As was foretold, we've added advertisements to the forums! If you have questions, or if you encounter any bugs, please visit this thread: https://forums.penny-arcade.com/discussion/240191/forum-advertisement-faq-and-reports-thread/
We're funding a new Acquisitions Incorporated series on Kickstarter right now! Check it out at https://www.kickstarter.com/projects/pennyarcade/acquisitions-incorporated-the-series-2

Paradox Can Into Space With [Stellaris]

18182848687100

Posts

  • CesareBCesareB Registered User regular
    Jars wrote: »
    I don't even see much point in defense stations anyway. like maybe one in a chokepoint in hyperspace only galaxies, but they're not going to stop any kind of fleet

    They are great at slowing enemy fleets down. Put cheap ones in the center of all your systems with the FTL snare. It will die but the fleets still have to crawl all the way to the edges of the system to jump out.

    Hyperspace fleets just kill it then zap out. No need to crawl to the edge.

    Right but even if they get away you pretty much know where they're going. Even slowing them down for a couple of days is worthwhile.

    HappylilElf
  • Lord_AsmodeusLord_Asmodeus goeticSobriquet: Here is your magical cryptic riddle-tumour: I AM A TIME MACHINERegistered User regular
    Plus they can snare smaller raiding fleets and the like and kill them, and if it's big enough it can destroy some enemy ships before dying, and if you have your own fleet lying in wait it's a great way to trap an enemy fleet trying to hit one of your more valuable systems by trapping them in the well of the FTL inhibitor field while your station and fleet crush the enemy.

    Capital is only the fruit of labor, and could never have existed if Labor had not first existed. Labor is superior to capital, and deserves much the higher consideration. - Lincoln
  • JarsJars Registered User regular
    man when I'm at war with someone I go conquer their shit and that's that

    credeikiMassena
  • Fondor_YardsFondor_Yards Elite Four Member: Hydra Registered User regular
    edited June 2016
    Edit: Woops

    Fondor_Yards on
    Secrets, lies, and tragedy. The trifecta.
    3DS Code: 5043-2172-1361
    Xbone Tag: Salal al Din
  • KafkaAUKafkaAU Western AustraliaRegistered User regular
    I had the AI rebellion event but I'm unsure which one is the home world? Like the machine consciousness faction has a homeworld that is mostly the race that they uprose from with 3 synthetics on the planet. But I came across an AI world that was 25 tiles, 50% minerals and 50% energy with 25 synthetics on it. I crushed it and when I conquered it, it just turfed me off it, since it had 0% habitability.

    steam_sig.png
    Origin: KafkaAU B-Net: Kafka#1778
  • TofystedethTofystedeth Registered User regular
    In my current game a large empire declared war on an ally. Their stack was 3k, and mine was about 800. So I was like, I'll just hang back and build up a bit before I commit to anything. It proceeds to run roughshod over my ally, just nickel-and-diming the warscore. My fleet gets built up to the point where I can figure I can go trample all over their back lines, wreck spaceports and infrastructure and stuff while they're busy, kite them around, and generally be a nuisance.

    No route to selected system.

    The only available hyperspace routes to my ally's space had 1 star system that was just a few pixels too far to the west and was in an unallied neighbor's space, and they flat refused to give border access.
    Sorry buddy, you're on your own.

    steam_sig.png
  • MortiousMortious The Nightmare Begins Move to New ZealandRegistered User regular
    So I wanted to start a Xenophobe game, but I was wondering if this will effect my own pop once I add/remove traits?

    Move to New Zealand
    It’s not a very important country most of the time
    http://steamcommunity.com/id/mortious
  • Fondor_YardsFondor_Yards Elite Four Member: Hydra Registered User regular
    Mortious wrote: »
    So I wanted to start a Xenophobe game, but I was wondering if this will effect my own pop once I add/remove traits?

    Yes.

