• 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:

~Robbie

Captain
26 Badges
Nov 6, 2017
342
417
  • Crusader Kings II: Conclave
  • Prison Architect
  • Crusader Kings II: Holy Fury
  • Shadowrun: Dragonfall
  • Shadowrun Returns
  • Surviving Mars: Digital Deluxe Edition
  • Crusader Kings II: Jade Dragon
  • Age of Wonders III
  • Surviving Mars
  • Stellaris - Path to Destruction bundle
  • Crusader Kings II: Monks and Mystics
  • Crusader Kings II: Reapers Due
  • Stellaris
  • Crusader Kings II: Horse Lords
  • Pillars of Eternity
  • Crusader Kings II: Way of Life
  • Teleglitch: Die More Edition
  • 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
  • Crusader Kings II: The Old Gods
  • Crusader Kings II: Legacy of Rome
  • Crusader Kings II: Charlemagne
Regarding your "space-game" point: Surely you didn't buy Stellaris for a space simulation, but for a strategy game that uses tropes from science fiction universes. "Rule of Cool" > Realism. That's not really a statement in favor of any decision regarding FTL, but more of an overall philosophical one: realism really shouldn't matter - how well the game depicts various sci-fi/space opera franchises should.

It's not a matter of depiction, but rather mechanics matching the setting. This new system is indistinguishable from standard land combat we see in other strategy games that don't offer free movement.

I don't think it's at all unreasonable for people to not want land combat mechanics in a space strategy game. Especially a space strategy game that already has distinct movement mechanic options that match the setting well, and are not so broken as to be completely beyond repair.

But now, people that enjoy those mechanics that we already have are being alienated, and will be forced to play this game like every other strategy game. I understand if you don't agree or don't enjoy the mechanics as they are now, but I hope you can at least understand where so many people are coming from. Imagine for a moment if one of your favorite features of Stellaris was removed wholesale, and how bad that might feel.
 

Druesling

Major
82 Badges
Feb 14, 2016
787
1.126
  • Cities: Skylines - Snowfall
  • Europa Universalis IV: Cossacks
  • Knights of Pen and Paper 2
  • Cities: Skylines - After Dark
  • Magicka 2
  • Crusader Kings II: Monks and Mystics
  • War of the Roses
  • Cities: Skylines
  • Crusader Kings III: Royal Edition
  • Europa Universalis IV: El Dorado
  • Crusader Kings II: Way of Life
  • Pillars of Eternity
  • Humble Paradox Bundle
  • Cities: Skylines - Natural Disasters
  • Crusader Kings II: Horse Lords
  • Crusader Kings II: Conclave
  • Stellaris: Galaxy Edition
  • Stellaris Sign-up
  • Hearts of Iron IV: Cadet
  • Stellaris: Necroids
  • Europa Universalis IV: Rights of Man
  • Tyranny: Archon Edition
  • Stellaris: Digital Anniversary Edition
  • Stellaris: Leviathans Story Pack
  • Shadowrun Returns
  • Shadowrun: Dragonfall
  • Cities: Skylines Industries
  • Stellaris: Megacorp
  • Crusader Kings II: Holy Fury
  • Prison Architect
  • Cities: Skylines - Campus
  • Stellaris: Ancient Relics
  • Stellaris: Lithoids
  • Stellaris: Federations
  • Crusader Kings III
  • Cities: Skylines - Parklife Pre-Order
  • Stellaris: Distant Stars
  • Cities: Skylines - Parklife
  • Cities: Skylines - Mass Transit
  • Surviving Mars
  • Stellaris: Nemesis
  • Cities: Skylines - Green Cities
  • Crusader Kings II: Jade Dragon
  • Stellaris: Humanoids Species Pack
  • Stellaris: Apocalypse
  • Teleglitch: Die More Edition
  • Victoria 2
  • Surviving Mars: Digital Deluxe Edition
  • Europa Universalis IV: Mare Nostrum
  • Stellaris
Why is it difficult to imagine that hyperlanes are natural occurrences like ocean currents? Because you don't want to?

If I had an FTL that was reliant on space currents, I would do my damndest to invent a real and reliable FTL as fast as possible. You can't really anymore in 1.9 or 2.0 or whatever the next version is.
If that would be possible, the FTL changes wouldn't be as dramatic for many people.
In advance, in the first dev stream they kinda alluded to the other two FTLs being inventable and hyperlane would be the only one you had from start. And them getting effectively rid of jump drives wasn't even on the table before this dev diary.
That kinda wouldn't have been that bad in comparison. But the actual scope of the "consolidation" shocked a lot of people.
I could live with "hypercurrents" in the first 100 years of the game, but the whole game?
 

