Return to “Games”

Post

Re: Stellaris

#301
HowSerendipitous wrote:
Fri Feb 23, 2018 12:20 pm
Baile nam Fonn wrote:
Fri Feb 23, 2018 10:40 am
I've reached the point in the game wherein all my original leaders are dying of old age (I went with Harmony, so they're all centennials).
Very sad, especially in the case the High King, who was well loved, generally benevolent, and led a popular faction for decades. :cry:
His successors have been underwhelming and uninspired, on top of taking the mantle of leadership with one foot already in the grave. :problem:

I'm dreading the inevitable demise of my old Admiral in charge of my battle-hardened corvette fleet, who has 3 different sub-light speed bonus traits and numerous victories over space fauna under his belt.
You need more Josephine Easterbrook in your life, the Lion of Theia :twisted:
puny mortals. i usually ascend to robopops before they get that old :ghost:
Post

Re: Stellaris

#302
Does the new fleet mechanic fix the "attack with one huge fleet" problem?
Combat got quite boring, as it was always just "buildup a bigger fleet than the other" and then "attack with that one fleet".
Also the static defenses (fortresses) did not really scale up with the fleet power, and never presented a challenge with a decently sized fleet.
Post

Re: Stellaris

#303
I feel like the fortresses still don't work well at defending at least from what I have seen. I still haven't had too much time to play and have only gotten to midgame, but I got to the size before star fortress and had like 6 support platforms around the base with 1 gun upgrade and it still lost to a single pirate raid spawn fleet.

Also those raids can die in a fire, they seem to show up right after I clear one out, and if you have one little hole in your territory they can spawn in it, even if your constructor ship is there and about to build the outpost to claim it.
Post

Re: Stellaris

#304
I like the raids and would actually prefer if they spawned a little more for me. My ethos is Fanatic Pacifist (and I'm loathe to reform) and I have reasonably obliging and amiable neighbours, so it's either ornery space fauna (extinct now, but that was a fun little early game mini-crisis) or pirates if my Admirals want something to cut their teeth on. Or I could poke a nearby Fallen Empire who has proven to be a brooding bad neighbour, but I've roughly sussed the math and I'm pretty sure that they have a few dozen more rows of teeth than I do at the moment.

I take back my grumbling about my new kings: they've overall done an astonishing job of reading my immediate priorities in their traits, and one was Resilient and had a good long reign, helping me with his expansionist leaning to decisively win a tense border growth race. :thumbup:
"omg such tech many efficiency WOW" ~ Josh Parnell
Post

Re: Stellaris

#305
Damocles wrote:
Sat Feb 24, 2018 1:50 am
Does the new fleet mechanic fix the "attack with one huge fleet" problem?
Combat got quite boring, as it was always just "buildup a bigger fleet than the other" and then "attack with that one fleet".
Also the static defenses (fortresses) did not really scale up with the fleet power, and never presented a challenge with a decently sized fleet.
The Attack with a huge fleet problem is still a problem. I would like to be able to do more gathering of intelligence and be able to use it to determine what weaknesses the enemy has prior to engagement as it would make ship design and the following combat far more interesting. I'm also not really seeing much difference with or without Admirals in charge of my fleets.
Image
Post

Re: Stellaris

#306
BFett wrote:
Sat Feb 24, 2018 10:09 am
I'm also not really seeing much difference with or without Admirals in charge of my fleets.
except fleets having 30% jumps in fleet power with admirals?
BFett wrote:
Sat Feb 24, 2018 10:09 am
I would like to be able to do more gathering of intelligence and be able to use it to determine what weaknesses the enemy has prior to engagement as it would make ship design and the following combat far more interesting.
have enemy ship in sensor range, click on it, use the inspect function.
Post

Re: Stellaris

#308
I played for a few hours last night and encountered a number of gamebreaking bugs... a lot more than I expected to find from what I thought would be a fairly polished 2.0. The worst was the population disappearing from a planet, and the second-worst was probably the entire galaxy becoming fully explored at once after I made a trade agreement with a neighboring empire for some minerals. I say "second-worst", but it was the thing that made me stop playing because my entire species was exploration-oriented, which made my whole strategy... useless. Granted, it gave me a major edge, but it was like using cheats. It just wasn't fun anymore.

Not sure about how I feel about the new changes yet. The starbase thing is interesting. I find the hyperlanes limiting so far. The game feels... "slower" than it used to, by a significant margin. Not necessarily a bad thing, but it's not a welcome change either. I think they still have a lot left to iron out - especially in terms of bugs.

