[Dev Team] 2.6.3 Patch Released  [checksum ae56]

[Dev Team] 2.6.3 Patch Released [checksum ae56]

  • Pre order now!

    Paradox Development Studio brings you the sequel to one of the most popular strategy games ever made! Crusader Kings III is soon upon us and you can pre order it today!


    Releasing September 1st 2020

Capt.Picard

Sergeant
Mar 10, 2018
58
4
  • Crusader Kings II
  • Stellaris - Path to Destruction bundle
  • Cities: Skylines - Green Cities
  • Stellaris: Lithoids
  • Stellaris: Ancient Relics
  • Cities: Skylines - Campus
  • Stellaris: Megacorp
  • Cities: Skylines Industries
  • Stellaris: Distant Stars
  • Cities: Skylines - Parklife
  • Cities: Skylines - Parklife Pre-Order
  • Stellaris: Apocalypse
  • Stellaris: Humanoids Species Pack
  • Stellaris: Synthetic Dawn
  • Hearts of Iron IV: Together for Victory
  • Cities: Skylines - Natural Disasters
  • Stellaris: Leviathans Story Pack
  • Hearts of Iron IV: Cadet
  • Stellaris
  • Cities: Skylines
  • Hearts of Iron III
  • Age of Wonders III
So is a lot of bile directed at the developers.
I mean the devs are starting to get real sloppy now with this game and more bile will be directed at them, i expect a lot more from PDS developers than what we are seeing especially when it comes to the bugs that have not been properly addressed and this multiplayer OOS that has been a constant plague with the Federations release. i mean the scroll got messed up, like really guys? fixes should not be causing more bugs, its real sloppy and until i start seeing some better results i am not paying for any more PDS products.
 

brbonfire

Corporal
Mar 25, 2018
43
1
  • Cities in Motion 2
  • Sengoku
  • Magicka 2
  • Stellaris: Synthetic Dawn
  • Cities: Skylines - Mass Transit
  • Pillars of Eternity
  • Cities: Skylines - After Dark
  • Stellaris
  • Stellaris: Digital Anniversary Edition
  • Stellaris: Leviathans Story Pack
  • Stellaris - Path to Destruction bundle
  • Cities: Skylines
  • Stellaris: Humanoids Species Pack
  • Stellaris: Apocalypse
  • Stellaris: Distant Stars
  • Shadowrun Returns
  • Stellaris: Megacorp
  • Stellaris: Ancient Relics
  • Stellaris: Lithoids
  • War of the Roses
  • Victoria 2
  • Europa Universalis III: Collection
  • Semper Fi
  • Majesty 2 Collection
  • Crusader Kings II
  • Crusader Kings II: The Old Gods
  • Crusader Kings II: Sons of Abraham
  • Europa Universalis III
  • Divine Wind
  • For the Motherland
  • Hearts of Iron III
  • Hearts of Iron III: Their Finest Hour
  • Hearts of Iron III Collection
  • Heir to the Throne
  • Magicka
  • Europa Universalis IV
I’ll admit, I’m a little concerned about ship balance. Now that hangars actually have a use (decent pd, shreds corvettes) I feel that the only usable ship type late game is battleships, titans and like one fleet of fast corvettes. While I can see the logic behind fleets progressing to the largest fleet size as tech rises as a form of progression, it’s beginning to feel like battleships are essentially self reliant and with a mix of artillery and hangar are more than capable of defeating anything except alpha strike BB fleets. Destroyers were at least used for extra L slots and pd before the hangar fix, cruisers have been poor man’s battleships since 2.0 and corvettes will always have a tactical niche because speed, but now it feels like you can comfortably get away with two ship types not counting titans - and maybe even just BBs if the hyperlanes go your way.

Don’t get me wrong, hangars needed the love, but working hangars bring their own design issues as well.
 

