FTL Discussion Thread

[Alblaka]

It detracts from the 'realism', but greatly enhances gameplay, and allows for further improvements of gameplay.

And gameplay is far more important to me than realism or asthetics.

 

[CocoCincinnati]

I'm really not sure what to make of it yet but I can see potential issues. It sounds like this could slow down the exploration at the start of the game which will be a shame. The way it is now, you could just bypass a system if you needed to, but now, not only do you have to go along hyperlanes but you have to cross the system to get from the end of one lane to the start of another. If there are space creatures in a system, that could stop your exploration cold in it's tracks until you've built up your military.

Also, I worry about possible micro management of the early exploration in regards to speed in the system. For example if a system has multiple hyperlane points, and you are just doing early exploration, you probably want to minimize time spent crossing each system. Will this lead to a series of opening systems one at a time to plot the most efficient course both along the hyperlanes AND from lane to lane in each system. If it takes 1 game week to go from lane A to lane B but it takes 3 weeks to go from lane A to lane C, then you probably want to plan your route to take the first one and hit the second one on the way back (did that make any sense?). This could get very frustrating.

 

[Crenickator]

Because people like to complain, specially the snowflakes of this generation. The patch will add so may layers of dept in this game I can't even start to imagine how much complex it will become if we compare with the game right now and this is a freaking awesome thing.

What depth? What complexity?
They took away depth and complexity to simplify things. The terrain as advertised isn't anything that couldn't already be done with 3 FTL types, and I don't recall anyone complaining sensors were overpowered.

 

[Crenickator]

For my the FTL rework was a necessity since the release. It's a part of the problem that make warfare uninteresting and boring. I'm glad to see they are finally doing the right changes... but we will need to see how it work in game.

Do explain how it makes warfare uninteresting and boring.

 

[Grubnessul]

People hate change, that is why. I have seen plenty of games that make drastic changes, people lose their shit, then play anyway realizing its better. The devs should not bow to internet trolls. It is their game, and I have confidence that they will pull through.

I think the issue is more that a lot of other space 4x games have hyperlanes already as only FTL mechanic. In my experience, in Stellaris it feels the most restrictive, least fun and least imaginative FTL, least strategic, most infuriating when you cannot reach a nearby star because another empire blocks your line mechanic.

It's a boring, repetitive and the most restrictive form of FTL in Stellaris. And now it becomes the default mode...

 

[Crenickator]

I think the issue is more that a lot of other space 4x games have hyperlanes already as only FTL mechanic. In my experience, in Stellaris it feels the most restrictive, least fun and least imaginative FTL, least strategic, most infuriating when you cannot reach a nearby star because another empire blocks your line mechanic.

Weirdest part is, they had that fixed by making you claim every star you can own, so you'd almost never have a situation where you owned a star your FTL drive couldn't take you to.

 

[jonjowett]

I would want the debuffs on that module to be extreme. Something like: "Immune to FTL inhibitors, -1000% shield hitpoints, -1000% armour, -50% fire rate, -50% sublight speed".

 

[Alblaka]

The jump drive is already a module like this though. Im curious if there are thoughts towards an early game module that does much the same but with a larger detriment in other areas. Otherwise an empire with a single point of entry can completely stop any attempt at raiding their inner systems during a war early game.

And this is great, because, depending upon which other things about war change, this would allow a potential underdog empire to force a superior attacker into a white peace by having an ultimate defensive position. It would allow tall play to actually become a thing, based upon local geography. Thinks like Space Switzerland could happen.

 

[anamiac]

This is not my image. I found it easily using a google search.

Now imagine that this is in a 6 player multi-player game. John (blue) here is completely cut off. This game isn't going to be any fun for John, so now we all have to restart the game. That's a lot of not-fun hassle, and there's no guarantee that next run, Timmy won't be the one screwed.

 

[jazzglands]

And I've enjoyed practically every change so far. While I think the change in the wormhole makes sense and is necessary (and it was compensated by the introduction of natural wormholes and gateways), the removal of warpdrive reduces the diversity, makes very restrictive and draws flavor from the game.

Of course, some people exaggerate.

