FTL Discussion Thread

[~Robbie]

I guess I'll be the one to say it: 2.0 doesn't fix doomstacks at all. Pouring all your ships to an enemy's weak point and/or picking off their disparate fleets one by one seems to still be the optimal strategy. It's borderline required if you want to be able to take on fortresses.

Hyperlanes have done nothing to address this problem, which is basically what I expected.

 

[emperror0815]

I guess I'll be the one to say it: 2.0 doesn't fix doomstacks at all. Pouring all your ships to an enemy's weak point and/or picking off their disparate fleets one by one seems to still be the optimal strategy. It's borderline required if you want to be able to take on fortresses.

Hyperlanes have done nothing to address this problem, which is basically what I expected.

[sarcasm] Well, what a surprise [/sarcasm]

 

[TheRealCally]

EDIT: {s} Oh yes and also the FTL change was all about removing doomstacks entirely to such a degree that stacking up your fleets is literal immediate suicide. That's why the FTL post talked about other issues it causes, didn't mention doomstacks, and the doomstack post gave FTL a passing mention. {/s}

Imagine my excitement at starting Stellaris 2.0 with the new Apocalypse splash screen only to start a game only to have that hope crushed by an ugly grid of railway-lines, dooming my play-style to be forever locked into an old game version 1.9 that will never receive exciting new content

The problem with reverting is that while, conceptually, I consider 1.9 to be the better game, it does suffer from a number of deficiencies that were addressed in 2.0 (i.e., the doomstack problem). So it's the choice between two games, an unmaintained space 4x game with a design I like or a maintained 4x game that is missing the fundamentals of space. Space, by it's very nature does not have choke points.

So you want the game to be continually updated and added to, but them never to touch the things you like?
If the developers are to keep working on the game, it is inevitable mechanics will be overhauled significantly, it's in Paradox's track record. (Can pull a few examples from EUIV.)
This FTL change is quite large, but it's not the only one, 2.0 is a large overhaul of systems.

 

[emperror0815]

EDIT: {s} Oh yes and also the FTL change was all about removing doomstacks entirely to such a degree that stacking up your fleets is literal immediate suicide. That's why the FTL post talked about other issues it causes, didn't mention doomstacks, and the doomstack post gave FTL a passing mention. {/s}

It was not ALL about Doomstacks, but it WAS one reason given to us. It came up during the whole discussion in the DEV-Thread. The initial post didn't mention it this is true.

So you want the game to be continually updated and added to, but them never to touch the things you like?
If the developers are to keep working on the game, it is inevitable mechanics will be overhauled significantly, it's in Paradox's track record. (Can pull a few examples from EUIV.)
This FTL change is quite large, but it's not the only one, 2.0 is a large overhaul of systems.

Yep, there i made a big mistake, not looking up the track record of this company. But from now on they see not another penny from me.
And BTW i have no problem with overhauling something. I have a problem with cutting it completely without the chance that a mod can restore it in a way that it resembles nearly what it was before. But that code is gone now.

 

[TheRealCally]

It was not ALL about Doomstacks, but it WAS one reason given to us. It came up during the whole discussion in the DEV-Thread. The initial post didn't mention it this is true.

Could I get a quote? All I can find in the FTL thread is this:

This change is also not happening in isolation. There will be more dev diaries on the topics of warfare, combat and doomstacks.

And BTW i have no problem with overhauling something. I have a problem with cutting it completely without the chance that a mod can restore it in a way that it resembles nearly what it was before. But that code is gone now.

Warp wasn't cut, it was moved to a utility, wormholes are not very similar to their old incarnation, although they're still wormholes and fill a similar role, except they're a later game utility rather than a starting FTL type.

And I haven't done much modding for Stellaris, but uh, when you say it's impossible. It's probably not.
Hell there was that case when humanoids came out without necessary parts for compatibility with some mods, and some modders claimed nobody would ever be able to model those parts, then someone did, within a few days from memory.
Where there's a will, there's a way.

Although, I would be very interested to see how it plays out, readding warp and wormhole to how 2.0 is now.
Something tells me it would break down and many of the changes would be mitigated.

 

[GhostInTheMachine22]

Reply to 1731 by TheRealCally
To explain my point of view let me say, IMHO the game ***is*** the ships, how they move strategically and fight tactically. The combat is the pay off for the gamer who has worked hard to build an economically viable stellar empire. In my view, dumbing down the ship aspect just to add "geography" that can be claimed to provide a casus belli is just treating the game as if it should be EU III or IV in space.