RoboCzar

Major
145 Badges
Apr 4, 2001
511
15
Visit site
  • Naval War: Arctic Circle
  • Hearts of Iron III: Their Finest Hour
  • Heir to the Throne
  • Impire
  • Europa Universalis III Complete
  • King Arthur II
  • Knights of Pen and Paper +1 Edition
  • Lead and Gold
  • Leviathan: Warships
  • Magicka
  • Majesty 2 Collection
  • March of the Eagles
  • Europa Universalis III Complete
  • Hearts of Iron III
  • Pirates of Black Cove
  • Europa Universalis IV: Res Publica
  • Victoria: Revolutions
  • Rome Gold
  • Semper Fi
  • Sengoku
  • Sword of the Stars
  • Sword of the Stars II
  • Supreme Ruler 2020
  • Starvoid
  • Teleglitch: Die More Edition
  • Hearts of Iron IV: No Step Back
  • Commander: Conquest of the Americas
  • Hearts of Iron II: Armageddon
  • Cities in Motion
  • Cities in Motion 2
  • Crusader Kings II
  • Crusader Kings II: Charlemagne
  • 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
  • Crusader Kings II: Sunset Invasion
  • Crusader Kings II: Sword of Islam
  • Arsenal of Democracy
  • Dungeonland
  • Europa Universalis III
  • Europa Universalis III: Chronicles
  • Divine Wind
  • Europa Universalis IV
  • Europa Universalis IV: Art of War
  • Europa Universalis IV: Conquest of Paradise
  • Europa Universalis IV: Wealth of Nations
  • Europa Universalis IV: Call to arms event
  • For the Motherland
The cartoony artwork really turned me off up until now, but since Stellaris is now poised to become just another mediocre starlane-infested land-warfare snorefest, I might check it out. Devs who support free movement in their 4x space games are becoming as rare as hen's teeth and really deserve to be supported.

They aren't *that* rare. That's why this change to Stellaris seems so off... most 4x out in the last 5-10 years has been free movement-based... with the exception of Endless Space, but even then there are options to bypass chokepoints.

Chokepoints, as far as I can tell, are recognized as a bad design decision in the majority of 4x.
 

brifbates

Field Marshal
93 Badges
Mar 4, 2004
10.889
2.841
  • Crusader Kings II: Way of Life
  • Victoria 2
  • Victoria 2: A House Divided
  • Victoria 2: Heart of Darkness
  • Warlock: Master of the Arcane
  • Warlock 2: The Exiled
  • 500k Club
  • Cities: Skylines
  • Cities: Skylines Deluxe Edition
  • Crusader Kings II: Holy Knight (pre-order)
  • Europa Universalis IV: El Dorado
  • Europa Universalis IV: Pre-order
  • Pride of Nations
  • Sword of the Stars II
  • Europa Universalis IV: Common Sense
  • Crusader Kings II: Horse Lords
  • Cities: Skylines - After Dark
  • Europa Universalis IV: Cossacks
  • Crusader Kings II: Conclave
  • Cities: Skylines - Snowfall
  • Europa Universalis IV: Mare Nostrum
  • Stellaris
  • Stellaris: Galaxy Edition
  • Stellaris: Galaxy Edition
  • Hearts of Iron IV: Cadet
  • Victoria 3 Sign Up
  • Europa Universalis IV: Art of War
  • Crusader Kings II: Charlemagne
  • 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
  • Crusader Kings II: Sunset Invasion
  • Crusader Kings II: Sword of Islam
  • Deus Vult
  • Europa Universalis III
  • Divine Wind
  • Europa Universalis IV
  • Crusader Kings II
  • Europa Universalis IV: Conquest of Paradise
  • Europa Universalis IV: Wealth of Nations
  • For the Motherland
  • Hearts of Iron III
  • Hearts of Iron III: Their Finest Hour
  • Heir to the Throne
  • Europa Universalis III Complete
  • March of the Eagles
  • Europa Universalis IV: Res Publica
  • Victoria: Revolutions
Somehow, I think this may be this game's "historical determinism vs. plausible freeform history" as seen in CK2 and EU3/4. That's why this discussion has gone on for over 200 pages and several other threads so far.

It's not just a matter of conscious preference but also of a deeper sense of how people are wired. Some people see the game as a challenge, enjoy staying on top of things, enjoy facing new obstacles and thrive, even if they have to deal with ping-ponging fleets and more micromanagement in exchange. Others are looking more for grand strategy comfort food, something that's easy to handle, that spits out an interesting story without too much input, preferably with as much randomization and as little player input as possible, with an easy-to-understand warfare system that is focused on narrative structure rather than strategic depth.

