• We will be taking the forums down for scheduled maintenance on Tuesday, May 22nd 2023 at around 8:00 CDT / 13:00 UTC for up to an hour hour.
  • We have updated our Community Code of Conduct. Please read through the new rules for the forum that are an integral part of Paradox Interactive’s User Agreement.
Status
Not open for further replies.

Stellaris Dev Diary #92: FTL Rework and Galactic Terrain

Hello everyone and welcome to another Stellaris development diary. Today's dev diary is about Faster than Light travel in the Cherryh update, and it's likely to be a controversial one. When discussing, please remember to keep things civil, and I would kindly ask that you read the entire dev diary before rushing to post, as it's going to cover some of the questions and concerns we expect to see from the playerbase. Also, as posted last week, 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. Thank you!

FTL Rework
The single biggest design issue we have had to tackle in the Stellaris team since release is the asymmetrical FTL. While it's a cool and interesting idea on paper, the honest truth is that the feature just does not fit well into the game in practice, and blocks numerous improvements on a myriad of other features such as warfare and exploration, as well as solutions to fundamental design problems like the weakness of static defenses. After a lot of debate among the designers, we finally decided that if we were ever going to be able to tackle these issues and turn Stellaris into a game with truly engrossing and interesting warfare, we would have to bite the bullet and take a controversial decision: Consolidating FTL from the current three types down into a primarily hyperlane-based game, with more advanced forms of FTL unlocked through technology.

However, as I have said on the previous occasions when discussing this issue, one thing we would never consider doing is just slashing FTL types from the game without adding in something else to compensate their loss. That is what most of this dev diary is going to be about. However, before continuing with the details on the additions and changes we're making to FTL, I want to cover a couple of the questions I expect will arise from this:

Why are you removing FTL choices instead of building on them?
A lot of people have asked this question when we have brought up consolidating FTL types before, suggesting that problems such as static defenses can be solved by just adding more mechanics to handle each special case. I think the problem with this is best illustrated with defense stations and FTL inhibitors. One of the aims of the Starbase system is to give empires the ability to 'lock down' their borders, building fortresses that enemy fleets cannot simply skip past to strike at their core worlds, instead of having to create static defenses in every single valuable system.

With hyperlanes, this is a pretty simple affair: As hyperlanes create natural choke points, the only thing a hyperlane-stopping FTL inhibitor needs to do is to prevent enemy fleets from leaving the system once they enter it. The fleet can enter, it can retreat (via emergency FTL) and it can bring down the source of the FTL inhibitor (which might be a Starbase or even a planet) to be able to continue. This is quite easy to understand, both in terms of which system you need to defend to lock down your borders, and how it works when you are on the offensive.

Now let's add Warp to the mix. In this case, the single-system FTL inhibitor is useless because Warp fleets can just go over it, so we'll invent another mechanic: A warp interdiction bubble, stretching a certain distance around the system, that pull in any hostile Warp fleets traveling there to the system containing the FTL inhibitor, and force them to battle it or retreat. This is immediately a lot more messy: First of all, this bubble can't possibly affect Hyperlane fleets, because it could potentially pull them dozens of jumps away from their current location. This means that when fortifying your borders, you now need to not just make sure that every important chokepoint is covered, but also that your entire border is covered in warp interdiction bubbles.

But there's more: Add Wormholes as well, and you now have an FTL type where not only the 'bubble' type interdictor doesn't make intuitive sense (because Wormhole fleets make point-to-point jumps rather than traveling over the map) but if said interdictor works to pull Wormhole fleets out of position regardless of what makes intuitive sense, you end up with the same probem as with hyperlanes, where the fleet can get pulled out of range of its wormhole network and end up stranded even if it brings down the defenses. This means you pretty much have to invent a third type of interdiction type for Wormhole on top of what is already an overengineered and hard to understand system.

Finally, add the problem of displaying all these different types of inhibitors and interdictors on the map, in a way that the player can even remotely start to understand, and you end up with nothing short of a complete mess, where it's far better to just have static defenses protecting single valuable systems... and so we come full circle.

This is the fundamental problem that we have been grappling with when it comes to asymmetrical FTL: What works in a game such as Sword of the Stars, with its turn-based gameplay, small maps of usually no more than 3-6 empires, and 1-on-1 wars breaks down completely in a Stellaris game with real-time gameplay and wars potentially containing a dozen actors, all with their own form of FTL. The complexity collapses into what is for the player just a mess of fleets appearing and disappearing with no discernible logic to them.