We need War War not Jaw Jaw. Now for small multiplayer galaxies the changes won't be bad because nearly all multiplayer galaxies were small anyway due to lack of time, forcing multiplayers to pick Hyperlanes (faster travel) previously anyway - they won't notice much change.

But for the solo player who enjoys free wide ranging early exploration and expansion into larger galaxies with a wealth of different ship types available to himself and enemies? ouch.

 

[TheRealCally]

But for the solo player who enjoys free wide ranging early exploration and expansion into larger galaxies with a wealth of different ship types available to himself and enemies? ouch.

Ship types haven't been dumbed down, if anything they've added to the strategy of your ships. Combat computers, fleet manager, all weapons available. I lost 2 options I was never going to pick and that didn't even happen during the game.
And you replace that with far more options for the makeup of your ship's armaments, composition of fleets and roles for these ships based on how you put all these bits together that you can watch unfold with the improved combat looks?

If we're talking ship options. This is certainly an improvement.


(For reference I play single player and multiplayer on large galaxies. Yes, I am feeling the burn of reduced movement speed, but I'm enjoying the changes to the war mechanics.)

 

[emperror0815]

Could I get a quote? All I can find in the FTL thread is this:




Warp wasn't cut, it was moved to a utility, wormholes are not very similar to their old incarnation, although they're still wormholes and fill a similar role, except they're a later game utility rather than a starting FTL type.

And I haven't done much modding for Stellaris, but uh, when you say it's impossible. It's probably not.
Hell there was that case when humanoids came out without necessary parts for compatibility with some mods, and some modders claimed nobody would ever be able to model those parts, then someone did, within a few days from memory.
Where there's a will, there's a way.

Although, I would be very interested to see how it plays out, readding warp and wormhole to how 2.0 is now.
Something tells me it would break down and many of the changes would be mitigated.

Well i tried to find posts from me in this Behemont of a thread, but it looks like that data is gone. So you have to search youreself.

And there was also the thing mentioned that the code for warp and wormeholes have been cut completely from the game. So no mod can restore something from it.
I remember this though, reason for cutting it completely had to do with doomstacks and AI-reasons.
It had to do with the ST-NewHorizons Mod.

And btw if you believe me or not is not something i care about.

 

[TheRealCally]

Well i tried to find posts from me in this Behemont of a thread, but it looks like that data is gone. So you have to search youreself.

And there was also the thing mentioned that the code for warp and wormeholes have been cut completely from the game. So no mod can restore something from it.
I remember this though, reason for cutting it completely had to do with doomstacks and AI-reasons.
It had to do with the ST-NewHorizons Mod.

And btw if you believe me or not is not something i care about.

Apologies, I meant quotes from the devs quoting doomstacks as a reason for FTL directly.
There's a button to filter down to just dev posts.

And I vaguely remember that ST New Horizons thing, but it was a while ago so can't really remember exactly what happened with it. Shrug

 

[~Robbie]

It was not ALL about Doomstacks, but it WAS one reason given to us. It came up during the whole discussion in the DEV-Thread. The initial post didn't mention it this is true.



Yep, there i made a big mistake, not looking up the track record of this company. But from now on they see not another penny from me.
And BTW i have no problem with overhauling something. I have a problem with cutting it completely without the chance that a mod can restore it in a way that it resembles nearly what it was before. But that code is gone now.

Well I mean even taking the other changes 2.0 made into consideration, doomstacks are still an obviously optimal strategy. Whether it was the FTL change or any of the other things that were supposed to combat doomstacks, it didn't work.

 

[bafat]

this game was the perfect Master of Orion 2 clone... now its just a shitty civ v clone in space...

 

[GhostInTheMachine22]

Ship types haven't been dumbed down, if anything they've added to the strategy of your ships. Combat computers, fleet manager, all weapons available. I lost 2 options I was never going to pick and that didn't even happen during the game.
And you replace that with far more options for the makeup of your ship's armaments, composition of fleets and roles for these ships based on how you put all these bits together that you can watch unfold with the improved combat looks?

If we're talking ship options. This is certainly an improvement.


(For reference I play single player and multiplayer on large galaxies. Yes, I am feeling the burn of reduced movement speed, but I'm enjoying the changes to the war mechanics.)

Just a quick Q. for you: Did you go for "Hyperlanes" mainly in your 1.9 games? how many stars in your Galaxy?

 

[TheRealCally]

Just a quick Q. for you: Did you go for "Hyperlanes" mainly in your 1.9 games? how many stars in your Galaxy?

800-1000 and I played wormhole(Some of the multiplayer games were hyperlane only). I don't entirely see the relevance of this. Although I mentioned the galaxy size I played on in my post.