    Secrets, lies, and tragedy. The trifecta.
    3DS Code: 5043-2172-1361
    Xbone Tag: Salal al Din
  • FoefallerFoefaller Registered User regular
    edited June 2016
    Mortious wrote: »
    So I wanted to start a Xenophobe game, but I was wondering if this will effect my own pop once I add/remove traits?

    Yes.

    Suppose to be fixed with the next patch though. In Asimov changing your entire species will make Species 2.0 your new primary species.

    Also, Dev Diary about diplomancy changes for Asimov is up:
    Hello everyone!

    Today we aim to shed some light on the upcoming changes for the 1.2 “Asimov” update.

    Border Rework
    Something we did not like with how Stellaris played out towards the mid-game previous to 1.2, was how that the player tended to get locked in and blocked from exploring or gaining access to the rest of the galaxy.

    In the upcoming update we aim to correct that issue by reworking how border access works. By default, everyone will have open border access to other empires’ borders. An empire may close its border through a diplomatic action, and access is denied to your rivals by default.

    We hope that this will make the game feel less constrained towards the mid-game.

    Another valuable addition is that when you give your ships or fleet a Return order, but they cannot find a valid path home, you may set them as “Missing in Action”. While ships are missing in action, they will be invisible to you and reappear within your borders within a certain amount of time.

    Expansion Cost
    To reduce exploits of the open borders, we have chosen to introduce an Influence cost to colonizing planets or building Frontier Outposts. This cost will be based on the range to your closest owned system.

    Embassies & Trust
    A significant change in 1.2 is the removal of embassies and the passive opinion increase they provided. In the “Asimov” update, players will have to gain trust by cooperating with the AI. Trust is gained over time by having some sort of treaty with the AI.

    Diplomatic Changes
    A number of diplomatic statuses that were previously available through trade have now been changed into being Diplomatic Actions available through the diplomacy screen. We felt that some of these actions did not really feel in place, and that they were too hidden, in the trade interface.

    We have changed how cooperating with the AI happens. It is no longer as easy to enter into an Alliance with the AI, and you have to start off by gaining their Trust through research agreements, guarantee independence, non-aggression pacts and defensive pacts.

    Defensive Pacts are a new diplomatic action that allows two empires to be called into wars if any of them should get attacked.

    Joint War Declarations
    Another new diplomatic feature is the possibility to invite other empires to your wars. The AI will not join your wars if their Attitude towards you is not at least neutral and they have something they also want from the target.

    All things combined we hope that these changes will make the mid-game feel less static and will open up more possibilities for interesting situations to occur.

    Join us again next week for more details about the upcoming 1.2 "Asimov" update!

    Foefaller on
    steam_sig.png
  • TakelTakel Registered User regular
    ooooh... Influence cost for colonisation? That's going to make things nasty on early game influence budgets. Possibly makes any government types with mandates really powerful in early game expansions.

    Steam | PSN: MystLansfeld | 3DS: 4656-6210-1377 | FFXIV: Lavinia Lansfeld
    CorehealerOats
  • CampyCampy Registered User regular
    I wondered what they were going to do about colonisation and outpost construction inside of claimed space. Seems like you can totally grab it, but you gotsta pay!

    The other big question mark on open borders is if you'll be able to investigate your opponents fleets. Given the rock/paper/scissors nature of combat, retrofitting your army to be rock to a neighbours scissors ahead of any actual declaration of war will be huge.

  • ElvenshaeElvenshae Registered User regular
    I wonder if they'll be taking away the ongoing influence cost of frontier stations, then.

    RuldarCorehealerEchoBobbleLord_Asmodeusenvoy1
  • ElvenshaeElvenshae Registered User regular
    edited June 2016
    To expand - I've really only played with the short-term democracy government options (currently, the spiritualist one and its advanced form). That government type gets access to some reasonable mandates for ~100 influence for ~360 minerals every 5 years, so you can be more or less drowning in influence in the ... Advanced early game? ... if you aren't allied to anyone.*

    The one more dictatorial game I played to figure out some mechanics was, comparatively, completely starved of influence through most of the early and mid-game.

