• 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:

minke19104

Lame Duck
77 Badges
Oct 17, 2012
1.326
0
  • Hearts of Iron III: Their Finest Hour
  • Stellaris: Galaxy Edition
  • Europa Universalis IV: Pre-order
  • Cities: Skylines Deluxe Edition
  • Europa Universalis IV: Third Rome
  • Victoria 2: Heart of Darkness
  • Victoria 2: A House Divided
  • Semper Fi
  • Europa Universalis IV: Res Publica
  • Crusader Kings II
  • Heir to the Throne
  • Hearts of Iron III
  • For the Motherland
  • Europa Universalis IV: Call to arms event
  • Europa Universalis IV: Wealth of Nations
  • Crusader Kings II: The Republic
  • Crusader Kings II: Charlemagne
  • Crusader Kings II: Legacy of Rome
  • Crusader Kings II: The Old Gods
  • Crusader Kings II: Rajas of India
  • Europa Universalis IV: Conquest of Paradise
  • Crusader Kings II: Sons of Abraham
  • Crusader Kings II: Sword of Islam
  • Europa Universalis III
  • Europa Universalis III: Chronicles
  • Europa Universalis III Complete
  • Divine Wind
  • Europa Universalis IV
  • Europa Universalis IV: Art of War
  • Surviving Mars
  • BATTLETECH
  • Hearts of Iron IV: Death or Dishonor
  • Europa Universalis IV: Mandate of Heaven
  • Stellaris - Path to Destruction bundle
  • Hearts of Iron IV: Together for Victory
  • Stellaris: Leviathans Story Pack
  • Stellaris: Digital Anniversary Edition
  • Europa Universalis IV: Rights of Man
  • Hearts of Iron IV: Cadet
  • Stellaris: Galaxy Edition
  • Stellaris
  • Europa Universalis IV: Mare Nostrum
  • Europa Universalis IV: Cossacks
  • Europa Universalis IV: Common Sense
  • Crusader Kings II: Way of Life
  • Europa Universalis IV: El Dorado
  • Battle for Bosporus
  • 500k Club
  • Victoria 2
  • 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 ;)

Civ V shipped with 1UPT. They didnt change it after release. Many people here feels like they got baited.
 

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
Civ V shipped with 1UPT. They didnt change it after release. Many people here feels like they got baited.
Of course, but that wasn't the point I made and I even explained so at the end of the first sentence of my post, as you'll see should you care to read it again. ;)
 

runrun

Second Lieutenant
11 Badges
May 26, 2016
107
19
  • Stellaris
  • Stellaris: Galaxy Edition
  • Stellaris: Digital Anniversary Edition
  • Stellaris: Leviathans Story Pack
  • Stellaris - Path to Destruction bundle
  • Stellaris: Humanoids Species Pack
  • Stellaris: Apocalypse
  • Stellaris: Distant Stars
  • Stellaris: Megacorp
  • Stellaris: Ancient Relics
  • Stellaris: Synthetic Dawn
Sins of a solar empire, a game I have enjoyed a lot. but so compartmentalize. This game will start to look like everyone else.
You will kill what made me love this game, and the spirit of this game. Freedom of action.
Personally I only play with the wormholes.
In which univers we would not be able to go where we want.
The difficulty of coding with 3 differents modes of propulsions is just an excuse for us to swallow the pill.
It is quite possible to make concentration point that would prohibit all 3 modes at once and without the player having the impression that fleets go in all directions. Even a person who plays for the first time at the game, understands what happened at the 1st beacon meet.
So it looks like the 1.8.3 update is the last one for me. I let you imagine what will happen to my game if the novelty side disappeared ...!
But since your decision is already taken, and since a moment ...
 
Last edited:

