• 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:

Held der Arbeit

Cultist of the Unbidden
89 Badges
Mar 26, 2010
795
1.498
  • Europa Universalis IV: Third Rome
  • Hearts of Iron III
  • Hearts of Iron III: Their Finest Hour
  • Hearts of Iron III Collection
  • Leviathan: Warships
  • Magicka
  • Europa Universalis IV: Res Publica
  • Victoria: Revolutions
  • Rome Gold
  • Semper Fi
  • Stellaris: Apocalypse
  • Cities in Motion
  • Victoria 2: A House Divided
  • Victoria 2: Heart of Darkness
  • Rome: Vae Victis
  • Stellaris - Path to Destruction bundle
  • Knights of Honor
  • Cities: Skylines - After Dark
  • Europa Universalis IV: Cossacks
  • Cities: Skylines - Snowfall
  • Europa Universalis IV: Mare Nostrum
  • Europa Universalis IV: Wealth of Nations
  • Arsenal of Democracy
  • Cities in Motion 2
  • Crusader Kings II
  • Crusader Kings II: Charlemagne
  • Crusader Kings II: Legacy of Rome
  • Crusader Kings II: The Old Gods
  • Crusader Kings II: Rajas of India
  • Crusader Kings II: The Republic
  • Crusader Kings II: Sons of Abraham
  • Crusader Kings II: Sunset Invasion
  • Darkest Hour
  • Europa Universalis III
  • Europa Universalis III Complete
  • Divine Wind
  • Crusader Kings II: Sword of Islam
  • For the Motherland
  • Europa Universalis IV: Conquest of Paradise
  • Europa Universalis IV: Art of War
  • Europa Universalis IV
  • Stellaris Sign-up
  • Crusader Kings II: Conclave
  • Europa Universalis III Complete
  • Europa Universalis IV: Common Sense
  • Pillars of Eternity
  • Crusader Kings II: Way of Life
  • Europa Universalis IV: El Dorado
  • Crusader Kings III
  • 500k Club
Oh dear, you seem to be very, very confused so allow me to set you straight.
Oh dear, you seem to be quite condescending, which is weird considering you missed both my and the Developers point completely.

It's not about hyperlane only games being possible, it's about where the Devs want to take the game from here. If they introduce a new feature, it has to make sense for the entire game, not for a specific subsection of it. Why bother to invest devtime and resources in a decent Defense and Terrain system, if 2 of 3 modes of travel will just ignore it. That might go down smoother with the community, but would be a recipe for disaster down the road.

Also that whole "just play 1.8.3 forever" line is an absolutely terrible solution. How would you like it if the devs suddenly changed core features of the game in a way that you hate so much it makes it totally unplayable for you, and then hordes of smug white-knights just tell you to forget about patches for bugs, mod updates or ANY new mods and just play 1.8.3. forever? I'm not talking hypothetically either, if they can do it with free movement, they can easily do it in the next dev diary with one or MORE of your most important defining core features too. And you know what, they wont give a damn about what you say either.

Its a very slippery slope to start doing this sort of thing with fully-mature released games that people have already paid for in good faith.
This was in response to Mr. "I was told this would be in the game!!! This change is treason!!!". Which i find to be a bad argument since, in fact, it IS in the game. And has been for a very long time. You got a TON out of novel, free movement 4x out of your 40 bucks.
Of course playing 1.83 forever is a terrible solution, but if this particular feature is what makes or breaks the game for some people, why not. I also think spending a good portion of your income on sterephone discs - because you think they are the only way music is meant to be stored - in 2017 is a terrible solution, yet there are people who do it.

