• 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:

terrycloth

Lt. General
61 Badges
Jun 8, 2016
1.478
416
  • Crusader Kings II: Legacy of Rome
  • Stellaris: Synthetic Dawn
  • Tyranny - Tales from the Tiers
  • Europa Universalis IV: Res Publica
  • Magicka
  • Leviathan: Warships
  • Knights of Pen and Paper +1 Edition
  • Europa Universalis IV: Wealth of Nations
  • Europa Universalis IV: Conquest of Paradise
  • Europa Universalis IV: Art of War
  • Dungeonland
  • 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
  • Crusader Kings II: The Old Gods
  • Crusader Kings II: Monks and Mystics
  • Stellaris: Nemesis
  • BATTLETECH
  • Surviving Mars
  • Imperator: Rome
  • Tyranny - Bastards Wound
  • Age of Wonders III
  • Stellaris: Humanoids Species Pack
  • Stellaris: Apocalypse
  • Stellaris: Distant Stars
  • Shadowrun Returns
  • Shadowrun: Dragonfall
  • Shadowrun: Hong Kong
  • Stellaris: Megacorp
  • Imperator: Rome Deluxe Edition
  • Europa Universalis IV: Cossacks
  • Europa Universalis IV
  • Victoria 2
  • Warlock: Master of the Arcane
  • Cities: Skylines
  • Europa Universalis IV: El Dorado
  • Crusader Kings II: Way of Life
  • Pillars of Eternity
  • Europa Universalis IV: Common Sense
  • Hearts of Iron IV: Together for Victory
  • Europa Universalis IV: Mare Nostrum
  • Stellaris
  • Hearts of Iron IV: Cadet
  • Crusader Kings II: Reapers Due
  • Europa Universalis IV: Rights of Man
  • Tyranny: Archon Edition
  • Stellaris: Digital Anniversary Edition
PS. What does "unpredictable, teleporting fleets" even mean? Stellaris shows pretty specifically where fleets are coming and going, at least with some FTL's.

Right. Not only do you get wormhole warnings or whatever, but you can hover over enemy fleets and it'll tell you where they're planning to go and where they're actually going next. Catching up to them is the problem. I expect it'll be a worse problem in 2.0 since movement will be so sluggish overall.

I mean, that's the real change here -- FTL movement is going to be really slow, to make the galaxy seem bigger. Same with the border changes -- make expansion glacial so that you don't claim everything as fast.
 

Butlerian

Captain
Jan 17, 2018
384
0
PS. What does "unpredictable, teleporting fleets" even mean? Stellaris shows pretty specifically where fleets are coming and going, at least with some FTL's.
It is technically possible to find it out by clicking on the enemy fleet and reading the "Entering orbit of Cv'Vivia" direction information, but this is the most awful, cumbersome, true in technicality but not in spirit way of "showing pretty specifically where fleets are coming and going" that it would be possible to dream up. And it does, I think, serve as a good example of how doomstacking is mostly a UI problem rather than anything else.

20170603151628_1.jpg


When we're fighting a war and want to be able to juggle several sub-fleets at once, what we would want the UI to be able to tell us is, at a glance: where those 3 enemy fleets are going (so we know where to intercept / avoid), and what the size of those 3 enemy fleets are (so we know whether our fleets are capable of taking them on if we decide to intercept). But the UI doesn't tell us this. At a glance, on the strategic map which is supposed to be where I formulate my strategy, we're just not told the information we need to be told. I don't know which of those enemy fleets is a doomstack or which is a lone corvette. I don't know which ones are retreating or advancing. In order to find out the size / destination of these enemy fleets I need to click on them individually, AND then I need to click on my fleets individually to remind myself where my doomstack is compared to my roving corvettes ("Ebbanaur"? Where's that? I have to zoom in until my face is smushed up against the screen to be able to get the system names to appear).

So no. Stellaris does not "show pretty specifically where fleets are coming or going". It can, very laboriously, be induced to tell you the name of the planet that the enemy fleet is headed to after you click several times and jump back and forth between the tactical and the strategic map, but that's not nearly good enough.

You know what might be good enough? If the galaxy map looked like this:
S2.jpg

Boom, 90% of doomstack problems, solved.
Because now I know what's happening at a glance, so I don't have to keep my fleet all bunched up to guard against enemy surprise attack defeat in detail.