Another example would be if they decided to remove random race generation and only offer predesigned races with modification options, MOO/DW-style. Some people wouldn't mind because the challenge and management aspects aren't really touched by that - others would abandon the game because it would severely compromise its customizability and story generator aspects (I, for example, would never touch Stars in Shadow based solely on the lack of completely custom species/empires).

This is a spectrum, of course, and not as clear cut - but I suppose it may touch upon what this discussion is really about. FTL drives aren't really the core issue of the matter - people seem to grow frustrated because they disagree with the philosophy behind the choice which is likely an indication of how development will progress, not the choice itself.

There is some truth to this, however, for many it's not just that they are removing the choices, it's the choice they are making. If they were keeping warp I'd adapt to the differences between warp and my go-to wormholes and carry on. However, they chose lanes only and every single experience I've had with any game using lanes only resulted in a rapid uninstall because I just find the system itself to be stupid and un-fun.
 

monsterfurby

Not really a fascist brony
122 Badges
Jul 5, 2005
2.285
888
  • Crusader Kings II: Conclave
  • Tyranny: Archon Edition
  • King Arthur II
  • Europa Universalis IV: Rights of Man
  • Crusader Kings II: Reapers Due
  • Hearts of Iron IV: Cadet
  • Stellaris: Galaxy Edition
  • Stellaris: Galaxy Edition
  • Stellaris: Galaxy Edition
  • Stellaris
  • Europa Universalis IV: Mare Nostrum
  • Cities: Skylines - Snowfall
  • Supreme Ruler: Cold War
  • Impire
  • Crusader Kings II: Horse Lords
  • Magicka 2
  • Stellaris: Humanoids Species Pack
  • Warlock: Master of the Arcane
  • War of the Roses
  • 500k Club
  • Hearts of Iron IV: Expansion Pass
  • Cities: Skylines Deluxe Edition
  • Stellaris: Apocalypse
  • Magicka: Wizard Wars Founder Wizard
  • Mount & Blade: With Fire and Sword
  • Pillars of Eternity
  • Europa Universalis IV: Mandate of Heaven
  • Cities in Motion 2
  • Cities: Skylines - Parklife
  • Crusader Kings II: Jade Dragon
  • Europa Universalis IV: Cradle of Civilization
  • Cities: Skylines - Green Cities
  • Age of Wonders III
  • Stellaris: Synthetic Dawn
  • Hearts of Iron IV: Death or Dishonor
  • BATTLETECH
  • Europa Universalis IV: Third Rome
  • Knights of Honor
  • Stellaris: Nemesis
  • Europa Universalis IV: Rule Britannia
  • Cities: Skylines - Mass Transit
  • Europa Universalis III: Chronicles
  • Stellaris - Path to Destruction bundle
  • Europa Universalis IV
  • Europa Universalis IV: Art of War
  • Crusader Kings II: Monks and Mystics
  • Hearts of Iron IV: Together for Victory
  • Europa Universalis IV: Call to arms event
  • Cities: Skylines - Natural Disasters
  • Stellaris: Leviathans Story Pack
It's not a matter of depiction, but rather mechanics matching the setting. This new system is indistinguishable from standard land combat we see in other strategy games that don't offer free movement.

I don't think it's at all unreasonable for people to not want land combat mechanics in a space strategy game. Especially a space strategy game that already has distinct movement mechanic options that match the setting well, and are not so broken as to be completely beyond repair.

But now, people that enjoy those mechanics that we already have are being alienated, and will be forced to play this game like every other strategy game. I understand if you don't agree or don't enjoy the mechanics as they are now, but I hope you can at least understand where so many people are coming from. Imagine for a moment if one of your favorite features of Stellaris was removed wholesale, and how bad that might feel.

As I mentioned in a post since then, I don't think it's really about the feature itself at all and more about what this change stands for. This is a change in favor of the story generator aspect of the game, as opposed to its strategic depth/challenge side. By making such a drastic change, they do imply that future changes will also go more in the direction of providing an easy-to-manage space opera narrative generator, not a challenging space strategy game.

Neither of these terms is supposed to be inherently superior to the other, I should note - people are just wired to appreciate different styles of entertainment.
 

Lucian667

First Lieutenant
May 17, 2016
250
64
They aren't *that* rare. That's why this change to Stellaris seems so off... most 4x out in the last 5-10 years has been free movement-based... with the exception of Endless Space, but even then there are options to bypass chokepoints.

Chokepoints, as far as I can tell, are recognized as a bad design decision in the majority of 4x.

