Could espionage solve the FTL problem

[JMensch]

I know that, but I don't think you should be able to know those things without espionage. Especially in multiplayer matches, espionage would give a lot of options to make the game more interesting.

Why? As soon as they're in range of whatever suite of sensors your ships and planets possess, everything is known to you. In the early game you might run into an empire or two that uses some other starting weapon but by mid and late game all empires have basically homogenized in what is fielded. Even in multiplayer, as a reader of the forums you know what weapons are best and which have been nerfed, you know the builds that are the best, and you know what possible counters there are to those builds. So what surprises can espionage reveal?

 

[Cat_Fuzz]

Why? As soon as they're in range of whatever suite of sensors your ships and planets possess, everything is known to you. In the early game you might run into an empire or two that uses some other starting weapon but by mid and late game all empires have basically homogenized in what is fielded. Even in multiplayer, as a reader of the forums you know what weapons are best and which have been nerfed, you know the builds that are the best, and you know what possible counters there are to those builds. So what surprises can espionage reveal?

Everything leading up to that point of homogeneity. If you start near an advanced race that's a fanatical purifier, you more or less start a new game. If you can know more about their location, FTL type and what ships they are fielding you can create an effective counter.

In reference to my OP - if you know their fleet position and FTL type, you can build your counter before the enemy war decs. Sure they may get around your defences, but that buys more time. If they are wormhole types, you can know where to send a strike team to eliminate their transport into your territory.

Of course, by the end game everyone's pretty much doing the same thing, but that's also fine. You change tactics as you go through the game.

 

[Drowe]

Why? As soon as they're in range of whatever suite of sensors your ships and planets possess, everything is known to you. In the early game you might run into an empire or two that uses some other starting weapon but by mid and late game all empires have basically homogenized in what is fielded. Even in multiplayer, as a reader of the forums you know what weapons are best and which have been nerfed, you know the builds that are the best, and you know what possible counters there are to those builds. So what surprises can espionage reveal?

Why should those sensors tell you that? Just because you can detect that a fleet is on course to your system, doesn't mean you also know everything about each individual ship in the fleet. If you only know the type of ships your enemy is using but not which composition of weapons, shields and armor, wars become less predictable. If one side has information the other side doesn't have, they actually have an advantage even if they would be technically weaker.

And there are a lot more ways espionage can make the game more interesting. Stealing technologies in order to catch up to more advanced empires faster, destabilising their empire and trying to shift their ethos towards your own are just a few examples.

 

[JMensch]

Why should those sensors tell you that? Just because you can detect that a fleet is on course to your system, doesn't mean you also know everything about each individual ship in the fleet. If you only know the type of ships your enemy is using but not which composition of weapons, shields and armor, wars become less predictable. If one side has information the other side doesn't have, they actually have an advantage even if they would be technically weaker.

And there are a lot more ways espionage can make the game more interesting. Stealing technologies in order to catch up to more advanced empires faster, destabilising their empire and trying to shift their ethos towards your own are just a few examples.

That's what sensors are for? What's the point of having sensors if they don't tell you weapon energy signatures or what sort of energy their engines put out.

What motivation would a militant isolationist empire have for stealing from its neighbors? Why would a pacifist xenophile empire foment armed rebellion in a neighbor? Kinda flies in the face of being pacifist.

 

[Emraldis]

Honestly, using an espionage system to find out with what an enemy is equipping their ships, or finding out where enemy fleets are travelling is pretty much the most bland and uninteresting use for an espionage system I can think of. This kind of thing sounds like it would be a great example of "putting in espionage just to tick a checkbox", something that wiz has stated he wants to avoid. Espionage would be so much more interesting if it were tied into the diplomacy, factions, government and leaders mechanics.

 

[Drowe]

That's what sensors are for? What's the point of having sensors if they don't tell you weapon energy signatures or what sort of energy their engines put out.

FTL I give you, but why would you be able to know what weapons they have? While they're not using them? What signatures do you imagine they emit that you could pick up? Using an FTL drive presumably emits some signature that travels even faster than the ship, but none of the weapon systems use FTL technology. It would be therefore reasonable to assume their signatures are not faster than light, so you would not be able to pick up any information before the first shots are fired.