dostillevi

Second Lieutenant
Jul 16, 2012
155
0
  • Crusader Kings II: Charlemagne
  • Stellaris: Synthetic Dawn
  • Age of Wonders III
  • Stellaris
  • Magicka 2
  • The Showdown Effect
  • Crusader Kings II
  • Sword of the Stars II
  • Magicka
  • Europa Universalis IV: Call to arms event
  • Europa Universalis IV
  • Crusader Kings II: Sword of Islam
  • Crusader Kings II: Sunset Invasion
  • Crusader Kings II: Sons of Abraham
  • Crusader Kings II: The Republic
  • Europa Universalis IV: Conquest of Paradise
  • Crusader Kings II: Legacy of Rome
  • Crusader Kings II: The Old Gods
  • Crusader Kings II: Rajas of India
  • Cities: Skylines - Mass Transit
  • Stellaris: Ancient Relics
  • Cities: Skylines - Green Cities
  • Stellaris: Humanoids Species Pack
  • Stellaris: Apocalypse
  • Cities: Skylines - Parklife Pre-Order
  • Cities: Skylines - Parklife
  • Stellaris: Distant Stars
  • Cities: Skylines Industries
  • Stellaris: Megacorp
  • Crusader Kings II: Holy Fury
  • Prison Architect
  • Stellaris - Path to Destruction bundle
  • Cities: Skylines - Natural Disasters
  • Stellaris: Leviathans Story Pack
  • Stellaris: Digital Anniversary Edition
  • Crusader Kings II: Reapers Due
  • Cities: Skylines - Snowfall
  • Crusader Kings II: Conclave
  • Cities: Skylines - After Dark
  • Crusader Kings II: Horse Lords
  • Pillars of Eternity
  • Crusader Kings II: Way of Life
  • Europa Universalis IV: Pre-order
  • Cities: Skylines
  • Warlock: Master of the Arcane
  • Teleglitch: Die More Edition
I’ll admit, I’m a little concerned about ship balance. Now that hangars actually have a use (decent pd, shreds corvettes) I feel that the only usable ship type late game is battleships, titans and like one fleet of fast corvettes. While I can see the logic behind fleets progressing to the largest fleet size as tech rises as a form of progression, it’s beginning to feel like battleships are essentially self reliant and with a mix of artillery and hangar are more than capable of defeating anything except alpha strike BB fleets. Destroyers were at least used for extra L slots and pd before the hangar fix, cruisers have been poor man’s battleships since 2.0 and corvettes will always have a tactical niche because speed, but now it feels like you can comfortably get away with two ship types not counting titans - and maybe even just BBs if the hyperlanes go your way.

Don’t get me wrong, hangars needed the love, but working hangars bring their own design issues as well.
I always come back to strategic goals. If the only strategy is to have a better fleet than your opponent and ram that fleet into theirs and then into their planets, there's only one niche to be filled and it gets filled the way you say. No matter what, there will always be a single optimal fleet build against AI, and straight forward and well known metas and counters to human designed fleets. To make combat more interesting, there need to be varied strategies to achieve varied goals. Back when the galactic marketplace was being introduced, I really hoped that economics could be a driving factor of conflict. Things like raiding supply lines, blockading planets or trade routes, economic activity being shared between empires (think friendly empires getting trade income from each other, with the reach of a trade base in one empire reaching into the other), and so on all present alternative strategic goals that make different fleet compositions viable. If blockading a planet kept the empire from receiving any of the planet's output while also keeping the planet from importing resources, there's suddenly a way to use military force to harm an opponent without direct fleet-to-fleet or fleet-to-planet combat. Further, non-military goals could be made a part of the game, such as using military force to create political or economic concessions. Anything that adds new dimensions to strategic goals creates scenarios where differing fleet and ship designs are better suited.

So what could all these strategic goals do to ship and fleet design? We see a simple example with piracy suppression. In theory, corvettes are great at suppressing piracy and could be used to patrol trade routes. Unfortunately, the game's mechanics are typically so forgiving this is rarely necessary. Remember back when fleet power caused significant delay in hyperjump time? Imagine that changed to be based on ship size instead of fleet power. Suddenly a small pack of corvettes could outrun and avoid a fleet of bigger ships to achieve a strategic goal other than fighting that fleet or conquering planets. Then it's a matter of balancing ship components and the like. A fleet of corvettes really shouldn't be that good at taking on a fortified position. I'm thinking something like a penalty to size class, where small weapons are slightly less effective against medium shields, and even less effective against large shields. Vice versa large weapons would shred small shields, but may miss a lot.

Another example in the game is raiding, where nihilistic acquisition allows stealing of pops. This is a neat idea, but without significant variance in ship speed, the mechanic still resolves to beating the enemy fleet and then beating their planet. It would be much more interesting if a small fleet of destroyers could sneak in (small fleets and ships might be less detectable than larger fleets and ships! Make sensor technology matter!), get into orbit, and quickly steal a few pops before defensive forces could mobilize.

Much to my chagrin, the game design has gone in almost the polar opposite direction of this since around 2.3. Starbases are one per system and sit over the star, so illogically it becomes necessary to disable (not destroy, that would be too complicated!) the starbase before interacting with planets. Planets have no inherent defenses against space forces aside from shields. Hyperlane inhibitors prevent all fleets (including raiding fleets) from getting past gateway systems. On and on, the game design has been to simplify the dimensions of armed force use to the most basic "enemy at the gates" big fleet-on-fleet combat. To go back to your original concern about fleet design, I don't think it's a conversation that can meaningfully be had without considering strategic goals.
 
