FTL Discussion Thread
- Thread starter scaper12123
- 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.
Oh, I meant the links, not the systems themselves. So whilst T2 might give a system 1 link away, it could show upto say 6 links away from the current position. Beyond that range you wouldn't know where the links are between systems. Once discovered they would remain visible. Does that make sense?
OK, I guess I can see some sense in this from a gameplay point of view... but from a roleplay point of view it looks so much illogical and artificial, that I even doubt I could stay playing Stellaris if this would be implemented(
Well... if it is optional, like a button " Civilian ships use warp drive" in a Galaxy creation manu... Well, this I could handle, although I would constantly have this button off.
But than it would still be constant headache for devs to maintain one another FTL method on every patch. And as far as I get the whole idea of implementing "Hyperlines only" FTL system was to stop FTL-issues to drain time and recourses of dev team(
Well... if it is optional, like a button " Civilian ships use warp drive" in a Galaxy creation manu... Well, this I could handle, although I would constantly have this button off.
But than it would still be constant headache for devs to maintain one another FTL method on every patch. And as far as I get the whole idea of implementing "Hyperlines only" FTL system was to stop FTL-issues to drain time and recourses of dev team(
The problem is, even if we can hack in warp and wormhole, the entire game is being reworked to be based on hyperlanes and simply won't accomodate correctly.
I've only played Hyperlanes when I started playing, until realizing how much better Warp and Wormholes worked. And you could even FTL into Hyperlane from any point in the system back then!
Why'd it feel terrible? Warp and Wormhole had all that range, not mention it wasn't at the whim of where the hyperlanes might point! If an empire with closed borders blobs over a hyperlane, you can kiss passing through that lane good-bye. It severely limited how you could expand, when compared with the other two.
So I'm quite okay with the change: Borders and Defenses get reworked in the same patch, which is a huge buff to Hyperlanes on its own. Also the game will be a True Hyperlane-only, and even Jump Drive can only on occasions perform the jump. No random primitive becoming space-faring in 2210 with Warp Drive and proceeding to stomp all the lesser Hyperlane peasants in the galaxy.
So if the other two FTL's are gone in the start, it's not a big deal - many of the reasons why Hyperlanes are terrible will be gone too when that happens.
Why'd it feel terrible? Warp and Wormhole had all that range, not mention it wasn't at the whim of where the hyperlanes might point! If an empire with closed borders blobs over a hyperlane, you can kiss passing through that lane good-bye. It severely limited how you could expand, when compared with the other two.
So I'm quite okay with the change: Borders and Defenses get reworked in the same patch, which is a huge buff to Hyperlanes on its own. Also the game will be a True Hyperlane-only, and even Jump Drive can only on occasions perform the jump. No random primitive becoming space-faring in 2210 with Warp Drive and proceeding to stomp all the lesser Hyperlane peasants in the galaxy.
So if the other two FTL's are gone in the start, it's not a big deal - many of the reasons why Hyperlanes are terrible will be gone too when that happens.
The stated problem was around combat. If only used on Science ships. Very little to no balancing is required that they won't be doing anyway.
That's not some tweak to make the game fairer or better, that's fundamental changes to the very concept of the game, your analogy is stupid.
1. Thanks to defense staitons the Fortress can scale a whole lot better with Fleet Sizes
2. With the FTL rework and new Inhibitor you only need a handfull of Fortresses to cover your entire empire. That is a lot less micro then any "coast guard" Fleet per System. They said they tried something like Unlimited Fortresses and it sucked.
3. You are forced to split your Doomstacks into smaler fleets anyway now. We are not certain how many fleets you can throw into one front yet. So It is your strategic decision to leave a few fleets back to reinforce your fortresses and deal with deep raiding.
It is only partly like an ocean. You see the inter-system space between Systems? That is utterly boring.
It is so boring, we have to invent Space Magic (FTL) to just ignore it. Without FTL, we would spend literal generations just travelling from Point A to Point B.
99.98% of all mass in the Solarsystem is tied up into our Sun. But that mass is largely irrelevant except for Central heating.
Space is also 99.98% boring interplanetry Space where nothing ever happens.
Even in WW1 + WW2 combined, was there ever a major battle that was not fought close to the coast or some place of strategic value? How many major Deep Sea engagements where there? How many where the in Island Chains?
In the dev diary it was said that you would find some old disabled gateways first, and later would be able to build on this system using new technology.
Will there be a possibility to develope gateway technology from scratch, that is, without finding an old one first?
Will there be a possibility to develope gateway technology from scratch, that is, without finding an old one first?
No. Obviously, Space Is An Ocean.
And yes, I think being true to tropes and expectations of what makes space opera sci-fi work is more important to this game than realism.
To misquote Hitchcock: "They don't worry about realistic depiction of space travel because it's dull."
And yes, I think being true to tropes and expectations of what makes space opera sci-fi work is more important to this game than realism.
To misquote Hitchcock: "They don't worry about realistic depiction of space travel because it's dull."
Well, if you say so. I have zero experience in game design, and a last time I dealt with code was years and years ago... I just have a feeling that maintaining Warp as an option for civilian ships in hypothetical 2.6 "Lem" patch would be more of a problem then it seems...