    If they're going to make influence even more spendy, then they'll probably need to address how quickly it's generated.

    * Then you run out of places to put easy research stations and go back to being starved of influence, too.

    Elvenshae on
  • TakelTakel Registered User regular
    You do get influence for establishing contact with other empires, which does help with the early game tightness on influence budgets. But if it costs 30 influence to colonise a planet... yeeesh. I suppose it does help make the decision to go with colonisation tech or something else as the first Social tech a little less of a default choice.

    Steam | PSN: MystLansfeld | 3DS: 4656-6210-1377 | FFXIV: Lavinia Lansfeld
  • chrono_travellerchrono_traveller Registered User regular
    I like the MIA option, though it might not be as big an issue with more open borders. I've had several times where I've had a science ship get stranded and not be able to return home because another civ settled a particular planet.

    The trouble with having an open mind, of course, is that people will insist on coming along and trying to put things in it. ~ Terry Pratchett
    Elvenshae
  • a5ehrena5ehren AtlantaRegistered User regular
    It'll be nice. I have a 22K stack stuck in an ally's space after a war cut off its return route.

  • CoinageCoinage Heaviside LayerRegistered User regular
    Man, I quit in the mid game because it gets too annoying, the solution is not to make things more difficult to do...

  • ElvenshaeElvenshae Registered User regular
    Also, before I report this as a bug, has anyone else seen this?

    Start a game as a democracy-type government - I've seen this with the spiritualist form, but it might affect others.

    You get to name your starting leader, right?

    Let them lose the first election.

    They disappear completely. Normally, people who are voted into the primary leadership position come from one of your leadership pools, and when they are voted out, they return to that pool - e.g., your scientist wins the election, they become Grand Poobah, you lose access to their scientific prowess for a bit (leaving a science vessel or research head slot empty), and if they lose the next election, they're available again.

    Your initial leader selection doesn't appear to work in the same way - maybe they aren't treated by the game as a governor or scientist or what have you, so when they lose election, they go back into the UNDEFINED pool.

    Anyone else see that?

  • AistanAistan Tiny Bat Registered User regular
    So sectors still broken, diplomacy harder, and colonizing planets is harder as well. Think I'll continue to have the game on hold for now.

  • CampyCampy Registered User regular
    In my latest game sectors don't seem broken at all. They just need a bit of initial funding to get going, especially if there's a lot of unbuilt planets and you're taxing them high.

    ElvenshaecredeikiHydroSqueegeeTeriferinRuldar
  • HydroSqueegeeHydroSqueegee ULTRACAT!!!™®© Registered User regular
    Elvenshae wrote: »
    Also, before I report this as a bug, has anyone else seen this?

    Start a game as a democracy-type government - I've seen this with the spiritualist form, but it might affect others.

    You get to name your starting leader, right?

    Let them lose the first election.

    They disappear completely. Normally, people who are voted into the primary leadership position come from one of your leadership pools, and when they are voted out, they return to that pool - e.g., your scientist wins the election, they become Grand Poobah, you lose access to their scientific prowess for a bit (leaving a science vessel or research head slot empty), and if they lose the next election, they're available again.

    Your initial leader selection doesn't appear to work in the same way - maybe they aren't treated by the game as a governor or scientist or what have you, so when they lose election, they go back into the UNDEFINED pool.

    Anyone else see that?

    It's been an issue since day 1

    kx3klFE.png
  • FoefallerFoefaller Registered User regular
    edited June 2016

    Aistan wrote: »
    So sectors still broken, diplomacy harder, and colonizing planets is harder as well. Think I'll continue to have the game on hold for now.

