Think the current situation is fine, I tried a few games without thinking about megastructures, and the game improved because I focused on the tactics
Remove 'Galactic Wonders' as perk.
- Thread starter Knuffeldraak
- 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.
In regards to those discussion the necessity/non-necessity of voidborne/space habitats.
Habitats cannot house science labs, so the ideal use for habitats is as a place to stuff all your forges/factories. Since ecumenopoli can do the same, but better that renders them obsolete on paper. But in practice Agrarian idyll players cannot build ecumenopolii so they still may want to go the habitat 'sky forge' approach, likewise not all players own Megacorp. It is also often faster/easier to get a habitat up first than it is an ecumenopoli, given their 10 year construction time and HUGE up-front mineral investment, allowing you to snowball your consumer goods/alloy economy quicker by rushing habitats.
My main point of irkness about voidborne Vs ecumenopoli, is that the tech that unlocks ecumenopoli is CALLED 'the arcology project' but by definition, space habitats are arcologies - self contained, largely self sufficient habitation 'blocks'. So from a flavour perspective it'd make sense to roll them both into the same perk.
Habitats cannot house science labs, so the ideal use for habitats is as a place to stuff all your forges/factories. Since ecumenopoli can do the same, but better that renders them obsolete on paper. But in practice Agrarian idyll players cannot build ecumenopolii so they still may want to go the habitat 'sky forge' approach, likewise not all players own Megacorp. It is also often faster/easier to get a habitat up first than it is an ecumenopoli, given their 10 year construction time and HUGE up-front mineral investment, allowing you to snowball your consumer goods/alloy economy quicker by rushing habitats.
My main point of irkness about voidborne Vs ecumenopoli, is that the tech that unlocks ecumenopoli is CALLED 'the arcology project' but by definition, space habitats are arcologies - self contained, largely self sufficient habitation 'blocks'. So from a flavour perspective it'd make sense to roll them both into the same perk.
they have a science district though. and also there can be built an institute iirc.
and if you fill it with (domestic)slaves or unemployed(depending on your build) you can open up all building slots and fill them with rare resources, silos, trade or even food - your choice
and no. ecomenopolis doesn't render them obsolete. ecu is only good for alloys or trade production(while require huge amount of pops). and most of it's slots are too precious to fill with rare resource generators
habitats on the other hand require less pops and less empire sprawl. they are both useful but I think they fulfil different roles
You do want strategic coordination center for extra starbases and sentry array for galaxy-wide sensor coverage even if you want to focus on conquest and going wide.
Yes but if you want to build more than 3-4 of them then you probably need to start early and thus getting the 3 perks is kind of necessary. At least it used to be. Honestly I haven't played with habitats as much recently so I am not sure how good they are atm. I actively tried to avoid picking any of the galactinc wonders trio to experiment more with the new perks.
3-4 of what? there is still a limit on how many megastructures of 1 type you can build
.png){kind=avatar}
I've been of this mind for a long time, and I couldn't agree more. Make the trees more complex and, perhaps, more branching, so that your choices of what kind of traditions actually matters. Like you say, it should matter a lot how focused on Unity your culture is, and whether you're specializing in a certain tradition strategy or more of a generalist. There are many possible ways to do this; one, as you've said, is for everyone to have to pick just one or two traditions to expand on over the course of a game, and I'd be down with that.
Another would be to keep the current 5 traditions allowed per tree, but make players pick which 5 they want out of a larger assortment available. For instance, you could pursue Domination traditions that make you a better overlord to vassals, or those that make you a more effective slaver, or those that give you better social stability. If each tree was like that, and there were enough options to be even somewhat mutually exclusive, being able to complete all 7 traditions could still make empires/ethics quite distinct if a Materialist's Discovery and Harmony trees was bound to end up very different from a Spiritualist's. (Different ethics or strategies might also have a very strong incentive to take certain trees sooner than at present.)
To boot, you could make the finishing effect of a tree dependent on what combination of traditions you chose; with a greater variety of finishing effects available, you could remove some of the more blah APs and make them finishers, and keep perks only for the most potent game-changers, like Galactic Wonders.
Last edited:
3-4 megastructures...you know, 1 Dyson sphere 1 science nexus, 1 sentry array, 1 to 4 ringworlds, etc...it depends on how long you play for and what type of empire you have too I suppose. Especially since there's a bunch of new megastructures too and other stuff like arcology project.
I mean I had games where I had 2 science nexi bc I conquered one from an enemy, and had like 5-6 ringworlds but those were before the new patch and on fairly unique settings (small map, small amount of enemies but highest difficulty with advanced start for AI)
so in a context of this thread it's at least 4 ascension perks if you'll listen to the proposition to tie all megastructures to a different AP? ok
If you spread galactic wonders among different perks that won't mean that every player will end with every single galactic wonder since the number of ascension perks is heavily limited, and not every single perk would unlock a structure. It would mean that each endgame empire would end with a different set of megastructures. To tie them over tradition trees, however, would have an homogenizing effect since in the end every empire unlocks every single one, yes.
As for the rest of the post: Hell yes. An expanded tradition tree and mutually exclusive choices when developing your empire would help a lot in giving character to each empire. But that's perhaps a rework fit for a future major patch.
Ascension Perks and traditions need to be expanded and revamped anyway. Too many things are just bland modifiers.
Paradox kept adding new features without expanding on traditions and perks despite their skeletal shape, to the point that the base game is basically unenjoyable.