Why Hyperlanes?
When discussing this, we essentially boiled down the consolidation into three possibilities: Hyperlanes only, Warp-only, and Warp+Hyperlanes. Wormhole is simply too different a FTL type to ever really work with the others, and not intuitive enough to work as the sole starting FTL for everyone playing the game. Keeping both Warp and Hyperlanes would be an improvement, but would still keep many of the issues we currently have in regards to user experience and fleet coordination. Warp-only was considered as an alternative, but ultimately Hyperlanes won out because of the possibilities it opens up for galactic geography, static defenses and enhancements to exploration.

Here are the some of the possibilities that consolidation of FTL into Hyperlanes creates for Stellaris:
  • Unified distance, sensor and border systems that make sense for everyone (for example, cost of claiming a system not being based on euclidean distance but rather the actual distance for ships to travel there)
  • Galactic 'geography', systems that are strategically and tactically important due to location and 'terrain' (more on this below) rather than just resources
  • More possibilities for galaxy generation and exploration (for example, entire regions of space accessible only through a wormhole or a single guarded hyperlane, containing special locations and events to discover)
  • Better performance through caching and unified code (Wormhole FTL in particular is a massive resource hog in the late game)
  • Warfare with a distinct sense of 'theatres', advancing/retreating fronts and border skirmishes (more on this in future dev diaries)
Are all new forms of FTL free patch content?
Yes. Naturally we're not going to charge for any form of content meant to replace the loss of old FTL types.

Hyperlane and Sublight Travel
As mentioned, in the Cherryh update. all empires will now start the game with Hyperlanes as their only mode of FTL. By default, hyperlane generation is going to be changed to create more 'islands' and 'choke points', to make for more interesting galactic geography. However, as we know some players do not enjoy the idea of constricted space, we are going to add a slider that controls the general frequency and connectivity of hyperlanes. Turning this up will create a more connected galaxy and make it harder to protect all your systems with static defenses, for players who prefer something closer to the current game's Warp-style movement.

Sublight travel is also being changed somewhat, in the sense that you need to actually travel to the entry point to a particular hyperlane (the arrow inside a system) to enter it, rather than being able to enter any hyperlane from any point outside's a system's gravity well. This means that fleets will move in a more predictable fashion, and interdictions will frequently happen inside systems instead of nearly always being at the edge of them, in particular allowing for fleets to 'guard' important hyperlane entry/exit points. To compensate for the need to move across systems, sublight travel has been sped up, especially with more advanced forms of thrusters.
2017_11_02_2.png


FTL Sensors
Along with the change to FTL, we are also changing the way sensors work. Instead of simply being a circle radiating an arbitrary distance from a ship, station or planet, each level of sensors can now see a certain distance in FTL connections. For example, a ship with level 1 sensors (Radar) will only give sensor coverage of the same system that it is currently in, while a ship with level 2 (Gravitic) sensors will give sensor coverage of that system and all systems connected to it through a Hyperlane or explored Wormhole (more on that below), a ship with level 3 sensors will be able to see systems connected to those systems, and so on. Sensor coverage can be 'blocked' by certain galactic features (more on that below), which will also block propagation into further connected systems. We are currently discussing the implementation of sensor blockers as a potential Starbase component.
2017_11_02_1.png


Wormholes
While Wormhole as a full-fledged FTL type is gone, Wormholes are not. Instead they have been changed into a natural formation that can be encountered while exploring the galaxy. Wormholes come in pairs, essentially functioning as very long hyperlanes that can potentially take a ship across the entire galaxy near-instantly. Natural Wormholes are unstable, and when first encountered, you will not be able to explore them. To explore a Wormhole, you need the Wormhole Stabilization technology, after which a science ship can be sent to stabilize and chart the Wormhole to find out what lies on the other side. If you're lucky, this may be unclaimed space full of valuable systems, but it could just as well be a Devouring Swarm eager to come over for dinner. There is a slider on game setup that controls the frequency of wormhole pairs in the galaxy.
2017_11_02_4.png


Gateways
Gateways is an advanced form of FTL most closely resembling the Wormhole FTL in the live version of the game. While exploring the galaxy, you can find abandoned Gateways that were once part of a massive, galaxy-spanning network. These Gateways are disabled and unusable, but with the Gateway Reactivation mid-game technology and a hefty investment of minerals, they can be restored to working order. Like Wormholes, Gateways allow for near-instant travel to other Gateways, but the difference is that any activated Gateway can be used to travel to any other activated Gateway, and late-game technology allows for the construction of more Gateways to expand the network. Also unlike Wormholes, which cannot be 'closed', Gateways also have the advantage of allowing any empire controlling the system they're in to control who goes through said Gateway - hostile empires and empires to whom you have closed your borders will not be able to use 'your' Gateways to just appear inside of your systems.

