard is for force composition! I've heard of the old 1:2:3 for Battleship, Destroyer/Cruiser, Corvette but I don't know if that's a bit antiquated post 2.0 now; considering some people make anti station/fast fleets nowadays? Generally though, is a 1:2 ratio a safe bet in general?
|
|
#
¿
Mar 14, 2019 12:16
|
|
|
ZypherIM posted:If you're doing psionics destroyers are definitely stupid good, because you can push up to 90% evasion on them later on. So for the latter half of the game, is it a good idea to simply translate the 'Small Core of Destroyers+Cov Mass' upward and simply have a load of Destroyers (some picket, others offensive) with Cruisers/Battleships the small core instead? Until late game, it feels like stacking tons of Battleships feels costly whilst you have the option to have quite (increasingly flexible) Destroyers to construct, is going to be useful and cheap to replace. Corvettes still seem to have their place in fast fleets of course, particularly as you could probably stack them with a few specialized speed cruisers.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 14, 2019 17:21
|
|
|
ZypherIM posted:Later game you honestly have a ton of options, and it sort of depends on what style of fleets you want to field. The most flexible ship type is the cruiser, while the others tend to have something they're sort of the best at. I'd suggest just going "I want to focus on weapon X", and build from there. When you get to the end-game crisis there are sort of optimal setups for each, because they tend to be hyper-focused so you can counter-build them. Alright,. I just always get the feeling that my fleet is unbalanced or there is some hidden optimal ratio I should be paying more attention to; but I suppose if it were that easy, it'd be well known. Balancing around a weapon begets certain design choices seems to make sense, given that it begets certain hull designs, pickets/screens etc.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 14, 2019 19:06
|
|
|
Oh and while I am asking things, I was curious if Authoritarian Empires have to use slavery mechanics, and if they do, do they have to use Slaver Guilds and enslave their own population? I heard that the 40% enslavement rate on pops can be a bit dicey given the new economy system.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 14, 2019 19:30
|
|
|
AAAAA! Real Muenster posted:No. It is one of three options to satisfy your authoritarian faction but is not required. From personal experience, slavery in Stellaris is pretty awesome so I would use it. Oooh I see! Yeah I knew it was a civic but I didn't know if it was one of those "This is the meta civic for this ethic," thing-thank you!
|
|
#
¿
Mar 15, 2019 03:48
|
|
|
Barbaric Despoilers look like a lot of fun and, I've heard a lot of people say that the 2.2 population mechanics make the play style worthwhile now! Is there any useful information to know (Starting strats, traditions etc) keep in mind when playing them? I have never played a more offensively minded civ, particularly one with a desire for extremely early war; running with GAI mod making things potentially dicey too.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 17, 2019 14:01
|
|
|
Demiurge4 posted:Sadly, they're actually pretty bad. You're best off saving the civics slot and picking Nihilistic Acquisition as your first ascension perk. What's actually wrong with them? Googling it, there is a feeling that pre 2.2 , it (and Nihilistic Acquisition) were absolutely dreadful, but it's a ton better post 2.2. SkySteak fucked around with this message at 15:27 on Mar 17, 2019 |
|
#
¿
Mar 17, 2019 15:21
|
|
|
ZypherIM posted:The problem with despoilers is you take a huge relations hit, though you do get a fun CB. Nihilistic meanwhile costs you a perk slot, but you can always get it by the time you need to fight a war. They're both a bit worse than right at 2.2, since the AI is better at detecting when you've got them beat and are trying to drag out a war to steal pops and just giving up. Ah so essentially it's something to complement a Militarist/Xenophobe expansionist playthrough as opposed to being the initial focus! Ascension Perk wise it does feel like a great pick, particularly if you're in a max AI neighbors based galaxy, wherein you'll probably aggressively bumping up against people anyway.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 17, 2019 16:20
|
|
|
Ak Gara posted:Got this game a few weeks ago, enjoying it much more than Distant Worlds. There is a mod which fixes this issue: https://steamcommunity.com/sharedfiles/filedetails/?id=1675606006
|
|
#
¿
Mar 20, 2019 18:27
|
|
|
Did the latest expansion meaningfully change/rebalance economic system, or are pops still the supreme king of expansion, growth and power? Additionally, does there any exist any good guides or resources for playing a Devouring Swarm? I have never done any of the non-diplomacy civics before, so the general build order and strategy for them is a bit lost to me. Is it merely a case of hunting down a normal AI as quickly as possible, destroying them with a few starting Corvettes and processing/purging them?
|
|
#
¿
Jun 18, 2019 12:06
|
|
|
What do you pick as your first couple of Unity Traditions? I have always swore by Expansion, considering the bonus to your early game colonization and expansion, but I have also seen a ton of people who will make use of Discovery (it feels most effective at game start). IIRC, I don't think Discovery directly influences the new DLC that much directly, but I can imagine that having a ton of fast surveying ships to discover those archaeological sites probably wouldn't harm.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 20, 2019 09:41
|
|
|
I should really go for a Supremacy opener one of these days, just to force myself into the mindset of conducting early wars and aggressively taking territory. Early warmongering is a concept which is really needed if you're doing a Devouring Swarm/Purifier as well. In this current game I went Expansion as I felt a hivemind could benefit from the rapid growth, combined with (though it may not be a good idea at game start) switching on food policy toward max pop growth early on. Never done a hivemind before, and it'll be nice not to have to have a consumer goods world; a forge world entirely for cheap tat.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 20, 2019 10:42
|
|
|
Apologies for asking probably an eternal question at this point but is Federations worth picking up? I haven't really touched Stellaris since 2019 so I am unsure what state of actual quality the game is currently in at this point. Going by the last page or two it still has problems it seems but has it also really improved at all?