    I'm pretty sure sector AI is going to be one of those things that will be constantly tweaked with every patch until they get it right (or at least right enough to satisfy the majority of people playing)

    Also, from what I understand, Guarantee Independence = new embassy. You can do it for anyone you meet, they don't have to reciprocate, and the action will build trust, but you can be dragged into a war that was declared on them and it might not build as much positive relations as much as embassies did (but hopefully enough to make them agree to the more trust-building mutual agreements)

    Foefaller on
    steam_sig.png
  • ValiantheartValiantheart Registered User regular
    Campy wrote: »
    In my latest game sectors don't seem broken at all. They just need a bit of initial funding to get going, especially if there's a lot of unbuilt planets and you're taxing them high.

    They are still kinda of broken. There are real issues with buildings or space ports that require special resources. You get warnings that the sector is missing them but no idea on what planet.

    The AI also tends to build up huge space stations which really draw a lot of cash from a sector. They also regularly dont build buildings on worlds. It doesnt seem to happen all the time but it happens enough to be a problem.

    PSN: Valiant_heart PC: Valiantheart99
  • CorehealerCorehealer The Apothecary The softer edge of the universe.Registered User regular
    Unless they have meaningful ways of replacing embassy relation gains over time, like diplomatic incidents offering opportunities as well as challenges to relations in the sense of giving you an opening to get in good with another empire and not just always being a sudden mess to clean up, I don't know if I can trust the AI enough to expect this patch to help much with the overall progression of the gameplay, particularly in midgame as a federation/alliance minded empire.

    It's already hard enough to get them to agree to basically anything noteworthy unless you go full ham in a war for them or buy them off a bunch. Embassies kept thing at a good baseline with the races you wanted to get in good with the most.

    488W936.png
    DarkPrimusElvenshaeAistan
  • Professor PhobosProfessor Phobos Registered User regular
    I think they should ditch the Embassy mechanic and have us recruit "Diplomats" from the leader pool instead, who can be ordered to go do various things regarding foreign relations.

    HappylilElfDark_SideMegaMek
  • FoefallerFoefaller Registered User regular
    Corehealer wrote: »
    Unless they have meaningful ways of replacing embassy relation gains over time, like diplomatic incidents offering opportunities as well as challenges to relations in the sense of giving you an opening to get in good with another empire and not just always being a sudden mess to clean up, I don't know if I can trust the AI enough to expect this patch to help much with the overall progression of the gameplay, particularly in midgame as a federation/alliance minded empire.

    It's already hard enough to get them to agree to basically anything noteworthy unless you go full ham in a war for them or buy them off a bunch. Embassies kept thing at a good baseline with the races you wanted to get in good with the most.

    Diplomatic Incidents will be a thing with Asimov.

    and like I said, I'm pretty sure the new Guarantee Independence (Defensive Pact will be what Guarantee Independence is now) is pretty much embassy 2.0, only you'll be obligated to go to war on their side if someone declares on them, rather than just free positive relations with no drawback.

    steam_sig.png
  • CorehealerCorehealer The Apothecary The softer edge of the universe.Registered User regular
    I think they should ditch the Embassy mechanic and have us recruit "Diplomats" from the leader pool instead, who can be ordered to go do various things regarding foreign relations.

    I would like this idea in tandem with what they are doing, as an extra active decision made by the player to affect interactions with a given empire.

    488W936.png
  • TakelTakel Registered User regular
    No embassies is also going to make Fallen Empires that are close to your borders a bit more difficult to work with.

    In most of my games, if I come across a FE I slap an Embassy on them and I can really start pushing into their borders before I get them pissed off enough due to the +100 relations.

    Steam | PSN: MystLansfeld | 3DS: 4656-6210-1377 | FFXIV: Lavinia Lansfeld
    HappylilElfElvenshaeCampyCorehealer
  • CampyCampy Registered User regular
    So it seems that Paradox are crowd sourcing some suggestions for the AI. They've put together a google doc for people to write on!

    Haven't had a change to read through and see if I have anything to add. But if you have some annoyances/ideas burning a hole in your brain, have at it!