There are many ways to do this, as the mods show. I hope they'll stop "fleeing forward" like they did since Utopia and actually build something on the foundations we have, just like CK2 stopped getting map/timeline expansions at some point.
Paradox kept adding new features without expanding on traditions and perks despite their skeletal shape, to the point that the base game is basically unenjoyable.
There are many ways to do this, as the mods show. I hope they'll stop "fleeing forward" like they did since Utopia and actually build something on the foundations we have, just like CK2 stopped getting map/timeline expansions at some point.
So that depends.
1) Which megastructures are tied to which APs
2) Are there general ones available by default through technologies for everyone
3) How are is the Habitat and Habitat size increase perk done, will the 2nd perk still give you megastructure build speed or not
Because here's the thing, right now you always want 2 points on your ascencion of choice, 1 point on an early game AP, 1 point on collossus weaponry and 1 point on Megalopolis/Hive world/Machine world. That's 5 points. you are left with 3. Now if the megastructure is tied with say technological ascendancy that's an early game AP so you'd have 4 points actually free to choose whichever megastructures you need. If they're all tied to early game perks then its pretty easy to get what you need/want.
Personally though, I'd still like it more if it was just tied to technologies instead of APs...
i'll answer this 1st cuz it's the easiest one.
Stellaris is a game where people with dlc and without can play together. so if all megastructures will be available for free(just research the tech) it'll give a lot of power creep. "hey, you're new, and I have 100500 dlc so I have free energy from a sphere. free minerals from decompressor. I create free planets, science, unity...also I have a free spies from espionage dlc, my diplomats can instabuy empires cuz I have megaemassy from diplomacy dlc and my fleet is unstoppable cuz I have a megamothership from a war dlc...oh wait, last one is already in the game in the form of colossus).
doubt it'll make games(especially multiplayer) exiting for a newcomers.
I guess I've addressed it on a previous page: either you'll tie them to something useless (then you'll basically remove some of the megastructures from the game, cuz only a true roleplayer will take that perk) or you'll increase the number of must have perks (like for now it's difficult to substitute a food ringworld unless you're xenophobe).
I think the addition of upgrade to habitats in MB was a good thing. cuz right now you at least getting something useful throughout the whole game (instead of just +build speed you had before)
That's a pretty weird answer mate. Whether its behind an AP or not, the person with the access to the structures has a very clear advantage anyways and besides its not like its meant to be balanced around the fact that people might not have a DLC...in fact I wonder why its still restricted behind a years old DLC at this point...if you want to make the game good for newcomers you gradually implement old DLC stuff in the base game...a DLC that's over a year old could easily just be incorporated into the game. And no don't even say that that would make them less money and stuff, because sure milking customers Total War or Civilization Style can get you money but also generates a LOT of consumer negativity and turns off a lot of people from even buying the game itself in the first place...
Lets take a quick look at WoW. yes, a very different game with a subscription model, microtransactions and expantions and a greedy ass parent company, BUT the one thing that even the Activision-Blizzard greed didn't think was a bad idea is - giving players all the expansions except the new one for free if they buy the base game. So you only have to pay for the base game and the last expansion, and every time a new expansion comes out the old one gets included in the base game.
The model is of course absurdly bad and different BUT the idea with the old expansions is pretty good. See, you already have discounts for older games and old DLC/expansions for most games, why not just over time include them in the base product? Maybe not all the expansions but it could certainly be a pro-consumer move if you made it so any expansion that's more than a year old gets included in the base game.
Yes, Ascension Perks, being limited and frequently mutually exclusive, should represent unique specializations of your empire. Ascension paths are a perfect example of this. I fail to see how being able to build a simple space habitat, which is basically just a big starbase, is indicative in any way of the type of people or empire I represent. Megastructures always should have been technologically based.
Special megastructures that are limited by APs are an area that I think could be further explored however.
Yeah I wish there were more ascencion paths too, the current 3 is not nearly enough, I grew bored of them already after all this time.
Also I think things like agrarian idyl, technocracy and the bureocratic thing is pretty damn good in terms of flavor and if you could build on that with ascencion perks it would be awesome. Like, imagine a giant megastructure that just makes food. Basically a megafarm. A planet-size agrarian flat-Earth practically. It would be dope as fuck imho for an agrarian/nature based empire.
In MP all players have access to the hosts DLCs so this situation doesn't occur. In SP it doesn't matter.
they are not adding old dlc into the base game...cuz money?
it's obvious.also... they tried to implement stuff from utopia in the core game(ascension perks). lot's of people who payed were upset.
and why my answer is strange? at least those who have all dlc are paying something for their power creep - ascension slots. which are limited enough so less balance issues.
let's not. different company. different standards.
ehm, no?
I have all dlc. my friend have everything except synthetic dawn - he can't create Machine Empire. though he can use machine worlds if someone will create them for him
same with my other friend without megacorp - he can play with us. he can even create commertial pact. but galactic wonders are different for him (no matter decompressor for example).
are you saying it's a bug and I should submit a bug report?
this is a completely nonsense argument since with paradox games the host of any multiplayer game sets what dlc the game is played with and everyone in that game gets access to all the dlc the host has regardless of whether or not they own them themselves.
its even more nonsense since i cant think of any strategy game where you could play a multiplayer game where different people have access to different features depending on what dlc they have, most games you wouldnt be able to join an mp game if you didnt have the same dlc as the host.