Last edited:

Mescaline

Sergeant
Jun 28, 2009
99
10
  • Stellaris: Apocalypse
  • Europa Universalis IV: Pre-order
  • Cities: Skylines Deluxe Edition
  • Victoria 2: Heart of Darkness
  • Victoria 2: A House Divided
  • Crusader Kings II: Horse Lords
  • 500k Club
  • Cities: Skylines - Mass Transit
  • Europa Universalis IV: El Dorado
  • Mount & Blade: Warband
  • Crusader Kings II: Way of Life
  • Europa Universalis IV: Common Sense
  • Hearts of Iron IV: Together for Victory
  • Crusader Kings II: Conclave
  • Stellaris: Galaxy Edition
  • Crusader Kings II: Monks and Mystics
  • Hearts of Iron IV: Cadet
  • Hearts of Iron IV: Colonel
  • Crusader Kings II: Reapers Due
  • Europa Universalis IV: Rights of Man
  • Stellaris: Digital Anniversary Edition
  • Stellaris: Leviathans Story Pack
  • Cities: Skylines - Natural Disasters
  • Crusader Kings II: Holy Fury
  • Cities: Skylines - Parklife Pre-Order
  • Stellaris: Distant Stars
  • Europa Universalis IV: Dharma
  • Europa Universalis IV: Golden Century
  • Imperator: Rome Deluxe Edition
  • Prison Architect
  • Cities: Skylines - Campus
  • Stellaris: Ancient Relics
  • Stellaris: Lithoids
  • Hearts of Iron IV: Expansion Pass
  • Cities: Skylines - Parklife
  • Victoria 2
  • Hearts of Iron IV: Death or Dishonor
  • Cities: Skylines - Green Cities
  • Hearts of Iron IV: Expansion Pass
  • Stellaris: Humanoids Species Pack
  • Europa Universalis IV: Mandate of Heaven
  • Europa Universalis IV: Rule Britannia
  • Cities: Skylines - After Dark
  • Europa Universalis IV: Third Rome
  • Stellaris
  • Europa Universalis IV: Mare Nostrum
  • Cities: Skylines - Snowfall
  • Europa Universalis IV: Cossacks
  • Sengoku
  • Semper Fi
So is a lot of bile directed at the developers.
If you think that's bile, wait until you see some other communities lol. Probably the only person that was a bit toxic (or rather passive-aggressive, imo) is klc123, and I kinda understand him.

When a developer claims to have released a fix three times in a row, and everything remains visibly untouched/unfixed, you bet people aren't gonna be happy about that. After all, all that we have been asking for is some basic feedback from the devs. Instead, we're getting "fixed (but not really)" x3.
 

Tyro

Second Lieutenant
I always come back to strategic goals. If the only strategy is to have a better fleet than your opponent and ram that fleet into theirs and then into their planets, there's only one niche to be filled and it gets filled the way you say. No matter what, there will always be a single optimal fleet build against AI, and straight forward and well known metas and counters to human designed fleets. To make combat more interesting, there need to be varied strategies to achieve varied goals. Back when the galactic marketplace was being introduced, I really hoped that economics could be a driving factor of conflict. Things like raiding supply lines, blockading planets or trade routes, economic activity being shared between empires (think friendly empires getting trade income from each other, with the reach of a trade base in one empire reaching into the other), and so on all present alternative strategic goals that make different fleet compositions viable. If blockading a planet kept the empire from receiving any of the planet's output while also keeping the planet from importing resources, there's suddenly a way to use military force to harm an opponent without direct fleet-to-fleet or fleet-to-planet combat. Further, non-military goals could be made a part of the game, such as using military force to create political or economic concessions. Anything that adds new dimensions to strategic goals creates scenarios where differing fleet and ship designs are better suited.

So what could all these strategic goals to do to ship and fleet design? We see a simple example with piracy suppression. In theory, corvettes are great at suppressing piracy and could be used to patrol trade routes. Unfortunately, the game's mechanics are typically so forgiving this is rarely necessary. Remember back when fleet power caused significant delay in hyperjump time? Imagine that changed to be based on ship size instead of fleet power. Suddenly a small pack of corvettes could outrun and avoid a fleet of bigger ships to achieve a strategic goal other than fighting that fleet or conquering planets. Then it's a matter of balancing ship components and the like. A fleet of corvettes really shouldn't be that good at taking on a fortified position. I'm thinking something like a penalty to size class, where small weapons are slightly less effective against medium shields, and even less effective against large shields. Vice versa large weapons would shred small shields, but may miss a lot.