Charbecue

Recruit
Nov 11, 2017
3
0
The first time I ever played a game that featured hyperlanes, I thought to myself "Man, what a cheap and limiting way to turn something as epic and vast as outer space into a game that can be understood by a simpleton." I hated it. Granted, game tech or disk space may have been the limiting factor, but the thought is still valid, especially today. As enormous as space is, artificially limiting galaxy-spanning civilization with the trappings of a terrestrial one is embarrassing. We don't have FTL in real life yet, so we can't say with certainty what it will look like. All forms represented in vanilla Stellaris are viable, and that's what makes it so beautiful. I always use warp; it's what I know and it's what I love. I love space colonizing/strategy games and Stellaris proved to be a cut above all that came before, largely for pulling from so many different sci-fi sources to build its universe. And now they're culling much of that in order to make it even more like EU4 or CKII. Yes, I enjoy those games. They bring out the details of the eras they're set in, with nobles and such, things very odd and foreign to me living where and when I do. But even there, I have many gripes about some of the directions they've been going with updates that are supposed to improve gameplay at the expense of realism and/or logic. So, can't we keep Stellaris outside of the box? Must we gut it's soul in order to add the mechanics of two-dimensional warfare to the vastness of space? If stationary border defenses don't make sense in this universe as presented, is that really a bad thing? Why should a defensive structure seven light-years away matter? Can't we keep what makes this universe seem odd and foreign? Do we have to make it conform to a more traditional video game structure simply for the sake of doing so?

No offense intended toward anyone who is a huge fan of these mechanics and welcome them. Like myself, you paid good money for the game and want more out of it than it has at the moment. There is no arguing that it could use a little more depth, but I strongly dislike this path. These changes are far too widespread and sweeping for me, and I do not welcome them in the least. Options for more hyperlanes? Bull. How about making all these Cherryh update changes optional instead? I can only accept so many changes to the core structure of the games I play before I say "enough is enough" and freeze it at an earlier version and close my wallet to future expansions. I appreciate the mechanics of the game as-is and don't like having them ripped out from underneath me. You can't make everyone happy, but you can balance how many you please against how many you anger far better than this.
 

MILINTarctrooper

Private
21 Badges
Nov 2, 2017
19
0
  • Stellaris: Synthetic Dawn
  • Stellaris: Federations
  • Stellaris: Lithoids
  • Stellaris: Ancient Relics
  • Stellaris: Megacorp
  • Cities: Skylines Industries
  • Stellaris: Distant Stars
  • Cities: Skylines - Parklife
  • Stellaris: Apocalypse
  • Stellaris: Humanoids Species Pack
  • Cities: Skylines - Green Cities
  • Cities: Skylines
  • Cities: Skylines - Mass Transit
  • Stellaris - Path to Destruction bundle
  • Cities: Skylines - Natural Disasters
  • Stellaris: Leviathans Story Pack
  • Stellaris: Digital Anniversary Edition
  • Stellaris
  • Cities: Skylines - Snowfall
  • Cities: Skylines - After Dark
  • Cities: Skylines Deluxe Edition
Just to give a fair point and warning, as a counterpoint to the Civ V debate point. Go look at Act of Aggression, a game that panned so hard because the developers deviated so much from the original Act of War series, that inside the year the developer was forced to redevelop their game into a second variant and publish it for free!

I think the problem here is a mid stream change after you have an established fan base and community. Stellaris was known for its originality and uniqueness, but it seems that the update will drive a wedge between the community that came up with the original release version, and the later 4X optimized mode. [Or technically is it pro-gamer optimized? Because release version seems to be open world and explore than competitive.]
 

MisadventuresVG

Private
2 Badges
May 15, 2016
19
0
  • Stellaris: Digital Anniversary Edition
  • Stellaris: Leviathans Story Pack
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.

I think you might of hit the nail on the head with this one paragraph, the lack of strategic manoeuvring in the new system removes everything I currently do. At the minute, when I declare war on an enemy, I prioritise their outer most colonies and work inwards towards their homeworld. The idea is that wars are so pricey that what you capture should be the most valuable to you and most damaging to your enemy. Capturing their homeworld is always one of my first objectives I set for my war goals.

In execution I usually fly 3 fleets into their space that were sitting on the closest systems to their space before declaring war. These fleets have 3 different objectives, one is capture colonies while eliminating static defences (starbases, military stations), one is destroy enemy outpost to reduce space claims and secondary to harass civilian targets like mining stations and research ships (forcing enemy fleets into reaction mode), and the last one is the fleet hunter which is sent to hunt the enemy fleet and intercept them before they can stop the invasion. This 3 fleets strategy has been so successful for me. It may rely on micromanagement but allow for carefully executed war plans.

How is any of this going to be possible under the NEW system. It just won't be, you will be forced to expand down a lane until you encounter your first neighbour, turtle up, declare war, expand, turtle up, declare war, expand, turtle up, declare war, expand, repeat, repeat, repeat until you get somewhere. This will eliminate any kind of strategy or tactics, its going to be war grinding.
 

