• 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:

LeanneKaos

First Lieutenant
24 Badges
May 11, 2016
255
9
  • Sword of the Stars II
  • Sword of the Stars
  • Warlock 2: Wrath of the Nagas
  • Stellaris: Federations
  • BATTLETECH: Heavy Metal
  • Stellaris: Lithoids
  • BATTLETECH: Season pass
  • Stellaris: Ancient Relics
  • Prison Architect
  • Stellaris: Megacorp
  • BATTLETECH: Flashpoint
  • Stellaris: Distant Stars
  • BATTLETECH - Digital Deluxe Edition
  • Stellaris: Apocalypse
  • Stellaris: Humanoids Species Pack
  • BATTLETECH
  • Stellaris - Path to Destruction bundle
  • Stellaris: Leviathans Story Pack
  • Stellaris: Digital Anniversary Edition
  • Stellaris: Galaxy Edition
  • Stellaris: Galaxy Edition
  • Stellaris
  • Warlock 2: The Exiled
  • Stellaris: Synthetic Dawn
Well, that's kind of the issue here. If a game is built in such a way that the natural reaction most people have is the wrong one, as a game designer you have screwed up. Saying that "players just need to be better" isn't a game design solution, it's offloading the burden of making intuitive design onto the player.

Respectfully disagree. Whether to make the game an intuitive re-visit to concepts one is intuitively familiar with or to make it a departure into a new territory, is not a right-or-wrong question. It's a design choice. There *should* be some games that break new ground and explore new areas. Otherwise we get what we (almost) have in the MMORPG field: almost every game is a "WoW clone." The existence of a game that asks you to unlearn what other games have taught you isn't a *bad* thing - though I'll resentfully admit it's often an unpopular thing.

Of course, that game doesn't have to be Stellaris. It could have been, but it doesn't have to be.

Well, the issue there is that if you do that, you'd effectively need to design, balance, and maintain two significantly different variants of the same game going forward pretty much as long as Stellaris is maintained. You can't simply bolt the FTL system onto the new system, not if you're intending to actually make a new, coherent warfare system as Paradox is currently trying to do.

Well, so they say. I'm not sure that's intrinsically true, though.

It may be true for the specific system Paradox has in mind, but what has been leaked so far (which I admit is not the whole thing) looks less like a 'new coherent warfare system' and more like 'an integrated, mechanically-enforced realpolitik concerning warfare.' It's about why war is conducted and what one can hope to achieve through doing so, not how it's done (which is what I would expect from a 'coherent warfare system.) And the only part so far that is really FTL dependent is the pricing of claims - in that while it makes sense to base the price on jump-count in a hyperlane-only system it doesn't for a warp or wormhole based empire.

The rest of it is just what I would call Khan's Syndrome (unless that phrase has been coined for something else): two dimensional thinking on a three dimensional plane. Forcing 'traditional' strategic thinking into a non-traditional environment.
 

Cat_Fuzz

General
May 10, 2016
1.772
2.365
Well, so they say. I'm not sure that's intrinsically true, though.

It may be true for the specific system Paradox has in mind, but what has been leaked so far (which I admit is not the whole thing) looks less like a 'new coherent warfare system' and more like 'an integrated, mechanically-enforced realpolitik concerning warfare.' It's about why war is conducted and what one can hope to achieve through doing so, not how it's done (which is what I would expect from a 'coherent warfare system.) And the only part so far that is really FTL dependent is the pricing of claims - in that while it makes sense to base the price on jump-count in a hyperlane-only system it doesn't for a warp or wormhole based empire.

The rest of it is just what I would call Khan's Syndrome (unless that phrase has been coined for something else): two dimensional thinking on a three dimensional plane. Forcing 'traditional' strategic thinking into a non-traditional environment.

That's because how you conduct war is coming next Thursday.
 

Ahahala

Corporal
Nov 8, 2017
30
0
And the only part so far that is really FTL dependent is the pricing of claims - in that while it makes sense to base the price on jump-count in a hyperlane-only system it doesn't for a warp or wormhole based empire.

Pricing is never an issue, actually. It is't more difficult to make an integrated hidden pricyng system, with complexity close to current damage calculation.

You need an example?

We have 4 pricing systems. One for each FTL and additional for Jump drive. Hiperlane price is calculated as planed now, based on hiperjumps count. Warp is based upon distance from closest owned system. Wormhole is most complex case, as they are unbalanced right now. It has to take into account (f.e.) the quantity of wormhole stations, distance from current station area. Jumpdrive - cunt of jumps from closest system. Add other factos thay have in mind - population, system count, techs, traditions, etc. In the late game, when you can choose between jumpdive and starting FTL, price is calculated for both and lowest is chosen.

It may look hard to calculate, but actually it is ordinary action, even MS Excell can handle hundrets of thousands of those with ease. And it is not hard to make a breackdown of price the same way as it is now for new tradition or tech - calculation itself is hidden, but can be found if needed. So most players will simply see the final price. if needed - enyone can investigate deep reasons why the the price is es it is.

Problem is, you have to make this system. Devs currently can't even ballance the ships. Does it mean you don't have to try? I don't think so. You have to try and make correctins base upon testing, then another corrections based upon players experience - it is an ordinary proces for complex systems.
 

