|
Baronjutter posted:<tech efficiency My experience so far is that, in practice, it just doesn't matter.  I'm playing the big purple blob here (this is a 1000 star galaxy, so that's like 300 systems easy and about 50/60 planets). Despite expanding very aggressively throughout the game, I have consistently been ahead of or on par with every other empire- considerably ahead of most of them, in fact (only the Stolis and the Shabtaks have been anywhere close to "equivalent" in centuries, and occasionally I've found myself up against equipment two generations out of date). Now, this is a species precision-engineered to flatten everyone else in tech... but the enormous millstone I've strung around their necks hasn't actually prevented them from doing so. I don't think a normal empire would have too much trouble keeping up with the pack in similar circumstances, even if it couldn't pull ahead. And the advantages in being large more than outweigh the downsides. Like, this war I'm in here in this screenshot. There was exactly one major fleet engagement in this war, in their capital system- two 45k fleets on my side, two 35k fleets and another 15k or so in stations on theirs. I probably should have waited until the rest of my navy was in position, but those fleets looked like they were leaving. It was a bloodbath on both sides- I lost I think ~120 fleet capacity to ~180 on theirs (plus the stations). Those two fleets I sent in were wrecked, had to immediately return to port- but the difference was, I could absorb those losses. I had another three fleets of equal size to replace them, and the minerals on hand to rebuild all the ships I'd lost. Meanwhile, the enemy was ended as a naval power. Being huge rules. (Unity scaling is nuts, though- I'm waiting two-three decades between each tradition now, I'm never going to get my last three ascension perks.)
|
#
¿
Feb 26, 2018 00:30
|
|
>
|
|
| # ¿ Apr 28, 2024 21:38 |
|
|
liveoctopus posted:This... is not actually a fix, but rather just obscuring the problem. Running the enemy fleet off and maintaining (or achieving) space superiority should count for something. It does. It means you have space superiority, allowing you to capture systems and planets without having to deal with enemy fleets.  Also: I'm fighting the Contingency right now, and I'm noticing that their ships bug out of fleets the way regular factions' ships do. What I'm not noticing is fleets that are forced to retreat fully reappearing anywhere. Meaning something like 75% of the Contingency ships are disappearing without actually being destroyed, which makes their fleets a lot less scary than I originally thought. (also they have no kinetic weapons at all so go hog-wild with shields)
|
|
#
¿
Mar 1, 2018 15:37
|
|
|
Fighting the Contingency has taught me that gateways are rad as gently caress. The size of my empire and the scale of the threat meant that, in order to get reinforcements in any sort of sensible timeframe, in order not to stall out the advance, I had to build a gateway over every shipyard in the empire and at every forward base against the C. Now of course anyone can just drop their entire navy into my industrial heartland whenever they please, but it's also made my internal lines vanishingly short. New era for galactic travel indeed.  (the war still took fifty years jesus gently caress)
|
|
#
¿
Mar 1, 2018 22:37
|
|
|
Javes posted:So is fanatical purifier the best archetype if I just want to be a marauding conqueror? Do you want to lord it over the lesser races or just exterminate them? 2.0's got a new "Barbarian Despoiler" civic for when you want to be only 80% evil, or you could just pick Slaver Guilds/Feudal Society and be a dick about it.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 1, 2018 22:52
|
|
|
Dallan Invictus posted:I'm pretty sure that people can't jump to one of your gateways if you don't have open borders to them (or are, say, at war)? Last I checked this was as yet unclear. You definitely can't use a wormhole if the other end is in the territory of actors you're in a pseudo-war with- Marauders, the crises, I tested that. But that's pretty weird/surprising behaviour if it's intended that way. I'm leaning towards it being a bug. Whether you can use them in a regular war is something I haven't tested yet.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 1, 2018 22:56
|
|
|
Baronjutter posted:Intended is for wormholes to be open to anyone while gates are restricted under normal movement rules but people you're at war with can't use them. Wormholes were explicitly supposed to be usable in war. Ah, cool. Though, I'm not certain if I want gates to be restricted like that? I quite like the idea that building a gate network is something of double-edged sword. And it's not like it would be totally unworkable- anywhere the enemy could instantly teleport to is somewhere you could instantly teleport to to fight them off.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 1, 2018 23:03
|
|
|
TalonDemonKing posted:Modding is hell. Is there some sort of secret resource that I'm not aware of or is everyone else just bumbling along like I am? What are you trying to do, my dude? The wiki has a bunch of reference material but it's far from a silver bullet.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 3, 2018 02:43
|
|
|