~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
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.
This is also an easy solution. Whichever snare they're closest to when they jump is where they end up. As far as not always being able to predict where an enemy will choose to go, that's just how strategy games go. I don't think there should ever be a solution where you can straight-up funnel people wherever you want, because then there's no strategy involved other than to block that one point. With snares, you can limit their options without eliminating them completely. You shouldn't have 100% control over an enemy's actions because then it's robbing them of their agency and they in turn will have no ability to devise their own strategy against you. This is in practice no different from the new hyperlane-only method as a tester has already established ITT that you'll never be able to block everything, that you'll always have weak spots in your defense. And that could be easily accomplished by limiting the number of snares the player can deploy at once, based on the size of their empire so you always have a roughly equivalent fortified:unfortified border star ratio.
 
Last edited:

Hawklaser

Second Lieutenant
Oct 28, 2017
163
0
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.

The flipside to this, really is if people don't voice their displeasure with the change there is no chance that the decision will get reviewed, and will also become the baseline for potential future titles in the series(if any). For me, there have actually been a number of titles I have permanently shelved due to the developers making "big" changes for various reasons, and each time there has been a flood of feedback in regards to it before the changes went live and the devs pushed ahead with it. From balance changes that basically broke a class, to a complete UI overhaul. By the way, this is one of those kind of changes which could easily get me to permanently shelf the game if its not done very well as even if the rest of the changes are great, it won't be the same game I originally purchased as this change goes much beyond balance adjustments and expansions adding to the game, it is really changing the soul of the game by altering fundamental mechanics that define the game. Those other ones were not shelved without trying the changes either, but the funny thing is the changes played out much like the nay sayers to the changes predicted. So the argument that keeps being bandied about people not knowing how the changes will play out is not always true.

Right now, Paradox is between a rock and a hard place, they drop the FTL changes and then it seems like they caved to the players, they push them out anyways and potentially piss off and loose ~23% of the player base, based on the votes at on the OP at time of writing this. Can Paradox afford to permently loose close to 1/4 of its Stellaris playerbase? This kind of change is really one that should be open beta tested for a period of time, as it is likely to leave a sour taste in the mouth of many players. Paradox also looses if they push out the patch, and then due to even more backlash against it adds back in the FTL types later because it will damage their Image even more.

Though on this thread being useful for the unhappy people, not really its more so others don't have to deal with all the feedback Paradox is getting on one problem. Seeing as there has not been a dev comment in regards to the FTL changes in a while, all the feedback is just going to waste being buried and/or being glossed over in the two mega threads. Sure those of us that are unhappy about the changes got a place to vent, but venting doesn't always do much good if it feels like it is in vain and no one is listening anyways. Which is another reason this change is going to cause a lot of people to be unhappy as not only do they dislike the changes to the FTLs, if their concerns and suggesitions are not addressed they will also feel as if they are unimportant and even more likely to quit the game. I really feel like there should have been more FTL related threads allowed so at least the constructive posts were not getting buried and likely ignored in the mega-threads.
 

wthree

Major
77 Badges
Oct 12, 2011
659
844
  • Victoria 2: Heart of Darkness
  • Europa Universalis IV: Third Rome
  • Stellaris: Synthetic Dawn
  • Europa Universalis IV: Mare Nostrum
  • Crusader Kings II: Jade Dragon
  • Europa Universalis IV: Pre-order
  • Warlock: Master of the Arcane
  • Rome: Vae Victis
  • Crusader Kings II
  • Victoria 2: A House Divided
  • Semper Fi
  • Rome Gold
  • Victoria: Revolutions
  • Europa Universalis IV: Res Publica
  • Magicka
  • Hearts of Iron III Collection
  • Hearts of Iron III
  • 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
  • Hearts of Iron III: Their Finest Hour
  • Europa Universalis IV: Art of War
  • Europa Universalis IV: Conquest of Paradise
  • For the Motherland
  • Europa Universalis IV: Wealth of Nations
  • Europa Universalis IV: Call to arms event
  • Crusader Kings II: Conclave
  • Crusader Kings II: Monks and Mystics
  • Hearts of Iron IV: Together for Victory
  • Stellaris: Leviathans Story Pack
  • Stellaris: Digital Anniversary Edition
  • Crusader Kings II: Reapers Due
  • Hearts of Iron IV: Cadet
  • Stellaris Sign-up
  • Hearts of Iron IV Sign-up
  • Stellaris
  • Europa Universalis IV
  • Europa Universalis IV: Cossacks
  • Europa Universalis IV: Common Sense
  • Pillars of Eternity
  • Crusader Kings II: Way of Life
  • Mount & Blade: With Fire and Sword
  • Stellaris: Nemesis
  • Europa Universalis IV: El Dorado
  • 500k Club
How is any of this going to be possible under the NEW system.

