Cherryh 2.0 - the end of the Galaxy as we know it

[~Robbie]

I am just here waiting and hoping that they only removed warp using soft removal and using modding, it could be possible to readd it again. Like they could just put # before the warp techs (that enable warp functionality) and there would still be a possibility for those die hard warp fans to get back their warp. But I like most of the other changes or at the least I can't think of anything that I specifically hate.

Unfortunately it won't be. Paradox confirmed this somewhere but I can't find the source. The code for current warp and wormhole travel is being removed.

The New Horizons team have been in touch with Paradox about that and they too confirmed that it will not be possible to mod warp back in, and that the new jump drives will not suffice as a replacement. You can find those comments on the New Horizons workshop page. Since I can't link to a comment page directly, it was posted November the 11th.

 

[Augustus93]

Unfortunately it won't be. Paradox confirmed this somewhere but I can't find the source. The code for current warp and wormhole travel is being removed.

The New Horizons team have been in touch with Paradox about that and they too confirmed that it will not be possible to mod warp back in, and that the new jump drives will not suffice as a replacement. You can find those comments on the New Horizons workshop page. Since I can't link to a comment page directly, it was posted November the 11th.

Well that sucks. But I will still see how their so called solution with more hyperlanes will work. If it would work that it would connect all the neighboring stars (within a reasonable range) if you turn up the number of lanes (wasn't it a max 5x?) then it could work out. Now I am not as opposed to hyperlanes as when they announced it but we will see what the final results will be. Even if the worst of my concerns come true then I could still play 1.9 and a great ST:NH mod.

 

[eon47]

OP: so long as you can still choose to play 1.9, there is no "betrayal of trust." You bought the game at launch. If that game ran OK, then you got what you bargained for. Any chances since then are gravy.

Exactly. I think people should ask themselves how they would react if 1.9 was the last patch. It would be sad, right? But the game never came with a promise of infinite patches, and all the free and paid content added in those major nine patches is still quite a bit more than many games ever get. It would be depressing, but it wouldn't cause any saltiness. You'd still have the game you paid for plus all the features that were added since then, and while it wouldn't be bug-free, I can't think of a game that is.

The problem, of course, is that there is still more content being made, but that content requires rewriting a major game system. I get being bummed about something you like going away, but this entire idea that the game won't be what people bought anymore is silly. The game is still there--everything you could have expected is still completely available to you, and more, although you may not like the 'more.' What people are complaining about isn't that the game won't be what they bought, but rather that other, additional content for the game isn't what they personally want. And hey, the disappointment from that is legit, but it's not the same as' the game you paid for being lost or taken away from you. It really isn't.

 

[eagletrekkie]

Do you enjoy the linear passage of time?

Because you sort of need to get rid of that for FTL.

The whole "there's stuff we're learning all the time, it's totally plausible we'll figure out FTL!" ignores the fact that the more we learn, the narrower the window of possibility grows, because any new discovery must be explainable within the framework of what we already know. FTL would fundamentally break physics we have otherwise proved extremely reliable- it's not possible.

You know what, I'm not done with this. Our framework as it is is fundamentally flawed. We haven't bridged the gap between Quantum Mechanics and Relativity. As we currently understand them, they can't work together, because Quantum Mechanics deals in probabilities which doesn't convert to Relativity's determinism.

It's not possible with the laws of physics as we understand them, but it's pretty clear we don't understand them anywhere near completely.

 

[Thanquilor]

OP: so long as you can still choose to play 1.9, there is no "betrayal of trust." You bought the game at launch. If that game ran OK, then you got what you bargained for. Any chances since then are gravy.

If the game was actually working entirely as advertised on release (no bugs) then I would agree, but like all other games it came with bugs that needed patches to fix. Along with most of the patches came changes and new features/content that in turn introduced new bugs and/or problems that needed further patches to fix/adjust. So even at 1.9 I still do not have the game working as advertised that I paid for to begin with ... and after Cherryh 2.0 there is no chance that will ever happen.

The "betrayal of trust" lies in the fact that they sold us a product promised to be functioning in a specific way, but are now changing that product to work in a significantly different way without first delivering on their initial promise.

It is a bit like being sold a lifetime subscription with a TV service provider with the promise of 3 specific channels being part of the deal where the picture is slightly skewed and the sound scratchy - which they promise to fix soon. Then a year into the subscription you are informed that they are changing the merits of the deal, so that they will only support 1 of those channels from then on and that the only way you can keep the other 2 channels is if you are willing to live with the slightly off picture and scratchy sound.

 

[King of Zoot]

Im sad

 

[SaucyBaron]

Honestly the horrid changes in 2.0 are just further enforcing my decision to stop buying Stellaris DLC with the brokenness of 1.6, followed by the disastrous Synthetic Dawn (many features of which are STILL unbalanced) and lazy Humanoids pack moneygrab (when there are numerous free mods that do your DLC's job better than your professional studio you know you've messed up).

Paradox's products across the board as a whole have been declining in quality rapidly these last few years.

 

[Jeyn]

Is that becoming a trend ? Because this is the 92th dev diary all over again. I can understand the anger in front of some of the (many) changes incoming, but is there truly a need for making that sort of threads ? It has all been discussed in the dev diary, in more than FIVE THOUSAND messages...

Now to voice my opinion :

I am one of the *many* people who likes the incoming changes; I believe it is needed. For people arguing that hyperlane only is lazy, I am not even going to bother answering, because it is not. For people saying that it is "unrealistic in a 4X game like Stellaris", I'd like you to know, once again, that Stellaris is NOT a 4X. It is a *grand strategy game*. If you want to play a wonderful space-theme 4X game, play Aurora. Wich leads me to another point raised, about how the game is becoming a "clickhell": Aurora is a clickhell, micromanagement made game. Stellaris, however, is NOT. Click twice on a star to build station in a system can hardly be called, well, tedious. TWICE.