Nevets posted:Artillery: Long range - good for kinetic batteries / X class weapons / missiles / carriers There's an energy equivalent of kinetic batteries now- neutron blasters. Same range, much higher alpha, hoses armour instead of shield. Sweet as gently caress. My current end game fleet is mostly autocannon swarm corvettes backed by sniper battleships and destroyers armed with neutrons/lances. I can't see much of a use for cruisers at the minute; they're too easy to hit, too thin to take a beating and can't be sniper fit. Maybe as pocket carriers? Those command points are much better spent on battleships. Titans seem a bit underwhelming, too. They're tough enough, and the perdition beam's pretty solid, but just six L slots? Six X shots sounds more like it. There's not even a carrier config, which is nuts. I mean, they're good, but they're not "you can only have three" good. They don't wow me. They're just bigger battleships. Aux slots, the 'vettes get ABs and the rest I've been slamming full of the accuracy boosters. Seemed like the closest thing to a straight DPS boost there. I haven't felt particularly power constrained unless I'm going for all-shield loadouts- and unless you can guarantee your enemy is heavily energy-biased, that seems like a dumb choice.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 3, 2018 21:27
|
|
|
Staltran posted:I use Giga Cannons now because of that, you don't want to waste the first neutron salvo on shields. That's not the clearest sentence I ever wrote, yeah. At this specific moment in time it's battleships with tachyon lances and an even split of neutrons and kinetics, while the destroyers have a neutron and two flak guns for PD. Switching to giga cannon is probably a better idea, you're right- originally I was hoping that the corvette swarm would tear through enemy shields while the snipers were still coming into range, but there is so much range on arty that that didn't pan out. The destroyers are there purely for PD duty- if I didn't need them for that I'd just build more battleships instead.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 3, 2018 23:01
|
|
|
Nevets posted:I think there should be an 'invasion' war policy thst lets you mod how your armies attack a planet. Right now there still isn't much point in having more than one army since even with combat width slowing down invasions it still takes only amonth or two to conquer most planets. I'd like an option to 'siege' planets: land my guys and leave them there for half a year or more. Armies would deal less much less damage and have a higher chance of disengaging, so you probably wouldn't lose any armies in each invasion but they would each take upwards of a year or more. This would encourage multiple armies with multiple generals. Right now you only need 1 army with (combat width + expected casulaties) troops. Those armies have to slowboat around like everyone else. If you have enough fleets to cover them and the enemy's large enough it is totally worth having multiple armies to gently caress up different sections of their empire at the same time. Though I'm totally down for slowing the pace of invasions. If invasions lasted long enough that the defender could launch a counter-attack and bring in a relief force that might add an interesting wrinkle to warfare. You'd have to actively hold the system while the armies were at work, rather than just blowing off the station and pushing on. I don't think a policy option is a good fit, though. As it stands, ground combat has only two dimensions: time and casualties. There's not enough room there to construct an interesting array of options.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 4, 2018 14:16
|
|
|
Zulily Zoetrope posted:They're real good, but I think I'm more partial to fungoid ships. They're somehow sleek and lumpy at the same time, and I will never tire of the colossus animation. I haven't seen the Molluscoid death star yet, though. The absolutely good and correct ranking is Molluscoid > Arthropoid = Fungoid > Reptilian > Avian = Humanoid >> straight loving garbage >> Mammalian = Plantoid Avian and Humanoid ships always feel like they should be better looking to me. 
|
|
#
¿
Mar 7, 2018 12:25
|
|
|
ZypherIM posted:How do you rate tradition tree opener/finishers? Curious because like Nevets said research has a +5% that you get even faster than +2 starbases, and people are all about taking the +10% perk. Which is .. kind of less than finishing the discovery tree (you get 10% + something). It's kind of different, isn't it? Like, faster science means more bigger better everything, and it snowballs. And you can't ever have enough science. Every little scrap is useful. Starbases... motherfucker, I have forty starbases and I probably only need half of them. (I do think the research perk is kinda eh)
|
|
#
¿
Mar 7, 2018 23:19
|
|
|
ZypherIM posted:Once you've got 40 starbases you've got like what, half the galaxy? You're already into victory lap territory at that point. Even at 600 stars it's only like a quarter. But the point is true at half the station count: Kaza42 posted:It's a question of marginal utility. You tend to have a handful of Really Important Starbases, and then everything else is just energy or anchorages. +4 starbases is only as good as your 4 least useful starbases.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 7, 2018 23:25
|
|
|
Taear posted:I play on a 1000 star galaxy with 16 empires every time and 1000 cap just seems insane. I mean I could get over it if I wanted to but why bother? It's so much effort for nothing. If you every find yourself fighting a Contingency with a half-million in fleet power sitting over every sterilisation hub you will quickly find yourself in need of every hull you can put in space...