Larva

Colonel
79 Badges
Jun 3, 2014
1.167
836
  • Crusader Kings II: Charlemagne
  • Crusader Kings II: Jade Dragon
  • Age of Wonders III
  • Stellaris: Synthetic Dawn
  • Europa Universalis IV: Third Rome
  • Stellaris - Path to Destruction bundle
  • Stellaris
  • Europa Universalis IV: Mare Nostrum
  • Cities: Skylines - Snowfall
  • Europa Universalis IV: Cossacks
  • Cities: Skylines - After Dark
  • Europa Universalis IV: Res Publica
  • Europa Universalis IV: Call to arms event
  • Europa Universalis IV: Conquest of Paradise
  • Crusader Kings II: The Republic
  • Crusader Kings II: Rajas of India
  • Crusader Kings II: Sons of Abraham
  • Crusader Kings II: Sunset Invasion
  • Crusader Kings II: Sword of Islam
  • Crusader Kings II: The Old Gods
  • Crusader Kings II: Legacy of Rome
  • Europa Universalis IV: Art of War
  • Crusader Kings II
  • Europa Universalis IV: Wealth of Nations
  • Cities: Skylines - Green Cities
  • Hearts of Iron IV: No Step Back
  • Hearts of Iron IV: Expansion Pass
  • Stellaris: Humanoids Species Pack
  • Hearts of Iron IV: Death or Dishonor
  • Surviving Mars
  • BATTLETECH
  • Europa Universalis IV: Mandate of Heaven
  • Cities: Skylines - Mass Transit
  • Stellaris: Apocalypse
  • Crusader Kings II: Monks and Mystics
  • Hearts of Iron IV: Together for Victory
  • Cities: Skylines - Natural Disasters
  • Stellaris: Leviathans Story Pack
  • Stellaris: Digital Anniversary Edition
  • Tyranny: Archon Edition
  • Europa Universalis IV: Rights of Man
  • Crusader Kings II: Reapers Due
  • Hearts of Iron IV: Cadet
  • Crusader Kings II: Conclave
  • Europa Universalis IV
  • Crusader Kings II: Horse Lords
  • Europa Universalis IV: Common Sense
  • Pillars of Eternity
  • Crusader Kings II: Way of Life
  • Europa Universalis IV: El Dorado
You know, after some time thinking back and back on this change, I found one thing that eluded me previously, which I think is an issue.
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.
The concept of 'locking down' borders is not something I would expect from space game. Even in terran representation - you can have tanks spearhead attack, you can have commandos infiltration, you can have cavalry flanking, you can have baneling drops...oops, that's not entirely terran based, but you got a point.
Instead of locking, they should have changed 'value' of systems, making protection of that systems in fact matter (instead of having to create static defenses in every single 'pseudo' valuable system)
Like - there shouldn't be fully operational stardock around each planet - make them valuable.
Minerals should not magically pop on one planet and went to magical well of minerals where they can be immediately used on the other side of galaxy - make the planet valuable by making them mineral/energy storage, and make raw stuff flow from border worlds to central hubs (megastructures as hubs - what can be better for RP?) - making raiding and piracy valuable.
Nah, instead we will lock down borders. How...eu-ish
Yeah, something like that. Sorry for just a random thought in a thread tho :rolleyes:
 

Fason

Recruit
17 Badges
Nov 9, 2017
3
0
  • Stellaris: Leviathans Story Pack
  • Stellaris: Federations
  • Stellaris: Ancient Relics
  • Stellaris: Megacorp
  • Stellaris: Distant Stars
  • Stellaris: Apocalypse
  • Age of Wonders III
  • Stellaris: Synthetic Dawn
  • Stellaris - Path to Destruction bundle
  • Stellaris
  • Magicka 2
  • Magicka: Wizard Wars Founder Wizard
  • Cities: Skylines
  • Warlock: Master of the Arcane
  • Crusader Kings II
  • A Game of Dwarves
  • Magicka
This idea HAS already been pitched...in the OP.



Short version is, the problem isn't just that Warp is hard to make strategic defense points for because there ARE potential solutions for that. The problem is that those potential solutions, when added to all the other potential solutions you need for each and every available FTL drive system, becomes an unintuitive mess to the player. This is the key issue with multiple FTL drives from a design perspective: Each drive system, individually, can be worked around to create interesting warfare, but when everything is added together things start getting exponentially more complex for both the player and the designer to wrap their heads around. It'd be rather like trying to develop a major highway intersection when you need that intersection to simultaneously incorporate the highway, railroad tracks, bicycle paths, and a space for cattle drives for good measure.