That said, they have changed stuff I enjoyed pretty much constantly over the development of the game. Lots of builds I enjoyed in the early days are no longer possible, the ethoses have been rewritten pretty much completely thrice over etc. I was slightly miffed about all of these changes but ultimately recognize that they make for a better, more challenging game.
Because that is the point here, they aren't just removing stuff for shits and giggles (not even the FTL), they are changing stuff to move the game along. All travel types will remain, just not in the way we are used to and that required them to consider 3 wildly different types of expansion right from the get go (which more often than not made them halt development of certain features completely, because Devtime is limited)

As such, no, I am not worried that this is a slippery slope. I'm pretty confident that if the Devs change something, they do so for a reason. They are the ones who came up with these features in the first place and invested years of thought and work into them. They have no interest in throwing anything out of the window lightly
 
Last edited:

zizard

Major
4 Badges
Jul 28, 2017
547
2
  • Stellaris
  • Stellaris: Leviathans Story Pack
  • Stellaris - Path to Destruction bundle
  • Stellaris: Distant Stars
People bought the game expecting several years of post release support as automatically implied by being Paradox, not just 1.5 years. It certainly was not worth full price at the beginning. It's easy to understand why people feel cheated to have to stay on 1.8.3
 

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
All travel types will remain, just not in the way we are used to

Er... no. I've seen this argument a few times, and it doesn't really hold up. Warp is gone. Artificial Wormhole is gone. Mid to late game unlockables that don't even do the same thing aren't 'the same thing but different,' they're actually *different.*

As such, no, I am not worried that this is a slippery slope. I'm pretty confident that if the Devs change something, they do so for a reason.

Of course it's always for a reason.
That doesn't imply it's a good reason, or a reason I'll care for. Static defenses and system-terrain are reasons I don't care much for.
 

ISitOnGnomes

They know what they did
87 Badges
Mar 30, 2015
530
381
  • Cities: Skylines - After Dark
  • Crusader Kings II: Jade Dragon
  • Stellaris: Synthetic Dawn
  • Europa Universalis IV: Third Rome
  • Stellaris - Path to Destruction bundle
  • Crusader Kings II: Reapers Due
  • Stellaris: Galaxy Edition
  • Stellaris
  • Europa Universalis IV: Mare Nostrum
  • Cities: Skylines - Snowfall
  • Europa Universalis IV: Cossacks
  • Knights of Pen and Paper 2
  • Crusader Kings II
  • Europa Universalis IV: Pre-order
  • Victoria 2: Heart of Darkness
  • Victoria 2: A House Divided
  • Crusader Kings II: Sons of Abraham
  • 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: Sunset Invasion
  • Crusader Kings II: Sword of Islam
  • Europa Universalis IV: Art of War
  • Europa Universalis IV: Conquest of Paradise
  • Europa Universalis IV: Res Publica
  • Majesty 2 Collection
  • Europa Universalis IV: Call to arms event
  • Europa Universalis IV: Wealth of Nations
  • Stellaris: Digital Anniversary Edition
  • Hearts of Iron IV: Death or Dishonor
  • Surviving Mars
  • BATTLETECH
  • Cities: Skylines
  • Hearts of Iron IV: No Step Back
  • Cities: Skylines - Mass Transit
  • Europa Universalis IV: El Dorado
  • Crusader Kings II: Monks and Mystics
  • Hearts of Iron IV: Together for Victory
  • Stellaris: Leviathans Story Pack
  • Europa Universalis IV: Rights of Man
  • Hearts of Iron IV: Cadet
  • Stellaris Sign-up
  • Victoria 2
  • Stellaris: Galaxy Edition
  • Crusader Kings II: Way of Life
  • Europa Universalis IV: Common Sense
  • Europa Universalis IV
  • Crusader Kings II: Conclave
People bought the game expecting several years of post release support as automatically implied by being Paradox, not just 1.5 years. It certainly was not worth full price at the beginning. It's easy to understand why people feel cheated to have to stay on 1.8.3

Tat is an unreasonable assumption to make. If the game barely sold would you honestly believe it would continue to get a bunch of free updates? As long as the game has enough draw to sell DLC they will be able to afford the free updates, but if they can't add any new content because they can't balance it against the 3 FTLs then there will be nothing to buy.
 

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
Oh dear, you seem to be quite condescending, which is weird considering you missed both my and the Developers point completely.