When the first Gateway is re-activated, another random Gateway will also be re-activated along with it, so that there is never a situation where you just have a single active Gateway going nowhere. There is a slider on game setup that controls the frequency of abandoned gateways in the galaxy.
2017_11_02_8.png


Jump Drives
Jump Drives and Psi Jump Drives have been changed, and is now an advanced form of FTL that mixes Hyperdrive with some functionality from the old Warp FTL. They allow for a ship to travel normally and very quickly along hyperlanes, but also come equipped with a tactical 'jump' functionality that allows a fleet to make a point-to-point jump ignoring the normal hyperlane limitations. This is done with a special fleet order where you select a target system for the jump (within a certain pre-defined range, with Psi Jump Drives having longer range than regular Jump Drives), after which the fleet charges up its jump drive and creates a temporary wormhole leading to the system. After the fleet makes its 'jump', the Jump Drive will need to recharge, with a significant cooldown before it can be used again, and also applies a debuff to the fleet that reduces its combat effectiveness while the cooldown is in effect. This allows for fleets with Jump Drives to ignore the usual FTL restrictions and skip straight past enemy fleets and stations, but at the cost of leaving themselves vulnerable and potentially stranded for a time afterwards. This design is highly experimental, and may change during the development of Cherryh, but we wanted Jump Drives to not just be 'Hyperdrive IV' but rather to unlock new tactical and strategic possibilities for warfare.

Galactic Terrain
With the switch to Hyperlanes and the creation of strategically important systems and chokepoints, we've also decided to implement something we had always thought was a really interesting idea, but which made little sense without such chokepoints: Galactic Terrain. Specifically, systems with environmental effects and hazards that have profound tactical and strategic effects on ships and empires. This is still something we are in the middle of testing and prototyping, but so far we have created the following forms of Galactic Terrain:
Nebulas block all sensor coverage originating from other systems, meaning that it's impossible for an empire to see what ships and stations are inside a system in a nebula without having a ship or station stationed there, allowing empires to hide their fleets and set up ambushes.
Pulsars interfere with deflector technology, nullifying all ship and station shields in a system with a Pulsar.
Neutron Stars interfere with navigation and ship systems, significantly slowing down sublight travel in a system with a Neutron Star.
Black Holes interfere with FTL, increasing the time it takes for a fleet to charge its emergency FTL and making it more difficult to ships to individually disengage from combat (more on this in a later dev diary).

The above is just a first iteration, and it's something we're likely to tweak and build on more for both the Cherryh update and other updates beyond it, so stay tuned for more information on this.
2017_11_02_3.png

2017_11_02_5.png


That's all for today! I will finish this dev diary by saying that we do not expect everyone to be happy with these changes, but we truly believe that they are necessary to give Stellaris truly great warfare, and that we think you will find the game better for it once you get a chance to try them. We will be doing a Design Corner feature on today's Extraterrestial Thursday stream, where me and Game Designer Daniel Moregård (grekulf) will be discussing the changes, fielding questions and showing off some gameplay in the internal development build. If you want a look at some of these changes in a live game environment, be sure to tune to the Paradox Interactive twitch channel at 4pm CET.

Next week, we're going to talk about war and peace, including the complete rework of the current wargoal system that was made possible by the changes to FTL and system control discussed in this and last week's dev diary. See you then!
 
Last edited:
  • 1
  • 1
Reactions:

Eelectrica

Colonel
81 Badges
Nov 12, 2016
922
390
  • Stellaris: Nemesis
  • Stellaris: Necroids
  • Crusader Kings II
  • Age of Wonders: Planetfall Season pass
  • Stellaris: Federations
  • Crusader Kings III
  • Europa Universalis IV
  • Stellaris: Synthetic Dawn
  • Tyranny - Tales from the Tiers
  • Stellaris: Galaxy Edition
  • Stellaris: Apocalypse
  • Stellaris: Humanoids Species Pack
  • Shadowrun Returns
  • Age of Wonders III
  • Tyranny - Bastards Wound
  • Stellaris: Distant Stars Pre-Order
  • Imperator: Rome - Magna Graecia
  • BATTLETECH: Heavy Metal
  • Stellaris: Lithoids
  • BATTLETECH - Beta Backer
  • Age of Wonders: Planetfall Premium edition
  • BATTLETECH: Season pass
  • Stellaris: Distant Stars
  • Imperator: Rome Deluxe Edition
  • Crusader Kings II: Holy Fury
  • Stellaris: Megacorp
  • Surviving Mars: First Colony Edition
  • Shadowrun: Hong Kong
  • Shadowrun: Dragonfall
  • BATTLETECH
  • Crusader Kings II: Way of Life
  • Pillars of Eternity
  • Stellaris
  • Stellaris - Path to Destruction bundle
  • Crusader Kings II: Monks and Mystics
  • Stellaris: Leviathans Story Pack
  • Stellaris: Digital Anniversary Edition
  • Tyranny: Gold Edition
  • Stellaris: Ancient Relics
  • Age of Wonders: Planetfall - Revelations
  • BATTLETECH: Flashpoint
  • Imperator: Rome
  • Age of Wonders: Planetfall Deluxe edition
So for you then NOTHING changes. Imagine that next patch is Stellaris 2 and don't update to it. Stellaris 1 in your version of reality, after more than a year of active support, has been stopped being supported or further developed by devs. Simple as that.
Beauty of it is the DLC we've already bought is effectively transferred across.
Everyone who has already bought the game gets to try out the new version as well. Shock, horror they might actually find they enjoy it.
 

