Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature currently requires accessing the site using the built-in Safari browser.
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.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly. You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
yes, I imagine the planetary administration building (if it even exists in the new version?) would have ruler job slots. Most Planets probably will have a ruler slot, I imagine. Planets which are primarily/solely for resources, however, I imagine wouldn't need that building. It all depends on what the Administration actually provides for benefits. In any case, the "low level Government Officials" wouldn't be the rulers. The rulers would be the Politicians, the lobbyists, the administrators, the corporate CEOs. The Rich/Powerful.
And those would be way, way to few people. We ran the numbers upstream, and what was shown in the teaser does fit real life figures for at least my 1st world Coutnry (germany).
It rather sounds like changing wich kind/amount of Consumer Goods Ruler State use should be in the game. And as the last DD showed, it already is in the game.
Instead you put a fortress planet on the enemy border, and then the entire war turns into the meat grinder of trench warfare, because there is no way that the ships can bypass or ignore the fortress in your chokepoint, and so the adversary is free to reinforce that chokepoint with impunity.
Have you actually played the game since 2.0 came out? Because that scenario makes no sense.
If the defender has that level of advatange (fleet and station), he would wait for a enemy attack, break it and then go on the counter attack.
In this post you just did. Your post is based on a premise the game is in a perfect position, because there is no way, according to you, that the proposal could change things for the better, which is the real best case scenario.
So I don't think your proposal would be a good thing, and that makes me thinking the game is in a perfect spot whatsoever, regarding any possible change or combination of changes?
Your proposal is the only thing that could ever be changed else we're stuck?
Maybe you might want to read that again. It's located in the same post. I'm not opposed to any change, I'm opposed to this change you're proposing. You could as well crank up the hyperlane count a bit for your games, I'm sure you will find chokepoints without habitable planets at all, giving you some choices as well.
I never said it would be a binary effect, I explicitly stated it would lean towards the 3 FTL situation, but thing is as defenses are now useful, they're also rather frail. With a thin frontier between being butter, and being absolute blockers. No need for habitable planets for that. Planetary fortresses are all that can be left when bastions are butter to the enemy, and are not always there, and won't hold that long. Minerals to build them can be used for ships and tiles they occupy to produce minerals. Any significant amount of them is a wasted opportunity to repel the invader with a fleet, opening for counter attack, without relying on inhibitors.
Instead you put a fortress planet on the enemy border, and then the entire war turns into the meat grinder of trench warfare, because there is no way that the ships can bypass or ignore the fortress in your chokepoint, and so the adversary is free to reinforce that chokepoint with impunity.
Yes we stick to the slow down definition of the word inhibit because it's clear from context using a nuanced understanding applied on your behalf that that is what meaning is meant.
From this screen we can see that at least machine gestalts have two strata, workers and thinkers. Thinker drones seem to be producing the same things as specialist and ruler strata organic pops, and the worker drones are producing what worker organics were producing. Unlike civilizations of individuals, it looks like the two strata cost the same maintenance (1 energy). The replicator on the right is spending minerals, but that's because it's making robots. I suspect the two types are split up because strata plays into robo-modding and gene-modding. I suspect you can choose who gets modified by strata now, but that is merely baseless speculation.
What's quite interesting is the stability value on display. Everyone on this is planet is a robot without a happiness value, and yet stability is 61%. Gonna be honest here, I have no idea what this means. It's clear that robot growth is produced by pops now, but how the player decides which models of robot to produce is unclear. Perhaps the decisions tab?
Nexus districts resemble city districts, providing infrastructure, housing, and a worker job. However, instead of clerks they provide maintenance drone jobs, which in turn provide Planet Amenities. We still don't know what those do. Given that Nexus districts provide them, perhaps they have something to do with buildings? On the topic of buildings, the civilian goods building has been replaced by a building using the graphic currently used for exterminator drone factories. Therefore, this is probably the replicator building.
This planet is producing no trade value. As trade value seems to represent the service economy, this makes sense for gestalts. We still don't know what it does, but I like the theory that trade routes exchange it into other resources.
While machine empires don't need to worry about food or consumer goods, pop growth for them will require buildings and pop jobs. This will no doubt be a concern of machine empire players.
Crystal Mines are likely a building, as there does not seem to be a way in the interface to build special districts. Since it's a mine, its likely to provide worker strata jobs, unlike the buildings we've previously seen. All district slots are clear, so the crossed out slots only seem to appear when a planet is colonized. Perhaps they represent land clearing and environmental modification beyond what a planet can naturally sustain? Perhaps they are merely absent deposits and produce fewer resources?