Oh no but wait, I still do have to keep my fleet all bunched up to guard against enemy surprise attack defeat in detail, because with warphole the enemy can change direction and jump on top of me so quickly that I don't have time to move out of a system if he happens to get within one warphole's jump range.

So there are two reasons Stellaris has "Unpredictable, teleporting fleets":
A) The strategic map is hopelessly information-poor so unless you pause every tick and click on each enemy fleet in turn, you don't know what size it's in or where it's going
B) Movement is so free, easy, and rapid that even if you did pause every tick and click on each enemy fleet in turn, you'd probably still end up getting ambushed because in-system STL travel times are very large compared to the between-system FTL travel times.
 

Kappenloch

Second Lieutenant
Nov 14, 2017
160
0
The dirty secret of distant worlds is that there is only one planet that matters - the homeworld. Most other planets lose you more money than you get over the course of the game... Doomstacking was only discouraged in the sense that defenses at that one strategic point were typically incredibly powerful, and in the sense that amassing enough ground troops to take a homeworld was difficult.

While this is quite true for the beginning to middle game it couldn't be further from the truth for the middle to late game. It is extremely common for colonies which start as liabilities to eventually exceed the population, taxation and production ability of the homeworld and in some cases greatly exceed it. It can also be done very early on by rush-conquering a neighboring empire's home system if you're lucky and skillful enough. No offense but you talk about DW as if you had only heard rumors and never actually played the game because I cant imagine anyone with actual experience making that mistake.

PS. What does "unpredictable, teleporting fleets" even mean? Stellaris shows pretty specifically where fleets are coming and going, at least with some FTL's.

It means that all 3 FTL types in Stellaris are broken in that the UI does not make enemy movement vectors obvious and the actual movement on the map occurs either as an instant teleport (WH) or in mere seconds (warp and hyper). This gives you little or no time to prepare or respond as enemy fleets just tend to unpredictably "pop up" in the middle of your empire and you have no idea where they came from or how they got there because you were busy concentrating on something else. The is where all the whack-a-mole criticism comes from.

Movement Phase 1: Warm up for a long time in total secrecy or near total secrecy where noticing the fleet takes effort and is not immediately obvious on the UI.
Movement Phase 2: Actual movement from origin to destination is either instant teleport (WH), or takes mere seconds (warp and hyper).
Movement Phase 3: Warm down for a long time in total secrecy or near total secrecy where noticing the fleet takes effort and is not immediately obvious on the UI.

So 90%+ of the entire movement time for ANY FTL in Stellaris either occurs in secrecy or takes significant effort on the player's part to keep track of. And the actual movement part is effectively instant. No other 4x games do movement this way, it is unique (and completely broken) to Stellaris because it doesn't give the player sufficient time or warning to respond or strategise effectively to enemy movement. A very bad thing in a strategy game.
 

zorkon08

Second Lieutenant
71 Badges
Mar 18, 2017
184
0
  • Europa Universalis IV: Mandate of Heaven
  • Hearts of Iron IV: Cadet
  • Crusader Kings II: Reapers Due
  • Europa Universalis IV: Rights of Man
  • Tyranny: Archon Edition
  • Tyranny: Archon Edition
  • Tyranny: Gold Edition
  • Stellaris: Digital Anniversary Edition
  • Stellaris: Leviathans Story Pack
  • Hearts of Iron IV: Together for Victory
  • Crusader Kings II: Monks and Mystics
  • Stellaris: Federations
  • Steel Division: Normandy 44
  • Stellaris
  • Stellaris: Lithoids
  • BATTLETECH
  • Hearts of Iron IV: Death or Dishonor
  • Stellaris: Distant Stars
  • Stellaris: Necroids
  • Tyranny - Bastards Wound
  • Age of Wonders III
  • Europa Universalis IV: Cradle of Civilization
  • Europa Universalis IV: Rule Britannia
  • Hearts of Iron IV: Expansion Pass
  • Stellaris: Humanoids Species Pack
  • Stellaris: Apocalypse
  • Shadowrun: Dragonfall
  • Stellaris: Ancient Relics
  • Crusader Kings III
  • Hearts of Iron IV: La Resistance
  • Crusader Kings II: Holy Fury
  • Age of Wonders: Planetfall
  • Age of Wonders: Planetfall - Revelations
  • Imperator: Rome Sign Up
  • BATTLETECH: Season pass
  • Stellaris: Nemesis
  • Europa Universalis IV: El Dorado
  • Crusader Kings II: Way of Life
  • Pillars of Eternity
  • Europa Universalis IV: Common Sense
  • Crusader Kings II: Horse Lords
  • Europa Universalis IV: Cossacks
  • Crusader Kings II: Conclave
  • BATTLETECH: Heavy Metal
  • Crusader Kings II: Charlemagne
  • Crusader Kings II: Rajas of India
  • Crusader Kings II: The Republic
  • Europa Universalis IV: Art of War
  • Europa Universalis IV: Conquest of Paradise
  • Europa Universalis IV: Wealth of Nations
First thing I'm doing in 2.0 is figuring out how to remove the jump drive malus and modding it in as a starting or tier 1 tech.