Flavor is more than what abilities you picked at the beginning of the game though. Knowing my species are spritualistic and have a long lifespan is fun flavor. Knowing they have been in several wars with the Hegemonic Imperialists over an area between two hyperspace chokepoints is also fun flavor. You aren't rivals just because you have different ethics anymore; you're rivals because your ethical differences keep you from sharing a defined area on your mutual border, you've been in conflict with your rival over this area for a long time, you've developed defenses and infrastructure there, etc... All of that says things about your empire's politics, their history, and the attitudes of their pops. It's flavor as much as anything you pick in character creation, but it's shaped by things you've actually done in the game. And you spend a lot more time in the game than in character creation

 

[TheDeadlyShoe]

And I'd like to add that I'm not really seeing why the terrain changes couldn't have been added with the 3 FTL types. A lot of the changes don't seem like an either/or thing between 3 FTLs and Hyperlanes only.

because its incredibly easy to go around any terrain that doesnt favor you. Terrain is actually in the game right now, it just doesnt matter.

 

[Bellicosity]

And this is great, because, depending upon which other things about war change, this would allow a potential underdog empire to force a superior attacker into a white peace by having an ultimate defensive position. It would allow tall play to actually become a thing, based upon local geography. Thinks like Space Switzerland could happen.

The reverse also holds true. A truly overpowering nation would have no fear of guerrilla warfare until Jump Drives are researched.

To be clear, both scenarios (no module exists or an early game module exists) are both interesting scenarios imho. I'd love a chance to be that space Switzerland. I'd also like an opportunity to at least attempt to fight someone clearly stronger through raiding tactics even if we share a highly defensible border in the early game.

I just pointed out that is is clear they have a FTL inhibitor skipping module in the late game and wonder if one might exist in the early/middle game and what that module(s) might be like. Early game could really be that massive "-1000% shield hitpoints, -1000% armour, -50% fire rate, -50% sublight speed" that enables you to just sneak in a corvette as recon, then a mid game module comes out that enables you to reasonably set up a raiding party but not honestly contest other fleets, and late game gives you the jump drive that allows your entire fleet to bypass the FTL inhibitor.

 

[TheDeadlyShoe]

The reverse also holds true. A truly overpowering nation would have no fear of guerrilla warfare until Jump Drives are researched.

To be clear, both scenarios (no module exists or an early game module exists) are both interesting scenarios imho. I'd love a chance to be that space Switzerland. I'd also like an opportunity to at least attempt to fight someone clearly stronger through raiding tactics even if we share a highly defensible border in the early game.

I just pointed out that is is clear they have a FTL inhibitor skipping module in the late game and wonder if one might exist in the early/middle game and what that module(s) might be like. Early game could really be that massive "-1000% shield hitpoints, -1000% armour, -50% fire rate, -50% sublight speed" that enables you to just sneak in a corvette as recon, then a mid game module comes out that enables you to reasonably set up a raiding party but not honestly contest other fleets, and late game gives you the jump drive that allows your entire fleet to bypass the FTL inhibitor.

a large empire has lots of territory to cover and only so much Starbase Capacity to go around. A small or tall empire will be on average better defended than a large empire.

 

[LordMagus]

Hyperlane only + naturally occuring wormholes seem good. I'm not sure about the hypergates and how that will be balanced (restrict the no. you can have).

In order to improve warfare and strategy, you need to be able to lose something valuable.
Some systems will become strategically valuable for hyperlane connections or the natural wormhole in the system, as well as connections to resource rich systems.

I mean, who cares if you lose system 58 that produces minerals?

As compared to a wormhole system connecting you with a far flung colony in a resource rich cluster who are fending off attacks by pirates and can no longer rrceive reinforcements now.

The more that differentiates systems the better, some need to be really strategically important to make the game more than 'chase their doomstack and then land 60 stack armies on planets till you win'.

 

[Crenickator]

because its incredibly easy to go around any terrain that doesnt favor you. Terrain is actually in the game right now, it just doesnt matter.

A) It's space. That's kind of the point.
B) There's nothing inherent to Hyperlanes that make it so Nebulas block sensors, pulsars drain shields, or areas of the galaxy can be blocked off. All of those can be accomplished with other FTL drives, and going around is and should be a valid choice.

 

[Bellicosity]

a large empire has lots of territory to cover and only so much Starbase Capacity to go around. A small or tall empire will be on average better defended than a large empire.

True but its not that rare to share a single or extremely few connection between two nations, especially on hyperlane only maps.

 

[Stadhouder]

This is not my image. I found it easily using a google search.

Now imagine that this is in a 6 player multi-player game. John (blue) here is completely cut off. This game isn't going to be any fun for John, so now we all have to restart the game. That's a lot of not-fun hassle, and there's no guarantee that next run, Timmy won't be the one screwed.