I will say though, I like the direction they're going with research trees. It's nice to be able to research auto-exploration early on.
Have a question? Send me a PM! || People talking in IRC over the past two hours: Image
Image
Image
Post

Re: Stellaris

#309
I stopped my last game (couple of month ago) when on of the fallend empires "awoke", and startet obliterating my worlds.
Thats not fun, because it felt just like a spawned in game mechanic. Plus, how can a first time player anticipate that here.

The other AI empires at least had to work up to their strength. Thats a fair position then. But spawning in units in a game that normally develops due to buildup-mechanics just felt like cheating...
Post

Re: Stellaris

#311
Cornflakes_91 wrote:
Sat Feb 24, 2018 3:18 pm
Damocles wrote:
Sat Feb 24, 2018 3:14 pm
But spawning in units in a game that normally develops due to buildup-mechanics just felt like cheating...
fallen ones that awake dont spontaneously spawn new units. the ones that steamroll at that point were there from the beginning.
True, but the new Raider races? They *DO* spawn in ships. 10-30k at a time.
I attacked them to push them off my border with just a little more than 10K fleetpower, took their first system and then they had a 30k fleet spawn under a Great Khan.
With zero warning. So I immediately surrender to them, and bam another 15k in my home system spawned.

This isn't a good system, I hope they fix it soon. Any reinforcements spawned should take time to arrive. With plenty of warning.
°˖◝(ಠ‸ಠ)◜˖°
Toba - A Development Dump
Post

Re: Stellaris

#312
I really dislike this new update. I gave it a fair chance, got the DLC to see if that fixed it for me, but it didn't. I've played a lot of Paradox games, and in my view this is the biggest change they've ever made to a game through an update. It really is a completely different game, and for me that's not for the better. I know you can roll back to 1.9, but when you buy a Paradox game, you don't expect to be getting something that will essentially be dead for you in two years. I would be less angry with Paradox if these changes would have came in an actual new Stellaris game, but I'm really disappointed with where they're taking this game, which is an experience I've never had with another Paradox game. Oh well, I guess I'll spend my money on Hearts of Iron IV since those guys do actually listen to their players and aren't jerks like the Stellaris lead, Wiz.
Post

Re: Stellaris

#313
masseffect7 wrote:
Sat Feb 24, 2018 6:21 pm
I really dislike this new update. I gave it a fair chance, got the DLC to see if that fixed it for me, but it didn't. I've played a lot of Paradox games, and in my view this is the biggest change they've ever made to a game through an update. It really is a completely different game, and for me that's not for the better. I know you can roll back to 1.9, but when you buy a Paradox game, you don't expect to be getting something that will essentially be dead for you in two years. I would be less angry with Paradox if these changes would have came in an actual new Stellaris game, but I'm really disappointed with where they're taking this game, which is an experience I've never had with another Paradox game. Oh well, I guess I'll spend my money on Hearts of Iron IV since those guys do actually listen to their players and aren't jerks like the Stellaris lead, Wiz.
what is your problem with the changes if i dare to ask?

because i find the changes so far really good

there are a bunch of balance errors i spotted (but it is the first iteration of a big change so eh) and one actual bug (the one with the duped fallen empire escorts)
but in sum the changes are really good in my opinion
Post

Re: Stellaris

#314
I know this isn't the answer you're looking for, but I pretty much hate everything they changed. I know hate is a strong word, but I feel it is appropriate in this case because it makes the game unplayable for me, not necessarily from the performance perspective, but from the perspective that I want to play the game at all. About the only thing I like is the addition of starports, but I don't like having to put a starbase in EVERY system. The early game used to be fun, now it's boring slog. I hate hyperlanes, I hated them before and I hate them even more in this iteration because they seem to have slowed down space travel. So, essentially you have all the drawbacks of hyperlanes in that you have limited paths, but you have none of the advantages in the faster speed. I know everyone is slower now, but speeding it up could have made the early game less of a bore. Also, the game has basically become one of waiting for your minerals to build up, build a star base, repeat.

Now I'm going to vent about the Stellaris devs a bit, because I'm pretty pissed at them:

I realize I'm in the minority, but I think I'm in the group of players who are so put off by these changes that I will never go back to Stellaris. As I said, I'd be fine if these changes had been made in the sequel. For example, I hate Civ VI, but I'm fine with it because I really like Civ IV and V, which are completed games. I'm not fine with taking a game like this and changing it this drastically. I really do think that Wiz, the lead Stellaris dev, has a level of contempt for people who disagree with his changes (if you don't believe me, peruse the Paradox forums). I'm not one to go with ad hominem often, but that's why I call him a jerk.