How is any of that not going to be possible? Everything you listed will still be possible under the new system (and with the other changes, a more viable strategy).

Also, how is not being able to use the same strategy over and over again a bad thing, instead having to adapt to galactic terrain?
 

Sibericus

Technocratic Sociocapitalist
26 Badges
Jun 14, 2016
529
91
  • Stellaris: Galaxy Edition
  • Stellaris: Synthetic Dawn
  • Crusader Kings II
  • Crusader Kings II: Sword of Islam
  • Stellaris: Nemesis
  • Stellaris: Necroids
  • Stellaris: Federations
  • Stellaris: Lithoids
  • Stellaris: Ancient Relics
  • Stellaris: Megacorp
  • Shadowrun: Hong Kong
  • Shadowrun: Dragonfall
  • Shadowrun Returns
  • Stellaris: Distant Stars
  • Stellaris: Apocalypse
  • Stellaris: Humanoids Species Pack
  • Surviving Mars
  • Stellaris - Path to Destruction bundle
  • Stellaris: Leviathans Story Pack
  • Stellaris: Digital Anniversary Edition
  • Stellaris: Galaxy Edition
  • Stellaris
  • Crusader Kings II: Way of Life
  • Europa Universalis IV
  • Crusader Kings II: The Old Gods
  • Crusader Kings II: Legacy of Rome
I've only read the same solutions to the snare problem: Just have it draw in all ftl from within its radius. The devs have said they don't like that one. We need to think outside the box for alternate solutions. Not sure if these would be any good, but to expand the idea pool. What if instead of the snare drawing in ships from neigboring systems, it denied ftl to them, but not into its own system. Alternatively, ships that enter the radius could be made to only be capable of jumping to the station's system, probably as forced pathing so that hyperlane vessels don't get stuck in systems multiple lanes away.
 

MisadventuresVG

Private
2 Badges
May 15, 2016
19
0
  • Stellaris: Digital Anniversary Edition
  • Stellaris: Leviathans Story Pack
How is any of that not going to be possible? Everything you listed will still be possible under the new system (and with the other changes, a more viable strategy).

Also, how is not being able to use the same strategy over and over again a bad thing, instead having to adapt to galactic terrain?

My apologies, I clearly didn't explain this well enough.

I assume you have played with all 3 FTL types? If not maybe you should before they are ripped from us forever.

Now to explain my comment, hyperlanes are corridors yes? Corridors tend to be from A to B yes? Now with warp/WH I can go from A to B, C, D, E, F etc... Now as part of my war goals I decide I want to take the enemy's homeworld system, for now lets call it C. Under the current system I can hit A miss B and then hit C. With the new system I have to go from A to B and then to C! Now lets say there is a starbase in each system and to cross the system to get to the opposite side to reach the exiting hyperlane I will get auto aggro'd and engaged by the starbases. This means I have to FIGHT each system to progress to the connecting system and then the next connecting system and the next and the next. This isn't strategy its a grind! No one could possibly want to do this (apparently a lot do :D), it would means grinding all the way to victory! Under the current system I am free to pick and choose targets AT random, fly directly to the systems they occupy and engage them... They might not be part of my war goals but as I stated above, they can play a part in my plans for ultimate victory. This is the same as dropping paratroopers behind enemy lines to raid key installations.

All of this is GONE with 1.9 as you will have to fight for each step you take! And the steps you step will be dictated to you via the hyperlanes which in turn limit your war goals/options, which in turn limit your empires growth from conquest. Some will argue that this is balanced because it will apply to everyone equally, which is absolutely true, but also handicaps all strategy due to what corridors you have access to. You could realistically end up cut off from the rest of the galaxy map by POOR hyperlane generation or neighbouring empires. With Warp and WH you can fly out of dead ends or around neighbouring empires without need for treaties or conquest.
 

