2.2 & Megacorp Teasers

[Avian Overlord]

I feel like one of issues with Stellaris's tech tree is the same one that afflicts most 4Xs, that of techs that only do one thing instead of representing a technological breakthrough with multiple implications. Even Civ, the last hold out, has fallen.

 

[TheDarkMaster]

I feel like one of issues with Stellaris's tech tree is the same one that afflicts most 4Xs, that of techs that only do one thing instead of representing a technological breakthrough with multiple implications. Even Civ, the last hold out, has fallen.

I blame the issue in 6 mostly on the split to have two separate trees, techs and civics, and the much lower number of city buildings. There are so many technologies that should really do more than they actually do. The ancient era stuff is what it should look like throughout the tree.

Stellaris use to be better for interesting technologies, though they still all did only one thing. The problem now is that there's far fewer opportunities to build anything that it's hard to have techs provide benefits beyond small passive bonuses. Funnily enough, a complaint I had for the old version of the game was that a lot of the start of game techs were completely useless until mid-game because they were building upgrades that were not cost effective while you could still build mining and research stations and never had enough minerals to do everything. I actually recommended replacing those lv2 building techs with passive bonuses for the first wave of technologies.

Now I'm just desperate for something useful I can spend my minerals on, rather than just selling them on the market or to AI empires. I haven't built a single mining district in my games before year 100 or so because I have far more minerals from mining stations than I need.

 

[ZomgK3tchup]

There was this indie 4x game (that was made by 1 guy, can't remember the name) that had this system of choices that i really liked. Basically, each tech came in 2 or 3 "cards", and you had to choose 1 and discard the rest. So for example, a tech like "fusion reactor" would come in 2 cards: miniaturized reactor (which would unlock a new ship component); and expanded reactor (gave you a new building upgrade for your planets). You pick one, and the other can't be researched, but you can still get it by trading with the AI (which made diplomatic races a bit OP). There was also an empire/race pick that allowed you to research and pick all cards, without having to choose, but it was a somewhat expensive pick.

This sounds cool, but I think vassals would break this system.

Specifically, the logical workaround is to create vassals as close to gamestart as you can and hope that they research different techs than you. The counter-workaround would be to restrict vassals to following your tech path, but that's EU4-tier as far as hyper-specific rules go.

And as @The Founder said, getting the AI to play well with diplo-heavy systems is difficult.

 

[Nikolai]

Warrior Culture is now slightly cooler @StellarisGame

https://twitter.com/dmoregard/status/1096404942410133505

 

[methegrate]

More unique techs would be nice to have, so different ethics/empires play more differently even when they're regular empires; like at some point we get the option to choose between different techs with significant gameplay effects and choosing one disables the other, sort of like a branching tech tree but still within the card system; so even playing the same empire we can tailor it differently in different games, not just with the perks; focus in battleships/cruisers/titans, choosing a weapon specialization, pick one disctrict type that will get a bonus (balanced so that minerals are not the obvious choice every time), that sort of thing.

I feel bad, but it's one of the reasons that I deleted Stellaris a little while back. I like talking about it on the forums because the game has really cool potential, but so many fundamental issues have been unaddressed since launch.

Like this one. One of the first criticisms of Stellaris was that most tech research amounts to nothing more than boring stat bumps, taking what should be one of the most interesting drivers of progress, change and conflict and turning it into an ignorable process of just marking time. It's going on three years now and that's still the case. Most research is still nothing more than five or ten precent bonuses or linear upgrades to existing systems. (Blue lasers! It's a whole new weapon... that's... exactly the same as the old one, but a little bit stronger.)

Idk... I'm going to keep having fun bouncing ideas around, because it's always cool to brainstorm, but tbh I'm kind thinking it might be time to just call this a big experiment and reboot to a Stellaris 2. This time with an actual, coherent vision for the game that they stick to.

 

[Lady Lacroix]

And a 50% increase to a very low weight means it'll probably take just as long to pull the card. It might mean the number of draws expected before the card appears falls by one. Maybe. You're still completely subject to the RNG gods.

Except when looking at it big picture, over the course of the game when selecting TA as your first point maybe for a tall tech rush, you're now getting 50% more rare techs over the course of the whole game especially if you're stacking alternative research bonuses. Sure everyone will eventually get mega-engineering yet there are real benefits to getting it before the point of no longer needing it. An early tech wonder can give you a tech edge that will last you the game.

 

[The Founder]

Warrior Culture is now slightly cooler @StellarisGame

https://twitter.com/dmoregard/status/1096404942410133505

Will we built a Thunder Dome instead of a Holo Theather?

 

[The Founder]

Except when looking at it big picture, over the course of the game when selecting TA as your first point maybe for a tall tech rush, you're now getting 50% more rare techs over the course of the whole game.

Your math is off. Way of.

There are not getting "50% more rare techs". There are still only X rare techs in the game.
You are more likely to draw them*. The same way you are more likely to draw them if you reserach faster and/or got more choice (more rolling on the chances).

*And not even 50% more likely.
Asume you got 20 techs.
19 normal with a weight of 20.
1 rare with a weight of 5.