What motivation would a militant isolationist empire have for stealing from its neighbors? Why would a pacifist xenophile empire foment armed rebellion in a neighbor? Kinda flies in the face of being pacifist.

A militant isolationist will want to stay that way, if his neighbour is gearing up for war he will want to know. If they have a tech that could make them a threat they will want that tech as well, just to be safe.

Because inciting a rebellion does not require the Pacifist to fight. Distracting that aggressive neighbour with internal conflicts seems way better than fighting a war you don't want. If you can make them Pacifist Xenophile through espionage, then they will never have to fight at all.

Honestly, using an espionage system to find out with what an enemy is equipping their ships, or finding out where enemy fleets are travelling is pretty much the most bland and uninteresting use for an espionage system I can think of. This kind of thing sounds like it would be a great example of "putting in espionage just to tick a checkbox", something that wiz has stated he wants to avoid. Espionage would be so much more interesting if it were tied into the diplomacy, factions, government and leaders mechanics.

You're right, espionage can be much more than we discussed, but those are part of the basics.

 

[Radene]

They will add it at some point. Yesterday Wiz did an AMA on reddit. He was asked the following question:

Do you have any plans regarding espionage in Stellaris? It is a bit hard to go to war without good intel on what enemy is actually capable of.
​

And Wiz answered:

Yes, absolutely. As I've said before, espionage is something we will definitely add at some point, but I want to make it a good espionage system that builds on existing features in the game. Adding espionage just to check a box is why so many games have lackluster espionage systems, and is something I want to avoid.​

I just read that answer in Wiz's voice, for some reason.

 

[Anaraxes]

While Wiz has stated that he won't drop two of the three FTL types in order to fix their problems

You can drop your disliked two of three types in every game you play with the startup options.

Sometimes I like to play hyperlane-only games, just to give a bigger role to geography and station defense.

 

[TheDeadlyShoe]

I too enjoy hyperlane only games, but the nature of hyperdrives means you still can't establish defenses the enemy has to fight through, not really.

 

[JMensch]

Because inciting a rebellion does not require the Pacifist to fight. Distracting that aggressive neighbour with internal conflicts seems way better than fighting a war you don't want. If you can make them Pacifist Xenophile through espionage, then they will never have to fight at all.

I dont think pacifist would support those that engage in armed conflict or armed rebellion. Now if pacifist used espionage to set up basically "The Underground Railroad" but in space for enslaved or unhappy pops, that would be acceptable.

 

[Drowe]

I dont think pacifist would support those that engage in armed conflict or armed rebellion. Now if pacifist used espionage to set up basically "The Underground Railroad" but in space for enslaved or unhappy pops, that would be acceptable.

That would be a possibility, basically stealing unhappy slaves. But encouraging ethics drift towards pacifist xenophile would also be a rather subtle influence that doesn't necessarily end in violence.

 

[TheDeadlyShoe]

Ethics drift through espionage is a dangerous mechanic. It's overpowered in HoI4; the AI doesn't even engage in it, presumably to avoid irritating players; meanwhile, players who choose to can reshape the ideology of entire continents.

A limited version where - say - you can supply arms to make existing discontented factions more dangerous, or conduct underground railroad smuggling *might* work. It might also make certain ai empires complete jokes, as you can completely undermine them with by pressing the politics button.

 

[Drowe]

Ethics drift through espionage is a dangerous mechanic. It's overpowered in HoI4; the AI doesn't even engage in it, presumably to avoid irritating players; meanwhile, players who choose to can reshape the ideology of entire continents.

A limited version where - say - you can supply arms to make existing discontented factions more dangerous, or conduct underground railroad smuggling *might* work. It might also make certain ai empires complete jokes, as you can completely undermine them with by pressing the politics button.

Depends on how it is implemented and how good the AI will be at counteracting ethics drift. The way an empire behaves has an effect on what ethics you drift towards, so if the AI is constantly waging war and keeps its population happy, it will be very hard to shift a militarist to pacifist. But if there are unhappy factions, your efforts could create internal tension and destabilization, forcing more attention on internal politics than external ones.