No reason at all for warp to be removed if jump drives are in. It's unsatisfactory to both warp and hyperlane players IMO and renders the removal of FTL choice asinine. Should have just limited the FTL types to one or the other. Stick a disclaimer/ warning on warp that it's "not as the developer wants you to play" and be done with it.
And slow it down by a lot so it takes time to travel and make the other ftl techs increase its speed a bit.
 
Last edited:

zizard

Major
4 Badges
Jul 28, 2017
547
2
  • Stellaris
  • Stellaris: Leviathans Story Pack
  • Stellaris - Path to Destruction bundle
  • Stellaris: Distant Stars
First thing I'm doing in 2.0 is figuring out how to remove the jump drive malus and modding it in as a starting or tier 1 tech.

No reason at all for warp to be removed if jump drives are in. It's unsatisfactory to both warp and hyperlane players IMO and renders the removal of FTL choice asinine. Should have just limited the FTL types to one or the other. Stick a disclaimer/ warning on warp that it's "not as the developer wants you to play" and be done with it.
Indeed, is the only qualitative difference between warp and jump the (small) travel time of warp? Seems a lot of effort to remove something inconsequential.
 

Butlerian

Captain
Jan 17, 2018
384
0
First thing I'm doing in 2.0 is figuring out how to remove the jump drive malus and modding it in as a starting or tier 1 tech.

No reason at all for warp to be removed if jump drives are in. It's unsatisfactory to both warp and hyperlane players IMO and renders the removal of FTL choice asinine. Should have just limited the FTL types to one or the other. Stick a disclaimer/ warning on warp that it's "not as the developer wants you to play" and be done with it.
What part of "endgame tech" do you not get?
This is like saying that Civ games should have deep-ocean movement or no deep-ocean movement but not both because that's "asinine".
But, for completionism's sake, let me spell it out for you:
  • Jump drive is a late-game "disruption technology" to open up new strategic avenues and thereby (a) reward people who have rushed tech, and (b) shake up staid turtlers
It's not a reward if it's a day-1 technology, because nobody had to work to get it.
It's not a shake-up strategic disruption if it's a day-1 technology, because no-one has had the opportunity to develop strategies which can be disrupted
 

Ediros

Second Lieutenant
5 Badges
Sep 22, 2017
109
306
  • Magicka
  • Stellaris
  • Stellaris: Leviathans Story Pack
  • Stellaris - Path to Destruction bundle
  • Age of Wonders III
What part of "endgame tech" do you not get?
This is like saying that Civ games should have deep-ocean movement or no deep-ocean movement but not both because that's "asinine".
But, for completionism's sake, let me spell it out for you:
  • Jump drive is a late-game "disruption technology" to open up new strategic avenues and thereby (a) reward people who have rushed tech, and (b) shake up staid turtlers
It's not a reward if it's a day-1 technology, because nobody had to work to get it.
It's not a shake-up strategic disruption if it's a day-1 technology, because no-one has had the opportunity to develop strategies which can be disrupted

I would have agreed with you, but some of us hate hyperlanes that much. I am not playing roads in space, but space game with different ftl types in space.

There are no roads or walls in space.

So I will either stay at 1.9 or mod in different ftl types as soon as possible.