A lot of recent ones have been starlane based though, Polaris Sector, Endless Space 2, Even MOO-Cts jumped ship and crossed over to the starlane dark-side (and ended up a forgettable, mediocre joke of a game as a result). Honestly though, I hope you turn out to be right about this, a bit of balance would be nice, I'd hate to see most 4x space games get swept away in this dumbed down tide of starlane darkness.
 

Sherry Fox

First Lieutenant
18 Badges
Nov 4, 2017
298
216
  • 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
Somehow, I think this may be this game's "historical determinism vs. plausible freeform history" as seen in CK2 and EU3/4. That's why this discussion has gone on for over 200 pages and several other threads so far.

It's not just a matter of conscious preference but also of a deeper sense of how people are wired. Some people see the game as a challenge, enjoy staying on top of things, enjoy facing new obstacles and thrive, even if they have to deal with ping-ponging fleets and more micromanagement in exchange. Others are looking more for grand strategy comfort food, something that's easy to handle, that spits out an interesting story without too much input, preferably with as much randomization and as little player input as possible, with an easy-to-understand warfare system that is focused on narrative structure rather than strategic depth.

Another example would be if they decided to remove random race generation and only offer predesigned races with modification options, MOO/DW-style. Some people wouldn't mind because the challenge and management aspects aren't really touched by that - others would abandon the game because it would severely compromise its customizability and story generator aspects.

This is a spectrum, of course, and not as clear cut - but I suppose it may touch upon what this discussion is really about. FTL drives aren't really the core issue of the matter - people seem to grow frustrated because they disagree with the philosophy behind the choice which is likely an indication of how development will progress, not the choice itself.
This is an apt way of putting it. I have to admit that i started playing wormholes from the beginning because it said 'advanced players only':D. But i wouldnt cut other FTL because it added huge diversity. The problem comes that we were given what we want for a year. And now its taken away for very flimsy reasons. Its not impossible to taylor the game and add new features for all 3 methods. Its not impossible to add galactic terrain and system effects for them to be relevant even with current build. I would love to build a ringworld in a neutron star system that discharges shields. That would make it very defencible against certain types of enemies. Its not impossible to for example add a nebula that considerably slows warping though it or wormholing into it. That would make a hyperlane nation hiding in that nebula have a huge defensive advantage. See the ideas?
 

~Robbie

Captain
26 Badges
Nov 6, 2017
342
417
  • Crusader Kings II: Conclave
  • Prison Architect
  • Crusader Kings II: Holy Fury
  • Shadowrun: Dragonfall
  • Shadowrun Returns
  • Surviving Mars: Digital Deluxe Edition
  • Crusader Kings II: Jade Dragon
  • Age of Wonders III
  • Surviving Mars
  • Stellaris - Path to Destruction bundle
  • Crusader Kings II: Monks and Mystics
  • Crusader Kings II: Reapers Due
  • Stellaris
  • Crusader Kings II: Horse Lords
  • Pillars of Eternity
  • Crusader Kings II: Way of Life
  • Teleglitch: Die More Edition
  • 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
  • Crusader Kings II: The Old Gods
  • Crusader Kings II: Legacy of Rome
  • Crusader Kings II: Charlemagne
As I mentioned in a post since then, I don't think it's really about the feature itself at all and more about what this change stands for.

I can't speak for everyone, but it certainly is about the feature itself for me. Multiple travel methods is one of my favorite things about Stellaris and legitimately what sold me on the game. I love the variety it adds, how it shakes up gameplay, how it changes war against a given empire, and I can't be excited for its removal. It's not about what its removal stands for, it's that one of my most beloved aspects of the game is being removed and I won't be able to play it any longer.
 

RoboCzar

Major
145 Badges
Apr 4, 2001
511
15
Visit site
  • Naval War: Arctic Circle
  • Hearts of Iron III: Their Finest Hour
  • Heir to the Throne
  • Impire
  • Europa Universalis III Complete
  • King Arthur II
  • Knights of Pen and Paper +1 Edition
  • Lead and Gold
  • Leviathan: Warships
  • Magicka
  • Majesty 2 Collection
  • March of the Eagles
  • Europa Universalis III Complete
  • Hearts of Iron III
  • Pirates of Black Cove
  • Europa Universalis IV: Res Publica
  • Victoria: Revolutions
  • Rome Gold
  • Semper Fi
  • Sengoku
  • Sword of the Stars
  • Sword of the Stars II
  • Supreme Ruler 2020
  • Starvoid
  • Teleglitch: Die More Edition
  • Hearts of Iron IV: No Step Back
  • Commander: Conquest of the Americas
  • Hearts of Iron II: Armageddon
  • Cities in Motion
  • Cities in Motion 2
  • Crusader Kings II
  • Crusader Kings II: Charlemagne
  • 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
  • Crusader Kings II: Sunset Invasion
  • Crusader Kings II: Sword of Islam
  • Arsenal of Democracy
  • Dungeonland
  • Europa Universalis III
  • Europa Universalis III: Chronicles
  • Divine Wind
  • Europa Universalis IV
  • Europa Universalis IV: Art of War
  • Europa Universalis IV: Conquest of Paradise
  • Europa Universalis IV: Wealth of Nations
  • Europa Universalis IV: Call to arms event
  • For the Motherland
A lot of recent ones have been starlane based though, Polaris Sector, Endless Space 2, Even MOO-Cts jumped ship and crossed over to the starlane dark-side (and ended up a forgettable, mediocre joke of a game as a result). Honestly though, I hope you turn out to be right about this, a bit of balance would be nice, I'd hate to see most 4x space games get swept away in this dumbed down tide of starlane darkness.

