Tacticular Cancer: We'll have your balls

  1. Welcome to rpgcodex.net, a site dedicated to discussing computer based role-playing games in a free and open fashion. We're less strict than other forums, but please refer to the rules.

    "This message is awaiting moderator approval": All new users must pass through our moderation queue before they will be able to post normally. Until your account has "passed" your posts will only be visible to yourself (and moderators) until they are approved. Give us a week to get around to approving / deleting / ignoring your mundane opinion on crap before hassling us about it. Once you have passed the moderation period (think of it as a test), you will be able to post normally, just like all the other retards.
    Dismiss Notice

Stellaris - Paradox new sci-fi grand strategy game

Discussion in 'Strategy Gaming' started by Perkel, Aug 6, 2015.

  1. ThisNameIsFreegender: ⚧ Learned

    ThisNameIsFree
    Joined:
    Mar 16, 2016
    Parrots:
    359
    Click here and disable ads!
    They have a point thought. In current state Stellaris only good for LARPing purposes :lol:
     
    • Brofist Brofist x 1
    • Funny Funny x 1
    ^ Top  
  2. Grifgender: ⚧ Learned

    Grif
    Joined:
    Nov 4, 2016
    Parrots:
    131
    More or less. But at least it's a very forgiving sandbox.
     
    • Agree Agree x 1
    ^ Top  
  3. MadMaxHellfiregender: ⚧ Magister

    MadMaxHellfire
    Joined:
    Mar 3, 2010
    Parrots:
    2,876
    Location:
    Italy
    all they had to do was to force travels through the nearest ftl inhibitor, as citadels do in eu4. after all if good placing of inhibitors fucks up your invasions plans it's all the defenders merit.
    fuck removing fun =_=
     
    • Balanced Balanced x 1
    ^ Top  
  4. Prime Juntagender: ⚧ Arcane

    Prime Junta
    Joined:
    Apr 8, 2006
    Parrots:
    4,595
    Combat is unsalvageable but warfare isn’t. I approve of this change.
     
    • Brofist Brofist x 1
    ^ Top  
  5. Jason Lianggender: ⚧ Liturgist

    Jason Liang
    Joined:
    Oct 26, 2014
    Parrots:
    1,914
    I read through that whole post. I can understand why they would change Wormholes, the Wormhole generator implementation was stupid to begin with. But why get rid of warp drives? They're just being lazy.

    Warp+Hyperlane seems like the obvious win-win.

    Also, the obvious way to differentiate Wormholes from Hyperlanes is to make all Wormholes (even the natural ones) one-way only. Enter at your own risk.
     
    ^ Top  
  6. `Helliongender: ⚧ Learned

    `Hellion
    Joined:
    Feb 5, 2013
    Parrots:
    269
    Sneak peek of the upcoming War Goals system:



    [​IMG]
     
    • incline incline x 1
    ^ Top  
  7. Make America Great Again Average Manateegender: ⚧ Prestigious Gentleman Arcane

    Average Manatee
    Joined:
    Jan 7, 2012
    Parrots:
    8,226
    inb4 space diplomats required to fabricate claims on systems?
     
    • Funny Funny x 9
    ^ Top  
  8. thesheeepgender: ⚧ Arcane

    thesheeep
    Joined:
    Mar 16, 2007
    Parrots:
    5,820
    Location:
    Tampere, Finland
    "I'm a space diplomat!"
     
    ^ Top  
  9. Alexiosgender: ⚧ Novice

    Alexios
    Joined:
    Feb 18, 2014
    Parrots:
    48
    dead fucking game lmao
     
    • Disagree Disagree x 3
    • Agree Agree x 2
    • Funny Funny x 1
    ^ Top  
  10. Raghargender: ⚧ Arcane

    Raghar
    Joined:
    Jul 16, 2009
    Parrots:
    9,343
    You can use the old pirated version.
     
    ^ Top  
  11. traisgender: ⚧ Arcane

    trais
    Joined:
    Jun 11, 2007
    Parrots:
    2,784
    Location:
    Festung Breslau
    Most likely just pay influence for instant claim. Resource management, you see, choices and consequences. Deep (derp) gameplay, such improvements, much wow.
     
    ^ Top  
  12. Make America Great Again Average Manateegender: ⚧ Prestigious Gentleman Arcane

    Average Manatee
    Joined:
    Jan 7, 2012
    Parrots:
    8,226
    Here I was expecting it just to be a "select provinces that you'd be interested in" system like how EU4 handles provinces of interest (which lets you see where the AI is angry about expanding and where it wants to blob). But requiring influence to conquer is definitely the kind of shit Paradox would add to slow down expansion. If that's it then Influence is now literally paper mana.
     