It's not about hyperlane only games being possible, it's about where the Devs want to take the game from here. If they introduce a new feature, it has to make sense for the entire game, not for a specific subsection of it. Why bother to invest devtime and resources in a decent Defense and Terrain system, if 2 of 3 modes of travel will just ignore it. That might go down smoother with the community, but would be a recipe for disaster down the road.


This was in response to Mr. "I was told this would be in the game!!! This change is treason!!!". Which i find to be a bad argument since, in fact, it IS in the game. And has been for a very long time. You got a TON out of novel, free movement 4x out of your 40 bucks.
Of course playing 1.83 forever is a terrible solution, but if this particular feature is what makes or breaks the game for some people, why not. I also think spending a good portion of your income on sterephone discs - because you think they are the only way music is meant to be stored - in 2017 is a terrible solution, yet there are people who do it.

That said, they have changed stuff I enjoyed pretty much constantly over the development of the game. Lots of builds I enjoyed in the early days are no longer possible, the ethoses have been rewritten pretty much completely thrice over etc. I was slightly miffed about all of these changes but ultimately recognize that they make for a better, more challenging game.
Because that is the point here, they aren't just removing stuff for shits and giggles (not even the FTL), they are changing stuff to move the game along. All travel types will remain, just not in the way we are used to and that required them to consider 3 wildly different types of expansion right from the get go (which more often than not made them halt development of certain features completely, because Devtime is limited)

As such, no, I am not worried that this is a slippery slope. I'm pretty confident that if the Devs change something, they do so for a reason. They are the ones who came up with these features in the first place and invested years of thought and work into them. They have no interest in throwing anything out of the window lightly
I don’t think you got my tv comparison, what you are talking about is an upgrade of hardware, for example an updated graphics engine that would force some users to upgrade their hardware, what i talk about is removal of content. Now it doesn’t matter that I am promised a billion times better soccer tv, if I want to watch sumo wrestling.

Secondly, we are talking from decades of experience with 4x games when we criticize hyperlanes, no amount of appeal to dev authority will change that our exoerience nor what we feel on this issue.

Thirdly, this is a public forum and meant for discussion, that includes opinions that go contrary to the official party line so to say.
Now if we feel a mistake is being made, we will weather this.
 

Mastakazam

Recruit
7 Badges
Nov 5, 2017
6
0
  • Stellaris
  • Stellaris - Path to Destruction bundle
  • Stellaris: Synthetic Dawn
  • Stellaris: Distant Stars
  • Stellaris: Megacorp
  • Stellaris: Federations
  • Stellaris: Necroids
The problem and solution are really clear, which is what makes the forced hyperlanes absurd and a problem:

The Problem: Forcing hyperlanes on everyone, which is actually REMOVING THE CHOICE

The Solution: It already exists! Making an option in the start of a game/galaxy which states whether the game will have the 3 FTL types or whether it's hyperlanes-for-all.

By adopting this novel 'solution' then we get to choose whether we want the hyperlanes-for-all game style, or choose-your-own-FTL playstyle. Then everybody's happy. Sure the not-all-hyperlaners might not benefit fully from the new 'galactic terrain' but maybe they don't value that as much as having the variety of FTL modes. The part that matters most is everybody gets to be happy.

SUPPLEMENTAL: Some of the common/current 'problems' with the 3x FTL methods being available might just disappear when the doomstack fleet problem is dealt with, and is really a bigger issue that should be resolved first.
 

Fefnir

Recruit
Nov 18, 2017
9
0
And devs can't just release the new changes on a free optional DLC called something like : "Advanced war", and then keep the original gameplay as it is on the non-DLC version?

I still feel we don't need Space terrain.

And if I imagine a battle on space, it will be an obvious whack-a-mole at less the two opposing forces wanted to engage each other.
Eventually all battles would resolve in the orbit of a planet because the owner would want to defend it.

Maybe some new type of ship with an "anti warp field" or "FTL deactivating weapon" could prevent ships from escaping, or ships entering your systems freely.