SelorKiith

Sergeant
19 Badges
Nov 11, 2017
69
0
  • Stellaris
  • Stellaris: Synthetic Dawn
  • Stellaris: Necroids
  • Crusader Kings II
  • Stellaris: Federations
  • Stellaris: Lithoids
  • Stellaris: Ancient Relics
  • Stellaris: Megacorp
  • Shadowrun Returns
  • Stellaris: Distant Stars
  • Stellaris: Apocalypse
  • Stellaris: Humanoids Species Pack
  • Stellaris - Path to Destruction bundle
  • Stellaris: Leviathans Story Pack
  • Stellaris: Digital Anniversary Edition
  • Hearts of Iron IV: Cadet
  • Cities: Skylines - Snowfall
  • Cities: Skylines - After Dark
  • Cities: Skylines
How is any of that not going to be possible? Everything you listed will still be possible under the new system (and with the other changes, a more viable strategy).

Also, how is not being able to use the same strategy over and over again a bad thing, instead having to adapt to galactic terrain?

The only "Strategy" we will have now is facing the enemy Head on, forced to pick off every insignificant, unnecessary System along the way, forced to face their fleets head on while literally screaming out our plan way in advance so the enemy can comfortably prepare their "defense".
There is no other way...
That is what Hyperlanes are, you only have one way to get where you want... the enemy doesn't even need a friggin' Sentry Array to know where the Hell your Fleet is and where it is heading next...
 

wthree

Major
77 Badges
Oct 12, 2011
659
844
  • Victoria 2: Heart of Darkness
  • Europa Universalis IV: Third Rome
  • Stellaris: Synthetic Dawn
  • Europa Universalis IV: Mare Nostrum
  • Crusader Kings II: Jade Dragon
  • Europa Universalis IV: Pre-order
  • Warlock: Master of the Arcane
  • Rome: Vae Victis
  • Crusader Kings II
  • Victoria 2: A House Divided
  • Semper Fi
  • Rome Gold
  • Victoria: Revolutions
  • Europa Universalis IV: Res Publica
  • Magicka
  • Hearts of Iron III Collection
  • Hearts of Iron III
  • 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
  • Hearts of Iron III: Their Finest Hour
  • Europa Universalis IV: Art of War
  • Europa Universalis IV: Conquest of Paradise
  • For the Motherland
  • Europa Universalis IV: Wealth of Nations
  • Europa Universalis IV: Call to arms event
  • Crusader Kings II: Conclave
  • Crusader Kings II: Monks and Mystics
  • Hearts of Iron IV: Together for Victory
  • Stellaris: Leviathans Story Pack
  • Stellaris: Digital Anniversary Edition
  • Crusader Kings II: Reapers Due
  • Hearts of Iron IV: Cadet
  • Stellaris Sign-up
  • Hearts of Iron IV Sign-up
  • Stellaris
  • Europa Universalis IV
  • Europa Universalis IV: Cossacks
  • Europa Universalis IV: Common Sense
  • Pillars of Eternity
  • Crusader Kings II: Way of Life
  • Mount & Blade: With Fire and Sword
  • Stellaris: Nemesis
  • Europa Universalis IV: El Dorado
  • 500k Club
Now lets say there is a starbase in each system and .

There is your problem. Your assuming very very narrow choke points with numerous starbases. But we know that the choke point issue is configurable, and it seems the starbase balancing would likely be worked out through play testing.

The situation seems that the effectiveness of your desired tactics would depend on the situation: they would work very well against a nation you share a large border with but not one with a small heavily defended border. Meaning your tactics would have to depend on the situation.
 