However, according to one of the streams different ftl types are gone for good in 2.0, so goodbye stellaris, no more money from me.
 

macd21

General
80 Badges
Oct 10, 2011
2.089
945
  • Europa Universalis IV: Res Publica
  • Europa Universalis IV: Mare Nostrum
  • Europa Universalis IV: Third Rome
  • Stellaris: Synthetic Dawn
  • Europa Universalis IV: Pre-order
  • Crusader Kings II: Jade Dragon
  • Victoria 2: Heart of Darkness
  • Victoria 2: A House Divided
  • Sword of the Stars II
  • Victoria: Revolutions
  • Europa Universalis IV: Call to arms event
  • Europa Universalis IV: Wealth of Nations
  • Europa Universalis IV: Art of War
  • Crusader Kings II: Charlemagne
  • Crusader Kings II: Legacy of Rome
  • Crusader Kings II: The Old Gods
  • Crusader Kings II: Rajas of India
  • Crusader Kings II: The Republic
  • Crusader Kings II: Sons of Abraham
  • Crusader Kings II: Sunset Invasion
  • Crusader Kings II: Sword of Islam
  • Europa Universalis III: Chronicles
  • Crusader Kings II
  • Europa Universalis IV: Conquest of Paradise
  • Stellaris: Apocalypse
  • Hearts of Iron IV: Together for Victory
  • Crusader Kings II: Monks and Mystics
  • Hearts of Iron IV: No Step Back
  • Stellaris: Leviathans Story Pack
  • Europa Universalis IV: Mandate of Heaven
  • BATTLETECH
  • Hearts of Iron IV: Death or Dishonor
  • Age of Wonders III
  • Europa Universalis IV: Cradle of Civilization
  • Hearts of Iron IV: Expansion Pass
  • Stellaris: Humanoids Species Pack
  • Stellaris: Digital Anniversary Edition
  • Europa Universalis IV: Rights of Man
  • Crusader Kings II: Reapers Due
  • Hearts of Iron IV: Cadet
  • Stellaris Sign-up
  • Stellaris
  • Crusader Kings II: Conclave
  • Europa Universalis IV: Cossacks
  • Crusader Kings II: Horse Lords
  • Europa Universalis IV: Common Sense
  • Crusader Kings II: Way of Life
  • Europa Universalis IV: El Dorado
  • 500k Club
  • Victoria 2
Indeed, is the only qualitative difference between warp and jump the (small) travel time of warp? Seems a lot of effort to remove something inconsequential.

There’s a lot more differences than that.

The biggest being timing. Warp tech is available from day 1, while jump is late game. The second is rarity - the first person to research jump tech will have a unique advantage, whereas warp tech is commonplace. There’s a big difference between a game in which the tech is standard from the beginning to one in which it’s a late game development that totally shakes things up.
 

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
What part of "endgame tech" do you not get?
This is like saying that Civ games should have deep-ocean movement or no deep-ocean movement but not both because that's "asinine".
But, for completionism's sake, let me spell it out for you:
  • Jump drive is a late-game "disruption technology" to open up new strategic avenues and thereby (a) reward people who have rushed tech, and (b) shake up staid turtlers
It's not a reward if it's a day-1 technology, because nobody had to work to get it.
It's not a shake-up strategic disruption if it's a day-1 technology, because no-one has had the opportunity to develop strategies which can be disrupted

Why the hell do you care if I mod warp back into my games? I don't want hyperlanes so this appears the best I can do short of a warp option being added. I give literally no damns about the loss to choke point warfare this will entail because, IMO, hyperlanes SUCK!

*edit* looking at the first result on google if jump drive is indeed a tech and the modding doesn't differ from the 1.9 guide overmuch, it should be easy to mod in as a starting tech. Just need to change the parameters somewhat and I'll be a happy camper :)
 
Last edited:

AlanC9

Field Marshal
16 Badges
Mar 15, 2001
5.081
320
Visit site
  • Hearts of Iron III
  • 500k Club
  • Europa Universalis III: Collection
  • Pillars of Eternity
  • Stellaris
  • Cities in Motion 2
  • Crusader Kings II
  • Crusader Kings II: The Old Gods
  • Europa Universalis III
  • Divine Wind
  • For the Motherland
  • Hearts of Iron III: Their Finest Hour
  • Heir to the Throne
  • Majesty 2 Collection
  • Semper Fi
  • Magicka 2
There are no roads or walls in space.

Unless there are. ATM all FTL methods are equally improbable. If any method ever does work out, it very well might be functionally equivalent to hyperlanes.
 