Sorry if I'm being too delusional or not making sense
 

Boygor

Second Lieutenant
13 Badges
May 18, 2017
133
0
  • Stellaris: Synthetic Dawn
  • Pillars of Eternity
  • Stellaris
  • Stellaris: Digital Anniversary Edition
  • Stellaris: Leviathans Story Pack
  • Stellaris - Path to Destruction bundle
  • Stellaris: Humanoids Species Pack
  • Stellaris: Apocalypse
  • Stellaris: Distant Stars
  • Shadowrun Returns
  • Shadowrun: Dragonfall
  • Stellaris: Megacorp
  • Crusader Kings II
As such, no, I am not worried that this is a slippery slope. I'm pretty confident that if the Devs change something, they do so for a reason. They are the ones who came up with these features in the first place and invested years of thought and work into them. They have no interest in throwing anything out of the window lightly

I'm not sure this is the case two-fold. Wiz wasn't the original game director (likely the only reason we got this far without star lanes) and additionally, star lanes are not a new feature. So they came up with nothing as far as I can see. Why Wiz didn't wait for Stellaris 2 before butchering someone else's legacy, in my opinion, is crass...
 

Shadeseraph

Captain
56 Badges
May 11, 2017
307
59
  • Magicka
  • Stellaris: Distant Stars
  • Stellaris: Synthetic Dawn
  • Stellaris: Apocalypse
  • Stellaris: Leviathans Story Pack
  • Cities: Skylines - Natural Disasters
  • Crusader Kings II: Monks and Mystics
  • Stellaris - Path to Destruction bundle
  • Cities: Skylines - Mass Transit
  • Surviving Mars
  • Stellaris: Federations
  • Age of Wonders
  • Cities: Skylines - Green Cities
  • Crusader Kings II: Jade Dragon
  • Stellaris: Humanoids Species Pack
  • Tyranny: Archon Edition
  • Cities: Skylines - Parklife
  • Shadowrun Returns
  • Shadowrun: Dragonfall
  • Stellaris: Lithoids
  • Surviving Mars: First Colony Edition
  • Stellaris: Megacorp
  • Crusader Kings II: Holy Fury
  • Prison Architect
  • Surviving Mars: First Colony Edition
  • Stellaris: Ancient Relics
  • Stellaris: Nemesis
  • Crusader Kings III: Royal Edition
  • Crusader Kings III
  • Europa Universalis IV
  • Europa Universalis IV: Art of War
  • Europa Universalis IV: Wealth of Nations
  • Cities: Skylines
  • Europa Universalis IV: El Dorado
  • Mount & Blade: Warband
  • Crusader Kings II: Way of Life
  • Pillars of Eternity
  • Crusader Kings II: Horse Lords
  • Cities: Skylines - After Dark
  • Europa Universalis IV: Cossacks
  • Crusader Kings II: Conclave
  • Cities: Skylines - Snowfall
  • Crusader Kings II: Reapers Due
  • Stellaris: Digital Anniversary Edition
  • Stellaris
  • Crusader Kings II: Sword of Islam
  • Crusader Kings II: The Republic
  • Crusader Kings II: Rajas of India
  • Crusader Kings II: The Old Gods
  • Crusader Kings II: Legacy of Rome
By adopting this novel 'solution' then we get to choose whether we want the hyperlanes-for-all game style, or choose-your-own-FTL playstyle. Then everybody's happy. Sure the not-all-hyperlaners might not benefit fully from the new 'galactic terrain' but maybe they don't value that as much as having the variety of FTL modes. The part that matters most is everybody gets to be happy.

Except the developers, who are back to having to develop three varieties of subsystem each time they want to add a new feature that interacts with travel.