    • Funny Funny x 1
    • Agree Agree x 1
    ^ Top  
  13. Space Satangender: ⚧ Arcane

    Space Satan
    Joined:
    May 13, 2013
    Parrots:
    2,986
    Location:
    Space Hell
    Setting demands on victory at least will make game interesting. EUIV had many flaws but war demand system is not one of them
     
    • Agree Agree x 2
    ^ Top  
  14. traisgender: ⚧ Arcane

    trais
    Joined:
    Jun 11, 2007
    Parrots:
    2,784
    Location:
    Festung Breslau
    In EU you're not bound by claims, you can demand whatever territory you want in peace "negotiations". In EU4 specifically, claims are basically casi belli + slightly less expensive coring afterwards. Might be the same here, but I have a suspicion that it won't.
     
    • Agree Agree x 1
    ^ Top  
  15. Jason Lianggender: ⚧ Liturgist

    Jason Liang
    Joined:
    Oct 26, 2014
    Parrots:
    1,914
    Yeah I think it's a terrible idea. Let Stelllaris be Stellaris, not CK2/ EU IV in space. Like the way Alpha Centauri ended up its own unique thing, not "Civ II in space."
     
    • Prestigious Prestigious x 1
    ^ Top  
  16. Space Satangender: ⚧ Arcane

    Space Satan
    Joined:
    May 13, 2013
    Parrots:
    2,986
    Location:
    Space Hell
    Current Stellaris is a piece of boring and tedious shit.
     
    • Agree Agree x 5
    • Disagree Disagree x 2
    ^ Top  
  17. Jason Lianggender: ⚧ Liturgist

    Jason Liang
    Joined:
    Oct 26, 2014
    Parrots:
    1,914
    So let's work on that. How to make the boring and tedious parts interesting and stimulating?

    Granted I haven't played Stellaris in over a year, but I think one problem with Stellaris is that all your threats are narratively external, when what has worked for CK and EU is to make internal threats credible.

    As your empire expands, you make some parts autonomous, but eventually those autonomous parts desire great independence, etc...

    Stellaris' problem is it lacks funk.

    At some point, it needs a moment where the player realizes that they're actually the Galactic Empire.
     
    Last edited: Nov 6, 2017
    • it is a mystery it is a mystery x 1
    ^ Top  
  18. fantadomatgender: ⚧ Dumbfuck! Dumbfuck Edgy

    fantadomat
    Joined:
    Jun 2, 2017
    Parrots:
    2,565
    Location:
    Bulgaria
    It was and always will be this,a boring shit. The core of the game is fucked up by a retarded faggot without any imagination. There is no hope for the game.
     
    • Edgy Edgy x 3
    • Despair Despair x 1
    • Friendly Friendly x 1
    ^ Top  
  19. Mark.L.Joygender: ⚧ Learned

    Mark.L.Joy
    Joined:
    Sep 11, 2016
    Parrots:
    135
    Mods will fix it.
     
    • Fabulously Optimistic Fabulously Optimistic x 2
    • Yes Yes x 1
    ^ Top  
  20. Space Satangender: ⚧ Arcane

    Space Satan
    Joined:
    May 13, 2013
    Parrots:
    2,986
    Location:
    Space Hell
    now we have war exhaustion and attrition
    [​IMG]
     
    • Funny Funny x 3
    • incline incline x 1
    ^ Top  
  21. thesheeepgender: ⚧ Arcane

    thesheeep
    Joined:
    Mar 16, 2007
    Parrots:
    5,820
    Location:
    Tampere, Finland
    Well... both makes sense.
    Just makes you wonder why it wasn't like that to begin with.

    Maybe they just tried so hard to do something that isn't Europa Universalis that they failed to realize many of its machnics are universally applicable.
     
    ^ Top  
  22. Space Satangender: ⚧ Arcane

    Space Satan
    Joined:
    May 13, 2013
    Parrots:
    2,986
    Location:
    Space Hell
    From devs
     
    ^ Top  
  23. Make America Great Again The Brazilian Slaughtergender: ⚧ Arcane

    The Brazilian Slaughter
    Joined:
    May 11, 2007
    Parrots:
    1,866,988
    Location:
    Belém do Pará
    How the fuck attrition works in space, anyway?
     
    • Funny Funny x 1
    • it is a mystery it is a mystery x 1
    ^ Top  
  24. thesheeepgender: ⚧ Arcane

    thesheeep
    Joined:
    Mar 16, 2007
    Parrots:
    5,820
    Location:
    Tampere, Finland
    Well, attrition is just the lack of maintenance, right?
    Ships must be supplied with whatever they need - remember they already cost materials and energy credits while in your space. That's to keep them working - abstracting whatever science you want to imagine behind it all. And they cost less when docked at a starbase. Makes sense to me.