|
|
#
¿
Mar 8, 2018 13:23
|
|
|
I thought habitats were generally poor, because they're only 12 tiles while still giving the full tech/tradition penalty, and being pretty useless for minerals. Though resource replicators might change that last one.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 13, 2018 22:05
|
|
|
Baronjutter posted:100% of the early space people I was observing nuked them selves to death tooterfish posted:And no one can prove otherwise! Once they get space-UN/galactic community stuff sorted out, I think there's a rich seam of content to be mined in treaties on the treatment of underdeveloped species. Does the community favour non-interference? Contact but no hand outs? Straight uplifts? When uplifting, are the client race legally beholden to their benefactors or are they allowed to go their own way? If they blow themselves up under your watch, does the UN send a team to investigate? Also I wish I could pick which flavour of crisis I'm going to get. I can't remember the last time I got to fight the Scourge.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 16, 2018 01:04
|
|
|
 Is it just me or are space marines a little... weedy, these days? Like, compare them to xenomorphs or androids. Less damage, no morale immunity, and you need to take an ascension perk to unlock them? They have more health than xenos, but they cost twice as much, so you end up paying 60% more per hitpoint. The only real advantage is the lower collateral damage mod, but half the time that's something I want more of, and the other half I just don't give a gently caress because you're going to break four buildings at most. I guess they're the best army type that can benefit from Very Strong... but it's not that good a trait. They'd still do less damage than xenos. VirtualStranger posted:I'm not really sure I understand why the Fanatic Purifier civic can't be added or removed after the game starts. It's especially weird when they shift ethos into regular ol' hegemonic imperialists or w/e but are stuck with a completely useless civic weighing them down. really queer Christmas posted:Sector AI, please understand that my empire has a massive food surplus. Please stop demolishing the power plants to build more farms and then request more energy The best thing is they'll still do it when you've gone chrome and not a single pop in your empire requires food 
|
|
#
¿
Mar 22, 2018 22:38
|
|
|
So is there like a cap on how low consumer goods costs can go or is it theoretically possible to hit 0? My robits appear to be running a galactic empire on air alone here  Really feeling that megastructure construction limit right now... DoubleNegative posted:I'm feeling kinda the same about xenomorph armies. I don't have any of the DLC, and xenos seem too good to not use. They don't take morale damage, and deal an insane amount of collateral as well. They also don't take very long to produce. It feels like they're the obvious good choice. 
|
|
#
¿
Mar 23, 2018 12:21
|
|
|
Gyrotica posted:In terms of vanilla: I don't have the numbers, so I can't say anything definitively, but it definitely feels like you hurt yourself more than you help yourself in terms of technology and unity by expanding now. You what I think would be a good UI change? Instead of showing your raw science output on the top bar, display your teching speed as a percentage of the base speed. So 7 points with no penalty is 100%. If you're still at 7 points but your costs are up 100%, you're at 50% speed. If you have no penalty but get up to 14 somehow, that's 200%. Etc. Factor in those global research speed bonuses as well, why not. Because, honestly, what the gently caress are those numbers on the top bar telling me? I'm producing 4.5k points of physics every month- is that good? Bad? It is a meaningless number. DatonKallandor posted:Also on the Habitat influence cost increase, that makes perfect sense to me. Expanding costs influence, no matter how you do it: New systems cost influence to control with outposts, getting systems from an enemy costs influence with claims and creating new resources with a habitat costs influence. Habitats have a lot more resources than a planet-less system so they need to cost a lot more influence, especially since you are also creating those resources out of thin air and can put them in defensible locations. Okay, sure- but 200 influence for 12 tiles? You have to pay minerals for them already, and burn a perk slot on them, and you get the full tech penalty for what is a pretty small planet. They were already a dubious proposition at 100 influence. KOGAHAZAN!! fucked around with this message at 00:36 on Mar 27, 2018 |
|
#
¿
Mar 26, 2018 23:49
|
|
|
Sloober posted:honestly the bloodthirsty happy starfish are the best so do that The starfish are easily the best of the cuties pack and it's not even a contest.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 27, 2018 14:20
|
|
|
I'm not sure about this. What bio ascension is about is flexibility- you have unparalleled control over your species' traits and more, better traits to work with. This is saying you have to take Erudite, or you're doing bio wrong. Which- might be true? It's an incredibly strong trait even for the cost, and you'd have to really stuggle to justify a build which doesn't include it... but that strikes me as a problem to be fixed, not something you want to double down on? 