AlanC9

Field Marshal
16 Badges
Mar 15, 2001
5.081
320
Visit site
  • Hearts of Iron III
  • 500k Club
  • Europa Universalis III: Collection
  • Pillars of Eternity
  • Stellaris
  • Cities in Motion 2
  • Crusader Kings II
  • Crusader Kings II: The Old Gods
  • Europa Universalis III
  • Divine Wind
  • For the Motherland
  • Hearts of Iron III: Their Finest Hour
  • Heir to the Throne
  • Majesty 2 Collection
  • Semper Fi
  • Magicka 2
Indeed, is the only qualitative difference between warp and jump the (small) travel time of warp? Seems a lot of effort to remove something inconsequential.

Removing stuff in itself isn't a lot of work. Obviously not, since any Stellaris player can turn warp off already.
 

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
OK, messing around the txt files after dinner here and looking at 1.9's tech files I can see that you should be able to add a start tech easily enough:

Basic science lab start tech in the 00_phys_tech.txt file:

tech_basic_science_lab_1 = {
cost = 0
area = physics
tier = 0
category = { computing }
start_tech = yes

# # unlock basic science lab lvl 1
}



Looking to make Jump Drives a starting tech by copying the structure from one of the other starting techs:


tech_jump_drive_1 = {
cost = 0
area = physics
tier = 0
category = { field_manipulation }
start_tech = yes

# # unlock ???????
}



Not sure yet what to put in the # # section at the end.... still looking :) Not sure about altering the negative effect.... going to have a look :)
 

Silens

General
58 Badges
Nov 3, 2017
1.809
6.329
  • Crusader Kings II
  • Stellaris
  • Stellaris: Synthetic Dawn
  • Stellaris: Distant Stars
  • Cities: Skylines - Mass Transit
  • BATTLETECH
  • Hearts of Iron IV: Death or Dishonor
  • Stellaris: Federations
  • Cities: Skylines - Green Cities
  • Hearts of Iron IV: Expansion Pass
  • Stellaris: Humanoids Species Pack
  • Stellaris: Apocalypse
  • BATTLETECH - Digital Deluxe Edition
  • Cities: Skylines - Parklife
  • Hearts of Iron IV: Together for Victory
  • Cities: Skylines Industries
  • BATTLETECH: Flashpoint
  • Stellaris: Megacorp
  • Hearts of Iron IV: Expansion Pass
  • Prison Architect
  • Cities: Skylines - Campus
  • Stellaris: Ancient Relics
  • BATTLETECH: Season pass
  • Stellaris: Lithoids
  • BATTLETECH: Heavy Metal
  • Prison Architect: Psych Ward
  • Hearts of Iron IV: La Resistance
  • Cities: Skylines - Natural Disasters
  • Hearts of Iron IV: No Step Back
  • Hearts of Iron IV: By Blood Alone
  • Stellaris: Nemesis
  • Warlock: Master of the Arcane
  • Stellaris: Necroids
  • Island Bound
  • Cities: Skylines
  • Crusader Kings III
  • Crusader Kings II: Way of Life
  • Pillars of Eternity
  • Crusader Kings II: Horse Lords
  • Cities: Skylines - After Dark
  • Cities: Skylines - Snowfall
  • Stellaris: Galaxy Edition
  • Hearts of Iron IV: Cadet
  • Stellaris: Digital Anniversary Edition
  • Stellaris: Leviathans Story Pack
  • Stellaris - Path to Destruction bundle
  • Crusader Kings II: Charlemagne
  • Crusader Kings II: Legacy of Rome
  • Crusader Kings II: The Old Gods
  • Crusader Kings II: Rajas of India
# # unlock ???????
}



Not sure yet what to put in the # # section at the end.... still looking :) Not sure about altering the negative effect.... going to have a look :)

Everything that begins with a '#' is only a comment, so you can put in whatever you want as it won't have any gameplay effect. You can write it like that: '# # unlocks standard jump drive as starting tech', so that you still know what this piece of code does when you decide to look at it in a few weeks or months.

It should work the way to changed it.
 

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
Everything that begins with a '#' is only a comment, so you can put in whatever you want as it won't have any gameplay effect. You can write it like that: '# # unlocks standard jump drive as starting tech', so that you still know what this piece of code does when you decide to look at it in a few weeks or months.

It should work the way to changed it.

Ahhh, I did wonder if that would be the case. Thanks for that! Going to edit the jumpdrive tech, save it and load up a game to see what happens.