  • CorehealerCorehealer The Apothecary The softer edge of the universe.Registered User regular
    Campy wrote: »
    So it seems that Paradox are crowd sourcing some suggestions for the AI. They've put together a google doc for people to write on!

    Haven't had a change to read through and see if I have anything to add. But if you have some annoyances/ideas burning a hole in your brain, have at it!

    This is a good idea, seeing as the AI in some respects is one of the weaker elements of the game right now. But it's a complex thing to try and program for all these different expectations of the player when interacting with other empires so this should hopefully help them address the most important and succinct issues at hand that could use some love or even a new perspective on how they are handled.

    488W936.png
  • ValiantheartValiantheart Registered User regular
    So i am having a happiness problem in my new game and need some advice.

    I am playing a Fanatic Collectivist/Xenophile/Despotic Empire race and cannot get my newly conquered people happy (mostly individualists). In my previous games it was fairly easy: slap on max defensive troops, pop on a propaganda broadcast and you were good to go in 10-25 years.

    In this game the angry factions are behaving in ways i havent seen before. Normally you could max out defensive troops on a planet and just wait for the pops to try to rebel. The pops in rebellion would turn into troops and land and then you would just wipe them out, but in this game instead of wiping the angry factions populations they immediately regenerate to maximum strength. Within a few more months they are rebelling and striking again. Its a constant loop i cant seem to end.

    I've tried to use the Fanatic Collectivist special edit Social Engineering but it isnt doing anything. I dont wont to completely enslave them because you lose significant research but im beginning to think it may be the only way.

    Any suggestions?

    PSN: Valiant_heart PC: Valiantheart99
  • PhillisherePhillishere Registered User regular
    Campy wrote: »
    So it seems that Paradox are crowd sourcing some suggestions for the AI. They've put together a google doc for people to write on!

    Haven't had a change to read through and see if I have anything to add. But if you have some annoyances/ideas burning a hole in your brain, have at it!

    Looking over that, I really like the idea of Fallen Empire rivalries. Having two half dormant superpowers playing Cold War in the galaxy would make for dynamic games.

    TheColonelElvenshaeAlbino BunnyCantideBobble
  • FoefallerFoefaller Registered User regular
    edited June 2016
    Campy wrote: »
    So it seems that Paradox are crowd sourcing some suggestions for the AI. They've put together a google doc for people to write on!

    Haven't had a change to read through and see if I have anything to add. But if you have some annoyances/ideas burning a hole in your brain, have at it!

    Too late to edit it, damn.

    Kinda disapointed noone mentioned (that I could see) about having the AI split their fleets and attack/defend multiple targets during a war. Haven't played since 1.0, but at the time (and I assume it's still true) it was fairly easy to divide your fleet and conquer simply because the enemy won't ever focus on more than one fleet/target at a time, regardless of how much they overwhelm you in numbers.

    Foefaller on
    steam_sig.png
  • DarkPrimusDarkPrimus Registered User regular
    I wonder what the new ethics/government benefits will be for races that currently get extra embassies.

    usnTyq4.jpg
    Gamertag: PrimusD | Rock Band DLC | GW:OttW - arrcd | WLD - Thortar
  • AbbalahAbbalah Registered User regular
    edited June 2016
    So i am having a happiness problem in my new game and need some advice.

    I am playing a Fanatic Collectivist/Xenophile/Despotic Empire race and cannot get my newly conquered people happy (mostly individualists). In my previous games it was fairly easy: slap on max defensive troops, pop on a propaganda broadcast and you were good to go in 10-25 years.

    In this game the angry factions are behaving in ways i havent seen before. Normally you could max out defensive troops on a planet and just wait for the pops to try to rebel. The pops in rebellion would turn into troops and land and then you would just wipe them out, but in this game instead of wiping the angry factions populations they immediately regenerate to maximum strength. Within a few more months they are rebelling and striking again. Its a constant loop i cant seem to end.