I admit I haven't played Polaris or the new MOO reboot yet. But I will defend ES2 in the sense that it makes up for the static movement and the inability to force warp drive by giving you other *compelling* victory options besides conquer.
 

TheAtreides84

General
137 Badges
Jan 13, 2010
1.729
1.497
  • Island Bound
  • Prison Architect: Psych Ward
  • Stellaris: Nemesis
  • Europa Universalis IV: Pre-order
  • Crusader Kings II: Holy Knight (pre-order)
  • Warlock 2: Wrath of the Nagas
  • Warlock 2: The Exiled
  • Rome: Vae Victis
  • Victoria 2: Heart of Darkness
  • Victoria 2: A House Divided
  • Sword of the Stars II
  • Europa Universalis IV
  • Europa Universalis III Complete
  • Europa Universalis III Complete
  • Victoria 2
  • 500k Club
  • Europa Universalis IV: El Dorado
  • Pride of Nations
  • Mount & Blade: Warband
  • Mount & Blade: With Fire and Sword
  • Crusader Kings II: Way of Life
  • Magicka 2
  • Europa Universalis IV: Common Sense
  • Crusader Kings II: Horse Lords
  • Crusader Kings II: Conclave
  • Hearts of Iron IV: Cadet
  • Crusader Kings II: Reapers Due
  • Europa Universalis IV: Rights of Man
  • 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
  • Steel Division: Normandy 44
  • Cities: Skylines - Mass Transit
  • Europa Universalis IV: Mandate of Heaven
  • Crusader Kings Complete
  • BATTLETECH
  • Surviving Mars
  • Hearts of Iron IV: Death or Dishonor
  • Tyranny - Bastards Wound
  • Age of Wonders III
  • Cities: Skylines - Green Cities
  • Hearts of Iron IV: Expansion Pass
  • Stellaris: Humanoids Species Pack
  • Europa Universalis IV: Rule Britannia
  • Cities: Skylines - Parklife
  • Stellaris: Distant Stars
  • Europa Universalis IV: Dharma
A lot of recent ones have been starlane based though, Polaris Sector, Endless Space 2, Even MOO-Cts jumped ship and crossed over to the starlane dark-side (and ended up a forgettable, mediocre joke of a game as a result). Honestly though, I hope you turn out to be right about this, a bit of balance would be nice, I'd hate to see most 4x space games get swept away in this dumbed down tide of starlane darkness.

This reminds mind of the debate around TW Warhammer sieges. They are one-wall affair now, so people say they are dumbed down relatively to the old full-castle assaults with multiple fortification rings, chokepoints an the like. Which would be true, if not for one small detail: the AI was incapable to deal with the complexity. It's the same here: you can make the rules as complex as you want, but if your opponents can't even understand them and you are able to routinely exploit this fact, *that's* dumbing down. Better to play chess with Deep Blue than Twilight Imperium with a Commodore64.
 