 

[AlanC9]

Well I mean even taking the other changes 2.0 made into consideration, doomstacks are still an obviously optimal strategy. Whether it was the FTL change or any of the other things that were supposed to combat doomstacks, it didn't work.

You sure? I'm finding that a single fleet can't cover my empire adequately.

 

[Thyrus]

I am not talking about doomstacks there, i am talking about this stupid "realism" and "how the space should be" argument.I told that i can't see a viable way to fix doomstacks without removing warp and wormholes. And i read the doomstack thread. Even in this system, i found myself using doomstacks after i found some wormholes that connect to the enemy empire. So i can clearly see what devs wanted to do.

First off, I regret using anything that could be interpreted as requesting "realism". It's not really about realism, it's about making space distinct from EU IV style province maps. As others already pointed out, if I want severely restricted movement, I play EU IV with its fort mechanic. To me (that is in my personal viewpoint, but consistent with all the Sci-Fi lore I'm aware of) space is something to move in relatively unconstrained. That leads to a mechanics of warfare wildly different from earth-bound conflicts. In my option, this made Stellaris 1.9 unique and interesting. The notion of a "front line" or "border system" simply becomes moot if your enemy can jump right into the middle of your empire.

So, to me, Stellaris 2.0 removes one of the main features setting it apart from other strategy games in what feels to me like an attempt to fix a balancing issue by trading the 1.9 model of space warfare for the familiar province pattern. And, taking others word that doomstacks are still the optimal strategy, a failed attempt at that. Hardly surprising given that keeping all your troops close together is (barring attrition) the optimal strategy for CK II and EU IV as well. And I sincerely hope that no one wants to see Stellaris turned into a front line grinding HoI clone.

 

[TheRealCally]

You sure? I'm finding that a single fleet can't cover my empire adequately.

Unless you're willing to take a few hundred minerals of damage, I've had trouble fending off pirates, marauders etc.
Not to mention if I'm particularly deep into enemy territory I've had trouble pulling back to repair and getting back before the enemy has recovered from our last bout.(Although that's mainly in early wars)

 

[Kappenloch]

I guess I'll be the one to say it: 2.0 doesn't fix doomstacks at all. Pouring all your ships to an enemy's weak point and/or picking off their disparate fleets one by one seems to still be the optimal strategy. It's borderline required if you want to be able to take on fortresses.

Hyperlanes have done nothing to address this problem, which is basically what I expected.

Yes no great surprise there, we've been saying it for weeks leading up to this debacle. In fact I wouldn't be surprised if it makes doomstack warfare even worse, I mean where else do you put your ships except the chokepoints? There's certainly no need to use them to protect the interior of your empire against "surprise attacks". With space-roads, surprise attacks and many other strategies including multiple simultaneous raids are now literally impossible.

 

[AlanC9]

First off, I regret using anything that could be interpreted as requesting "realism". It's not really about realism, it's about making space distinct from EU IV style province maps. As others already pointed out, if I want severely restricted movement, I play EU IV with its fort mechanic. To me (that is in my personal viewpoint, but consistent with all the Sci-Fi lore I'm aware of) space is something to move in relatively unconstrained. That leads to a mechanics of warfare wildly different from earth-bound conflicts. In my option, this made Stellaris 1.9 unique and interesting. The notion of a "front line" or "border system" simply becomes moot if your enemy can jump right into the middle of your empire.

There are actually a lot of SF examples of FTL drives which don't let you move between systems unconstrained, typically set up that way because if an enemy can jump right not the middle of your empire, empires don't work.

This is not a problem for your argument, which isn't about SF lore any more than it's about realism.

 

[AlanC9]

With space-roads, surprise attacks and many other strategies including multiple simultaneous raids are now literally impossible.

That's a bit much, unless you're talking about small galaxies. I haven't had a border yet with fewer than a half-dozen attack routes unless it's a FE who only controls a handful of systems.

 

[Matrix Aran]

There are actually a lot of SF examples of FTL drives which don't let you move between systems unconstrained, typically set up that way because if an enemy can jump right not the middle of your empire, empires don't work.

This is not a problem for your argument, which isn't about SF lore any more than it's about realism.

Pretty much this. If you can't control how people move through space, its very hard to lay claim to it. Take away all the social conventions, and the only reason your house is yours is because you're the only one that can open the door to it. If I can materialize inside your kitchen, it's not really your kitchen anymore.

So as a Sci-Fi writer, you have to go and borrow from the existing world if you want to tell a story of Empires. Which is really just an excuse to tell stories of 16th century sailing adventures with really cool glowing swords.

Yes, warp and wormholes in 1.9 made Stellaris different than other space strategy games. But I find it hard to say it was in any way objectively better for it.