    I've tried to use the Fanatic Collectivist special edit Social Engineering but it isnt doing anything. I dont wont to completely enslave them because you lose significant research but im beginning to think it may be the only way.

    Any suggestions?

    I haven't played much with Xenophile but I'm pretty sure the intended Collectivist solution to rebellious pops is Purging and/or slavery, since Collectivist doesn't give you any helpful modifiers to happiness or ethics divergence that might allow you to bring them under control.

    'kill all the aliens' does seem like a bit of a nonbo with Xenophile, and Despotic Empire gives bonuses to slaves, so my guess is that you're supposed to be enslaving them, which will probably make them unhappy but will also make them unable to rebel or strike, so you're not strictly obligated to care very much.

    You only lose research if the enslaved pops are the ones working your research stations - just have free pops work those tiles. You're collectivist, so you should be able to forcibly resettle your own people from other planets to those tiles if necessary.

    Abbalah on
  • CuddlyCuteKittenCuddlyCuteKitten Registered User regular
    Collectivist gives a building with -15% ethics divergence, a tech with -20 % and their fanatic edict is -15 % divergence. They are very good at brainwashing people into happiness.

    waaaaaaaaaaaaaaaow - Felicia, SPFT2:T
    ElvenshaeMegaMek
  • ValiantheartValiantheart Registered User regular
    Collectivist gives a building with -15% ethics divergence, a tech with -20 % and their fanatic edict is -15 % divergence. They are very good at brainwashing people into happiness.

    I am trying that. I have the empire wide policy to reduce ethics and have the ethics policy on those worlds but i am not seeing the people change their ethics at all. I wiped out several of the pops to test this and the new ones coming back are the same as the ones i killed.

    PSN: Valiant_heart PC: Valiantheart99
  • DonnictonDonnicton Registered User regular
    Collectivist gives a building with -15% ethics divergence, a tech with -20 % and their fanatic edict is -15 % divergence. They are very good at brainwashing people into happiness.

    I am trying that. I have the empire wide policy to reduce ethics and have the ethics policy on those worlds but i am not seeing the people change their ethics at all. I wiped out several of the pops to test this and the new ones coming back are the same as the ones i killed.

    Their total ethics divergence has to be in the negatives. The speed at which they convert is based on how far into the negatives they are. If it's like -1%, it will happen extremely slowly but it will happen.

    ElvenshaeLord_AsmodeusMoridin889
  • FoefallerFoefaller Registered User regular
    edited June 2016
    DarkPrimus wrote: »
    I wonder what the new ethics/government benefits will be for races that currently get extra embassies.

    There was a devstream of the Asimov Beta build that has shown more info than was in the dev diary.

    Something that wasn't mentioned in the dev diary is that some diplomacy options will now have influence costs as well. Xenophiles, instead of extra embassies, will have cheaper costs for those deals (since they're the main way you increase relations now)

    A couple other ethos related changes shown on the dev streams (this isn't an exhaustive list btw)

    There is now a War Philosophy Policy, that determines what you have available as war goals. two of the possible policies is Unrestricted Warfare (what we can do now) and Liberators (can't demand cede planets) Pacifists will have a higher Warscore cost for ceding planets, Fanatic Pacifist can't pick Unrestricted Warfare, making them unable to directly conquer worlds (though you can always try to reclaim world that were once yours, regardless of policy). Pacifist will also have it's pop growth bonus replaced with a happiness bonus.

    Spiritualists will have -ethics divergence instead of of happiness.

    ...and some other tweaks, mostly of fanatic bonuses to make them more appealing since they cost you a third ethos (like Materialist getting a +15% research bonus instead of +10).

    Foefaller on
    steam_sig.png
    Elvenshae
  • JarsJars Registered User regular
    I wonder if they are intentionally nerfing pacifists with that. the -30% growth time is ridiculously strong right now with rapid expansion

Sign In or Register to comment.