|
|
#
¿
Nov 30, 2020 00:45
|
|
|
MrL_JaKiri posted:Depends why you didn't like it so much. Some things are better, some things aren't. However, for the first time I'm optimistic about a post-Wiz dev team's ideas, so that's something. Oh I like the game but the pop management, whilst a cool idea, became extremely tiresome when your Empire got to any real size. Additionally the AI's complete inability to manage the system, whilst completely expected me, left a bit of a bad taste in my mouth.
|
|
#
¿
Nov 30, 2020 04:45
|
|
|
This may have been changed but is it still advantageous to get as many migration treaties as possible so you can get extra pops? I know pop growth is powerful but I don''t know if Federations put the kabosh in turning your demographics pie chart into a wheel of fortune.
|
|
#
¿
Dec 6, 2020 12:30
|
|
|
This is a bit of a long shot but for anyone using the Carrying Capacity mod, do you run it with District Overhaul 2 and/or Planet Diversity? If so I presume they all mostly play nice with each other? I'm a bit concerned the combination of a ton of new district types particularly may break things or accidentally cause exponential pop growth again.
|
|
#
¿
Dec 8, 2020 21:56
|
|
|
Cheers for the reply. Yeah I'll drop Diverse Overhaul 2 for now, though funnily enough it is going through a 2.8 playtest, and Real Space 2 is also getting its update for non Patreon people. It seems even Stellaris mods embody the spirit of "Waiting for thing to change," though I am carrying on regardless otherwise I will never get started.
|
|
#
¿
Dec 9, 2020 12:53
|
|
|
Can someone remind me of the name of the AI mod, the one which isn't Glavius. I think it's called Star something?
|
|
#
¿
May 3, 2021 04:09
|
|
|
With the the changes of 3.0 put through, has the standard practices of growing as rapidly as possible with the aid of the Expansion and Prosperity Traditions changed at all? At the very least I do hope Carrying Capacity has become an unneeded mod now.
|
|
#
¿
May 16, 2021 15:06
|
|
|
You can also lovingly depict a Space Pirate civilization by picking some shade of Egalitarian ethics. After all a pirate is free.
|
|
#
¿
Nov 24, 2021 16:54
|
|
|
Captain Oblivious posted:Yeah same. I yanked Living Metal tech out of a Fallen Empire scientist's head. I appreciate that it's a sci fi universe with psionics, but just imagine how the individual in question must've sounded when explaining the tech.
|
|
#
¿
Nov 28, 2021 18:15
|
|
|
I am glad the singular MP player is with us. What do they yearn to balance currently?
|
|
#
¿
Nov 30, 2021 19:02
|
|
|
I appreciate this is context sensitive and a vague thing to generally ask but does anyone have any good tips for what constitutes a good economy early to mid game? On top of that is there a good metric for a good amount of research (in a similar period)? I find that I can get the initial expansion down just fine, but the move to specializing planets to certain tasks+producing strat always feels really slow and start+stop. Technology suffers from this too and I just find myself suddenly realizing it's really behind in the 2300s. Also in case it makes a big difference, I play with 0.25x habitable worlds.
|
|
#
¿
Dec 8, 2021 06:28
|
|
|
Yami Fenrir posted:Well, there's your problem. Ah fair enough I'll have to give it a try. When it comes to early game alloy production, (before any specialized worlds) is it simply a matter of placing the alloy foundry building wherein available, using the industrial districts or well, both?
|
|
#
¿
Dec 9, 2021 00:12
|
|
|
isndl posted:Sometimes a neighboring AI empire has nothing I want, so I have no reason to obliterate them. This is also a bug. The terrible feeling of having an amazing navy but having no good justification to use it on anyone, an immense agony which ultimately leads one to make up a reason in their head.
|
|
#
¿
Dec 26, 2021 08:14
|
|
|
Long shot modding compatibility question, because I cannot seem to find consensus on this: Without a compatibility patch (both are abandoned currently), has anyone found Planetary Diversity and Gigastructures to overall play nicely with eachother? Irony Mod Manager throws up a ton of conflicts between them but I don't know if that's causing actual meaningful problems! It'd absolutely suck to have to choose one or the other.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 22, 2023 20:11
|
|
|
Jazerus posted:gigastructures will not handle the new planet classes very well without a compat patch. probably "crash the game" not well. i would try the abandoned compatibility patches because the basic infrastructure needed to make the two mods play nice with each other hasn't changed in years Appreciate the reply! Yeah the latest compatibility patch was last updated for 3.4 which isn't brilliant but I suppose it could be far far worse: https://steamcommunity.com/sharedfiles/filedetails/?id=2851156907 By the looks of the bug reports page, there is some habitability/colonization problems popping up; something I've oddly a bit of when it comes to older mods post Toxoids.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 23, 2023 16:48
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ Apr 27, 2024 13:10 |
|
|
Relevant Tangent posted:back when your borders expanded in a circle entirely on their own Playing some mods which haven't been updated for a while provides almost a time capsule to mechanics that, if distant enough almost feel dreamt up. For example having a civic which gives penalties to Administrative Capacity whilst running around with a trait which increases scientist critical failure chance. Hell, just anything in this image:  Edit: Make sure to go militarist to get your oversized flagship!
|
|
#
¿
Mar 11, 2023 14:27
|
|