I understand where you are coming from, but my perspective is coming from a place were instead of hyperlanes being the default FTL method, warpdrives being the main method.
 

elektrizikekswerk

AYBABTU
Moderator
104 Badges
Jun 26, 2015
2.919
4.694
  • Europa Universalis IV: Common Sense
  • Crusader Kings II: Monks and Mystics
  • Crusader Kings II: Holy Fury
  • Crusader Kings II
  • Crusader Kings II: Sword of Islam
  • Crusader Kings II: Sons of Abraham
  • Europa Universalis IV: El Dorado
  • Warlock: Master of the Arcane
  • Mount & Blade: Warband
  • Crusader Kings II: Way of Life
  • Shadowrun: Dragonfall
  • Humble Paradox Bundle
  • BATTLETECH
  • Crusader Kings II: Horse Lords
  • Imperator: Rome Deluxe Edition
  • Steel Division: Normandy 44
  • Crusader Kings II: Conclave
  • Imperator: Rome Sign Up
  • Stellaris: Galaxy Edition
  • Shadowrun Returns
  • Hearts of Iron IV Sign-up
  • Stellaris Sign-up
  • Hearts of Iron IV: Cadet
  • Hearts of Iron IV: Colonel
  • Hearts of Iron IV: Field Marshal
  • Surviving Mars
  • Europa Universalis IV: Rights of Man
  • Tyranny: Archon Edition
  • Imperator: Rome
  • Age of Wonders: Planetfall
  • Age of Wonders: Planetfall Deluxe edition
  • Age of Wonders: Planetfall Sign Up
  • Hearts of Iron IV: No Step Back
  • Crusader Kings II: The Republic
  • Hearts of Iron IV: Expansion Pass
  • Cities: Skylines - Mass Transit
  • Cities: Skylines - Green Cities
  • Europa Universalis IV
  • Prison Architect
  • Hearts of Iron IV: Expansion Pass
  • Cities: Skylines
  • Cities: Skylines - Natural Disasters
  • Europa Universalis III Complete
  • Hearts of Iron IV: Death or Dishonor
  • Europa Universalis III Complete
  • Europa Universalis IV: Mandate of Heaven
  • Surviving Mars: First Colony Edition
  • Teleglitch: Die More Edition
  • Cities: Skylines - Parklife
  • Europa Universalis IV: Rule Britannia
Even in terran representation - you can have tanks spearhead attack, you can have commandos infiltration, you can have cavalry flanking, you can have baneling drops...oops, that's not entirely terran based, but you got a point.
And most important - and I think the best analogy to e.g. warp here - you can have surprise air strikes (from high altitude).

What I want to say: Removing Warp/Wormhole is like removing air force from - let's say - Command and Conquer Generals, because they can bypass choke points...
Or think of all the shenanigans you can do with the Japanese units in Red Alert 3. These would be impossible if you couldn't strike by land, sea and air.
 

Larva

Colonel
79 Badges
Jun 3, 2014
1.167
836
  • Crusader Kings II: Charlemagne
  • Crusader Kings II: Jade Dragon
  • Age of Wonders III
  • Stellaris: Synthetic Dawn
  • Europa Universalis IV: Third Rome
  • Stellaris - Path to Destruction bundle
  • Stellaris
  • Europa Universalis IV: Mare Nostrum
  • Cities: Skylines - Snowfall
  • Europa Universalis IV: Cossacks
  • Cities: Skylines - After Dark
  • Europa Universalis IV: Res Publica
  • Europa Universalis IV: Call to arms event
  • Europa Universalis IV: Conquest of Paradise
  • Crusader Kings II: The Republic
  • Crusader Kings II: Rajas of India
  • Crusader Kings II: Sons of Abraham
  • Crusader Kings II: Sunset Invasion
  • Crusader Kings II: Sword of Islam
  • Crusader Kings II: The Old Gods
  • Crusader Kings II: Legacy of Rome
  • Europa Universalis IV: Art of War
  • Crusader Kings II
  • Europa Universalis IV: Wealth of Nations
  • Cities: Skylines - Green Cities
  • Hearts of Iron IV: No Step Back
  • Hearts of Iron IV: Expansion Pass
  • Stellaris: Humanoids Species Pack
  • Hearts of Iron IV: Death or Dishonor
  • Surviving Mars
  • BATTLETECH
  • Europa Universalis IV: Mandate of Heaven
  • Cities: Skylines - Mass Transit
  • Stellaris: Apocalypse
  • Crusader Kings II: Monks and Mystics
  • Hearts of Iron IV: Together for Victory
  • Cities: Skylines - Natural Disasters
  • Stellaris: Leviathans Story Pack
  • Stellaris: Digital Anniversary Edition
  • Tyranny: Archon Edition
  • Europa Universalis IV: Rights of Man
  • Crusader Kings II: Reapers Due
  • Hearts of Iron IV: Cadet
  • Crusader Kings II: Conclave
  • Europa Universalis IV
  • Crusader Kings II: Horse Lords
  • Europa Universalis IV: Common Sense
  • Pillars of Eternity
  • Crusader Kings II: Way of Life
  • Europa Universalis IV: El Dorado
The good side of the whole thing is, the Victoria 3 mod now can make all the hyperlanes train tracks, and the spaceships locomotives.
:D Yeah - even poop is someones compost, right? (no offence, ofc)

UPD: Shiet, I cannot not to pun myself - even POP is someones food, compost and enhancement partner.