The symbology indicates that Holo-Theatres and the Palace provide job slots. Entertainers for the former and Nobles for the later? As we'll see later, Entertainers produce planetary amenities, but what would nobles do? Produce Unity perhaps? A production bonus to the entire planet? Luxury residences give planetary amenities as well, so perhaps amenities play into happiness somehow?
I think the buttons next to every job are used to designate a job as high priority, low priority, or off. All of the jobs have the down arrow selected as the same time, so we know it's a toggle, not a button.
Stability is at 55%, while happiness is 48%. The enforcer at the top of the screen probably has something to do with that.
Immigration is being displayed as a percentage, not as the numerical value.This might be because that % is how much of emigration there is available to boost pop growth. Perhaps this empire has 6 immigrant growth available, and .9 is the portion this planet gets.
Some other interesting things we can see are that the pop with a hat for the worker strata is at 8, while the population of workers is only 2. This means that pop with hat indicates the total number of available jobs, not the number of employed pops.
This colony has no ruler pops, but has a specialist that is producing PA. Maybe the initial colony capital only gives a specialist job, and higher levels of capital give more ruler jobs?
And those would be way, way to few people. We ran the numbers upstream, and what was shown in the teaser does fit real life figures for at least my 1st world Coutnry (germany).
It rather sounds like changing wich kind/amount of Consumer Goods Ruler State use should be in the game. And as the last DD showed, it already is in the game.
Okay that last sentence makes no sense. What I meant to say:
The Consumer Goods that the "Ruler" Strata consumes should change based on Ethics. And the name should be adapted.
From a previous teaser, we know that "Noble" is a possible Ruler Stratum Job Title.
And the DD showed that adapting the Consuemr goods based on Ethics and Species rights is entirely possible.
What's quite interesting is the stability value on display. Everyone on this is planet is a robot without a happiness value, and yet stability is 61%. Gonna be honest here, I have no idea what this means. It's clear that robot growth is produced by pops now, but how the player decides which models of robot to produce is unclear. Perhaps the decisions tab?
Stability could be "stability of the WiFi Signal used to control those drones."
It would face more or less the same challenges and produce the same effects as "unruly Organic Individuals" do.
You should asume that every mechanic that exists for Organic, Individual based Empires will be mapped to Gestalt Consciousness Empires. There are only a few Exceptions like Happiness and Factions. It is just way easier to balance stuff that way.
Leaders already were mapped with that whole "Autonomoues Drones" thing.
The GC ruler was simply tagged with a "Immortal" rule, that even most Scripts check for.
From this screen we can see that at least machine gestalts have two strata, workers and thinkers. Thinker drones seem to be producing the same things as specialist and ruler strata organic pops, and the worker drones are producing what worker organics were producing. Unlike civilizations of individuals, it looks like the two strata cost the same maintenance (1 energy). The replicator on the right is spending minerals, but that's because it's making robots. I suspect the two types are split up because strata plays into robo-modding and gene-modding. I suspect you can choose who gets modified by strata now, but that is merely baseless speculation.
This was a very early teaser. So It is possible Ruler stratum was simply not in (in a way that was showable as a Teaser).
Again, "asume every mechanic of Individualsitic Empires will be mapped for GC's".
They could easily call those GC Ruler jobs "Uplink Coordinator" or something. Maybe "Communication Coordinator" to imply that they are also used for Diplomatic Drones.
While machine empires don't need to worry about food or consumer goods, pop growth for them will require buildings and pop jobs. This will no doubt be a concern of machine empire players.
All other empries do have jobs for Pop Growth as well. They are called "Farmer"
And note that Tinkers Provide some sort of "Maintenance" resource. Wich is a perfect mapping for "Consumer Goods that non-individual Robots use".
So if anything, this will unify the pop growth of Organic and Robotic Pops into a single System.
Crystal Mines are likely a building, as there does not seem to be a way in the interface to build special districts. Since it's a mine, its likely to provide worker strata jobs, unlike the buildings we've previously seen. All district slots are clear, so the crossed out slots only seem to appear when a planet is colonized. Perhaps they represent land clearing and environmental modification beyond what a planet can naturally sustain? Perhaps they are merely absent deposits and produce fewer resources?