Another example in the game is raiding, where nihilistic acquisition allows stealing of pops. This is a neat idea, but without significant variance in ship speed, the mechanic still resolves to beating the enemy fleet and then beating their planet. It would be much more interesting if a small fleet of destroyers could sneak in (small fleets and ships might be less detectable than larger fleets and ships! Make sensor technology matter!), get into orbit, and quickly steal a few pops before defensive forces could mobilize.

Much to my chagrin, the game design has gone in almost the polar opposite direction of this since around 2.3. Starbases are one per system and sit over the star, so illogically it becomes necessary to disable (not destroy, that would be too complicated!) the starbase before interacting with planets. Planets have no inherent defenses against space forces aside from shields. Hyperlane inhibitors prevent all fleets (including raiding fleets) from getting past gateway systems. On and on, the game design has been to simplify the dimensions of armed force use to the most basic "enemy at the gates" big fleet-on-fleet combat. To go back to your original concern about fleet design, I don't think it's a conversation that can meaningfully be had without considering strategic goals.
ALL. OF. THIS!
 

brbonfire

Corporal
Mar 25, 2018
43
1
  • Cities in Motion 2
  • Sengoku
  • Magicka 2
  • Stellaris: Synthetic Dawn
  • Cities: Skylines - Mass Transit
  • Pillars of Eternity
  • Cities: Skylines - After Dark
  • Stellaris
  • Stellaris: Digital Anniversary Edition
  • Stellaris: Leviathans Story Pack
  • Stellaris - Path to Destruction bundle
  • Cities: Skylines
  • Stellaris: Humanoids Species Pack
  • Stellaris: Apocalypse
  • Stellaris: Distant Stars
  • Shadowrun Returns
  • Stellaris: Megacorp
  • Stellaris: Ancient Relics
  • Stellaris: Lithoids
  • War of the Roses
  • Victoria 2
  • Europa Universalis III: Collection
  • Semper Fi
  • Majesty 2 Collection
  • Crusader Kings II
  • Crusader Kings II: The Old Gods
  • Crusader Kings II: Sons of Abraham
  • Europa Universalis III
  • Divine Wind
  • For the Motherland
  • Hearts of Iron III
  • Hearts of Iron III: Their Finest Hour
  • Hearts of Iron III Collection
  • Heir to the Throne
  • Magicka
  • Europa Universalis IV
I always come back to strategic goals. If the only strategy is to have a better fleet than your opponent and ram that fleet into theirs and then into their planets, there's only one niche to be filled and it gets filled the way you say. No matter what, there will always be a single optimal fleet build against AI, and straight forward and well known metas and counters to human designed fleets. To make combat more interesting, there need to be varied strategies to achieve varied goals. Back when the galactic marketplace was being introduced, I really hoped that economics could be a driving factor of conflict. Things like raiding supply lines, blockading planets or trade routes, economic activity being shared between empires (think friendly empires getting trade income from each other, with the reach of a trade base in one empire reaching into the other), and so on all present alternative strategic goals that make different fleet compositions viable. If blockading a planet kept the empire from receiving any of the planet's output while also keeping the planet from importing resources, there's suddenly a way to use military force to harm an opponent without direct fleet-to-fleet or fleet-to-planet combat. Further, non-military goals could be made a part of the game, such as using military force to create political or economic concessions. Anything that adds new dimensions to strategic goals creates scenarios where differing fleet and ship designs are better suited.

So what could all these strategic goals do to ship and fleet design? We see a simple example with piracy suppression. In theory, corvettes are great at suppressing piracy and could be used to patrol trade routes. Unfortunately, the game's mechanics are typically so forgiving this is rarely necessary. Remember back when fleet power caused significant delay in hyperjump time? Imagine that changed to be based on ship size instead of fleet power. Suddenly a small pack of corvettes could outrun and avoid a fleet of bigger ships to achieve a strategic goal other than fighting that fleet or conquering planets. Then it's a matter of balancing ship components and the like. A fleet of corvettes really shouldn't be that good at taking on a fortified position. I'm thinking something like a penalty to size class, where small weapons are slightly less effective against medium shields, and even less effective against large shields. Vice versa large weapons would shred small shields, but may miss a lot.

Another example in the game is raiding, where nihilistic acquisition allows stealing of pops. This is a neat idea, but without significant variance in ship speed, the mechanic still resolves to beating the enemy fleet and then beating their planet. It would be much more interesting if a small fleet of destroyers could sneak in (small fleets and ships might be less detectable than larger fleets and ships! Make sensor technology matter!), get into orbit, and quickly steal a few pops before defensive forces could mobilize.