Sorry guys, I should feel ashamed...but I don't
 
Last edited:

OverthinkingThis

Second Lieutenant
18 Badges
May 17, 2017
143
0
  • Magicka
  • Surviving Mars
  • Stellaris: Federations
  • Stellaris: Ancient Relics
  • Surviving Mars: First Colony Edition
  • Prison Architect
  • Stellaris: Megacorp
  • Stellaris: Distant Stars
  • Stellaris: Apocalypse
  • Stellaris: Synthetic Dawn
  • BATTLETECH
  • Stellaris - Path to Destruction bundle
  • Stellaris: Leviathans Story Pack
  • Stellaris: Galaxy Edition
  • Stellaris: Galaxy Edition
  • Stellaris
  • Europa Universalis IV
  • Crusader Kings II
This thread is still alive? Let it die guys, it's in pain....

But seriously though, to the ten or so people who are still thinking if they repeat themselves enough times they'll convince someone (both sides): take a break. Leave for a day, read a book, do some yoga, get some sleep. Do literally anything except increasing your blood pressure arguing on the internet in a zombie thread that no one's going to bother reading past the first 10 pages.
 

Malecord

Graf
66 Badges
May 13, 2016
802
937
  • Cities in Motion 2
  • Europa Universalis IV: Third Rome
  • Crusader Kings II: Jade Dragon
  • Europa Universalis IV: Rule Britannia
  • Stellaris - Path to Destruction bundle
  • Europa Universalis IV: Cossacks
  • Crusader Kings II: Conclave
  • Cities: Skylines - Snowfall
  • Cities: Skylines Industries
  • Stellaris
  • Stellaris: Galaxy Edition
  • Crusader Kings II: Reapers Due
  • Europa Universalis IV: Rights of Man
  • Stellaris: Digital Anniversary Edition
  • Stellaris: Leviathans Story Pack
  • Cities: Skylines - Natural Disasters
  • Crusader Kings II: Monks and Mystics
  • Crusader Kings II: Horse Lords
  • Cities: Skylines - Mass Transit
  • Europa Universalis IV: Mandate of Heaven
  • Stellaris: Synthetic Dawn
  • Age of Wonders III
  • Age of Wonders II
  • Cities: Skylines - Green Cities
  • Europa Universalis IV: Cradle of Civilization
  • Stellaris: Humanoids Species Pack
  • Stellaris: Apocalypse
  • Europa Universalis IV: Common Sense
  • Crusader Kings II: Holy Fury
  • Europa Universalis IV: Golden Century
  • Imperator: Rome
  • Cities: Skylines - Campus
  • Europa Universalis IV: Dharma
  • Stellaris: Megacorp
  • Cities: Skylines - Parklife
  • Stellaris: Distant Stars
  • Europa Universalis IV
  • Stellaris: Nemesis
  • Europa Universalis 4: Emperor
  • Stellaris: Federations
  • Stellaris: Lithoids
  • Stellaris: Ancient Relics
  • Warlock: Master of the Arcane
  • Cities: Skylines
  • Cities: Skylines Deluxe Edition
  • Europa Universalis IV: El Dorado
  • Crusader Kings II: Way of Life
  • Magicka 2
  • Cities: Skylines - After Dark
  • Crusader Kings II
This thread is still alive? Let it die guys, it's in pain....

But seriously though, to the ten or so people who are still thinking if they repeat themselves enough times they'll convince someone (both sides): take a break. Leave for a day, read a book, do some yoga, get some sleep. Do literally anything except increasing your blood pressure arguing on the internet in a zombie thread that no one's going to bother reading past the first 10 pages.

Thnx for helping keep the thread alive buddy
 

Joppeius

Sergeant
68 Badges
Jun 4, 2004
69
0
  • Europa Universalis IV: Pre-order
  • Heir to the Throne
  • Europa Universalis III Complete
  • Europa Universalis III Complete
  • Europa Universalis IV: Res Publica
  • Victoria: Revolutions
  • Europa Universalis: Rome
  • Semper Fi
  • Victoria 2
  • Rome: Vae Victis
  • 500k Club
  • Europa Universalis III: Collection
  • Europa Universalis IV: El Dorado
  • Hearts of Iron III Collection
  • Europa Universalis: Rome Collectors Edition
  • Crusader Kings II: Way of Life
  • Europa Universalis IV: Common Sense
  • Crusader Kings II: Horse Lords
  • Crusader Kings II: Conclave
  • Europa Universalis IV: Mare Nostrum
  • Stellaris
  • Stellaris: Galaxy Edition
  • Stellaris: Galaxy Edition
  • Crusader Kings II: Reapers Due
  • Europa Universalis IV: Rights of Man
  • Stellaris: Nemesis
  • East India Company
  • Cities in Motion
  • 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
  • Deus Vult
  • Diplomacy
  • Hearts of Iron II: Armageddon
  • Europa Universalis III
  • Europa Universalis III: Chronicles
  • Europa Universalis III Complete
  • Divine Wind
  • Europa Universalis IV
  • Europa Universalis IV: Art of War
  • Europa Universalis IV: Conquest of Paradise
  • Europa Universalis IV: Wealth of Nations
  • For the Motherland
  • Hearts of Iron III
I have been attacked, both from a current enemy and backstabbed. I have to fight superior enemy fleets. I have been using stations (early in game), I have been attacking enemies both on border systems and further inside their territory and so on...

I have never thought this was wrong, unfair or unrealistic.

This is the way I prefere a game since it enforces me to ADAPT to different situations, and adapting is the fun part!