If you have espionage, you need a way to defend against such actions as well. It all comes down to tradeoffs, investing resources in espionage prevents you from using those resources for other things. If espionage actions require influence for example, especially if it is a monthly cost, you have to decide what to use your limited income for.

 

[TheDeadlyShoe]

thats exactly how it works in hoi4 and its still overpowered like crazy

 

[Drowe]

thats exactly how it works in hoi4 and its still overpowered like crazy

And that's a valid argument because?

If Stellaris was HoI in space, then maybe I would see your point, but it's not. Stellaris is its own game with very different mechanics and a different focus. I haven't played HoI4, but judging on previous entries in the HoI franchise it probably focuses a lot more on warfare and things like supply lines that have a direct impact on your ability to fight. Politics are of secondary concern. Stellaris is more a game about internal politics, especially with the upcoming expansion.

 

[TheDeadlyShoe]

Because you can convert the USA to fascism, or convince the Soviet Union of the value of despicable neutrality - using a resource called political power, in strictly limited supply. The AI doesn't use the functionality - I presume because it would be frustrating and irritating. (A common feature of espionage systems). The AI also has virtually no ability to defend itself - presumably so the player is actually able to accomplish such significant changes if they want to.

It is actually pretty ironic; it's called the Clausewitz engine,yeah? "War is the continuation of politics by other means." Hearts of Iron embodies that - it is at heart a political, ideological struggle. So does Stellaris. It's a game in the same engine, by the same studio, in the same genre. An ability to meddle with the politics of other empires directly risks trivializing the emergent rivalries that Stellaris currently features. A optimizing player will use it to cut off their strongest opposition at the knees, particularly if they are presumably vulnerable slavers/conquerors. And the AI using these measures against the player will basically be raining on their parade - inhibiting their ability to actually play their empire. Which is a big pile of shit. Even a system that's shackled to limit its impact but still be useful has significant dangers - several of the Total War games featured an 'Agent Death Spiral' when enough nations were at war with you.

 

[Drowe]

Because you can convert the USA to fascism, or convince the Soviet Union of the value of despicable neutrality - using a resource called political power, in strictly limited supply. The AI doesn't use the functionality - I presume because it would be frustrating and irritating. (A common feature of espionage systems). The AI also has virtually no ability to defend itself - presumably so the player is actually able to accomplish such significant changes if they want to.

It is actually pretty ironic; it's called the Clausewitz engine,yeah? "War is the continuation of politics by other means." Hearts of Iron embodies that - it is at heart a political, ideological struggle. So does Stellaris. It's a game in the same engine, by the same studio, in the same genre. An ability to meddle with the politics of other empires directly risks trivializing the emergent rivalries that Stellaris currently features. A optimizing player will use it to cut off their strongest opposition at the knees, particularly if they are presumably vulnerable slavers/conquerors. And the AI using these measures against the player will basically be raining on their parade - inhibiting their ability to actually play their empire. Which is a big pile of shit. Even a system that's shackled to limit its impact but still be useful has significant dangers - several of the Total War games featured an 'Agent Death Spiral' when enough nations were at war with you.

Espionage is nothing more than another weapon in the arsenal. Stellaris simply isn't HoI, they use the same underlying engine, but where one focuses on war first and foremost, the other is more focused at ethics, government and expansion. Those are very different things.

The faction system in Stellaris gives a lot more options to deal with ethics drift than HoI gives, as far as I know at least. Each ethic has an attraction, just increasing the attraction of a certain ethic doesn't turn a fanatical purifier into a fanatic Pacifist Xenophile, that's not how it works. Your ethics attraction just reflects how the ethics of your pops will be distributed. If you have Xenophile attraction a few pops will become Xenophile and you can suppress those factions.

 

[TheDeadlyShoe]

So...the system is pointless? You're just conducting a slow drain on their influence at best?

That's pretty much exactly what the problem is. The system(s) you are positing seesaw between OP and useless, and there's no real middle ground for it.