Much to my chagrin, the game design has gone in almost the polar opposite direction of this since around 2.3. Starbases are one per system and sit over the star, so illogically it becomes necessary to disable (not destroy, that would be too complicated!) the starbase before interacting with planets. Planets have no inherent defenses against space forces aside from shields. Hyperlane inhibitors prevent all fleets (including raiding fleets) from getting past gateway systems. On and on, the game design has been to simplify the dimensions of armed force use to the most basic "enemy at the gates" big fleet-on-fleet combat. To go back to your original concern about fleet design, I don't think it's a conversation that can meaningfully be had without considering strategic goals.
Honestly, I just want mixed fleets to be viable, I was speaking more tactically than stragetically, focusing on the big battle itself rather than anything around the battle.

But you’re absolutely right. There does need to be strategic considerations to make. Never mind the espionage, or diplomacy, what Stellaris needs is a war update.
 

RoaringSheep1116

Science Guy in Charge
May 7, 2017
45
0
  • Stellaris
  • Stellaris: Galaxy Edition
  • Stellaris: Galaxy Edition
  • Stellaris: Digital Anniversary Edition
  • Stellaris: Leviathans Story Pack
  • Stellaris - Path to Destruction bundle
  • Stellaris: Synthetic Dawn
  • Stellaris: Humanoids Species Pack
  • Stellaris: Apocalypse
  • Stellaris: Distant Stars
  • Stellaris: Megacorp
  • Stellaris: Ancient Relics
  • Stellaris: Lithoids
Fixed a bug where you could replace starbase shipyards.
This seems to have broken something for me, if this is not how it's supposed to work. I can't demolish/replace shipyards at all. Which is a shame, because I normally move my main shipyard out of my starting system. Anyone knows if this is a bug or intended? (I can't demolish shipyards on different stations either.)
 

Moah

Platypus Admirer
Sep 20, 2011
649
2.800
  • Crusader Kings II
  • Europa Universalis IV: Pre-order
  • Sengoku
  • Semper Fi
  • Europa Universalis IV: Res Publica
  • Magicka
  • Heir to the Throne
  • Hearts of Iron III
  • Europa Universalis IV: Call to arms event
  • Europa Universalis IV: Wealth of Nations
  • Europa Universalis IV: Conquest of Paradise
  • Europa Universalis IV: Art of War
  • Europa Universalis IV
  • Europa Universalis III Complete
  • Cities in Motion
  • Crusader Kings II: Charlemagne
  • Crusader Kings II: Legacy of Rome
  • Crusader Kings II: The Old Gods
  • Crusader Kings II: Rajas of India
  • Divine Wind
  • Crusader Kings II: The Republic
  • Crusader Kings II: Sons of Abraham
  • Crusader Kings II: Sunset Invasion
  • Crusader Kings II: Sword of Islam
  • Europa Universalis III
  • Europa Universalis III: Chronicles
  • Shadowrun: Hong Kong
  • Shadowrun: Dragonfall
  • Shadowrun Returns
  • Tyranny - Bastards Wound
  • Prison Architect
  • Stellaris: Synthetic Dawn
  • Stellaris - Path to Destruction bundle
  • Stellaris: Leviathans Story Pack
  • Stellaris: Galaxy Edition
  • Stellaris: Galaxy Edition
  • Stellaris
  • Crusader Kings II: Horse Lords
  • Europa Universalis IV: Common Sense
  • Pillars of Eternity
  • Crusader Kings II: Way of Life
  • Europa Universalis IV: El Dorado
  • 500k Club
  • Victoria 2
  • Europa Universalis III Complete
  • Europa Universalis III Complete
  • Stellaris: Galaxy Edition
  • Stellaris Sign-up
  • Tyranny - Tales from the Tiers
I was wondering if there is an Issue with the crossplay on the stellaris_test beta for 2.6.3. I personally play on GOG while my friends run it on steam and we cant seem to play together without going on the roll rollback.
There was an issue with the stellaris_test branch which has been fixed. If you try again, it should work now.
 