Now I have to learn to build fortresses, fight fortresses and move my fleets into enemy territory by predictable lanes...
Is that to be strategic? To adapt? To have varations?
NO!
It is to be doing the same thing all the time:
- Expand as far as possible.
- Build inpenetrable defences.
- Penetrate enemys defences.
- Build new defence on a new spot.
- Penetrate enemys defences.
...

And the next game, follow the manual above, again, and again, and again and...
Where is the adaptation, the varations, the different challenges, where is the FUN by doing this?

I´ve played this type of games before, and have have NEVER spent over 1000h insouch a game and felt I want to play more. On the other hand, it is exactly what I have done in Stellaris!
I will (be forced into) try the patch if I have to, but I guess I only try it once and then leave Stellaris...

The only games I play a lot is unpredictable games where I need to play different styles every time. I might sometimes play with robots, but I am not one my self!
 

Wessexking

Private
31 Badges
Mar 3, 2015
18
23
  • Europa Universalis IV
  • Stellaris Sign-up
  • Cities: Skylines
  • Europa Universalis IV: El Dorado
  • Victoria 2
  • Crusader Kings II: Way of Life
  • Europa Universalis IV: Common Sense
  • Crusader Kings II: Horse Lords
  • Stellaris
  • Hearts of Iron IV: Cadet
  • Europa Universalis IV: Rights of Man
  • Europa Universalis IV: Cradle of Civilization
  • Cities: Skylines - Parklife Pre-Order
  • Cities: Skylines - Parklife
  • Imperator: Rome
  • Imperator: Rome Sign Up
  • Victoria 2: A House Divided
  • Victoria 2: Heart of Darkness
  • Crusader Kings II
  • Victoria: Revolutions
  • Europa Universalis IV: Res Publica
  • Europa Universalis IV: Conquest of Paradise
  • Europa Universalis IV: Art of War
  • 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
I'm not about to throw all this under the bus, but its fair to say I'm very worried by it.

It seems like the main strategy element has been removed and not really replaced. Maneuvering your fleets to trap enemy fleets or ensuring you could drop onto and destroy an enemy starbase in the shortest possible time before reinforcements arrive or ambushing that enemy transport fleet following the main enemy battle fleet, all gone.
By the sounds of it I won't be able to raid my enemies assembly facilities, disrupt their production or scout their fleet movements.

In addition it renders a lot of choices world wise redundant, where previously I've colonized three worlds in the same system to create a fortified fleet base that acts like a castle allowing me to sally out and attack the enemy reinforcements and quickly concentrate fresh off the line ships into a single fleet in safety etc. now I should just colonize worlds with the most space and that's it. In couple with the outpost/starbase and border elements changed, planets sound rather un-intresting.

It seems like in system 'tactical' play is being favoured over the grand campaign strategy, with having to move to the correct exit points will there be any overall ETA notice given when moving fleets over multiple systems? will this mean more micro management? will there be any more options in terms of fleet tactics? especially with the addition of terrain or will ships still be restricted to the tactic/strategy of its class? Any formation options? Anything other than maybe trying to get a second fleet in at a different angle? It seems like it might just be massive buffs from travelling or terrain at the mo :/

I'm worried war will become Blob A at point 1 vs Blob B at point 2, with the defender the guaranteed victor, offensive tactics boiled down to 'have such a quantity you don't need tactics.' In games I've played getting Right of Way has been near impossible with nations your not allied with in your general area, could this weaken alliances if the rest of the group can't even get to one of their members being attacked? Will the diplomacy between empires be freshened up in addition to the wargoals etc. to help ensure this works?

Terrain is an interesting idea and an aspect I'm positive about, though with hyperlanes it becomes bogging again. Will it encourage me to spam ship designs specialized for each possible flashpoint? Will it further hinder offense? If I'm able to 'lure' an enemy fleet to a system that's bad for it, would that make me happy or annoyed the AI was stupid enough to follow? Was there any need to 'lure' if its a choke point? Will there be a slider to set the % of systems that have a terrain effect? There are def some positive things here, but still concerned.

The wormholes idea I like, in the same vein as terrain it adds some flavour to the galaxy, It will also help move fleets quicker around larger empires which will be nec with hyperlanes. The gateways thing I don't see why its needed as well, and I hope it isn't a 'Its just there' kind of implementation but is something similar to precursors, and that you have the option to generate galaxies without it. That or if players where just given the ability to build them by tech so trying to destroy them and hinder your enemies movement would be an option.

I think the reason I'm so worried is probably because you are changing so much in one go, and I should take the time to thank you for that, for not flinging token or purely aesthetic upgrades at it but still giving a damn about adding to and improving core elements and game play (So thank you) but it leaves me having difficulty seeing how it will all fit and work together which is why I'm both concerned and not making my mind up now, so I guess trusting you're jumping through all the hoops is my only option and you deserve my trust. Sorry for the ramble, looking forward to more info and seeing it all applied!
 