The minimum I asume is that there are 2 caps:
One for each District Type. And one for overall Districts.
Planets already have deposits based on their class. Allowing 6 Energy but only 4 Farming and 4Mining Districts would make sense. Even more so if you can only build around 10 districts or so in total (City ones included).
Some might even need more then 1 Slot (like 1.5).
Indeed, looking at this image of Cevant again:
I am really not sure how to parse those district squares.
Maybe they are marked off because they can not be uild in yet (to few infrastucture or Global District limit?)
Maybe they are marekd off, because you need to build/plan the previous district before you can use that slot?
This is still early prototyping, so stuff might not nessearily make sense.
Cosnidering we havea very similar Picture of Unity:
I would guess that those are how starting planets look like in the current build. A decent mix of City, Farm, Energy and Mineral Districts. Commonly used starter buildings (Capitol, Reserach lab, Alloy foundry, not sure about Nr. 3*)
Oh man these teasers are so amazing. I've really enjoyed Stellaris so far but this is the Paradox Treatment that keeps me coming back to their game. I'm so excited for this!
Ohh. I just realize something myself. Perhaps new to some in here. Perhaps not.
After looking back and forward between the two picture of Unity and Cevant.
I just count the icons of terrain blocker (I think) and they goes up to 11. If I see 2 in the bottom left I assume that single square unlock two instead of just one.
Then go back and count the "red" shaded grid and they all match up to 11 as well! I think those art are still a work in progress since their icon may be confusing like what does swamp unlock? River plain may be food but some icon look like a rolling hill. Mountain may be mine but there are some that looks like half mountain half plain.
Since both planet has the same initial builds. It is safe to assume that they will not change the grid for those jobs at day 1.
I believe those grid and "blocker" are the replacement for the old tile blocker/bonus system.
You also get the same corresponding unshaded 3/4/3 grid between both planet as well.
Instead you put a fortress planet on the enemy border, and then the entire war turns into the meat grinder of trench warfare, because there is no way that the ships can bypass or ignore the fortress in your chokepoint, and so the adversary is free to reinforce that chokepoint with impunity.
What if they have lots of shipyards, or they are effectively defending their shipyards with their fleet, and so bombing/invading the planet has a better payoff than chasing after shipyards or fleet? What I'm advocating for is strategic choice. Currently there isn't strategic choice. A change in the balance isn't going to immediately polarise back to the issues with Warp and Wormhole, where chokepoints could more easily be bypassed or avoided, mainly because for both of those they simply don't exist.
Given that many strategy games have more maneuverability around fortifications than Stellaris does, and don't suffer from the same issues that Stellaris pre 2.0 did, your assertion that any change to maneuverability would result in Stellaris returning to pre-2.0 days is false.
In this post you just did. Your post is based on a premise the game is in a perfect position, because there is no way, according to you, that the proposal could change things for the better, which is the real best case scenario.
I'm talking about the mechanic here. Yes, 20% charge up time is too short. So maybe 500% charge up time?
That was a reference to another post I've seen recently which argued the game was at one extreme, then saw a counterpoint to that extreme and immediately started arguing that if anything was changed, the game would end up at the opposite extreme.
I don't think our posts are kilometers long. Maybe if you are on a phone and have to scroll through...
Yes we stick to the slow down definition of the word inhibit because it's clear from context using a nuanced understanding applied on your behalf that that is what meaning is meant.
This is a 95 page thread, dedicated to twitter teasers, which is cluttered with a whole lot random crap. And our particular conversation has been going for 'days' because everytime you post at 3am, and then I post while you are asleep, and so on.I don't see anything wrong with that - that's an effect of time zones. We haven't been posting every 15 minutes for three days solid. However if you don't want to participate in a conversation, then I suggest you do as Oscot does.
This was a very early teaser. So It is possible Ruler stratum was simply not in (in a way that was showable as a Teaser).
Again, "asume every mechanic of Individualsitic Empires will be mapped for GC's".
They could easily call those GC Ruler jobs "Uplink Coordinator" or something. Maybe "Communication Coordinator" to imply that they are also used for Diplomatic Drones.
That would rather defeat the point of showing off the different system machine empires have, i.e. the stated intent of that tweet. Combined with Wiz saying that Hive Minds are also getting some work to differentiate them with the new system, and it looks like Gestalts are becoming more different from individualists.
So I don't think your proposal would be a good thing, and that makes me thinking the game is in a perfect spot whatsoever, regarding any possible change or combination of changes?