*edit* http://oi68.tinypic.com/2hdqm4z.jpg

Lovely. This worked perfectly:

tech_jump_drive_1 = {
cost = 0
area = physics
tier = 0
category = { field_manipulation }
start_tech = yes

# # death to hyperlanes
}

*another edit*

Looks like the malus effects may live in the 00_defines.txt file...

Found this relating to the current jumpdrive:

JUMPDRIVE_WINDUP = 150 # In micro updates ( 10/day )
JUMPDRIVE_WINDDOWN = 50 # In micro updates ( 10/day )

so I guess that this is where the jumpdrive malus will be located (if indeed we can edit the malus in 2.0). A few tweaks appears to be all that is required to reinstate at least some kind of warp travel in 2.0 if it follows some semblance of 1.9's structure in the .txt files.
 
Last edited:

Butlerian

Captain
Jan 17, 2018
384
0
I would have agreed with you, but some of us hate hyperlanes that much. I am not playing roads in space, but space game with different ftl types in space.

There are no roads or walls in space.
FTL isn't about space.
It's about hyperspace.
There may very well be roads or walls in hyperspace.

This is perhaps the most infuriating anti-hyperlanes argument, because it's disingenuousness combined with pop-culture myopia combined with anti-scientific hypocrisy combined with missing the point.
  1. If you really cared about "realistic space travel" you'd have been complaining about Warp too since Day 1, because it's not "centuries long cryoship slower than light travel times". So that's how I know your complaint is disingenuous
  2. The counter to (1) is that "Stellaris is a futuristic, space video game and warp travel is an absolute staple of futuristic, space media", to which the answer is: Don't pretend you're some historian of science fiction, approximately one popular sci-fi setting has warp travel and it's Star Trek. The fact that you think this one example is representative of the entire genre is proof that you don't really know what you're talking about. I don't want to say "If you make this argument you're a fake sci-fi fan", but... ... ...I don't know how to finish that sentence.
  3. The "Hyperlanes are unscientific" argument is... well, unlike the point above, I do want to say that "If you make this argument you're a fake science enthusiast". Firstly, Krasnikov Tubes. Secondly, all FTL is unscientific, so this argument is very similar to growing the beard of a medieval theologian and pounding the table yelling "The number of angels who can dance on the head of a pin is 12! The heretics who say it's 15 are fools who don't understand exegecis! Burn the heretics! BURN THEM!"
  4. Stellaris is a VIDEO GAME. The important consideration for a VIDEO GAME is whether or not its mechanics produce good gameplay, not how pseudo-scientifically accurate they are. Warpholes pre-2.0 have resulted in very bad gameplay. Anti-hyperlanes complaints are therefore the same kind of argument as "This red car doesn't work, and that blue car does, but I like the colour red more, so I'll buy the red car", and then sitting in the car dealer's lot unable to drive anywhere but yelling about how happy you are with your purchase and how unaesthetic all those blue car drivers are as they drive past you and out into the world.
So if your objective was to annoy me, mission accomplished. But your arguments are still ridiculous from multiple different angles.
 

Kappenloch

Second Lieutenant
Nov 14, 2017
160
0
Why the hell do you care if I mod warp back into my games? I don't want hyperlanes so this appears the best I can do short of a warp option being added. I give literally no damns about the loss to choke point warfare this will entail because, IMO, hyperlanes SUCK!

*edit* looking at the first result on google if jump drive is indeed a tech and the modding doesn't differ from the 1.9 guide overmuch, it should be easy to mod in as a starting tech. Just need to change the parameters somewhat and I'll be a happy camper :)

While I completely agree with you about the Suckability of hyperlane-only travel, I think there's a very good chance we'll find that a 2.0 AI optimised for early to mid game fortified chokepoints and trench-warfare in space wont have a clue how to deal with warp fleets moving wherever they want in the early game. In fact I'd be willing to bet money on it. And of course the AI is one thing we cant mod.

But by all means the modding should still be tried ASAP after release, I'd love to find out that I'm wrong and 2.0 doesn't end up being forced hyperlane hell for everybody. It would be a very pleasant surprise because it means I wont have to stick with 1.9 until I get bored to death with it.
 