Hype

Major
54 Badges
Apr 21, 2017
536
0
  • Cities: Skylines Deluxe Edition
  • Stellaris - Path to Destruction bundle
  • Age of Wonders III
  • Stellaris
  • Cities: Skylines - After Dark
  • Crusader Kings II
  • Europa Universalis IV: Res Publica
  • Magicka
  • Lead and Gold
  • Europa Universalis IV: Wealth of Nations
  • Europa Universalis IV: Conquest of Paradise
  • Crusader Kings II: Rajas of India
  • Crusader Kings II: Charlemagne
  • Crusader Kings II: Legacy of Rome
  • Crusader Kings II: The Old Gods
  • Europa Universalis IV: Art of War
  • Europa Universalis IV
  • Crusader Kings II: Sword of Islam
  • Crusader Kings II: Sons of Abraham
  • Crusader Kings II: The Republic
  • Crusader Kings II: Sunset Invasion
  • Shadowrun: Dragonfall
  • Crusader Kings III: Royal Edition
  • Crusader Kings II: Jade Dragon
  • Stellaris: Humanoids Species Pack
  • Stellaris: Apocalypse
  • Surviving Mars: Digital Deluxe Edition
  • Stellaris: Distant Stars
  • Surviving Mars: First Colony Edition
  • Stellaris: Megacorp
  • Crusader Kings II: Holy Fury
  • Prison Architect
  • Surviving Mars: First Colony Edition
  • Stellaris: Ancient Relics
  • Stellaris: Lithoids
  • Surviving Mars
  • Crusader Kings II: Monks and Mystics
  • Hearts of Iron IV: Together for Victory
  • Cities: Skylines - Natural Disasters
  • Stellaris: Leviathans Story Pack
  • Stellaris: Digital Anniversary Edition
  • Crusader Kings II: Reapers Due
  • Hearts of Iron IV: Cadet
  • Cities: Skylines - Snowfall
  • Crusader Kings II: Conclave
  • Crusader Kings II: Horse Lords
  • Europa Universalis IV: Common Sense
  • Pillars of Eternity
  • Crusader Kings II: Way of Life
  • Europa Universalis IV: El Dorado
as pointed out a frankly incredible amount of times, snares dont work for anything but warp because the restrictions placed on wormholes and hyperlanes make it possible to strand a fleet.

That's not an unsolvable problem. A simple (not ideal for sure) solution would be to give ships with those FTL types an "emergency escape" ability for use when stranded that puts them in the closes system they have access to with some sort of malus. I'm sure someone else can think of a much better solution as well.
 

~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
That's not an unsolvable problem. A simple (not ideal for sure) solution would be to give ships with those FTL types an "emergency escape" ability for use when stranded that puts them in the closes system they have access to with some sort of malus. I'm sure someone else can think of a much better solution as well.
This isn't even a bad solution. Wormhole and hyperlane ships could just be put back where they were before they made the jump in the case of an emergency exit. If they defeat whatever's waiting for them at the snare, they are free to leave and continue on with their attack using their own FTL method.

Personally though I wouldn't do it like this. People keep bringing up the idea that you could jump over these snares but there's a really simple solution to that -- make them so you can't pass by them. If they're in your path, you must stop at them, and can't go further. Instead of their area of effect being a circle, it could just be a line that one cannot cross without getting sucked in. You know, like a border. You could even expand on this by letting players construct these snares in adjacent stars, and the game would draw a line between them, forming a kind of border wall.

This would also provide the player with more agency in defining their own choke points. This turns choke points into creative strategic decisions instead of just how the map ends up for everyone based on RNG. I don't think anybody can make the argument that it's more strategic to fortify natural choke points that you have no control over rather than to create your own defenses and choke points.
 
Last edited:

Hawklaser

Second Lieutenant
Oct 28, 2017
163
0
This isn't even a bad solution. Wormhole and hyperlane ships could just be put back where they were before they made the jump in the case of an emergency exit. If they defeat whatever's waiting for them at the snare, they are free to leave and continue on with their attack using their own FTL method.

Personally though I wouldn't do it like this. People keep bringing up the idea that you could jump over these snares but there's a really simple solution to that -- make them so you can't pass by them. If they're in your path, you must stop at them, and can't go further. Instead of their area of effect being a circle, it could just be a line that one cannot cross without getting sucked in. You know, like a border.

This would also provide the player with more agency in defining their own choke points. This turns choke points into creative strategic decisions instead of just how the map ends up for everyone based on RNG. I don't think anybody can make the argument that it's more strategic to fortify natural choke points that you have no control over rather than to create your own defenses and choke points.

I want to add on to this, while getting fleets stranded somewhere sucks, I think the defender should have the option to cause attackers fleets that enter their territory to become stranded if the attacker is ill prepared. As well as the attacker being able to use similar tactics to pull reinforcements out of place on an unaware defender. Much like how removing a wormhole station can strand wormhole fleets currently. Passing by in "Neutral" space shouldn't cause it, but trying to enter the Defenders territory should(or what the attacker has taken over). Would at least also promote a little bit of scouting and creative defense planning instead of move doomstack to Planet, fleet, or soon to be Starfort'ed chokepoints.
 

Ahahala

Corporal
Nov 8, 2017
30
0
I want to add on to this, while getting fleets stranded somewhere sucks, I think the defender should have the option to cause attackers fleets that enter their territory to become stranded if the attacker is ill prepared. As well as the attacker being able to use similar tactics to pull reinforcements out of place on an unaware defender. Much like how removing a wormhole station can strand wormhole fleets currently. Passing by in "Neutral" space shouldn't cause it, but trying to enter the Defenders territory should(or what the attacker has taken over). Would at least also promote a little bit of scouting and creative defense planning instead of move doomstack to Planet, fleet, or soon to be Starfort'ed chokepoints.