RoboCzar

Major
145 Badges
Apr 4, 2001
511
15
Visit site
  • Naval War: Arctic Circle
  • Hearts of Iron III: Their Finest Hour
  • Heir to the Throne
  • Impire
  • Europa Universalis III Complete
  • King Arthur II
  • Knights of Pen and Paper +1 Edition
  • Lead and Gold
  • Leviathan: Warships
  • Magicka
  • Majesty 2 Collection
  • March of the Eagles
  • Europa Universalis III Complete
  • Hearts of Iron III
  • Pirates of Black Cove
  • Europa Universalis IV: Res Publica
  • Victoria: Revolutions
  • Rome Gold
  • Semper Fi
  • Sengoku
  • Sword of the Stars
  • Sword of the Stars II
  • Supreme Ruler 2020
  • Starvoid
  • Teleglitch: Die More Edition
  • Hearts of Iron IV: No Step Back
  • Commander: Conquest of the Americas
  • Hearts of Iron II: Armageddon
  • Cities in Motion
  • Cities in Motion 2
  • Crusader Kings II
  • Crusader Kings II: Charlemagne
  • 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
  • Crusader Kings II: Sunset Invasion
  • Crusader Kings II: Sword of Islam
  • Arsenal of Democracy
  • Dungeonland
  • Europa Universalis III
  • Europa Universalis III: Chronicles
  • Divine Wind
  • Europa Universalis IV
  • Europa Universalis IV: Art of War
  • Europa Universalis IV: Conquest of Paradise
  • Europa Universalis IV: Wealth of Nations
  • Europa Universalis IV: Call to arms event
  • For the Motherland
This reminds mind of the debate around TW Warhammer sieges. They are one-wall affair now, so people say they are dumbed down relatively to the old full-castle assaults with multiple fortification rings, chokepoints an the like. Which would be true, if not for one small detail: the AI was incapable to deal with the complexity. It's the same here: you can make the rules as complex as you want, but if your opponents can't even understand them and you are able to routinely exploit this fact, *that's* dumbing down. Better to play chess with Deep Blue than Twilight Empires with a Commodore64.

No AI in existence currently is going to be able to deal with player chokepoints, or anticipate contested chokepoints. The issue is MP among mostly-equal-skill players who are going to, as intelligent players do, go chokepoint hunting. The default Stellaris AI will bleed itself dry on any moderately well designed chokepoint. This is evident in testing with just the current "hyperlane only" FTL mode.

This was something that was really problematic in Sins of a Solar Empire if you were not playing Vasari and why the TEC faction was basically a joke in the MP community. If you couldn't bypass chokepoints, you couldn't credibly win the game. The old Space Empires community also had house rules that you couldn't lock down more than one chokepoint, or you couldn't defend it with certain types of structures, like limits to the number of mines or warp interdictors, to prevent permanent chokepoint lockdowns.
 

brifbates

Field Marshal
93 Badges
Mar 4, 2004
10.889
2.841
  • Crusader Kings II: Way of Life
  • Victoria 2
  • Victoria 2: A House Divided
  • Victoria 2: Heart of Darkness
  • Warlock: Master of the Arcane
  • Warlock 2: The Exiled
  • 500k Club
  • Cities: Skylines
  • Cities: Skylines Deluxe Edition
  • Crusader Kings II: Holy Knight (pre-order)
  • Europa Universalis IV: El Dorado
  • Europa Universalis IV: Pre-order
  • Pride of Nations
  • Sword of the Stars II
  • Europa Universalis IV: Common Sense
  • Crusader Kings II: Horse Lords
  • Cities: Skylines - After Dark
  • Europa Universalis IV: Cossacks
  • Crusader Kings II: Conclave
  • Cities: Skylines - Snowfall
  • Europa Universalis IV: Mare Nostrum
  • Stellaris
  • Stellaris: Galaxy Edition
  • Stellaris: Galaxy Edition
  • Hearts of Iron IV: Cadet
  • Victoria 3 Sign Up
  • Europa Universalis IV: Art of War
  • Crusader Kings II: Charlemagne
  • 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
  • Crusader Kings II: Sunset Invasion
  • Crusader Kings II: Sword of Islam
  • Deus Vult
  • Europa Universalis III
  • Divine Wind
  • Europa Universalis IV
  • Crusader Kings II
  • Europa Universalis IV: Conquest of Paradise
  • Europa Universalis IV: Wealth of Nations
  • For the Motherland
  • Hearts of Iron III
  • Hearts of Iron III: Their Finest Hour
  • Heir to the Throne
  • Europa Universalis III Complete
  • March of the Eagles
  • Europa Universalis IV: Res Publica
  • Victoria: Revolutions
This reminds mind of the debate around TW Warhammer sieges. They are one-wall affair now, so people say they are dumbed down relatively to the old full-castle assaults with multiple fortification rings, chokepoints an the like. Which would be true, if not for one small detail: the AI was incapable to deal with the complexity. It's the same here: you can make the rules as complex as you want, but if your opponents can't even understand them and you are able to routinely exploit this fact, *that's* dumbing down. Better to play chess with Deep Blue than Twilight Empires with a Commodore64.

To a point, sure, but remember this is Paradox. They've been building the ai for EU for coming up on 20 years and it's still relying on bonuses to present a challenge to average players and being swept aside with ease by top players. "Improving the ai" should be a fair bit down the list of reasons to make any changes let alone one they know up front is going to be unpopular and cause a significant uproar among the player base.