grommile

Field Marshal
66 Badges
Jun 4, 2011
22.449
38.847
  • Europa Universalis IV
  • Crusader Kings III
  • Stellaris
  • Shadowrun Returns
  • Teleglitch: Die More Edition
  • Victoria 2
  • 500k Club
  • March of the Eagles
  • Knights of Pen and Paper 2
  • Crusader Kings II
  • Europa Universalis III
  • Hearts of Iron IV: Cadet
  • Cities: Skylines
  • Prison Architect
I don't care how nice the chocolate part of the chocolate and walnut cake is.

It's got walnuts in it.
 

Heliros

Private
25 Badges
Jul 23, 2016
10
0
  • Crusader Kings II
  • Crusader Kings II: Sword of Islam
  • Crusader Kings II: Sunset Invasion
  • Crusader Kings II: Sons of Abraham
  • Crusader Kings II: The Republic
  • Crusader Kings II: Rajas of India
  • Stellaris
  • Stellaris: Federations
  • Stellaris: Lithoids
  • Stellaris: Ancient Relics
  • Prison Architect
  • Stellaris: Megacorp
  • Stellaris: Distant Stars
  • Stellaris: Apocalypse
  • Stellaris: Humanoids Species Pack
  • Stellaris - Path to Destruction bundle
  • Stellaris: Leviathans Story Pack
  • Stellaris: Digital Anniversary Edition
  • Crusader Kings II: Conclave
  • Knights of Pen and Paper 2
  • Crusader Kings II: Horse Lords
  • Crusader Kings II: Way of Life
  • Crusader Kings II: The Old Gods
  • Crusader Kings II: Legacy of Rome
  • Stellaris: Synthetic Dawn
During recent dev stream Wiz said something like that - there was a choice - scrap Stellaris, stop it's further development and start from scratch with Stellaris 2 or change Stellaris into Stellaris 2.0
Your choice?
Honestly if the choice is between "We're turning this into a game you won't like" and "we're making something else" I'd prefer the second alternative.

If this doesn't pan out it's going to cause a rift in the playerbase between those who stay on the current version and never update, and the ones that move on. And with time, mods are going to transition over to the new format and the ones who stayed behind are going to be left in the dust.

If they make stellaris 2 instead, we'll at least have continuously updated mods for as long as interest remains. You'll have the people playing and modding Stellaris, and the people playing and modding Stellaris 2.

With this the community as a whole is going to move on to the new version, and eventually us few who loathe hyperlanes are going to be completely out of the loop since modders will move onto the new version or the next game.

Look at any game that has heavy modding. Modders tend towards newer patches, this is natural and as it should be but it also means that with a controversial patch like this that actively removes liked content...
 

Lucian667

First Lieutenant
May 17, 2016
250
64
Shock, horror they might actually find they enjoy it.

Oh please, starlanes are not some new and exciting concept that people might like if only they tried it. Its been around for decades and all 4x gamers already know if they like it or not (in my case, not). There's nothing even slightly novel about Stellaris 2.0's very derivative implementation, they're just bog-standard starlanes, except perhaps for the way ships will also have to slow-boat across each and every star system to reach the next lane. I've only seen that tried in MOO-Cts and it *massively* killed the pace of the game, so not a good thing by any means.
 