Without the +50% your chance to draw the rare is
5/385 = 1.298%
With the +50%, your chance to draw the rare is:
7.5/387.5 = 1.935%

With +50% till only a <2% chance.

 

[Lady Lacroix]

Your math is off. Way of.

There are not getting "50% more rare techs". There are still only X rare techs in the game.
You are more likely to draw them*. The same way you are more likely to draw them if you reserach faster and/or got more choice (more rolling on the chances).

*And not even 50% more likely.
Asume you got 20 techs.
19 normal with a weight of 20.
1 rare with a weight of 5.

Without the +50% your chance to draw the rare is
5/385 = 1.298%
With the +50%, your chance to draw the rare is:
7.5/387.5 = 1.935%

With +50% till only a <2% chance.

Oh I thought rare techs came out of their own pool when you got a rare tech pull. My mistake.

 

[The Founder]

Oh I thought rare techs came out of their own pool when you got a rare tech pull. My mistake.

Nope. Just a graphical marker and a low weight:

# Galactic Markets
tech_galactic_markets = {
    cost = @tier4cost1
    area = society
    tier = 4
    category = { statecraft }
    prerequisites = { "tech_colonial_centralization" "tech_interstellar_economics" }
    weight = @tier4weight1
    is_rare = yes
    
    # unlocks Galactic Stock Exchange empire wonder
    
    potential = {
        is_gestalt = no
    }
    
    weight_modifier = {
        factor = 0.5
        modifier = {
            factor = 0.25
            NOR = {
                research_leader = {
                    area = society
                    has_trait = "leader_trait_expertise_statecraft"
                }
                research_leader = {
                    area = society
                    has_trait = "leader_trait_curator"
                }
            }
        }
        modifier = {
            factor = 1.25
            research_leader = {
                area = society
                has_trait = "leader_trait_expertise_statecraft"
            }
        }
        modifier = {
            factor = 0
            num_communications < 2
        }
    }
    
    ai_weight = {
        modifier = {
            factor = 1.25
            research_leader = {
                area = society
                has_trait = "leader_trait_expertise_statecraft"
            }
        }
    }
}

 

[SpectralShade]

Warrior Culture is now slightly cooler @StellarisGame

https://twitter.com/dmoregard/status/1096404942410133505

huh? why would I ever want to start using alloys instead for upkeep? requiring massive alloy sinks ensures I'll never bother picking it. I'm already using all my alloys to build fleets, haivng an alloy sink inherent in your 'entertainers' just means your fleet is worse off and everything else equal, will loose to an equal economy enemy without that trait.

 

[Slynx]

why would I ever want to start using alloys instead for upkeep?

well...they give NavalCap… still not sure it's a good idea to use alloys for this... UNLESS they'll also change the base job to consume alloys too(but that'll just make entertainers shitty

 

[sillyrobot]

Except when looking at it big picture, over the course of the game when selecting TA as your first point maybe for a tall tech rush, you're now getting 50% more rare techs over the course of the whole game especially if you're stacking alternative research bonuses. Sure everyone will eventually get mega-engineering yet there are real benefits to getting it before the point of no longer needing it. An early tech wonder can give you a tech edge that will last you the game.

A 50% increase in weight will not result in a 50% increase in rare techs researched. First, in most of my games ALL non-infinite repeatable techs get researched over time. Second the math doesn't work that way even in the short run. Here's an example:

The player's deck has 50 tech cards, 5 of which are rare. The total weight of all the cards is 2,500 (average of 50 per card). The weight of all the rare cards is 50 (average of 10 per -- it's typically about a quarter or less the weight of a non-rare tech). The first card drawn has a 50 / 2,500 = 2% chance of being a rare. The player picks the TA perk and increases the rare weights by 50% woohoo! The rare weights increase to 75 and the total weight increases to 2,525. The first card drawn now has a chance of 75 / 2,525 = 2.97% chance of being rare. And that's any rare. If we're looking for a specific card, the chance goes down.

But sillyrobot, I hear someone cry, why did you only allow a single card to be drawn? Because the odds change depending on the weight of the card drawn and whether or not it was rare. Which gets tedious to type out, mainly. Suffice to say, the odds, per shuffle, do not change much.

 

[The Founder]

huh? why would I ever want to start using alloys instead for upkeep? requiring massive alloy sinks ensures I'll never bother picking it. I'm already using all my alloys to build fleets, haivng an alloy sink inherent in your 'entertainers' just means your fleet is worse off and everything else equal, will loose to an equal economy enemy without that trait.

A masively simplified Production Pipeline.

Entertainers current use Consumer goods.
I always find it a lot easier to justify having Forge Worlds then Industry worlds. Or adding some alloy forges to all my planets, to distribute my military production.
Alloys is something I alraedy manage as a warmonger. It would be better if I did not also have to manage Consuemr Goods.