|
|
#
¿
Mar 27, 2018 17:10
|
|
|
Jazerus posted:if you're doing bio-ascension you probably have lots of different species; you probably want at least 3 different erudite species, each specialized in a different science field, if you're min-maxing to take full advantage of the ascension path. for a xenophobe, that lack of flexibility is just another reason to go psi or synth instead. OwlFancier posted:I mean I think the point with biological ascension is that you have no reason to not put it on one of your species, you should really be running lots of them for different planet types and different functions. Fair, I hadn't considered that.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 27, 2018 18:13
|
|
|
Goffer posted:
Yeah, the final Contingency system is a lot weaker than the others, despite the paper strength? I think it might be that it's all stations, so they have no evasion?
|
|
#
¿
Mar 28, 2018 12:29
|
|
|
First 2.0 game I had, the Khanate formed in the north-east of the galaxy. Disappointing, because the region was fairly isolated and sparsely populated- two empires in region, roughly equal-sized and rivals. Naturally, they both get smashed, reduced to tiny rump states before the khanate itself explodes and over the next two centuries the local devouring swarm moves in to eat the lot of them. So far so whatever. Later on, I'm looking through the species tab on a whim when I notice that the primary species of one of these empires is the second most prolific in the galaxy (after my own wildly successful brain squid). There's something like three hundred and fifty of the little bastards running around, despite the fact that there can't be more of a quarter of that in their original territory. So I check around and lo and behold these guys are everywhere. They're pluralities or substantial minorities basically anywhere that isn't a fascistic nightmare state. It's the most successful diaspora you've ever seen. The punchline: they're Repugnant, Wasteful Deviants with Extremely Adaptive and Nomadic. 
|
|
#
¿
Mar 28, 2018 20:56
|
|
|
Black Pants posted:An update on this: I certainly did burst out onto the galaxy, grabbed an awesomely choke-pointed area, got a Cybrex ringworld and set my sights on everyone else. Which is when I noticed something odd, or rather several somethings. The first was that the first non-FE empire I came into contact with created a cascade of xeno discovery since they were in a federation already. What surprised me more was that they had a positive opinion of me. Why? 'Mutual threat.' I wondered what the hell that could be for many years. In the meantime, I discovered more empires, in a second federation. So at this point almost everyone was in one of two federations, which annoyed me because Despoiling them suddenly became more annoying. midgame_crisis_encounters_player_nation.txt
|
|
#
¿
Apr 11, 2018 11:42
|
|
|
Wallet posted:It's missing quite a few personality types, and it has a major glut of some others. What's it missing?
|
|
#
¿
Apr 27, 2018 13:13
|
|
|
Crazycryodude posted:Rip it all out and replace it with something kinda like Stars in Shadow does imo I am low-key super impressed by SiS' planet/population/economic model. It is everything Stellaris' is not in terms of differentiation, clarity, low effort/high impact. Except for shuffling pops around to fill out biomes, that desperately needs an interface overhaul. I feel like it might have been lifted wholesale from one of the MoOs? If so, that is the one aspect of MoO people don't copy enough.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 28, 2018 00:21
|
|
|
Splicer posted:Morrigi were my poison, as evidenced by my inability to stop building hangar cruisers and battleships no matter how bad they are. Try cranking up the base and rotation speeds on strike craft. That helps them a lot.
|
|
#
¿
May 2, 2018 16:58
|
|
|
Tomn posted:This is what I think every time I see someone rave about SotS1 being the perfect game and every other game behind a step back from its streamlined simplicity. Yes, SotS1 is perfect...for a certain kind of player. There's a significant fraction of players, though, myself included, who WANT the crunchy empire management and enjoys its complexities and the feel of ruling over more than sliders. I don't think it really works for that sort of player, either. If what you're there for is interesting tactical fights the strategic layer is a) an unnecessary distraction and b) fails to consistently generate interesting scenarios. You really want either some kind of of tightly authored experience like Nexus: the Jupiter Incident/a sort of Wargame-in-space thing or something with a really solid scenario editor.