Last edited:

Mrakvampire

Captain
88 Badges
Oct 19, 2009
406
247
  • Crusader Kings II: Charlemagne
  • Stellaris - Path to Destruction bundle
  • Stellaris: Galaxy Edition
  • Cities: Skylines - Mass Transit
  • Europa Universalis IV: Mare Nostrum
  • Cities: Skylines - Snowfall
  • Europa Universalis IV: Mandate of Heaven
  • Cities: Skylines - After Dark
  • Europa Universalis IV: Pre-order
  • Europa Universalis IV: Third Rome
  • Crusader Kings II: Jade Dragon
  • Semper Fi
  • Europa Universalis IV: Res Publica
  • Majesty 2 Collection
  • Hearts of Iron III Collection
  • Hearts of Iron III: Their Finest Hour
  • Crusader Kings II: Sunset Invasion
  • Crusader Kings II
  • Crusader Kings II: Legacy of Rome
  • Crusader Kings II: The Old Gods
  • Crusader Kings II: Rajas of India
  • Crusader Kings II: The Republic
  • Crusader Kings II: Sons of Abraham
  • Hearts of Iron III
  • Crusader Kings II: Sword of Islam
  • Europa Universalis IV: Wealth of Nations
  • For the Motherland
  • Europa Universalis IV: Call to arms event
  • Europa Universalis IV: Conquest of Paradise
  • Europa Universalis IV: Art of War
  • Europa Universalis IV: El Dorado
  • Europa Universalis IV
  • Crusader Kings II: Monks and Mystics
  • Cities: Skylines - Natural Disasters
  • Stellaris: Leviathans Story Pack
  • Stellaris: Digital Anniversary Edition
  • Europa Universalis IV: Rights of Man
  • Crusader Kings II: Reapers Due
  • Hearts of Iron IV: Field Marshal
  • Hearts of Iron IV: Colonel
  • Hearts of Iron IV: Cadet
  • Pillars of Eternity
  • Stellaris: Galaxy Edition
  • 500k Club
  • Hearts of Iron IV: No Step Back
  • Hearts of Iron IV: Death or Dishonor
  • Crusader Kings II: Conclave
  • Victoria 2
  • Crusader Kings II: Way of Life
  • Crusader Kings II: Horse Lords
Honestly if the choice is between "We're turning this into a game you won't like" and "we're making something else" I'd prefer the second alternative.

If this doesn't pan out it's going to cause a rift in the playerbase between those who stay on the current version and never update, and the ones that move on. And with time, mods are going to transition over to the new format and the ones who stayed behind are going to be left in the dust.

If they make stellaris 2 instead, we'll at least have continuously updated mods for as long as interest remains. You'll have the people playing and modding Stellaris, and the people playing and modding Stellaris 2.

With this the community as a whole is going to move on to the new version, and eventually us few who loathe hyperlanes are going to be completely out of the loop since modders will move onto the new version or the next game.

Look at any game that has heavy modding. Modders tend towards newer patches, this is natural and as it should be but it also means that with a controversial patch like this that actively removes liked features you're creating a rift in the playerbase.

I still do not understand. If all that you state is true, than in either scenario those who stayed with Stellaris 1 "are left in the dust". But in scenario Stellaris 2.0 those that at least wanted to experience changes have an opportunity to play updated game FOR FREE. Hell, as Eelectrica stated above YOU also have an opportunity to try new updated game, and who knows, maybe it is not so bad as you may think?
 

Sherry Fox

Captain
18 Badges
Nov 4, 2017
302
234
  • Stellaris: Humanoids Species Pack
  • Stellaris: Nemesis
  • Stellaris: Necroids
  • Stellaris: Federations
  • Stellaris: Lithoids
  • Stellaris: Ancient Relics
  • Stellaris: Megacorp
  • Stellaris: Distant Stars
  • Stellaris: Apocalypse
  • Magicka
  • Stellaris: Synthetic Dawn
  • Stellaris - Path to Destruction bundle
  • Stellaris: Leviathans Story Pack
  • Stellaris: Digital Anniversary Edition
  • Stellaris
  • Magicka 2
  • Pillars of Eternity
  • Magicka: Wizard Wars Founder Wizard
Since the only people still posting in this thread seem to be upset with the FTL change and sure that hyperlanes-only will ruin the game, maybe a poster here can explain something to me.

A few people have posted that hyperlanes simplify the game and remove strategic options from warfare. But with warp or wormhole travel there is no layer of strategy whatsoever in situating your forces around the galaxy. Offensively, you move your forces to the system you want to attack using the shortest route possible. Defensively, it's worth it to defend a system with assets in it, and it's not worth it to defend a system with nothing. It's literally a binary decision that isn't influenced in any way by the surrounding systems because those systems can be bypassed or ignored if they're unimportant.

The definition of the word "strategy" is taking advantage of elements other than the pure numbers of ships - their organization and deployment, and the layout of the territory through which they are moving. Hyperlanes add a layer of strategic thinking to these elements the same way that wormholes and warp drives take away from it - a hyperlane route may run through a well defended system or a choke point, whereas a warp or wormhole fleet could simply bypass those systems.