 

[Kayden_II]

Warrior Culture is now slightly cooler @StellarisGame

So, I guess, that they get some sort of gladiators, but I don't really know, why they have alloys as upkeep since the other jobs have either nothing or increased needs of what's considered as consumer-goods or minerals (aka the minerals, which are actually a part of the actual upkeep of the respective buildings to produce alloys or consumer-goods). I'm also not really a fan of the production-structure, that some jobs produce multiple stuff: I'm fine with multiple inputs, but a single job, like this "duelist", doesn't have to produce unity AND amnesties AND nava-capacity. It's no crime to specialize them: 1 job - 1 output. By the way, the tool-tip is incomplete since I don't know how many unity, amnesties and naval-capacity this "duelist" will produce.

 

[Mauer]

So, I guess, that they get some sort of gladiators, but I don't really know, why they have alloys as upkeep since the other jobs have either nothing or increased needs of what's considered as consumer-goods or minerals (aka the minerals, which are actually a part of the actual upkeep of the respective buildings to produce alloys or consumer-goods). I'm also not really a fan of the production-structure, that some jobs produce multiple stuff: I'm fine with multiple inputs, but a single job, like this "duelist", doesn't have to produce unity AND amnesties AND nava-capacity. It's no crime to specialize them: 1 job - 1 output. By the way, the tool-tip is incomplete since I don't know how many unity, amnesties and naval-capacity this "duelist" will produce.

I think it's good to have jobs produce many things, especially if we're talking about jobs from civics, which are supposed to be special, that way you don't have to build every type of building every time, for example with Technocracy you can get your unity from researchers and forget about Heritage sites to build more research labs instead, etc.

 

[Kayden_II]

So, I guess, that they get some sort of gladiators, but I don't really know, why they have alloys as upkeep since the other jobs have either nothing or increased needs of what's considered as consumer-goods or minerals (aka the minerals, which are actually a part of the actual upkeep of the respective buildings to produce alloys or consumer-goods). I'm also not really a fan of the production-structure, that some jobs produce multiple stuff: I'm fine with multiple inputs, but a single job, like this "duelist", doesn't have to produce unity AND amnesties AND nava-capacity. It's no crime to specialize them: 1 job - 1 output. By the way, the tool-tip is incomplete since I don't know how many unity, amnesties and naval-capacity this "duelist" will produce.

I think it's good to have jobs produce many things, especially if we're talking about jobs from civics, which are supposed to be special, that way you don't have to build every type of building every time, for example with Technocracy you can get your unity from researchers and forget about Heritage sites to build more research labs instead, etc.

A metallurgist (for example) is performing pretty well, even without producing anything else than alloys, but unfortunately, such a POP-job is rather the exception. Round about half of the POP-jobs don't have a definitve purpose / role and it's not that "helpful" either, that even a lot of buildings / some districts are offering multiple types of POP-jobs, too. (Civics are messing up this situation even more). If you want to keep the distinctivness / importance of the POP-jobs / buildings / districts, (so that you have to make actual (trade-off)-decisions), or the ability to specialize your colonies or the general overview then it's better the other way around.

 

[SpectralShade]

A masively simplified Production Pipeline.

Entertainers current use Consumer goods.
I always find it a lot easier to justify having Forge Worlds then Industry worlds. Or adding some alloy forges to all my planets, to distribute my military production.
Alloys is something I alraedy manage as a warmonger. It would be better if I did not also have to manage Consuemr Goods.

I am just going to point out here, that researchers require consumer goods, and I doubt you are not going to use researchers. Some people are not using entertainers in the first place, though, so I'm a little puzzled by your comment.

 

[Lady Lacroix]

I am just going to point out here, that researchers require consumer goods, and I doubt you are not going to use researchers. Some people are not using entertainers in the first place, though, so I'm a little puzzled by your comment.

He's saying that Alloys are more flexible an investment than consumer goods and that having to invest fewer of your development opportunities into consumer goods means bonuses elsewhere by virtue of reduced opportunity costs. This of course as you point out assumes that you even plan to invest heavily into Duelists to be useful, but since you probably won't be taking it if you aren't planning on it anyway, that's somewhat of a moot point.

 

[TheDarkMaster]

It's true. At present you do want to avoid having any buildings except alloy foundries, research labs, and monuments/temples on your planets. Most of the other buildings are either just things that offer only situational useful benefits like Gene Clinics, Robot assembly plants, and strategic resource extractors, or are things you only build when you absolutely have to like housing, precincts, entertainment buildings, and consumer industries.

You absolutely need more alloys, research, and unity, and have no other way to get them than planet buildings. So you're strongly incentivised to build as many of those as you possibly can, usually ignoring the other options. I can't really see this changing until there's other ways to get alloys, research, and unity. The only thing that's close to being important is getting more naval capacity if you're boxed in and cannot expand to new systems to increase your starbase capacity (every 10 systems you own increases your starbase capacity by 1). However, the planetary naval capacity buildings are just so bad at producing naval capacity that they're not worth making. You only get one soldier job out of a fortress or military academy, that's almost nothing and does not come close to the value of another annoy foundry. I'd rather just go over the naval or starbase capacity than try to use soldiers to increase my naval capacity at the moment.