I can repeat) New starbase and outpost system means, that you have an outpost in each system you owe. Currently they don't plan to have any modules on these outposts. But if you add one special slot for FTL-management module, this will allow to make tons of things. To make all ships comming via wormhole stranded, for example. But this makes system inpenetrable for wormhole, so everyone must have several FTLs.

But you can make conditions to keep unique FTLs, like: strands all ships, jumping from systems futher then two hipelanes. Or futher, than stated distance. Or with fleetpower over both minimal limit+fleetpover of fleets protecting system. Ot fleets w/o certain module.

And after you capture the stantion, you may use such modules and the stantion, as we can see from last dev diary.

Personally though I wouldn't do it like this. People keep bringing up the idea that you could jump over these snares but there's a really simple solution to that -- make them so you can't pass by them. If they're in your path, you must stop at them, and can't go further. Instead of their area of effect being a circle, it could just be a line that one cannot cross without getting sucked in. You know, like a border. You could even expand on this by letting players construct these snares in adjacent stars, and the game would draw a line between them, forming a kind of border wall.

Nice idea! Defending stantion may have a "border module" with shpere radius. If you have another station with such module inside this radius, they create a border between systems. The map is flat anyway. And only jump to systems with border stations can be made. This is simple solution. Complex one? Jumps behind border have a chance of fleet being stranded. And stranded from borders fleets may also suffer losses. Or such fleets or will get staned after arrival. Or you may have different modules and borders with different effects, which enemy can't see.

P.S. Actually waht I'm trying to do is to show how FTLs can still be present within new game concept. Though, I don't think spaseforts and space borders a perfect change.
 
Last edited:

Soladept

Captain
93 Badges
Apr 23, 2013
392
334
  • Crusader Kings II
  • Crusader Kings II: Rajas of India
  • Cities: Skylines - Mass Transit
  • Stellaris - Path to Destruction bundle
  • Europa Universalis IV: Mare Nostrum
  • Crusader Kings Complete
  • Hearts of Iron IV: Field Marshal
  • Europa Universalis IV: Rights of Man
  • Tyranny: Archon Edition
  • Tyranny: Archon Edition
  • Stellaris: Digital Anniversary Edition
  • Stellaris: Leviathans Story Pack
  • Cities: Skylines - Natural Disasters
  • Crusader Kings II: Monks and Mystics
  • Hearts of Iron IV: No Step Back
  • Stellaris Sign-up
  • Hearts of Iron IV: Death or Dishonor
  • Tyranny - Bastards Wound
  • Cities: Skylines - Green Cities
  • Hearts of Iron IV: Expansion Pass
  • Stellaris: Humanoids Species Pack
  • Stellaris: Apocalypse
  • Europa Universalis IV: Rule Britannia
  • BATTLETECH - Digital Deluxe Edition
  • Cities: Skylines - Parklife
  • Stellaris: Distant Stars
  • Europa Universalis IV: Dharma
  • Europa Universalis IV: Golden Century
  • Hearts of Iron IV: Expansion Pass
  • BATTLETECH: Season pass
  • Stellaris: Lithoids
  • Stellaris: Ancient Relics
  • BATTLETECH: Heavy Metal
  • Hearts of Iron IV: La Resistance
  • Stellaris: Federations
  • Europa Universalis IV
  • Victoria 2
  • BATTLETECH: Flashpoint
  • Stellaris: Megacorp
  • Hearts of Iron IV: Colonel
  • Cities: Skylines
  • Europa Universalis IV: El Dorado
  • Mount & Blade: Warband
  • Crusader Kings II: Way of Life
  • Imperator: Rome - Magna Graecia
  • Europa Universalis IV: Common Sense
  • Crusader Kings II: Horse Lords
  • Crusader Kings II: Conclave
  • Stellaris: Galaxy Edition
  • Hearts of Iron IV Sign-up
As far as the statements that there’s only ten people keeping the thread going, it doesn’t help when there’s someone in the paradox mod team banning people from posting in the thread for flimsy reasons, I have a friend that was restricted from posting in this thread only for a reason roughly like “posting too much” and that’s because he didn’t do anything wrong other than state why he disagreed with the FTL changes

My own opinion is different, i amkind of on the fence with everything, but I am deeply disturbed by paradox mods trying to censor their forums from polite dissent, even if it was an isolated incident

And no, my friend has not spoken up because he sees no point in contesting being restricted from the thread, and I am concerned there are other players that has been civil and been censored also, and just quietly quit out of disgust

If I see any more hard evidence of paradox crossing over the censorship line I will not buy another product from them period
 
Last edited:

ImpalerWrG

First Lieutenant
14 Badges
Feb 26, 2012
234
249
  • A Game of Dwarves
  • Crusader Kings II
  • Crusader Kings II: Legacy of Rome
  • Crusader Kings II: The Republic
  • Crusader Kings II: Sunset Invasion
  • Crusader Kings II: Sword of Islam
  • Europa Universalis IV
  • Sword of the Stars II
  • Stellaris
  • Hearts of Iron IV: Cadet
  • Age of Wonders III
  • Age of Wonders
  • Hearts of Iron IV: Expansion Pass
  • Prison Architect
I want to add on to this, while getting fleets stranded somewhere sucks, I think the defender should have the option to cause attackers fleets that enter their territory to become stranded if the attacker is ill prepared. As well as the attacker being able to use similar tactics to pull reinforcements out of place on an unaware defender. Much like how removing a wormhole station can strand wormhole fleets currently. Passing by in "Neutral" space shouldn't cause it, but trying to enter the Defenders territory should(or what the attacker has taken over). Would at least also promote a little bit of scouting and creative defense planning instead of move doomstack to Planet, fleet, or soon to be Starfort'ed chokepoints.

Yes my point exactly, stranding the attacker is good, not bad.

With regard to Robbie's proposed interaction of snares and current wormhole FTL. I understand your intent but I think your proposal presents some ambiguity as to what system the wormhole ships are pulled into. Say I am crossing said 'snare line' formed from the overlapping snares of several systems, how dose the defender know where the attacker is going to be pulled, for the attacker not to know is fine, but for defenders to be advantages they need to know. To show this you would need to still have some kind of 'bubble' visual on the map even if such bubbles are touching each other it still acts as a clear indicator of where you will end up.

That said I don't think a snare should effect the current wormhole drive unless the exit point is inside the effect of the snare. So 'leaping' over the snare is possible with a wormhole or any of 'discontinuous' drive system, discontinuous meaning the ships do not travel through normal space. The issue of doom-stack appearing suddenly in your rear is to fundamentally limit discontinuous drive systems from easily, cheaply or rapidly moving huge stacks as part of the drive. This makes the whole drive an inherently 'small raid' oriented drive. The defender is simply not able to deflect the inbound attack to a different location, but they may DELAY the opening of wormholes so that they can move forces to meet the attacker, a dispersed and mobile fleet is thus the ideal defense against wormholes.

Slowing enemy movement is done via a Repulsor device, where snare act to change the enemies destination while leaving their speed unaffected (it may also 'root' the enemy too), a repulsor slows the enemy speed while leaving their destination unaffected. Repulsors and Snares can be present in the same location as two independent fields, every drive system will be hampered by at least one and many by both with effects that are appropriate the the drive type. A Warp ship simply slows when flying through a repulsor, like it was flying through molasses, while a wormhole drive takes longer to open etc.

For all drive systems a simple and intuitive effect can be determined, I've brainstormed 10 types of FTL with means of limiting them by logistics like energy consumption and can easily make them all respond to at least 1 of the two types of interdiction. If this game would just let you mod in new FTL types I'd have done so ages ago.
 
Last edited:

Taciturn Scot

Major
103 Badges
Jun 10, 2007
538
760
  • Europa Universalis IV: El Dorado
  • Europa Universalis IV: Res Publica
  • Victoria: Revolutions
  • Semper Fi
  • Sengoku
  • Victoria 2
  • Victoria 2: A House Divided
  • Victoria 2: Heart of Darkness
  • Warlock 2: The Exiled
  • Warlock 2: Wrath of the Nagas
  • 500k Club
  • Cities: Skylines
  • Cities: Skylines Deluxe Edition
  • Europa Universalis III Complete
  • Europa Universalis IV: Pre-order
  • Pride of Nations
  • Crusader Kings II: Way of Life
  • Europa Universalis IV: Common Sense
  • Cities: Skylines - After Dark
  • Europa Universalis IV: Cossacks
  • Crusader Kings II: Conclave
  • Cities: Skylines - Snowfall
  • Europa Universalis IV: Mare Nostrum
  • Stellaris
  • Stellaris: Galaxy Edition
  • Hearts of Iron IV: No Step Back
  • Divine Wind
  • Cities in Motion
  • 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: Sword of Islam
  • Darkest Hour
  • Europa Universalis III
  • Europa Universalis III: Chronicles
  • Hearts of Iron II: Armageddon
  • 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
  • Hearts of Iron III
  • Hearts of Iron III: Their Finest Hour
  • Heir to the Throne
  • Europa Universalis III Complete
This reminds me of the Civ V 1UPT design decision where people thought that if they posted enough, they could somehow reverse this decision after the release. The decision has already been made. Development on the game is now hyperlane-only and that's not going to change now. If that were going to happen, Paradox would have said something by now.

Sure, you might feel that if you don't continue to complain that there is no chance that Paradox will reverse this decision or that the numbers of 'disagrees' vs 'agrees+helpfuls'* might swing in your favour at some point in the future. But at this point, this thread serves as a useful outlet for those folks who continue to be 'unhappy' and express their unhappiness without spamming the boards with multiple threads about the same issue.

*I consider a helpful vote to be a positive vote based on the assumption that people who don't like the post would more likely vote disagree because they would want their disagree to be clear and unambiguous. Helpful is what I vote when I think a post goes beyond mere 'agree'. Perhaps it could mean "Well, that post was helpful. I really don't like this decision. Screw you Paradox!" but I don't see many people here posting against the decision as being quite that subtle ;)
 
Status
Not open for further replies.