    Behind enemy lines it would be much harder to maintain that steady supply.
    As to what consequences that could have in game, I could imagine a number of things:
    Deteriorating effectiveness, taking actual damage (though that would be rather heavy handed design and really copying medieval EUIV...), steadily increasing maintenance cost, etc. Who knows?

    I like the idea, though. Would make defense easier even if the enemy has superior numbers (given same tech levels and other factors), as it should be.
     
    Last edited: Nov 7, 2017
    • Agree Agree x 2
    • Informative Informative x 1
    ^ Top  
  25. Space Satangender: ⚧ Arcane

    Space Satan
    Joined:
    May 13, 2013
    Parrots:
    2,986
    Location:
    Space Hell
    DD
    Show Spoiler

    Hello everyone and welcome to another Stellaris dev diary. Today we're going to continue talking about major changes coming in the Cherryh update, specifically on the topic of war and peace. As said before, all of these changes are currently far away, and we cannot give more details on ETAs or the exact nature of the Cherryh update than we already have.


    Wargoal Overhaul
    The wargoal system in Stellaris has always felt a bit odd, and has been the target of some very well-reasoned criticism from players. In one way, the system is extremely unrestrictive, allowing you to declare war on anyone for any reason to take any planet, no matter if said planet is on the literal other side of the galaxy in the middle of enemy territory and could not feasibly be held by your empire, and then demand that planet in the peace even if none of your soldiers had ever set foot on it. On the other hand, the restriction to only being able to take planets meant that you had a fairly limited control over your actual borders after the peace, and might be forced to take planets you had no interest in just to get that system with a resource or colonizable planet that you *actually* wanted. Other issues include a rather messy wargoal interface (particularly when trying to set goals after being declared on) and a lack of ability as an ally in a war to affect what gains you were going to get in the peace, and that wars were very 'all or nothing' affairs with no real mechanics for any other outcome than total victory for one side.

    With the change to borders discussed in Dev Diary #91, system control is now separated from planets, and so allows for systems to be conquered and traded even if they do not contain a colonizable planet. This, in addition to all the previously mentioned issues, means that we need a new wargoal system that can handle both limited wars fought over a few border systems, and massive wars that result in dozens of systems changing hands. The way we have decided to solve this is to completely rework wargoals, peace negotiations and to add the concept of claims.

    Claims
    Claims are effectively territorial ambitions - an empire claiming territory they do not currently control, for whatever justification they can come up with. Which systems can be claimed depends on an empire's war philosophy policy, with the unrestricted warfare philosophy allowing for the claiming of any system not owned by a fellow Federation member. Claims, however, are not free. Much like territorial expansion through building outposts, they require expenditude of Influence, to represent the political effort (or mind/processing power in the case of Gestalt Consciousnesses) required to claim and integrate the territory. How expensive a system is to claim depends on distance to your borders, how built up the system is (a remote mining system will be much cheaper than the homeworlds) and other factors such as traditions and technology. Overall, claims will be more expensive in the early game, and become less so later on to allow for more decisive wars to be fought in the mid- and lategame. Claims are managed through the claims interface, accessible from the topbar. From the claims interface, you can easily make and revoke claims (please note that the interface is currently a rough WIP, thus the weird-looking green arrows, among other unfinished bits of art). It is possible to claim the same system multiple times to gain a stronger claim on it, which is mainly useful when going to war together with an ally that is claiming the same system (more on this later in the DD). Finally on the topic of claims, as mentioned in Dev Diary #91, influence gain is going to be majorly rebalanced to reflect its new uses in expansion, and some things which previously cost influence may now use other currencies.
    [​IMG]

    Casus Belli and Wargoals
    To go to war with another empire in the Cherryh update, you now need a Casus Belli - a reason for war. The simplest Casus Belli to get is the Claim Casus Belli, gained by creating a claim on another empire. Each Casus Belli grants access to at least one type of Wargoal, with some Casus Belli (like Subjugation) potentially allowing for several different Wargoals to choose between. When declaring war on another empire, rather than put together a list of Wargoals, you choose just one Wargoal allowed by one of your Casus Belli, and the defender similarly chooses one after being declared on, with the Humiliate wargoal always available to defenders regardless of Casus Belli. However, the Wargoal is always in addition to rather than instead of claims the two war sides have on each other. What this means is that the Wargoal is the overall purpose of the war (for example, to humiliate a rival) and any claims you have on the target and their allies is your territorial ambitions in the war (for example, a string of border systems). Some Empires (such as Fanatical Purifiers, Devouring Swarms and Determined Exterminators) have special Casus Belli that usually allow them to conquer their neighbors at will (exceptions being empires they don't hate, such as other Machine Empires for Exterminators), ignoring claims altogether, but are vulnerable to be similarly conquered by others who see them as a threat to the entire galaxy.
    [​IMG]