Plus, people stating that hyperlines only is "awful" because they've "tried it", I'd like to point out that the current hyperlane system is not the same as the incoming one. There are changes made to borders, wargoals and speed that will make it *drastically* different and balance the game around it. Currently, hyperlanes ARE annoying when it comes to many things, mainly because of the border system that quickly boxes everyone in a corner of the galaxy.

Another thing: Stellaris is not hard science fiction. It is however classic sci-fi, following well known tropes fleshed-out in previous sci-fi works. Hyperlanes are one of them, and it is a wonderful tool when it comes to a *strategy game* that happens to be played on a *flat board*, because of the movement limitations it induces. Starbases as they're going to be implemented woudn't work without it. Borders as they're going to me rethought woudn't work without it.

Short answer: we are going to lose two poorly-balanced features and gain, well, *many* new ones, hopefully properly balanced and fleshed out. This is not a bad tradeoff.

 

[BlackUmbrellas]

Major flaw in your argument here: any new discovery DOES NOT need to be explainable with the framework of what we already know. That literally just means that our framework is wrong and we need to update it... as has been done previously, as @methegrate describes.

Here's the thing: you're ignoring the part where I specify that the more we know, the [/i]more[/i] bits of the "framework" that have to be reconciled with any new discovery that doesn't fit- a new discovery has to fit with what we can already reliably observe, one way or another. So something that involves MASSIVE, far-reaching changes like FTL would thus need to somehow allow for a TON of other things to still work the way they do.

Which it couldn't.

 

[permeakra]

Do you enjoy the linear passage of time?

Because you sort of need to get rid of that for FTL.

I humbly suggest you do your homework. Space-time is not flat, and nothing requires it to be flat. This means, that not every way from star to star needs to be years long. In fact it is perfectly allowed under general relativity to have wormholes. Creation of such ways, however, is an entire different matter, and is unlikely to be in our capabilities within foreseeable future.

 

[LeanneKaos]

I know I won't change any minds, but I do believe the up coming changes are needed to really make Stellaris a great game. I already love it, and I want to see it get better. I do have my own reservations about the already announced changes, but I am confident and optimistic that Wiz and his team know what they're doing and they will give us the best update they can provide.

I had that kind of confidence in a dev once. He was known as Mecron. SOTS2 tells the tale of how that went.

I no longer have that kind of confidence.

 

[Weedes]

I had that kind of confidence in a dev once. He was known as Mecron. SOTS2 tells the tale of how that went.

I no longer have that kind of confidence.

They are the developers we deserve, not the developers we need, something, something, something batman.

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

 

[ZomgK3tchup]

I had that kind of confidence in a dev once. He was known as Mecron. SOTS2 tells the tale of how that went.

I no longer have that kind of confidence.

You make it sound like this Mecron guy killed your dog. It’s not that serious.

 

[Nyrael]

If the game was actually working entirely as advertised on release (no bugs) then I would agree

There is no game in existence that promises no bugs, and unless you count the likes of Tetris, there is also no game in existence that has no bugs.

 

[LeanneKaos]

You make it sound like this Mecron guy killed your dog. It’s not that serious.

The way people talk about how needed this update is makes it sound like the game is totally unplayable in it's current state.

But we know that isn't true either

 

[The First God]

The end of the galaxy as you know it means the beginning of a new galaxy you know nothing about. So the best thing that can be done is to discover this new galaxy instead of feeling sorry for the end of the galaxy you know.

 

[ShoGuL]

You make it sound like this Mecron guy killed your dog. It’s not that serious.

I'd say it's even worse! It's like he destroyed a piece of our hearts Sword of the Stars is a truly magnificent game, a classic of the genre. It's incredibly stable, has had tons of patches, and does what it does really really well. I'm almost positive the entire Stellaris FTL choice aspect was lifted directly from SotS.

SotS2 is terrible and pretty much unplayable. Like, literally. It crashes constantly. Even when it works, it's a station micro-hell and is in almost every way, a downgrade from the original (except for the Loa, what a brilliant concept for a race).

 

[Vexurius]

i've read the DD to 2.0 and after the release, i'll give stellars an other try,
it sounds like now i get the game i purshed so long time ago!

like CK2 after 1.04 incl. LoR or Eu4 with forts and the rework in 1.12
and hopefully the changes in Hoi4 and the waking tiger.

for me the changes looks amazing!
thx

 

[Tim_Ward]

Consider 4-arm spiral galaxy setup.
With hyperdrave you can explore your entire arm early and quickly using corvettes. You also can get an early shot in exploring other arms early if lucky, .e. lanes between the arms are not blocked. If said lines are close, you can colonize nearby arm early. This is might be huge, because the claimed systems in another unpopulated arm give you a boost in territory and colonized systems midgame.
With warp most of the time you can immediately explore and colonize your arm only. This is still big, because you get contact with all empires in your arm and diplo/rivalries might help a lot.
With wormholes you might have access to another arm early, but searches for habitable planets early on are slower.

The difference in the drives is clear and significant, and translates into mid-game. I fail to see how it translates to "different, but not that different"

And I fail to see how that translates to "the end of the galaxy as we know" - only particular galaxy set up might play out a bit differently.

 

[Riftwalker]

You don't need to wait for the rain to start pouring down to know that you will get wet standing in it without an umbrella ...

if only your issues with the game changes, making it worse; were as demonstrable as rain making you wet.