Paradox is testing the loyalty of their fans. I have ten Paradox games, so I've been a fairly loyal customer, and I don't know if I'll ever buy a new release developed by them. Why buy a game for $50, only for the support to essentially be cut off within a year or two because the devs start making changes you hate? Paradox has built up a certain level of expectations surrounding how their games will be developed, which is that features will be added and things will be tweaked, but generally core features won't be removed, as was the case here. I think those expectations are working against them here, because those additions and tweaks have become something you expect when you pay for the game, but removals aren't. You can debate whether warp types were a core feature, but for me they were because I wouldn't have bought the game with hyperlanes only.

When you purchase a Paradox game, you are not only purchasing the game, but in many ways you are also purchasing a service of further development. The expectation is that it will make the game better over time. They advertise this further development in their forums all the time and use it to attract people to the game. So, basically I'm left with a game (since I can revert back to 1.9, albeit without the mods I like and the inability to use any further DLC) and none of the service I paid for. To say I'm disappointed is an understatement, since I had high hopes for this game from the day I saw it announced.
Post

Re: Stellaris

#315
masseffect7 wrote:
Sun Feb 25, 2018 9:19 am
I know this isn't the answer you're looking for, but I pretty much hate everything they changed. I know hate is a strong word, but I feel it is appropriate in this case because it makes the game unplayable for me, not necessarily from the performance perspective, but from the perspective that I want to play the game at all. About the only thing I like is the addition of starports, but I don't like having to put a starbase in EVERY system. The early game used to be fun, now it's boring slog. I hate hyperlanes, I hated them before and I hate them even more in this iteration because they seem to have slowed down space travel. So, essentially you have all the drawbacks of hyperlanes in that you have limited paths, but you have none of the advantages in the faster speed. I know everyone is slower now, but speeding it up could have made the early game less of a bore. Also, the game has basically become one of waiting for your minerals to build up, build a star base, repeat.

Now I'm going to vent about the Stellaris devs a bit, because I'm pretty pissed at them:

I realize I'm in the minority, but I think I'm in the group of players who are so put off by these changes that I will never go back to Stellaris. As I said, I'd be fine if these changes had been made in the sequel. For example, I hate Civ VI, but I'm fine with it because I really like Civ IV and V, which are completed games. I'm not fine with taking a game like this and changing it this drastically. I really do think that Wiz, the lead Stellaris dev, has a level of contempt for people who disagree with his changes (if you don't believe me, peruse the Paradox forums). I'm not one to go with ad hominem often, but that's why I call him a jerk.

Paradox is testing the loyalty of their fans. I have ten Paradox games, so I've been a fairly loyal customer, and I don't know if I'll ever buy a new release developed by them. Why buy a game for $50, only for the support to essentially be cut off within a year or two because the devs start making changes you hate? Paradox has built up a certain level of expectations surrounding how their games will be developed, which is that features will be added and things will be tweaked, but generally core features won't be removed, as was the case here. I think those expectations are working against them here, because those additions and tweaks have become something you expect when you pay for the game, but removals aren't. You can debate whether warp types were a core feature, but for me they were because I wouldn't have bought the game with hyperlanes only.

When you purchase a Paradox game, you are not only purchasing the game, but in many ways you are also purchasing a service of further development. The expectation is that it will make the game better over time. They advertise this further development in their forums all the time and use it to attract people to the game. So, basically I'm left with a game (since I can revert back to 1.9, albeit without the mods I like and the inability to use any further DLC) and none of the service I paid for. To say I'm disappointed is an understatement, since I had high hopes for this game from the day I saw it announced.

so your alternative to breaking the promise of contiously improving and maintaining the game for a minority is to break the promise for a majority and demanding additional 60+bucks for whats essentially a patch?

that sounds vastly more like "testing customer loyalty" than what they actually have done.

completely ignoring the fact that there'd be "they completely broke the game!" complaints at every and any way they could have tackled the lack of interesting mechanics around FTL with the assorted "you lost a loyal customer!" raging.

so why do it the way you are asking for here?

masseffect7 wrote:
Sun Feb 25, 2018 9:19 am
Why buy a game for $50, only for the support to essentially be cut off within a year or two because the devs start making changes you hate?
you mean the same price you pay for pmuch any other game out there for which you dont get the amount of improvement paradox hands out to everyone for free?

Online Now

Users browsing this forum: Bing [Bot] and 4 guests

cron