FerrusR

Corporal
57 Badges
May 11, 2016
38
0
  • Crusader Kings II: Charlemagne
  • Magicka 2
  • Crusader Kings II
  • Magicka
  • 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
  • BATTLETECH: Season pass
  • Crusader Kings II: Jade Dragon
  • Cities: Skylines - Green Cities
  • Stellaris: Humanoids Species Pack
  • Stellaris: Apocalypse
  • Surviving Mars: Digital Deluxe Edition
  • BATTLETECH - Digital Deluxe Edition
  • Cities: Skylines - Parklife Pre-Order
  • Cities: Skylines - Parklife
  • Stellaris: Distant Stars
  • Shadowrun Returns
  • Surviving Mars: First Colony Edition
  • Cities: Skylines Industries
  • Stellaris: Federations
  • Stellaris: Megacorp
  • Crusader Kings II: Holy Fury
  • Surviving Mars: First Colony Edition
  • Imperator: Rome Sign Up
  • Cities: Skylines - Campus
  • Stellaris: Lithoids
  • Tyranny: Archon Edition
  • Cities: Skylines
  • Crusader Kings II: Way of Life
  • Pillars of Eternity
  • Crusader Kings II: Horse Lords
  • Cities: Skylines - After Dark
  • Crusader Kings II: Conclave
  • Cities: Skylines - Snowfall
  • Stellaris: Necroids
  • Crusader Kings II: Reapers Due
  • BATTLETECH: Heavy Metal
  • Stellaris: Digital Anniversary Edition
  • Stellaris: Leviathans Story Pack
  • Cities: Skylines - Natural Disasters
  • Crusader Kings II: Monks and Mystics
  • Stellaris - Path to Destruction bundle
  • Cities: Skylines - Mass Transit
  • BATTLETECH
  • Surviving Mars
My apologies, I clearly didn't explain this well enough.

I assume you have played with all 3 FTL types? If not maybe you should before they are ripped from us forever.

Now to explain my comment, hyperlanes are corridors yes? Corridors tend to be from A to B yes? Now with warp/WH I can go from A to B, C, D, E, F etc... Now as part of my war goals I decide I want to take the enemy's homeworld system, for now lets call it C. Under the current system I can hit A miss B and then hit C. With the new system I have to go from A to B and then to C! Now lets say there is a starbase in each system and to cross the system to get to the opposite side to reach the exiting hyperlane I will get auto aggro'd and engaged by the starbases. This means I have to FIGHT each system to progress to the connecting system and then the next connecting system and the next and the next. This isn't strategy its a grind! No one could possibly want to do this (apparently a lot do :D), it would means grinding all the way to victory! Under the current system I am free to pick and choose targets AT random, fly directly to the systems they occupy and engage them... They might not be part of my war goals but as I stated above, they can play a part in my plans for ultimate victory. This is the same as dropping paratroopers behind enemy lines to raid key installations.

All of this is GONE with 1.9 as you will have to fight for each step you take! And the steps you step will be dictated to you via the hyperlanes which in turn limit your war goals/options, which in turn limit your empires growth from conquest. Some will argue that this is balanced because it will apply to everyone equally, which is absolutely true, but also handicaps all strategy due to what corridors you have access to. You could realistically end up cut off from the rest of the galaxy map by POOR hyperlane generation or neighbouring empires. With Warp and WH you can fly out of dead ends or around neighbouring empires without need for treaties or conquest.
Hey, I've got an idea how to make war less than a grind then. So as soon as you declare war game automatically takes your and your opponent's doomstacks and pits them against each other. The winner is declared the victor of war! No grind. Lots of STRATEGY (I guess?)
 

Zane Wolfe

Recruit
36 Badges
May 6, 2017
7
0
  • Europa Universalis III Complete
  • Europa Universalis III
  • Magicka
  • Sword of the Stars
  • Shadowrun: Dragonfall
  • Stellaris: Nemesis
  • Shadowrun: Hong Kong
  • BATTLETECH: Flashpoint
  • Stellaris: Megacorp
  • Stellaris: Ancient Relics
  • BATTLETECH: Season pass
  • Age of Wonders: Planetfall
  • Age of Wonders: Planetfall Deluxe edition
  • Age of Wonders: Planetfall Premium edition
  • Age of Wonders: Planetfall Season pass
  • Stellaris: Lithoids
  • BATTLETECH: Heavy Metal
  • Age of Wonders: Planetfall - Revelations
  • Stellaris: Federations
  • Stellaris: Necroids
  • Shadowrun Returns
  • Stellaris: Distant Stars
  • BATTLETECH - Digital Deluxe Edition
  • Stellaris: Apocalypse
  • Stellaris: Humanoids Species Pack
  • Age of Wonders III
  • BATTLETECH
  • Stellaris - Path to Destruction bundle
  • Stellaris: Leviathans Story Pack
  • Stellaris: Digital Anniversary Edition
  • Stellaris
  • Knights of Pen and Paper 2
  • Pillars of Eternity
  • Europa Universalis III Complete
  • Europa Universalis III Complete
  • Stellaris: Synthetic Dawn
So, how many patches will it take before Stellaris is just a clone of Sins of a Solar Empire?
To be fair, that's a pretty damn good game to be a clone of.