Someone please explain this idea that hyperlanes remove an element of complexity from galactic warfare, because I'm seeing the exact opposite.
Ill try to explain it in simple terms. I too have seen many people not understanding why hyperlanes detract from strategy. They do it in a subtle way. You see, different FTL methods offer wildly different playstyles.
Wormholes offer 'spheres of influence'. Basically I posses supreme fleet presense everywhere withing the bubble around a wormhole station. So do my enemies. Since I can bypass any defences set up around strategic systems(planets and important resources) i dont find borders relevant. What i do find relevant are the defences of those same important systems. Correctly put fortesses with debuffs are a pain in the ass, especially if fleet powers are roughly equivalent. I also have to be mindful of my WH station valnurability. These things die FAST. And if i exted too far ill be unable to return without using emergency ftl if the station gets destroyed. Which would give my enemy time to wreck my shit. In the same vein, since i can reach any of the systems withing my range bubble faster than anyone else i plan my defences accordingly. In the central world ill put a fortress that pulls incoming ships to it and use it as a damage sink while my fleet shreds the invaders. In the rim-systems ill put a frotress exactly where i would come out of the WH if i went in it. That way a fortress would pull the ships exactly at my drop point and i can use a specialised close range corvette/cruiser fleet to have the fight on my terms. It doesnt even matter if the fortress does no damage, it serves its purpose by positioning enemy ships in my favor. There is more to that since you have mostly only one relevant fleet. it gets more complicated when you extend further that 1 wormhole station range.
Warp is inferior to wormholes in terms of defensive warfare. It does however offer huge benefits in expansion freedom and exploration freedom. When I play wormholes i cant wait to get jump drives to explore outside my bubbles.
Hyperlanes are straight up the worst FTL method. They offer better exploration than wormholes(and even that is situational). But they are straight up shit when you consider warfare, unless everyone else is equally restricted to hyperlanes. Hyperlanes need love to become relevant, but i absolutely abhor devs forcing them down our throats. They could have buffed them with more speed, they could have made it so hyperlane ships CANT be pulled out of FTL by a fortress. That would make them unique, more relevant. I would have trouble fighting hyperlane ships if i couldnt make them engage on my terms.
When you are playing with hyperlanes only 2 relevant playstyles i briefly described above are butchered in favor of clear and coherent defence line. It dumbs down the game by putting signs 'HERE! THIS PLACE IS IMPORTANT! PROTECT HERE!' without you needing to adjust to different playstyles. Those playstyles are removed in favor of one very specific way to play. Its so specific in fact that its like playing tic-tac-toe where you know the whole outcome of the game from the first turn.
 

Jerkops

Sergeant
43 Badges
Jul 17, 2012
90
8
  • Crusader Kings II
  • Pillars of Eternity
  • Europa Universalis IV
  • Crusader Kings III
  • Stellaris: Lithoids
  • Stellaris: Ancient Relics
  • Stellaris: Megacorp
  • Shadowrun: Hong Kong
  • Shadowrun: Dragonfall
  • Shadowrun Returns
  • Stellaris: Distant Stars
  • Stellaris: Apocalypse
  • Stellaris: Humanoids Species Pack
  • Age of Wonders III
  • Stellaris - Path to Destruction bundle
  • Stellaris: Leviathans Story Pack
  • Stellaris: Digital Anniversary Edition
  • Tyranny: Archon Edition
  • Crusader Kings II: Reapers Due
  • Stellaris
  • Europa Universalis IV: Mare Nostrum
  • Europa Universalis IV: Cossacks
  • Crusader Kings II: Horse Lords
  • Europa Universalis IV: Common Sense
  • Crusader Kings II: Way of Life
  • Mount & Blade: Warband
  • Europa Universalis IV: El Dorado
  • 500k Club
  • Warlock: Master of the Arcane
  • Cities: Skylines
I never implied that the current system is fine, far from it. And i can also see why for a more compelling strategy game everyone must play by the same rules, so you need to restrict ftl. But of all systems they went with hyperlanes, the most mind numbingly boring and stupid of the three.

You don't need to think where to position fleets and defences because the map does the thinking for you. Using a chokepoint is not strategy it's the obvious thing to do, if you don't do it you are not using your defences effectively. Knowing where the enemy is coming from means you really can't make the wrong call and so wars are decided merely by the numbers.
Other games have already done it and in all these games war always reduces itself to a chore:

Enter enemy obviously defended chokepoint.
Clear defences.
Rinse and repeat.

You never have to guard your rear because the enemy is forced to face you because chokepoints.
At the very least now putting your fleets in a position rather than another matters, at the very least now you can try to wage a guerrilla war, with the next update that goes away.
How do warp or wormhole FTL methods change this? You didn't address the point I made in my post: you have a binary decision about strategy in the current game, you either defend/attack a system or don't defend/attack it. The surrounding systems have absolutely no bearing on this decision because they can be bypassed. The large picture is what defines the term "strategy."