Yes. We've identified that fleet manoeuvrability is an issue, you think it's in the perfect position as it is right now, and any change would return us to the evils of warp and wormhole style warfare in conjunction with hyperlanes.
Your proposal is the only thing that could ever be changed else we're stuck?
Maybe you might want to read that again. It's located in the same post. I'm not opposed to any change, I'm opposed to this change you're proposing. You could as well crank up the hyperlane count a bit for your games, I'm sure you will find chokepoints without habitable planets at all, giving you some choices as well.
You say you are against the idea, but then post a balance condition under which you see it working. I did see that, it wasn't consistent with the rest of your post, so I gave you the benefit of the doubt. Saying that something is a bad idea is different from saying something is a good idea which needs more work.
I never said it would be a binary effect, I explicitly stated it would lean towards the 3 FTL situation, but thing is as defenses are now useful, they're also rather frail. With a thin frontier between being butter, and being absolute blockers. No need for habitable planets for that. Planetary fortresses are all that can be left when bastions are butter to the enemy, and are not always there, and won't hold that long. Minerals to build them can be used for ships and tiles they occupy to produce minerals. Any significant amount of them is a wasted opportunity to repel the invader with a fleet, opening for counter attack, without relying on inhibitors.
So now you're walking back the extremity of your argument? Yes, on the continuum from completely mobile to completely immobile, anything that improves manoeuvrability will be "leaning towards" one end of the spectrum, but that is not the same as saying it would be equivalent to.
lol "impunity"? Really? Maybe with 5x planets and 0.25 hyperlanes.
Have you actually played the game since 2.0 came out? Because that scenario makes no sense.
If the defender has that level of advatange (fleet and station), he would wait for a enemy attack, break it and then go on the counter attack.
I could ask either or both of you the same questions. Remember that the algorithm for generating hyperlanes was changed with Niven? I play on default galaxy generation settings and for all practical purposes, 1 fortress on one planet can completely lock down a front, leaving me to attack somewhere else.
Well I guess since the devs defined the context in game, they don't have the same view on how it applies.
I think that shifting away from common meanings is not conducive to discussion, and would point out that it is inappropriately named if it is intended to prevent or obstruct FTL, as common meanings of inhibition mean to slow down.
The minimum I asume is that there are 2 caps:
One for each District Type. And one for overall Districts.
Planets already have deposits based on their class. Allowing 6 Energy but only 4 Farming and 4Mining Districts would make sense. Even more so if you can only build around 10 districts or so in total (City ones included).
I would guess that those are how starting planets look like in the current build. A decent mix of City, Farm, Energy and Mineral Districts. Commonly used starter buildings (Capitol, Reserach lab, Alloy foundry, not sure about Nr. 3*)
Ohh. I just realize something myself. Perhaps new to some in here. Perhaps not.
After looking back and forward between the two picture of Unity and Cevant.
I just count the icons of terrain blocker (I think) and they goes up to 11. If I see 2 in the bottom left I assume that single square unlock two instead of just one.
Then go back and count the "red" shaded grid and they all match up to 11 as well! I think those art are still a work in progress since their icon may be confusing like what does swamp unlock? River plain may be food but some icon look like a rolling hill. Mountain may be mine but there are some that looks like half mountain half plain.
Since both planet has the same initial builds. It is safe to assume that they will not change the grid for those jobs at day 1.
I believe those grid and "blocker" are the replacement for the old tile blocker/bonus system.
You also get the same corresponding unshaded 3/4/3 grid between both planet as well.
If there are 21 deposits on a starting size 16-20 planet, and 4 cities already, I am wondering how many of those deposits can be utilized in total. We have 11 deposits and 11 districts already, plus 3 open, for a total of 25.
I would guess that those are how starting planets look like in the current build. A decent mix of City, Farm, Energy and Mineral Districts. Commonly used starter buildings (Capitol, Reserach lab, Alloy foundry, not sure about Nr. 3*)
Solar plant.
Incidentally, for those of us who remember v1.0, the Alloy foundry is currently the habitat mineral processor but before that it was a strategic resource processor that you had to build before you could get the empire-wide bonus.
This looks like some of the restrictions are going away.
at least i can't see anything that would indicate you have to be egalitarian in order to give Utopian living standarts
Maybe with 5x planets and 0.25 hyperlanes.
.png){kind=avatar}