(and I'm saying this as a player who doesn't do multiplayer)
 

Lucian667

First Lieutenant
May 17, 2016
250
64
I admit I haven't played Polaris or the new MOO reboot yet. But I will defend ES2 in the sense that it makes up for the static movement and the inability to force warp drive by giving you other *compelling* victory options besides conquer.

I dont actually own ES2 because I was turned off by the starlanes, but I've heard that its possible to quickly tech your way to free movement. Is that true? If so I might give it a try as a replacement for Stellaris. As long as I can get rid of them pretty quickly I think I'd be ok with it.

This reminds mind of the debate around TW Warhammer sieges. They are one-wall affair now, so people say they are dumbed down relatively to the old full-castle assaults with multiple fortification rings, chokepoints an the like. Which would be true, if not for one small detail: the AI was incapable to deal with the complexity. It's the same here: you can make the rules as complex as you want, but if your opponents can't even understand them and you are able to routinely exploit this fact, *that's* dumbing down. Better to play chess with Deep Blue than Twilight Empires with a Commodore64.

I honestly haven't ever seen a single starlane-based 4x space game with even mediocre AI. For example the AI in the recent MOO-Cts was an absolute joke so I'm not sure where you're getting this "starlanes make for great AI" stuff from. There certainly haven't been any made yet.
 

TheAtreides84

General
137 Badges
Jan 13, 2010
1.729
1.497
  • Island Bound
  • Prison Architect: Psych Ward
  • Stellaris: Nemesis
  • Europa Universalis IV: Pre-order
  • Crusader Kings II: Holy Knight (pre-order)
  • Warlock 2: Wrath of the Nagas
  • Warlock 2: The Exiled
  • Rome: Vae Victis
  • Victoria 2: Heart of Darkness
  • Victoria 2: A House Divided
  • Sword of the Stars II
  • Europa Universalis IV
  • Europa Universalis III Complete
  • Europa Universalis III Complete
  • Victoria 2
  • 500k Club
  • Europa Universalis IV: El Dorado
  • Pride of Nations
  • Mount & Blade: Warband
  • Mount & Blade: With Fire and Sword
  • Crusader Kings II: Way of Life
  • Magicka 2
  • Europa Universalis IV: Common Sense
  • Crusader Kings II: Horse Lords
  • Crusader Kings II: Conclave
  • Hearts of Iron IV: Cadet
  • Crusader Kings II: Reapers Due
  • Europa Universalis IV: Rights of Man
  • 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
  • Steel Division: Normandy 44
  • Cities: Skylines - Mass Transit
  • Europa Universalis IV: Mandate of Heaven
  • Crusader Kings Complete
  • BATTLETECH
  • Surviving Mars
  • Hearts of Iron IV: Death or Dishonor
  • Tyranny - Bastards Wound
  • Age of Wonders III
  • Cities: Skylines - Green Cities
  • Hearts of Iron IV: Expansion Pass
  • Stellaris: Humanoids Species Pack
  • Europa Universalis IV: Rule Britannia
  • Cities: Skylines - Parklife
  • Stellaris: Distant Stars
  • Europa Universalis IV: Dharma
No AI in existence currently is going to be able to deal with player chokepoints, or anticipate contested chokepoints. The issue is MP among mostly-equal-skill players who are going to, as intelligent players do, go chokepoint hunting. The default Stellaris AI will bleed itself dry on any moderately well designed chokepoint. This is evident in testing with just the current "hyperlane only" FTL mode.

Because it was developed to deal with all three modes of travel. I'm sure it can be optimized around hyperlanes only. Not to spectacular levels, but a bit. And even discounting that, the alternative is the AI bleeding itself AND the player's patience with endless whack-a-mole.

This was something that was really problematic in Sins of a Solar Empire if you were not playing Vasari and why the TEC faction was basically a joke in the MP community. If you couldn't bypass chokepoints, you couldn't credibly win the game. The old Space Empires community also had house rules that you couldn't lock down more than one chokepoint, or you couldn't defend it with certain types of structures, like limits to the number of mines or warp interdictors, to prevent permanent chokepoint lockdowns.

But MP is played by a small percentage of Paradox fans, according to surveys.
 