Your argument is that chokepoints simplify the game because you can just focus your defenses on a choke point. But you're arguing that focusing your defenses on your home systems, systems that are of strategic value to your empire, enriches the game? You're just substituting one decision for the same decision in another system, while at the same time removing the strategic complexity from the situation because that system is where your colony is.

The hyperlane system adds a layer of strategy to the game because it makes systems valuable even if they have no resources in them. So far no one has been able to provide a counterpoint to this argument.
 

Dunmur

Sergeant
86 Badges
Apr 24, 2013
94
0
  • Stellaris
  • Europa Universalis IV: Mare Nostrum
  • Cities: Skylines - Snowfall
  • Europa Universalis IV: Cossacks
  • Cities: Skylines - After Dark
  • Europa Universalis IV: Rights of Man
  • Crusader Kings II: Horse Lords
  • Crusader Kings II: Conclave
  • Stellaris: Galaxy Edition
  • Stellaris: Galaxy Edition
  • Hearts of Iron IV: Cadet
  • Hearts of Iron IV: Colonel
  • Stellaris: Lithoids
  • Europa Universalis IV: Common Sense
  • Tyranny: Archon Edition
  • Stellaris: Digital Anniversary Edition
  • Stellaris: Leviathans Story Pack
  • Cities: Skylines - Natural Disasters
  • Hearts of Iron IV: Together for Victory
  • Crusader Kings II: Monks and Mystics
  • BATTLETECH: Heavy Metal
  • Cities: Skylines - Mass Transit
  • Europa Universalis IV: Mandate of Heaven
  • Hearts of Iron IV: La Resistance
  • BATTLETECH
  • Hearts of Iron IV: Death or Dishonor
  • Cities: Skylines - Green Cities
  • Shadowrun: Dragonfall
  • Cities: Skylines Industries
  • Stellaris: Megacorp
  • Crusader Kings II: Holy Fury
  • Europa Universalis IV: Golden Century
  • Imperator: Rome Deluxe Edition
  • Imperator: Rome
  • Hearts of Iron IV: Expansion Pass
  • Cities: Skylines - Campus
  • Europa Universalis IV: Dharma
  • Stellaris: Distant Stars
  • Stellaris: Necroids
  • Shadowrun Returns
  • Hearts of Iron IV: Expansion Pass
  • Stellaris: Humanoids Species Pack
  • Victoria 2
  • Stellaris: Apocalypse
  • Europa Universalis IV: Rule Britannia
  • BATTLETECH - Digital Deluxe Edition
  • Cities: Skylines
  • Europa Universalis IV: El Dorado
  • Cities: Skylines - Parklife
  • Crusader Kings II: Way of Life
People are upset that they can't vote with their wallet because the update is free? Oh heavens.

This is really getting out of hand.
While we cannot vote with our wallet in this game because the update is free/forced. Do not mistake the fact that people WILL still vote with out wallets on other Paradox Games and DLC.

There is a certan amount of trust between game devs and the consumers. For those of us who bought this game because of the pre-launch showcasing of the asymmetrical FTL dynamic through advertisements and Developer Diaries, we were very happy with that direction. The subsequent removal over a year later and about face change in direction is a betrayal of the initial promise of the game and as such WILL effect our decision to trust Paradox in the future with new Games/DLC.

So to say people cannot vote with their wallets is kinda false.
 

emperror0815

Second Lieutenant
Nov 5, 2017
162
0
How do warp or wormhole FTL methods change this? You didn't address the point I made in my post: you have a binary decision about strategy in the current game, you either defend/attack a system or don't defend/attack it. The surrounding systems have absolutely no bearing on this decision because they can be bypassed. The large picture is what defines the term "strategy."

Your argument is that chokepoints simplify the game because you can just focus your defenses on a choke point. But you're arguing that focusing your defenses on your home systems, systems that are of strategic value to your empire, enriches the game? You're just substituting one decision for the same decision in another system, while at the same time removing the strategic complexity from the situation because that system is where your colony is.

The hyperlane system adds a layer of strategy to the game because it makes systems valuable even if they have no resources in them. So far no one has been able to provide a counterpoint to this argument.