That, or admit that they are not going to support non-hyperlanes FTL in future content (meaning - not balance those features against non-hyperlane gameplay: the content might still be there, but if they intended for something to be locked behind "hyperlane secured" soft-locks, you might end with a fully functioning ringworld in year 2230 because you bypassed the expected barriers), raising the ire of non-hyperlane players anyway. Several things have already been designed under the idea of hyperlanes only already - like hyperlane-based system/space control, compared to radius-based system/space control
 

permeakra

Major
67 Badges
Nov 20, 2017
650
345
  • Tyranny - Bastards Wound
  • Crusader Kings II: Reapers Due
  • Tyranny: Archon Edition
  • Tyranny: Archon Edition
  • Tyranny: Gold Edition
  • 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
  • Crusader Kings II: Holy Fury
  • Stellaris: Megacorp
  • Stellaris: Galaxy Edition
  • Cities: Skylines - Green Cities
  • Crusader Kings II: Jade Dragon
  • Stellaris: Humanoids Species Pack
  • Stellaris: Apocalypse
  • Surviving Mars: Digital Deluxe Edition
  • Cities: Skylines - Parklife
  • Stellaris: Distant Stars
  • Shadowrun Returns
  • Shadowrun: Dragonfall
  • Cities: Skylines Industries
  • Surviving Mars: First Colony Edition
  • Cities: Skylines
  • Surviving Mars: First Colony Edition
  • Stellaris: Nemesis
  • Stellaris: Necroids
  • Stellaris: Federations
  • Crusader Kings III
  • Victoria 2
  • Cities: Skylines - Campus
  • 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: Lithoids
  • Stellaris: Galaxy Edition
  • Cities in Motion 2
  • Crusader Kings II
  • Crusader Kings II: Legacy of Rome
  • Crusader Kings II: The Old Gods
  • Crusader Kings II: The Republic
  • Crusader Kings II: Sword of Islam
  • Majesty 2 Collection
  • Sword of the Stars
  • Tyranny - Tales from the Tiers
IWe will as always maintain a beta branch for old versions, so you can always continue to play on the current version instead.
Hm. Some good news.

This was not a decision taken lightly, but I genuinely believe it's for the better of the game, and hope you're at least willing to give it a try before deciding that you for sure hate it.
Respectfully, but introduction of choke-points and meaningful galactic 'geography' could be just as well handled via reduction of travel-distance of FTL and tweaks to galaxy generators. It is possible to create un-bypassable choke-point even for jump drive in certain star distributions. In fact, I believe that the game needs a massive rework of Galaxy Generators ASAP.

Also, starlanes have a subtle inherent flaw that is impossible to remove: they do not allow estimation of travel distance by eyes without manual counting of number of hyperlanes in the route. Our eyes are tuned for Cartesian coordinates system, not graph analysis.

That said, I really hope that mods will provide workarounds for this disappointing decision as soon as possible.
 

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
Except the developers, who are back to having to develop three varieties of subsystem each time they want to add a new feature that interacts with travel.

That, or admit that they are not going to support non-hyperlanes FTL in future content (meaning - not balance those features against non-hyperlane gameplay: the content might still be there, but if they intended for something to be locked behind "hyperlane secured" soft-locks, you might end with a fully functioning ringworld in year 2230 because you bypassed the expected barriers), raising the ire of non-hyperlane players anyway. Several things have already been designed under the idea of hyperlanes only already - like hyperlane-based system/space control, compared to radius-based system/space control
Or they could developer features that would affect all forms of ftl in different ways, this way we could have more ways to counter and counter-counter difrent forms of ftl.
 