Oh and for all the comments, from players and @Wiz about fleet's getting 'stranded'... IT CAN NOT HAPPEN. The fix for it ALREADY EXISTS WITHIN THE GAME AS IT IS RIGHT NOW. See currently if your ships are caught inside of someone else's borders when they get closed/accidentally jump into an FE, they get sent right back to your closest colony with a short period of being unable to be used that depends entirely on how far away they were. You wouldn't even need to make it automatic. All fleets have this neat little emergency "OH SHIT I'M GOING TO DIE! GET ME OUT OF HERE NOW!" button while in combat. Which does EXACTLY what having your fleet 'trapped' would do. All that you would need to allow is for this button to be pushed outside of combat, which is a minor UI tweak. Add a second tweak to give a warning about a fleet being 'cut off from the empire', and boom. Problem with 'stuck fleets' is solved.
 

SelorKiith

Sergeant
19 Badges
Nov 11, 2017
69
0
  • Stellaris
  • Stellaris: Synthetic Dawn
  • Stellaris: Necroids
  • Crusader Kings II
  • Stellaris: Federations
  • Stellaris: Lithoids
  • Stellaris: Ancient Relics
  • Stellaris: Megacorp
  • Shadowrun Returns
  • Stellaris: Distant Stars
  • Stellaris: Apocalypse
  • Stellaris: Humanoids Species Pack
  • Stellaris - Path to Destruction bundle
  • Stellaris: Leviathans Story Pack
  • Stellaris: Digital Anniversary Edition
  • Hearts of Iron IV: Cadet
  • Cities: Skylines - Snowfall
  • Cities: Skylines - After Dark
  • Cities: Skylines
There is your problem. Your assuming very very narrow choke points with numerous starbases. But we know that the choke point issue is configurable, and it seems the starbase balancing would likely be worked out through play testing.

The situation seems that the effectiveness of your desired tactics would depend on the situation: they would work very well against a nation you share a large border with but not one with a small heavily defended border. Meaning your tactics would have to depend on the situation.

Configurable?
Sorry, I haven't seen a button I can click that reads "Please no Chokepoints"... this whole Hyperlane debacle is completely random.
And still the point stands, with or without Chokepoints, you have to brute force every goddamn step you want to take, take every little system along the way.
There is NO Tactics... you have no other option than to go head on while literally screaming out your intentions because you can only come from a very very very limited pool of directions while being forced to go through every system.
This incidentally completely eradicates the usefullness of Sentry Arrays, I mean, you don't need to know where the enemy fleet is in their own territory because all you need to is to look at your own little border, they literally cannot surprise you... Turtle up and you're safe till the Endgame Crisis.
The only thing you can do on the active front is to use Brute Force. No Sneak Attacks, No "going around", no Politics to gain an advantage... Face to Face... Mano a mano... as someone said the only thing that you can do is boiled down to a "Maginot Line" gameplay or literal Wild West Standoffs.
 

Owlfriend

Sergeant
65 Badges
Jan 28, 2007
52
0
  • Stellaris - Path to Destruction bundle
  • Mount & Blade: Warband
  • Pillars of Eternity
  • Europa Universalis IV: Common Sense
  • Europa Universalis IV: Cossacks
  • Europa Universalis IV: Mare Nostrum
  • Stellaris
  • Stellaris: Galaxy Edition
  • Stellaris: Galaxy Edition
  • Europa Universalis IV: Rights of Man
  • Tyranny: Archon Edition
  • Stellaris: Digital Anniversary Edition
  • Stellaris: Leviathans Story Pack
  • Europa Universalis IV: Pre-order
  • Europa Universalis IV: Mandate of Heaven
  • Europa Universalis IV: Third Rome
  • Surviving Mars
  • Stellaris: Synthetic Dawn
  • Tyranny - Tales from the Tiers
  • Tyranny - Bastards Wound
  • Age of Wonders III
  • Europa Universalis IV: Cradle of Civilization
  • Stellaris: Humanoids Species Pack
  • Stellaris: Apocalypse
  • Europa Universalis IV: Rule Britannia
  • Stellaris: Necroids
  • Europa Universalis III Complete
  • Crusader Kings II
  • Commander: Conquest of the Americas
  • East India Company
  • 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
  • Hearts of Iron III
  • Heir to the Throne
  • A Game of Dwarves
  • Europa Universalis III Complete
  • Europa Universalis IV: Res Publica
  • Europa Universalis: Rome
  • Sword of the Stars
  • Sword of the Stars II
  • Victoria 2
  • Rome: Vae Victis
  • Warlock: Master of the Arcane
  • Warlock 2: The Exiled
  • 500k Club
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.