Dear Mr Jerkops,
Chokepoints doesn't work even in rel-life.
Ask the French at the start of WW2 as the Germans simply cut thru belgium to suround the maginot-line.
You cut say the germans used the "warp-way"
 

Mrakvampire

Captain
88 Badges
Oct 19, 2009
406
247
  • Crusader Kings II: Charlemagne
  • Stellaris - Path to Destruction bundle
  • Stellaris: Galaxy Edition
  • Cities: Skylines - Mass Transit
  • Europa Universalis IV: Mare Nostrum
  • Cities: Skylines - Snowfall
  • Europa Universalis IV: Mandate of Heaven
  • Cities: Skylines - After Dark
  • Europa Universalis IV: Pre-order
  • Europa Universalis IV: Third Rome
  • Crusader Kings II: Jade Dragon
  • Semper Fi
  • Europa Universalis IV: Res Publica
  • Majesty 2 Collection
  • Hearts of Iron III Collection
  • Hearts of Iron III: Their Finest Hour
  • Crusader Kings II: Sunset Invasion
  • Crusader Kings II
  • Crusader Kings II: Legacy of Rome
  • Crusader Kings II: The Old Gods
  • Crusader Kings II: Rajas of India
  • Crusader Kings II: The Republic
  • Crusader Kings II: Sons of Abraham
  • Hearts of Iron III
  • Crusader Kings II: Sword of Islam
  • Europa Universalis IV: Wealth of Nations
  • For the Motherland
  • Europa Universalis IV: Call to arms event
  • Europa Universalis IV: Conquest of Paradise
  • Europa Universalis IV: Art of War
  • Europa Universalis IV: El Dorado
  • Europa Universalis IV
  • Crusader Kings II: Monks and Mystics
  • Cities: Skylines - Natural Disasters
  • Stellaris: Leviathans Story Pack
  • Stellaris: Digital Anniversary Edition
  • Europa Universalis IV: Rights of Man
  • Crusader Kings II: Reapers Due
  • Hearts of Iron IV: Field Marshal
  • Hearts of Iron IV: Colonel
  • Hearts of Iron IV: Cadet
  • Pillars of Eternity
  • Stellaris: Galaxy Edition
  • 500k Club
  • Hearts of Iron IV: No Step Back
  • Hearts of Iron IV: Death or Dishonor
  • Crusader Kings II: Conclave
  • Victoria 2
  • Crusader Kings II: Way of Life
  • Crusader Kings II: Horse Lords
When modders move to the new version of patches, they might stop working.

So, just to be sure that I understand you correctly. Devs issued an optional patch, modders who work on their mods in their free time and do not have any obligations to you, also decided to move to new patch... And that is why devs and modders are bad people, right?
 

krios41

General
65 Badges
May 14, 2016
2.494
728
  • Tyranny: Gold Edition
  • Tyranny - Tales from the Tiers
  • Stellaris: Synthetic Dawn
  • Tyranny - Bastards Wound
  • Europa Universalis IV
  • Tyranny: Archon Edition
  • Tyranny: Archon Edition
  • Age of Wonders: Planetfall - Revelations
  • Stellaris: Necroids
  • Stellaris: Nemesis
  • Hearts of Iron IV: By Blood Alone
  • Hearts of Iron IV: No Step Back
  • Stellaris: Humanoids Species Pack
  • Stellaris: Megacorp
  • BATTLETECH: Flashpoint
  • Surviving Mars: First Colony Edition
  • Stellaris: Distant Stars
  • Hearts of Iron IV: Expansion Pass
  • Stellaris: Apocalypse
  • Hearts of Iron IV: Expansion Pass
  • Hearts of Iron IV: Death or Dishonor
  • Age of Wonders: Planetfall
  • Age of Wonders: Planetfall Sign Up
  • Stellaris: Lithoids
  • Hearts of Iron IV: La Resistance
  • Stellaris: Federations
  • Crusader Kings III
  • Battle for Bosporus
  • War of the Roses
  • Europa Universalis IV: Common Sense
  • Stellaris
  • Stellaris: Galaxy Edition
  • Stellaris: Galaxy Edition
  • Hearts of Iron IV: Together for Victory
  • Stellaris: Digital Anniversary Edition
  • Hearts of Iron IV: Cadet
  • Hearts of Iron IV: Expansion Pass
  • Stellaris - Path to Destruction bundle
  • Stellaris: Leviathans Story Pack
  • Stellaris: Ancient Relics
  • Surviving Mars: Digital Deluxe Edition
  • Surviving Mars: First Colony Edition
  • Prison Architect
  • Prison Architect: Psych Ward
  • BATTLETECH
  • BATTLETECH: Season pass
  • BATTLETECH: Heavy Metal
Dear Mr Jerkops,
Chokepoints doesn't work even in rel-life.
Ask the French at the start of WW2 as the Germans simply cut thru belgium to suround the maginot-line.
You cut say the germans used the "warp-way"
no, that would be "oh, he has that chokepoint fortified, lets go trough his neighbour"
the warp way would be "let's jump over the defenses"
 
Status
Not open for further replies.