The only thing wrong with this is the lack of extravagant over-designed robo hats for the nobles.
2.2 & Megacorp Teasers
- Thread starter Mitchz95
- Start date
-
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.
That's why I mentioned it. What I replied to was talking about that.
.png){kind=avatar}
Isn't there already an icon in the game for ordinary consumer goods? That futuristic space toaster thing?
I'd wager a few iron rings that the ring icon is actually just a generic refined minerals/rare minerals resource instead of exclusively being consumer goods. Actually, looking back at the market tab, the ring is definitely rare minerals. The pile of ingots is space-steel, the yellow crystals might just be reactive elements... as for the pile of red ore, I'd wager some bronze rings that it represents low-tech energy sources like coal/petroleum.
Last edited:
Yeah, this is huge. A noble robot needing 5 House means that Earth Ecumenopolis can only house 20 of them. Now, if slaves need less than 1 House...
Indeed there is, but it could be too specific for it's new role. I'd imagine some special buildings using and building a temple with toasters would be a little weird.
I didn't think the city-world pic showed how much housing it had, just that it had "102 POPs".
Oooh, lots of very, very interesting things regarding the latest pic wih the hedonism bot:
- Different types of pops consuming different types of resources and most importantly, different amounts of housing, seems really interesting to me, and a great way to differenciate planets (size and pop types defining its capacities) and empires having different wants and needs (as they should be)
- Pop based planet management: Hell YES. I hope that it goes beyond the old simplistic MoO2 model of "putting intelligent species to work as scientists" and introduces pops with their own agendas, evolutions, and mixed, complex outputs, complete with their own limitations (so we have trade backs and empire intra-politics)
- Unique pop jobs are also a great way to bring personality to empires and ethics. Eagerly waiting to see priests and METABARONS (!)
- Consumer goods being splitted among different types seems like a good decision to me, but only as long as they bring additional effects a la strategic resources. As in, as a regular empire, it is good to have golden rings so I can build my holographic palaces and have happiness bonuses, but as an empire sustained by noble houses I NEED that shit to live. It would creat really interesting economic dynammics
- I really hope that the whole galactic marketplace is more than a simple trading window a la trade enclaves. The hyperlane model is ripe for implementing a trade route system. Make it so the trades we do on the marketplace do reflect in the galaxy map, and we might have something really interesting going on here
Still, this seems that it is going to be one of Stellaris most deep expansions so far. Bring it on!
- Different types of pops consuming different types of resources and most importantly, different amounts of housing, seems really interesting to me, and a great way to differenciate planets (size and pop types defining its capacities) and empires having different wants and needs (as they should be)
- Pop based planet management: Hell YES. I hope that it goes beyond the old simplistic MoO2 model of "putting intelligent species to work as scientists" and introduces pops with their own agendas, evolutions, and mixed, complex outputs, complete with their own limitations (so we have trade backs and empire intra-politics)
- Unique pop jobs are also a great way to bring personality to empires and ethics. Eagerly waiting to see priests and METABARONS (!)
- Consumer goods being splitted among different types seems like a good decision to me, but only as long as they bring additional effects a la strategic resources. As in, as a regular empire, it is good to have golden rings so I can build my holographic palaces and have happiness bonuses, but as an empire sustained by noble houses I NEED that shit to live. It would creat really interesting economic dynammics
- I really hope that the whole galactic marketplace is more than a simple trading window a la trade enclaves. The hyperlane model is ripe for implementing a trade route system. Make it so the trades we do on the marketplace do reflect in the galaxy map, and we might have something really interesting going on here
Still, this seems that it is going to be one of Stellaris most deep expansions so far. Bring it on!
Quite probable
still, I don't think that it is too far fetched to expect some Victoria-ish system regarding pop management.
That gives me an idea for a new ascension. Virtual ascension where your pops get digitized, becoming immortal and requiring only energy and very little housing but being incapable of anything that includes physical work. Physical work has to be done by normal robots or slaves.
Only late game automated facilities are free from that restriction and can be controlled by virtualized pops.
Only late game automated facilities are free from that restriction and can be controlled by virtualized pops.
Last edited:
Doesn't Synthetic Ascension already involve virtualization? You don't put organic brains into robotic exosceletons, you know. Likewise, what would stop a virtual being from remotely piloting a synth drone to do physical work?
That's the strange thing with robots in Stellaris: for some reason everyone is stuck in one body. And when that body breaks, they die.
Did I say it should be a good thing? No I did not. I simply stated that unemployed pops could have some use instead of just costing money. Why make this a boring feature when it could be filled with interesting gameplay choices. For example there could be unemployment policies that decide what happens with unemployed pops:
- nothing, they just cost money and sit around
- unpaid work for the state (some unhappiness for the unemployed pops but some upside like happiness for other pops or unity production?)
- slavery, for example in societies that hate useless members. These could then be sold on the slave market
- test subjects for research (bonus for bio research but leads to unhappiness?)
- ...
And what are my means of doing so? You make it sound like I said "oh let's give every trait an up and a downside!" I did not say that. Just disagreeing and throwing soundbites like "no not like that, but i want complex traits" to get some upvotes is not helpful. What does complex traits mean to you?
To me that means:
- some traits should have upsides and downsides (more than currently anyways),
- some traits should exclude each other (not just polar opposites),
- some traits should require another trait or one of several traits,
- some traits should influence other aspects of the game like attraction to certain ethics (for example an "aggressive" trait that increases militarist ethics attraction)
Currently, the traits are so one dimensional, that it is always straightforward which traits to choose for the best results. I think it would be much more interesting if there would be traits are only better than others depending on you empire setup/ethics etc. and not one-size-fits all as you can do right now (especially with syncretic evolution).
No. The ascended pops are strictly their own. They no longer have bodies they use but live as data. They can still research, create unity, etc. They would be a third kind of pop in gameplay terms along with organic and robotic pops.
Synthetic ascension just converts you into a robot.
Stuff like Decadent, honestly. Weird ones with oddball effects. Not stuff like you've suggested, because what you've suggested is too limiting and has too many restrictions.
Polar opposites should be the only stuff that excludes one another, and traits shouldn't require other traits. That's imposing your own little narrative on every species.
Sorry, but that is nonsense. Every choice at the start of the game already imposes a narrative on the game. Why can't a secondary species be intelligent? Doesn't that impose a narrative on every syncretic species game? Why should a weak species be less militaristic? There are a lot of these already in the game and many make sense, although they restrict the possible narratives.
There are some restrictions and downsides already in the game to make choices meaningful, but there should be more. If the choices are always just between pure positives and pure negatives then the end result will always be the same. Decadent sounds interesting on paper but was terrible to actually use. That trait imposes really bad restrictions on gameplay because it blocks the movement of pops without any chance of even understanding who is owned by whom. I hope they will come up with better oddball traits than that one.
I have suggested new traits that could fit into the new features. My main point was that small and large would be good traits to fit with the new housing requirement. It is beside the point if they have downsides or exclude other traits, I just threw that in with the suggestion. How about staying on topic of the new features in the teasers?
Last edited:
One thing i aw expecting with the new employment system is that i should be able the feel the overwhelming cost of bureaucracy as my empire expands, and I should be compelled to divert more and more pops to ensure tjhe good administration of my Empire.
As far as the game is, one pop per planet working on administrative and bureaucratic task for an empire which half-galaxy size made it the smallest state ever.
As far as the game is, one pop per planet working on administrative and bureaucratic task for an empire which half-galaxy size made it the smallest state ever.