TGK72

Socially Awkward Molluscoid Foundation
61 Badges
Nov 29, 2013
353
114
  • Crusader Kings II: Reapers Due
  • Stellaris: Galaxy Edition
  • Stellaris
  • Sword of the Stars
  • Sword of the Stars II
  • Hearts of Iron IV: Together for Victory
  • Stellaris: Digital Anniversary Edition
  • Crusader Kings II: Monks and Mystics
  • Stellaris: Federations
  • Cities: Skylines - Mass Transit
  • BATTLETECH
  • Surviving Mars
  • Age of Wonders: Planetfall
  • Stellaris: Humanoids Species Pack
  • Stellaris: Apocalypse
  • Surviving Mars: Digital Deluxe Edition
  • Cities: Skylines - Parklife
  • Stellaris: Distant Stars
  • Surviving Mars: First Colony Edition
  • Cities: Skylines Industries
  • BATTLETECH: Flashpoint
  • Stellaris: Megacorp
  • Crusader Kings II: Holy Fury
  • Imperator: Rome Deluxe Edition
  • Imperator: Rome
  • Surviving Mars: First Colony Edition
  • BATTLETECH: Season pass
  • Cities: Skylines
  • Hearts of Iron IV: La Resistance
  • Stellaris: Lithoids
  • Europa Universalis IV
  • Stellaris: Nemesis
  • Crusader Kings III
  • Age of Wonders: Planetfall Deluxe edition
  • Stellaris: Necroids
  • Cities: Skylines - Natural Disasters
  • Crusader Kings II: Way of Life
  • Cities: Skylines - After Dark
  • Crusader Kings II: Conclave
  • Cities: Skylines - Snowfall
  • Stellaris: Galaxy Edition
  • Stellaris: Galaxy Edition
  • Hearts of Iron IV: Cadet
  • BATTLETECH: Heavy Metal
  • Stellaris: Leviathans Story Pack
  • Crusader Kings II: Charlemagne
  • Hearts of Iron IV: Expansion Pass
  • Crusader Kings II: The Republic
  • Hearts of Iron III Collection
  • Stellaris: Distant Stars Pre-Order
FTL isn't about space.
It's about hyperspace.
There may very well be roads or walls in hyperspace.

This is perhaps the most infuriating anti-hyperlanes argument, because it's disingenuousness combined with pop-culture myopia combined with anti-scientific hypocrisy combined with missing the point.
  1. If you really cared about "realistic space travel" you'd have been complaining about Warp too since Day 1, because it's not "centuries long cryoship slower than light travel times". So that's how I know your complaint is disingenuous
  2. The counter to (1) is that "Stellaris is a futuristic, space video game and warp travel is an absolute staple of futuristic, space media", to which the answer is: Don't pretend you're some historian of science fiction, approximately one popular sci-fi setting has warp travel and it's Star Trek. The fact that you think this one example is representative of the entire genre is proof that you don't really know what you're talking about. I don't want to say "If you make this argument you're a fake sci-fi fan", but... ... ...I don't know how to finish that sentence.
  3. The "Hyperlanes are unscientific" argument is... well, unlike the point above, I do want to say that "If you make this argument you're a fake science enthusiast". Firstly, Krasnikov Tubes. Secondly, all FTL is unscientific, so this argument is very similar to growing the beard of a medieval theologian and pounding the table yelling "The number of angels who can dance on the head of a pin is 12! The heretics who say it's 15 are fools who don't understand exegecis! Burn the heretics! BURN THEM!"
  4. Stellaris is a VIDEO GAME. The important consideration for a VIDEO GAME is whether or not its mechanics produce good gameplay, not how pseudo-scientifically accurate they are. Warpholes pre-2.0 have resulted in very bad gameplay. Anti-hyperlanes complaints are therefore the same kind of argument as "This red car doesn't work, and that blue car does, but I like the colour red more, so I'll buy the red car", and then sitting in the car dealer's lot unable to drive anywhere but yelling about how happy you are with your purchase and how unaesthetic all those blue car drivers are as they drive past you and out into the world.
So if your objective was to annoy me, mission accomplished. But your arguments are still ridiculous from multiple different angles.
Easiest agree I've given in a while

Unfortunately, I fear all this will most likely fall on the def ears of those who prefer the red car. Since if they wasn't so zealous to their own beliefs to begin with then they wouldn't still be sitting in that lot blasting free bird at an uncomfortable volume.

However, I still appreciate the effort. That was probaby the most sensible post I've read in this volatile wasteland of a thread.
 
Last edited:
Status
Not open for further replies.