I don't think customers can change the decision. The Game goes in this new direction with full steam ahead. I think however it is important to let them know (or others that read this thread), why we disagree. Maybe some Company out there (or future devs of space games) see this and think... hey maybe a game without the usual Hyperlanes / Chokepoints could also be successful. As to the Civ part, see minke19104 answer:

Civ V shipped with 1UPT. They didnt change it after release. Many people here feels like they got baited.

Up until 1.8.3 Stellaris was a fun Game, with different FTL Methods being part of the deal. The new Stellaris will be a Hyperlane / Chokepiont Game. And I simply can't see the Fun in playing another such Game (I already tried the remastered Master of Orion.... because I have nostalgic feelings for MoO and MoO2. Ascendany, MoO3 etc were not that much fun either).

The new Superstarbases around stars.... why not around a planet. Why make one structure in a solar system that important. I would prefer a modification of the current system (with stronger bases around or Shipyards around planets). SiS solves this with Orbital building slots, for example. I also am not a Fan of Superfortresses, that can defeat Attack Fleet's on their own.

There seems to be a limitation to the amount of Fortresses you can build. Now we already have a limitation to core planets (yes I know of the mods), Fleetstrenght, Metall you can store etc. If the interpretation of some of the pictures etc we saw is correct, we will get limitations to the amount of ships in a Fleet etc. And I can imagine we will get a limitation to the amount of ships we can put into one system in order to make doomstacks impossible. The last one is just a guess though ;)

And lets not forget that we probably can't send out military scouts anymore at the start of the Game, because it has to be science ships, with a scientist in it. I see more and more Walls and Limitations wherever I look. And that does not seem like a fun Game to me.

The FTL change is just one Symptom of this Mindset. Remove Options, set up artificial limitations...
 

Obak

Hiiii-aaa hiiii-aa!
62 Badges
Mar 22, 2012
142
20
  • Crusader Kings II
  • Semper Fi
  • Hearts of Iron III: Their Finest Hour
  • Hearts of Iron III
  • For the Motherland
  • War of the Roses
  • Stellaris: Distant Stars
  • 500k Club
  • Crusader Kings II: Way of Life
  • Stellaris: Lithoids
  • Crusader Kings II: Horse Lords
  • Crusader Kings II: Conclave
  • Stellaris
  • Hearts of Iron IV: Cadet
  • Crusader Kings II: Reapers Due
  • Stellaris: Digital Anniversary Edition
  • Stellaris: Leviathans Story Pack
  • Hearts of Iron IV: Together for Victory
  • Crusader Kings II: Monks and Mystics
  • Stellaris: Megacorp
  • Steel Division: Normandy 44
  • Hearts of Iron IV: Death or Dishonor
  • Shadowrun Returns
  • Crusader Kings II: Jade Dragon
  • Hearts of Iron IV: Expansion Pass
  • Stellaris: Humanoids Species Pack
  • Stellaris: Apocalypse
  • Crusader Kings II: Holy Fury
  • Stellaris: Nemesis
  • Imperator: Rome
  • Hearts of Iron IV: Expansion Pass
  • Victoria 2
  • Stellaris: Necroids
  • Hearts of Iron IV: La Resistance
  • Europa Universalis III Complete
  • Europa Universalis III Complete
  • Stellaris: Ancient Relics
  • Stellaris: Federations
  • Supreme Ruler 2020
  • Divine Wind
  • Crusader Kings II: Rajas of India
  • Crusader Kings II: The Old Gods
  • Crusader Kings II: Sons of Abraham
  • Arsenal of Democracy
  • Europa Universalis III
  • Europa Universalis III Complete
  • Majesty 2
  • Sengoku
  • Sword of the Stars
  • Sword of the Stars II
Master of Orion had a better solution, warp travle paired with fuel cell tech that controlled how far from your own borders you could stray.
Tjis could be further enhanced with refuling stations.

My worst case scenario is this will throw us back to Sins of a solar empire style grind-wars or Endless space forced borderconflicts when locked in a galactic arm blocked by a stagnant ascendancy, but I will give it a try.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.