RoboCzar

Major
145 Badges
Apr 4, 2001
511
15
Visit site
  • Naval War: Arctic Circle
  • Hearts of Iron III: Their Finest Hour
  • Heir to the Throne
  • Impire
  • Europa Universalis III Complete
  • King Arthur II
  • Knights of Pen and Paper +1 Edition
  • Lead and Gold
  • Leviathan: Warships
  • Magicka
  • Majesty 2 Collection
  • March of the Eagles
  • Europa Universalis III Complete
  • Hearts of Iron III
  • Pirates of Black Cove
  • Europa Universalis IV: Res Publica
  • Victoria: Revolutions
  • Rome Gold
  • Semper Fi
  • Sengoku
  • Sword of the Stars
  • Sword of the Stars II
  • Supreme Ruler 2020
  • Starvoid
  • Teleglitch: Die More Edition
  • Hearts of Iron IV: No Step Back
  • Commander: Conquest of the Americas
  • Hearts of Iron II: Armageddon
  • Cities in Motion
  • Cities in Motion 2
  • Crusader Kings II
  • Crusader Kings II: Charlemagne
  • 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
  • Crusader Kings II: Sunset Invasion
  • Crusader Kings II: Sword of Islam
  • Arsenal of Democracy
  • Dungeonland
  • Europa Universalis III
  • Europa Universalis III: Chronicles
  • Divine Wind
  • Europa Universalis IV
  • Europa Universalis IV: Art of War
  • Europa Universalis IV: Conquest of Paradise
  • Europa Universalis IV: Wealth of Nations
  • Europa Universalis IV: Call to arms event
  • For the Motherland
I dont actually own ES2 because I was turned off by the starlanes, but I've heard that its possible to quickly tech your way to free movement. Is that true? If so I might give it a try as a replacement for Stellaris. As long as I can get rid of them pretty quickly I think I'd be ok with it.

You can't *force* free movement at will, but if the pathfinding isn't able to find a route to your destination due to AI borders or no exploration, it will default to warp, which takes *forever* but still gets you there. It's not very useful in fast-changing tactical circumstances.
 

RoboCzar

Major
145 Badges
Apr 4, 2001
511
15
Visit site
  • Naval War: Arctic Circle
  • Hearts of Iron III: Their Finest Hour
  • Heir to the Throne
  • Impire
  • Europa Universalis III Complete
  • King Arthur II
  • Knights of Pen and Paper +1 Edition
  • Lead and Gold
  • Leviathan: Warships
  • Magicka
  • Majesty 2 Collection
  • March of the Eagles
  • Europa Universalis III Complete
  • Hearts of Iron III
  • Pirates of Black Cove
  • Europa Universalis IV: Res Publica
  • Victoria: Revolutions
  • Rome Gold
  • Semper Fi
  • Sengoku
  • Sword of the Stars
  • Sword of the Stars II
  • Supreme Ruler 2020
  • Starvoid
  • Teleglitch: Die More Edition
  • Hearts of Iron IV: No Step Back
  • Commander: Conquest of the Americas
  • Hearts of Iron II: Armageddon
  • Cities in Motion
  • Cities in Motion 2
  • Crusader Kings II
  • Crusader Kings II: Charlemagne
  • 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
  • Crusader Kings II: Sunset Invasion
  • Crusader Kings II: Sword of Islam
  • Arsenal of Democracy
  • Dungeonland
  • Europa Universalis III
  • Europa Universalis III: Chronicles
  • Divine Wind
  • Europa Universalis IV
  • Europa Universalis IV: Art of War
  • Europa Universalis IV: Conquest of Paradise
  • Europa Universalis IV: Wealth of Nations
  • Europa Universalis IV: Call to arms event
  • For the Motherland
But MP is played by a small percentage of Paradox fans, according to surveys.

Right, which makes this change even more startling, because the AI isn't nearly up to dealing with the kinds of traps human players can set. This is the kind of change that you would want to set up if you're trying to slow down or stymie MP players and force them to deal with chokepoints or well defended sectors.

From the beginning this change (to me) has always had the OMG ESPORTS stench to it that I don't think is wise from a business or design standpoint. Lanes and clear lines of attack are a hallmark of esport meta, not single player or causal MP play.
 

Lucian667

First Lieutenant
May 17, 2016
250
64
You can't *force* free movement at will, but if the pathfinding isn't able to find a route to your destination due to AI borders or no exploration, it will default to warp, which takes *forever* but still gets you there. It's not very useful in fast-changing tactical circumstances.

Meh, I appreciate the info but I think I'll pass. Distant Worlds 2 cant be too far away. I hope.
 

Sherry Fox

First Lieutenant
18 Badges
Nov 4, 2017
298
216
  • 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
Because it was developed to deal with all three modes of travel. I'm sure it can be optimized around hyperlanes only. Not to spectacular levels, but a bit. And even discounting that, the alternative is the AI bleeding itself AND the player's patience with endless whack-a-mole.
Whack a mole is not unsolvable even in the current game. Force a confrontation, its not that hard. Not hard even on your own terms.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.