Shadeseraph

Captain
56 Badges
May 11, 2017
307
59
  • Magicka
  • Stellaris: Distant Stars
  • Stellaris: Synthetic Dawn
  • Stellaris: Apocalypse
  • Stellaris: Leviathans Story Pack
  • Cities: Skylines - Natural Disasters
  • Crusader Kings II: Monks and Mystics
  • Stellaris - Path to Destruction bundle
  • Cities: Skylines - Mass Transit
  • Surviving Mars
  • Stellaris: Federations
  • Age of Wonders
  • Cities: Skylines - Green Cities
  • Crusader Kings II: Jade Dragon
  • Stellaris: Humanoids Species Pack
  • Tyranny: Archon Edition
  • Cities: Skylines - Parklife
  • Shadowrun Returns
  • Shadowrun: Dragonfall
  • Stellaris: Lithoids
  • Surviving Mars: First Colony Edition
  • Stellaris: Megacorp
  • Crusader Kings II: Holy Fury
  • Prison Architect
  • Surviving Mars: First Colony Edition
  • Stellaris: Ancient Relics
  • Stellaris: Nemesis
  • Crusader Kings III: Royal Edition
  • Crusader Kings III
  • Europa Universalis IV
  • Europa Universalis IV: Art of War
  • Europa Universalis IV: Wealth of Nations
  • Cities: Skylines
  • Europa Universalis IV: El Dorado
  • Mount & Blade: Warband
  • Crusader Kings II: Way of Life
  • Pillars of Eternity
  • Crusader Kings II: Horse Lords
  • Cities: Skylines - After Dark
  • Europa Universalis IV: Cossacks
  • Crusader Kings II: Conclave
  • Cities: Skylines - Snowfall
  • Crusader Kings II: Reapers Due
  • Stellaris: Digital Anniversary Edition
  • Stellaris
  • Crusader Kings II: Sword of Islam
  • Crusader Kings II: The Republic
  • Crusader Kings II: Rajas of India
  • Crusader Kings II: The Old Gods
  • Crusader Kings II: Legacy of Rome
Or they could developer features that would affect all forms of ftl in different ways, this way we could have more ways to counter and counter-counter difrent forms of ftl.

Yah, but that requires manpower, work hours, and exponentially more testing - which then can't go to more features and DLC (which is what brings in money). As someone who works in the IT business, I've been there in the situation where trying to support multiple different features leads to eating your budget away, so you end having to axe some of those features to give the product more space (meaning, more budget elsewhere).

Don't get me wrong, ideally, I'd prefer it if they were to keep all the FTL types and develop features that meaningfully interact with each other, but I'm fairly sure they've made their own cost-benefit analysis and decided that the costs outweighted the advantages.

Other option would have been to change to hyperlanes and then put on them "make-up" so that they still look like different subsystems, even if down below at the code level they are the same. But I'm sure this would just anger people more, unless the make-up were really cleverly done.
 

Cat_Fuzz

General
May 10, 2016
1.772
2.365
Or they could developer features that would affect all forms of ftl in different ways, this way we could have more ways to counter and counter-counter difrent forms of ftl.

They could do that, in the same way a burger chef may make you all the burgers they have on offer, just in case they happen to make the one you like.
 

Tsu Chi

Sergeant
3 Badges
Sep 13, 2016
93
27
  • Warlock: Master of the Arcane
  • Stellaris
  • Age of Wonders III
I have seen it!
Salvation is coming
Star lanes are the One.
One path to go
One future to live
One destiny for all because all are one
Our beloved Gods hear our cry, our suffering
Wiz the Creator in his wisdom reached for us
Blessed us with everlasting serenity
So much uncertainty, all gone
At last we can sleep as children do
Though we are safe
Truly safe
But for how long?
We, mortals, can’t see far
Tiny creatures we are, lack the strong will
But we are many
Many to pray, many to cry, many to betray
As other Gods exists, yes they do
Beyond the boundaries of our world
Beyond the playground of our Gods
And They are calling, through the rift in reality
I can hear Them, stronger and stronger
Whispers give me no sleep
Strange thoughts occupies my mind
But I will not betray, I will be obedient
Because in our Gods I trust
I was born in this world
With Divine Wiz in heart
And I tell you this
As I have seen the star lanes in their greatness
I have seen Them consuming freedom of star travel
I have seen Them removing star gateways
Many are terrified, will our world exist as we know it
Fear not my brothers for prophecy is here
All to be reborn in star lanes
Couse all are one, one is all we need
Through different star lanes each can go
For the greatness of our worlds
Thanks to our Gods far in the sky

Tsu Chi Mad Prophet
Star date 2095709.2320.2
Buried treasures: https://forum.paradoxplaza.com/forum/index.php?posts/23526942/
 

Cat_Fuzz

General
May 10, 2016
1.772
2.365
Sadly the chef choose to make the same burger like everyone else instead of adding something new to the offer.

You're still getting a burger which still has some interesting elements to it, (ethos system, sectors, FE and crises) they've just chosen to standardise the patty a little so they can better work on new flavours.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.