|
|
#
¿
May 13, 2018 12:24
|
|
|
OwlFancier posted:Big ships do more raw damage than small ships because big guns are more DPS efficient. I don't think that's what Ham Sandwiches is asking? They want to know why the system was designed this way- what dynamics were the devs hoping to produce? I think the two basic goals here were: a) they wanted a progression of ever-increasing ship sizes for tech to unlock, but b) they didn't want larger hulls to obsolete smaller ones. e: the former strikes me as the problem child of the two, if there is to be one KOGAHAZAN!! fucked around with this message at 02:45 on Aug 4, 2018 |
|
#
¿
Aug 4, 2018 02:42
|
|
|
I have never played a single game with xenophile 
|
|
#
¿
Aug 4, 2018 11:54
|
|
|
Bloodly posted:I wonder how this will play out. Will you actually have 'diversity' or will you be constrained even more? Well, a lot of the buildings we've seen so far seem to be of the form "provides 1 job of type x for every y infrastructure". To me that sounds like an incentive to concentrate all those facilities on worlds with maxed infra (meaning, probably, 100% city district worlds) and reserve the building slots on other worlds for those buildings that don't scale. Which I think would push the player to a mix of heavily industrialised ecumenopoleis and sparsely populated basic resource worlds with as little in between as they can get away with. Which would still be an improvement over the current setup! (e: Actually, I think a system that favours highly distinct types is going to feel better than one where everything is on a spectrum) But, uh, there's a lot of unknowns here. Anyway, good DD, may tiles rest in hell. KOGAHAZAN!! fucked around with this message at 14:03 on Aug 16, 2018 |
|
#
¿
Aug 16, 2018 14:01
|
|
|
Darkrenown posted:Well, OK: That's like half a planet's worth of district sites. Gonna genocide those fuckers harder than I have ever genocided them before 
|
|
#
¿
Sep 27, 2018 15:32
|
|
|
I've been wondering what this cogzerg resource is about for a while now and it just gets more and more intriguing m-m-magic??
|
|
#
¿
Oct 18, 2018 14:20
|
|
|
Baronjutter posted:Same. Specially when they do a dumb gimmick like endless space 2's. There was a point during EA when ES2's tech screen was laid out similar to how EL does it:  Not the most readable thing ever, but a hell of a lot better than what we ended up with. Then people complained that it wasn't enough like ES1... 
|
|
#
¿
Oct 22, 2018 22:03
|
|
|
Jay Rust posted:I can’t not play humans either, and only because their randomized planet names are cooler than the Blurp Blorps other name lists give their colonies Taear posted:Who allows the game to assign names to planets and doesn't rename them and also rename stars? Come on now. I actually wrote a little program to procedurally generate a name list for my favourite empire. It's a very specific name list, but man, it does wonders for giving that empire a distinct identity.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 25, 2018 22:10
|
|
|
Nuclearmonkee posted:It is canonical that all cutie portraits are supposed to be played as some flavor of shitlord or space hitler im pretty sure. Shitlords with the Charismatic trait Stupid Sexy Hitlers
|
|
#
¿
Oct 25, 2018 22:35
|
|
|
DrSunshine posted:GAWD, the milspergs in this thread. I just call my ships based on their class and weapons loadout and I'm surprised more people don't. "Plasma Cruiser"-class Cruiser. "Torpedo Corvette"-class torpedo corvettes. "Carrier"-class Battlecruisers. This is a crime. I'm calling the fun police. PittTheElder posted:CK, EU, and Vicky stop at their end dates, though it's pretty trivial to mod them to run forever. EU4 will let you keep going now. Far cry from the day when an end date extension mod meant patching the .exe 
|
|
#
¿
Oct 30, 2018 22:21
|
|
|
Baronjutter posted:I still don't really like population alone unlocking building slots. "Buildings" in stellaris obviously represent more than just a single building, it's some sort of planet-wide special industry or network that generally provides jobs or improves other things, but they don't really take up a meaningful amount of space. Might as well just pay to unlock slots directly, if infra isn't going to do anything else. Except then you're just increasing build costs, so we might as well nix the idea of unlocking slots entirely. If infra's gone, how do the "adds x jobs per y infra" buildings work now? Just flat values, no scaling?
|
|
#
¿
Nov 23, 2018 02:08
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ Apr 28, 2024 21:38 |
|
|
GunnerJ posted:"Establish Newspaper" lmbo The cornerstone of any true socialist movement :cryingtrotsky: If there's not already there should absolutely be a posadist event chain keying off a fanatic egalitarian empire plonking an observation post over primitive Earth.
|
|
#
¿
Nov 23, 2018 16:10
|
|