Bhurano

Private
Sep 1, 2013
12
4
  • Crusader Kings II: Charlemagne
  • Stellaris: Galaxy Edition
  • Stellaris - Path to Destruction bundle
  • Crusader Kings II
  • Stellaris: Synthetic Dawn
  • Europa Universalis IV: Res Publica
  • Europa Universalis IV: Wealth of Nations
  • Europa Universalis IV: Conquest of Paradise
  • Europa Universalis IV: Art of War
  • Crusader Kings II: Sword of Islam
  • Crusader Kings II: Sunset Invasion
  • Crusader Kings II: Sons of Abraham
  • Crusader Kings II: The Republic
  • Europa Universalis IV
  • Crusader Kings II: Legacy of Rome
  • Crusader Kings II: Rajas of India
  • Crusader Kings II: The Old Gods
  • Stellaris: Digital Anniversary Edition
  • Stellaris: Leviathans Story Pack
  • Hearts of Iron IV: Expansion Pass
  • Europa Universalis IV: Mare Nostrum
  • Hearts of Iron IV: Death or Dishonor
  • Hearts of Iron IV: Expansion Pass
  • Stellaris: Humanoids Species Pack
  • Stellaris: Apocalypse
  • Hearts of Iron IV: Expansion Pass
  • Stellaris: Distant Stars
  • Europa Universalis IV: Rights of Man
  • Hearts of Iron IV: Colonel
  • Hearts of Iron IV: Cadet
  • Stellaris Sign-up
  • Stellaris: Galaxy Edition
  • Stellaris
  • Europa Universalis IV: Cossacks
  • Crusader Kings II: Horse Lords
  • Europa Universalis IV: Common Sense
  • Crusader Kings II: Way of Life
  • Europa Universalis IV: El Dorado
  • Cities: Skylines
  • Stellaris: Megacorp
  • Hearts of Iron IV: Expansion Pass
Used to play Stellaris a lot with a friend in multiplayer prior to the Federation release. Something changed in regard of game speed. After it was impossible to play on fastest speed, or even fast. He would end up lag 3 days behind and the game would choke on itself (or if he hosted, I would end up do the same). Whenever we started out a new game, we preferred to play on fastest speed, because watching grass grow is not fun. And before; It must be your riggs or connection.. No, nothing changed, and we play all kinds of multiplayer/online games together.

edit; we just tried a new game this morning, and still got out of sync issues. as well. Not even 50 years into a new game. :/
Yeah... that's the same for me and a buddy of mine.
Anything above normal? Not gonna happen... it de-syncs like crazy. It works sometimes like a charm at normal speed for a while, but that's not holding up constantly.
In a usual round of 4 to 6 hours? There's at least 4 to 6 de-syncs that we have to account in a typical Stellaris session... at least.
It's annoying as hell.

At normal it begins to drop to somewhere into yellow and then into red (the 3 day area) and then stays there.
The game handles that for a long time, but inevitable as a tax collector it will fail de-sync.
I do have fun with the game, I can't deny it. It's still bothering me to death.

I mean the devs are starting to get real sloppy now with this game and more bile will be directed at them, i expect a lot more from PDS developers than what we are seeing especially when it comes to the bugs that have not been properly addressed and this multiplayer OOS that has been a constant plague with the Federations release. i mean the scroll got messed up, like really guys? fixes should not be causing more bugs, its real sloppy and until i start seeing some better results i am not paying for any more PDS products.
The thing is, Federation IS objectively a really, really nice product. There's no doubt about it. I can't fault them for that.
And yeah, they did stoke a certain interest and brought me back to Stellaris. Great job there.
But yeah, there's room for improvement especially for the damn issues in multiplayer.
Or they could just build a working and LAN or Co-op, hah as if that would happen! I'd be a happy camper though.

If they aren't damn careful at Paradox though they are liable to go the way of Bethesda, which would be a friggin' shame.
Those Bethesda morons, to be fair it was probably more the high chieftains and not the keyboard slingers but whatever, decided to rely more and more
on the modding community to polish their products and just cruise on in Auto-Mode and call it a day.
I think we know how this has ended with Fallout, right?
That Franchise is right now in tatters and probably in it's dying breath.

I’ll admit, I’m a little concerned about ship balance. Now that hangars actually have a use (decent pd, shreds corvettes) I feel that the only usable ship type late game is battleships, titans and like one fleet of fast corvettes. While I can see the logic behind fleets progressing to the largest fleet size as tech rises as a form of progression, it’s beginning to feel like battleships are essentially self reliant and with a mix of artillery and hangar are more than capable of defeating anything except alpha strike BB fleets. Destroyers were at least used for extra L slots and pd before the hangar fix, cruisers have been poor man’s battleships since 2.0 and corvettes will always have a tactical niche because speed, but now it feels like you can comfortably get away with two ship types not counting titans - and maybe even just BBs if the hyperlanes go your way.

Don’t get me wrong, hangars needed the love, but working hangars bring their own design issues as well.
For ships I have only ONE hard rule:
Destroyers will be stuffed to the gills with PD's.
They are excellent in that role. Load up on flaks and anything peeking out of a hangar is dead meat.
Fast, small, fitting in the range band and good evasion and decent toughness.
I do discard corvettes though. I find them to meta gamey and undergunned.
Everything a corvette can do, a Destroyer can do more efficient and at a better pricepoint.