Exactly the weakpoint of this Argument:
If you hold a choke point, you inherently give up all the space beyond said chokepoint for colonisation/conquest.
If you do colonise/conquer it? Well, that makes that space vulnerable for raiding.
You would have to jump from chokepoint to chokepoint (and scrap the previous choke), to even have a chance to maintain such a defense. Wich with between the new Wargoal System and Warscore costs, might well be impossible.
That sounds great. Might also alleviate some of the concerns about warfare maybe becoming too static and predictable that some people have been voicing.
Anger is a big driving force.
People are much more likely to go to the forums and complain about something, because they are angry, than people are likely to say "I'm content with these changes".
That's why we see a lot of posts complaining about these changes, while the voting under those posts is way in favor of these changes.
That's why I think it's important for content people to say: "Yes, I support this, I like this!"
And from what I see here, the vast majority is in favor of these changes as well.
So here you go devs, I know you won't be discouraged to pull through with these changes, because you made up your mind and are biting the apple with the backlash. I'm very proud, that you decided to do what's best for the game regardless of the backlash.
Don't let the complaints drag down your motivation, I think you're doing an awesome job.
Cheers!
People are much more likely to go to the forums and complain about something, because they are angry, than people are likely to say "I'm content with these changes".
That's why we see a lot of posts complaining about these changes, while the voting under those posts is way in favor of these changes.
That's why I think it's important for content people to say: "Yes, I support this, I like this!"
And from what I see here, the vast majority is in favor of these changes as well.
So here you go devs, I know you won't be discouraged to pull through with these changes, because you made up your mind and are biting the apple with the backlash. I'm very proud, that you decided to do what's best for the game regardless of the backlash.
Don't let the complaints drag down your motivation, I think you're doing an awesome job.
Cheers!
That does not mean Deep Sea battles. Pretty sure most battles were still fought around sea geography (the equivlanet of Stellaris Systems). Here is a list from Wikipedia. Nearly every battle is named after the geographic region it was fougth in:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Naval_warfare#20th_Century
Indeed that the Bismark could not get close enough to the coast to get fighter cover was propably what sealed it's fate.
Let us go over WW2, Pacific Theather:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_of_the_Coral_Sea
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_of_Midway
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_of_the_Philippine_Sea
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_of_Leyte_Gulf
They are oddly all named for the part of Ocean Geography they took place in and around. Almost as if attacking a base weight a thousand times heaver then literal months of Skirmishing in the surrounding water.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_of_the_Coral_Sea
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_of_Midway
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_of_the_Philippine_Sea
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_of_Leyte_Gulf
They are oddly all named for the part of Ocean Geography they took place in and around. Almost as if attacking a base weight a thousand times heaver then literal months of Skirmishing in the surrounding water.
We've heard the word on FTL, some agree, some don't.
In the diary SoTS was dismissed as simplistic game so that's why different FTL techs work. Let's look at this a bit more..
SoTS has a concept of "fuel". In many 4X games this is a hard limit on how far you can go. In SoTS it was implemented as having to actually build fleet tenders. Combined with the doomstack defying relatively low limit on fleet size, this effectively stopped you from going arbitrarily long distances with a warfleet. Scouts could take along their own gas station and go very far indeed.
The second game mechanism is that wormhole travel is tied to Stargåtes. The bugs have to haul the portal with them and that's really slow business at sublight. An antithesis of "jump behind lines" really. On the other hand if they can deploy that gateway on your colony they're damn difficult to dislodge.
The concept of fuel could be implemented as fuel modules. You can load a science ship or scout corvette up to the gills but your long range cruisers would be seriously crippled if you want them to "go behind the lines".
Whether it would be reasonable to implement some kind of doomstack limiting mechanism is a different discussion really. The most straightforward method would be to steal a page from other paradox games. Too many ships = combat effectiveness drops. Better admiral / better organizational tech = more ships.
Shouldn't be too herculean task to add to the game.
In the diary SoTS was dismissed as simplistic game so that's why different FTL techs work. Let's look at this a bit more..
SoTS has a concept of "fuel". In many 4X games this is a hard limit on how far you can go. In SoTS it was implemented as having to actually build fleet tenders. Combined with the doomstack defying relatively low limit on fleet size, this effectively stopped you from going arbitrarily long distances with a warfleet. Scouts could take along their own gas station and go very far indeed.
The second game mechanism is that wormhole travel is tied to Stargåtes. The bugs have to haul the portal with them and that's really slow business at sublight. An antithesis of "jump behind lines" really. On the other hand if they can deploy that gateway on your colony they're damn difficult to dislodge.
The concept of fuel could be implemented as fuel modules. You can load a science ship or scout corvette up to the gills but your long range cruisers would be seriously crippled if you want them to "go behind the lines".
Whether it would be reasonable to implement some kind of doomstack limiting mechanism is a different discussion really. The most straightforward method would be to steal a page from other paradox games. Too many ships = combat effectiveness drops. Better admiral / better organizational tech = more ships.
Shouldn't be too herculean task to add to the game.
Given the number of other changes that will accompany the switch to Hyperlanes your jumping the gun...