    War Exhaustion and Peace Negotiations
    As wars can now be anything from a small border skirmish to a massive war of conquest (depending on the wargoal and number of claims), we felt that the Warscore system so common to our other games was inadequate for dealing with this variety, and tended to turn every conflict into a total war with one undisputed winner and another, utterly crushed loser. As such, Warscore is gone in the Cherryh update. Instead, we have introduced the concept of War Exhaustion. War Exhaustion goes from 0-100%, and measures the total weariness and attrition suffered by all empires on one side in a war (psychological and logistical). War Exhaustion goes up from having Planets and Starbases occupied by the enemy, suffering losses during Space and Ground Combat, and passive accumulation over time (called Attrition). When a war side's War Exhaustion hits 100%, they can be forced into a Status Quo peace (more on this below). The speed at which War Exhaustion accumulates is influenced by factors such as ethics, traditions, technology and the amount of claims being pressed - an empire that is fighting to hold onto a handful of border systems will tire of a costly conflict quicker than one whose very independence is being threatened.

    There are three ways a war can end in the Cherryh update: With the surrender of either side, or with a negotiated Status Quo peace. When an empire Surrenders, it is usually either because they have been completely defeated, or because the war aims are limited enough that they view it as more costly to continue the war than to end it.

    Surrender means that the victor's Wargoal (for example, to humiliate or vassalize the loser) is enforced, and any claims the winning side has on the losing side are automatically ceded regardless of occupation status. Surrender can only be forced on an enemy that is entirely or nearly entirely defeated - an empire can never be forced to cede territory that the enemy is not able to take control of with their military.
    Status Quo means that the war has reached a point where total victory is unlikely for either side, and both sides agree to stop hostilities and settle for whatever gains or losses they have suffered. Under a Status Quo peace, all occupied systems claimed by an enemy empire is ceded to the enemy with the strongest claim. This is where multiple claims on the same system comes in - if you and an ally are both claiming the same enemy system, you can continue to invest influence into 'trumping' their claim so that you are the one given the system rather than your ally. In the case of a tie, whoever has the oldest claim on the system is considered the stronger claimant. As mentioned above, a war side that is at 100% War Exhaustion can not reject a Status Quo peace.

    Status Quo being not a white peace but a "Uti possidetis" style peace where claimed and occupied (or in some special cases like the aforementioned Purifier Wargoal, just occupied) territory is kept is meant to be able to create more varied and interesting outcomes to wars, such as a war of conquest where the attacker started with the ambition to conquer an entire enemy empire, and easily took over the lightly defended border systems, but found themselves unable to make headway against the more heavily defended enemy core systems, eventually settling for only what they were able to control. Along with the way surrender works, it also means that empires are never forced to cede systems that they are able to militarily defend - no matter how much the enemy is overrunning your outposts, if your fleets and starforts can keep them away from your homeworld, you can't be forced to hand it over in the peace. It also makes it possible for an empire that is losing a war to still fight to minimize their territorial losses by fighting to inflict War Exhaustion on the enemy, making them pay for every system they take until they can be forced to make peace. Furthermore, it means that wars can end in a way that isn't one-sided, with gains and losses on both sides.
    [​IMG]

    Starbase and System Occupation
    Finally, I wanted to write a short bit on how occupying systems actually works now. There will be more details on this (especially about ground combat) in later dev diaries, but the gist it is that a system is considered occupied only if the Starbase and all planets (excluding potentially neutral ones like primitives) are under enemy control. For a Starbase to be taken control of, it must first be disabled (brought to 0 hp) by the enemy fleet. Taking control of an enemy system will also take control of all mining and research stations in that system and allow the occupied to benefit from them economically for as long as the war continues. Similarly, Starbases that are taken control of are also able to be used by the controller - controlled enemy shipyards can be used to refit, repair and build your own fleets, and enemy fortresses to keep them from retaking occupied systems. All of this means that 'raiding' and striking at vital enemy systems becomes an important aspect of warfare, allowing you to turn the enemy's own economic, military and logistical assets against them if they do not do a good enough job defending them.
    [​IMG]

    Other Thoughts
    We are still heavily testing and tweaking these new systems, and we have some other things we are thinking about and trying out to see how they work. They include:
    - The ability to claim unsettled systems as a way to put 'dibs' on a system before actually going there to build an outpost
    - Having claims be cheaper if you don't have a ton of them, to encourage smaller scale conflicts
    - Potentially allowing claims to be made by attackers (rather than just defenders) during war, but have them be more expensive
    - Ways to slow and reduce War Exhaustion at the expense of your economy and population

    That's all for today! Next week we'll continue talking about war, on the topic of space battles, command limits and doomstacks. See you then!
     
    • Brofist Brofist x 1
    • it is a mystery it is a mystery x 1
    ^ Top  

(buying stuff via the above buttons helps us pay the hosting bills, thanks!)