Anything else there's people who are probably more knowledgable than me, but damn does flak rock! :)
 

Tyro

Second Lieutenant
<snip>
For ships I have only ONE hard rule:
Destroyers will be stuffed to the gills with PD's.
They are excellent in that role. Load up on flaks and anything peeking out of a hangar is dead meat.
Fast, small, fitting in the range band and good evasion and decent toughness.
I do discard corvettes though. I find them to meta gamey and undergunned.
Everything a corvette can do, a Destroyer can do more efficient and at a better pricepoint.

Anything else there's people who are probably more knowledgable than me, but damn does flak rock! :)
I'm not accustomed to using hangars yet - I'm a relic from the days of corvette swarm spam, haven't really learned to use larger ships except as artillery platforms. Any tips or links so I can learn?
 

Tarlar

Recruit
Apr 21, 2020
2
1
  • Cities: Skylines - Natural Disasters
  • Stellaris: Megacorp
  • Cities: Skylines - Parklife
  • Cities: Skylines - Parklife Pre-Order
  • Stellaris: Apocalypse
  • Cities: Skylines - Green Cities
  • Stellaris: Synthetic Dawn
  • Cities: Skylines - Mass Transit
  • Stellaris - Path to Destruction bundle
  • Cities: Skylines
  • Stellaris: Leviathans Story Pack
  • Stellaris: Digital Anniversary Edition
  • Stellaris: Galaxy Edition
  • Stellaris: Galaxy Edition
  • Stellaris
  • Cities: Skylines - Snowfall
  • Cities: Skylines - After Dark
  • Cities: Skylines Deluxe Edition
Correct me, if I am wrong but aren't there any improvement to the sector management AI?

In 2.6.2 (no mods) I am confronted with rebelling planets unless I manage those planets/sectors myself...
 

Dëzaël

Captain
Nov 12, 2016
494
19
  • Stellaris: Synthetic Dawn
  • Stellaris
  • Stellaris: Galaxy Edition
  • Stellaris: Digital Anniversary Edition
  • Stellaris: Leviathans Story Pack
  • Stellaris - Path to Destruction bundle
  • Stellaris: Humanoids Species Pack
  • Stellaris: Apocalypse
  • Stellaris: Distant Stars
  • Stellaris: Megacorp
  • Stellaris: Ancient Relics
  • Stellaris: Lithoids
Correct me, if I am wrong but aren't there any improvement to the sector management AI?

In 2.6.2 (no mods) I am confronted with rebelling planets unless I manage those planets/sectors myself...
AFAIK, no others than the economic plans the regular AI now uses. I don't know if sector AI is using them, but they have been barely introduced, need tweaking and several new plans to be written, and from what I saw regular AIs suffer from the same rebellions. At least they squash the rebels rather quick, but for player sectors it seems we have to wait some more.
 

UltimateTobi

Lt. General
Mar 8, 2010
1.411
28
www.youtube.com
  • Prison Architect: Psych Ward
  • Arsenal of Democracy
  • Darkest Hour
  • Hearts of Iron III
  • Cities: Skylines
  • Cities: Skylines Industries
  • Stellaris: Apocalypse
  • Stellaris: Lithoids
  • Stellaris: Digital Anniversary Edition
  • Stellaris: Leviathans Story Pack
  • Cities: Skylines - Natural Disasters
  • Stellaris - Path to Destruction bundle
  • Cities: Skylines - Mass Transit
  • Europa Universalis IV: Mandate of Heaven
  • Cities: Skylines - Green Cities
  • Stellaris: Humanoids Species Pack
  • Prison Architect
  • Cities: Skylines - Parklife Pre-Order
  • Europa Universalis IV: Rights of Man
  • Cities: Skylines - Parklife
  • Stellaris: Distant Stars
  • Stellaris: Ancient Relics
  • Europa Universalis IV: Dharma
  • Stellaris: Megacorp
  • Stellaris: Galaxy Edition
  • 500k Club
  • Europa Universalis IV: Mare Nostrum
  • Europa Universalis IV: El Dorado
  • Europa Universalis IV: Common Sense
  • Europa Universalis IV: Rule Britannia
  • Europa Universalis IV: Cradle of Civilization
  • Europa Universalis IV: Pre-order
  • Cities: Skylines Deluxe Edition
  • Europa Universalis IV: Res Publica
  • Europa Universalis IV: Call to arms event
  • Europa Universalis IV: Wealth of Nations
  • Europa Universalis IV: Conquest of Paradise
  • Europa Universalis IV: Art of War
  • Cities: Skylines - After Dark
  • Europa Universalis IV: Cossacks
  • Stellaris: Synthetic Dawn
  • Europa Universalis IV: Third Rome
  • Stellaris: Galaxy Edition
  • Stellaris
  • Cities: Skylines - Snowfall
  • Europa Universalis IV
  • Cities in Motion 2
AFAIK, no others than the economic plans the regular AI now uses. I don't know if sector AI is using them, but they have been barely introduced, need tweaking and several new plans to be written, and from what I saw regular AIs suffer from the same rebellions. At least they squash the rebels rather quick, but for player sectors it seems we have to wait some more.
My ME Fed ally completely collapsed because one planet after another seceded due to low Stability and no AI was ever at war with their rebels. Only sometimes would they DOW their Seperatists. So this is a major issue.
 