Come on be creative. John can suck up to the hive so they allow his ship through. Alternatively he que two colony ships, declare war, distract the enemy fleets and skip his colony ship and a science ship past, and quickly colonize 2 some other places. Sure, in multiplayer, John will have a slightly slower start, but multiplayer also allow for more diplomatic option to take the hive mind down, so... For purely competitive multiplayer Stellaris is unsuitable anyway, due to the highly randomized start.

 

[Tavior]

Come on be creative. John can suck up to the hive so they allow his ship through. Alternatively he que two colony ships, declare war, distract the enemy fleets and skip his colony ship and a science ship past, and quickly colonize 2 some other places. Sure, in multiplayer, John will have a slightly slower start, but multiplayer also allow for more diplomatic option to take the hive mind down, so... For purely competitive multiplayer Stellaris is unsuitable anyway, due to the highly randomized start.

You can't do that with the upcoming Cherryh update because your corvette/anything non-science ships can't reveal/explore solar system that aren't surveyed past the Hive empire. So you would have to explore while being at war.

So his point about john start not fun is still a valid point.

Edit: Almost all but forgotten about needing to build an outpost to claim a system with an empty planet for colonizing on top of surveying. So that is even MORE reason to dislike the hyperlane only approach.

 

[The Founder]

The jump drive is already a module like this though. Im curious if there are thoughts towards an early game module that does much the same but with a larger detriment in other areas. Otherwise an empire with a single point of entry can completely stop any attempt at raiding their inner systems during a war early game.

First off, the FTL Inhibitor itself is a technology. So your chance to have it early game might not be that good.
Secondly, if you need to close off a chokepoint that usually means that you can not expand into that direction anymore. Any systems on the far side of the chocke might be vulnerable to attack/raiding, because they are on the wrong side of that wonderfull fortress. So having that chokepoint is already a tradeoff.
Third, you can close off up to 3 at start.
Fourth, the number of inroads into your empire might not work out as well as you planned. Actually securing all paths into "your" section of the galaxy propably needs a lot of influence on early expansion into far-off systems. Indeed the more planets you can expand too, the more chokepoints there are and the more expensive it is to secure them all.

You might have the best defensive position, but latest when you attack you will have to risk your fleets against the enemy defenses. And if you take enough losses, that in itself will make you open for a counter attack.

 

[HAL.9000.1]

Do explain how it makes warfare uninteresting and boring.

OK, since you asked:

1. The new movement system, which is hyperlanes only with the added annoyance of having to physically cross a system to get to the next hyperlane access point, is completely at odds with the very concept of movement in the vastness of space. You will not be able to avoid fixed defenses, when in reality space is immense and it should be possible to maneuver around them. Combine that with the complete lack of tactical control in battle, and you have a dreary, unimaginative series of battles just to get from one place to another.
2. Historically, this will cause warfare in outer space to resemble warfare in the Age of Marlborough (early 1700's). That scarcely seems like the model that should be used for a space warfare game set in the distant future. Heck, by the time WW2 came around the Germans had figured out how to fight a war of maneuver and render the Maginot Line obsolete in about two weeks. But I guess that all got thrown out the window by the time the 22nd century rolled around, eh? Guderian is rolling over in his grave. Vauban and Maginot, on the other hand, approve. Which should tell you something right there.
3. You will pretty much be restricted to going to war against your immediate neighbors, and to plodding through their territory one contested system at a time. Yes, if your immediate neighbors will let you pass you could move further out, but (1) it will take forever and (2) the risk that the borders will be closed to you on your way back, trapping you far from home, is such that you would be very foolish to risk it. Much less interesting than the current version, which allows for wide outflanking movements and actual grand tactical/operational planning. That is all out the window with this new and more primitive system of movement.

With a degree in military and diplomatic history, forty+ years of wargaming and 20+ years of specifically playing space games, I think I have the proper foundations for forming an opinion of a gaming system from both historical and gaming perspectives. And this one is to me a giant step backwards, illogical in the context of the vastness of outer space and frustrating because it will be combined with the complete lack of tactical control that has been a hallmark of this game from the get-go. Remember, many people have been asking for some tactical control for some time; they didn't get it. This is far more work from a development perspective, but is what is being shoved down their throats instead.

PDX is trying to force everyone to play the game the way they think it should be played, and has been nerfing features and restricting choice for a long time; this proposed change is just another step in that direction and is, for me, a bridge too far.