Dëzaël

Captain
Nov 12, 2016
494
19
  • Stellaris: Synthetic Dawn
  • Stellaris
  • Stellaris: Galaxy Edition
  • Stellaris: Digital Anniversary Edition
  • Stellaris: Leviathans Story Pack
  • Stellaris - Path to Destruction bundle
  • Stellaris: Humanoids Species Pack
  • Stellaris: Apocalypse
  • Stellaris: Distant Stars
  • Stellaris: Megacorp
  • Stellaris: Ancient Relics
  • Stellaris: Lithoids
My ME Fed ally completely collapsed because one planet after another seceded due to low Stability and no AI was ever at war with their rebels. Only sometimes would they DOW their Seperatists. So this is a major issue.
Well, I guess the conditions for this to happen were not met in my games. I only played 800 stars 24 empires games, vanilla AI for now, and I saw OPMs emerging a lot, but managed and no full collapsing. I play with a set of preset empires with carefully selected civics, traits, etc... No bad combo. There is one empire for nearly each AI personality. Only DA, RS and regular machines are not represented. I have only two exterminators as MEs, and didn't specifically watch after them, but I'm sure they didn't collapse, and I don't remember them taking big losses in wars or anything.

Maybe are MEs prone to collapsing in this patch? Or maybe my civics/traits pick for my set was good enough to just keep them afloat, and random empires are not that lucky? The later seems likely since you say your AIs only rarely DOW their rebels. Mine would routinely take back their planets in like ~5 years tops. Only sometimes taking a bit longer.
 

Gilbert95

Sergeant
Dec 7, 2018
96
18
  • Stellaris: Apocalypse
  • Stellaris: Lithoids
  • Age of Wonders: Planetfall
  • Stellaris: Ancient Relics
  • Surviving Mars: First Colony Edition
  • Stellaris: Megacorp
  • Surviving Mars: First Colony Edition
  • Stellaris: Distant Stars
  • Cities: Skylines - Parklife
  • Cities: Skylines - Parklife Pre-Order
  • Surviving Mars: Digital Deluxe Edition
  • Stellaris: Humanoids Species Pack
  • Surviving Mars
  • Stellaris - Path to Destruction bundle
  • Stellaris: Leviathans Story Pack
  • Stellaris: Digital Anniversary Edition
  • Stellaris
  • Europa Universalis IV: Common Sense
  • Cities: Skylines
  • Europa Universalis IV
  • Stellaris: Synthetic Dawn
  • Imperator: Rome
  • Europa Universalis IV: Wealth of Nations
  • Europa Universalis IV: Art of War
AFAIK, no others than the economic plans the regular AI now uses. I don't know if sector AI is using them, but they have been barely introduced, need tweaking and several new plans to be written, and from what I saw regular AIs suffer from the same rebellions. At least they squash the rebels rather quick, but for player sectors it seems we have to wait some more.
In the Dev Diary where the new economic AI that uses the economic plans was presented, someone asked about sectors. The Dev responded that right now, sector AI does not use the new economic plans. In other words sector AI is same in 2.6 as 2.5. The Dev did say they will be monitoring the new plan-based economic AI and will tweak and expand it over time, so we may see sector AI using the plans in a future update.
 

LWE

Colonel
Jul 10, 2015
892
157
  • Victoria 2
  • Stellaris
  • Warlock 2: The Exiled
  • Imperator: Rome
  • Europa Universalis IV
  • Europa Universalis III
By this point, I would be fine with the devs fixing the bugs so that the game is in the state of Victoria 2 or even Imperator bugwise (including AI bugs) and then declaring the game to be finished. This option has its negatives, but I actually don't mind the current state of the game mechanic-wise.
 

EvilxFish

Recruit
Apr 21, 2020
2
0
  • Stellaris
  • Stellaris: Digital Anniversary Edition
  • Stellaris: Leviathans Story Pack
  • Stellaris - Path to Destruction bundle
  • Stellaris: Humanoids Species Pack
  • Stellaris: Apocalypse
  • Stellaris: Distant Stars
  • Europa Universalis IV
  • Naval War: Arctic Circle
  • Sword of the Stars
  • Sword of the Stars II
  • Stellaris: Synthetic Dawn
Will AI allies now reliably come to your aid in wars or will they just protect their own borders mostly still?