Upvote
0
technological research - adding more topics to research?
- Thread starter Ertest
- 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.
it is too boring to repeat the same thing,
I think there are still many good research ideas that are missing here
I think there are still many good research ideas that are missing here
- 2
I'd love to see some rare super late game techs but idk what they would be other than repeatable.
The game engine might not handle it but moving planets could be one. Maybe the ability to create a new species from scratch? or seed a planet with primitives. A super late game secret tech jump drive to jump anywhere? A special discount on the market? Build new planets?
The game engine might not handle it but moving planets could be one. Maybe the ability to create a new species from scratch? or seed a planet with primitives. A super late game secret tech jump drive to jump anywhere? A special discount on the market? Build new planets?
- 4
there is an in game event for a planet that phases in and out of our reality
while we cant create new species we can sure as hell gene-mod them into something different [and seeding a planet with prims wouldnt be worth it unless you plan to advance them, given how long it takes for them to advance on their own]
jump drives are a thing; but they are dangerous tech [this is how you trigger The Unbidden crisis]
that'd be odd
some species/government types have tech to change planets [hive worlds/machine worlds]
- 1
I think there are plenty of technologies, but we blitz through them too quickly on default settings. Especially now with the empire sprawl rework. The tier 0 techs at the very start of the game take a bit long to research, tier 1 feels about perfect, tier 2 is a little bit quick, and by the time you're researching tier 3 tech the tech pace starts spiraling out of control.
So my proposal would be to rebalance either tech costs and/or how sprawl functions and/or tie techs to traditions rather than to add more techs for the sake of having more techs to research. New technologies should be added only if they're needed for a cool new game mechanic, not simply for the sake of having something other than repeatables to research.
So my proposal would be to rebalance either tech costs and/or how sprawl functions and/or tie techs to traditions rather than to add more techs for the sake of having more techs to research. New technologies should be added only if they're needed for a cool new game mechanic, not simply for the sake of having something other than repeatables to research.
- 1
I feel the military repeatables could be supplemented with some rare, randomly-generated weapons tech.
Like a Borderlands gun, but without the spam - each empire could maybe get one or two uniques as part of their late-game weapons research.
Give it some randomised stats, a palette swap with an existing weapon, and a cool procedurally-generated name, and you have something to add interest to late game spaceship design.
It might grant you a war-winning death ray, or an interesting curiosity like a missile that does 300% damage versus shields, but no major problem, since you're not forced to incorporate the tech into your ship designs, and you might be able to steal another empire's unique tech (conversely, protecting your own unique tech would make the Enigmatic Engineering perk a lot more attractive).
Potentially infinite weapons! It might unbalance the end game, but I think the added interest would be worth it (and it could always be an optional game rule if you wanted to keep tech 'fair').
Like a Borderlands gun, but without the spam - each empire could maybe get one or two uniques as part of their late-game weapons research.
Give it some randomised stats, a palette swap with an existing weapon, and a cool procedurally-generated name, and you have something to add interest to late game spaceship design.
It might grant you a war-winning death ray, or an interesting curiosity like a missile that does 300% damage versus shields, but no major problem, since you're not forced to incorporate the tech into your ship designs, and you might be able to steal another empire's unique tech (conversely, protecting your own unique tech would make the Enigmatic Engineering perk a lot more attractive).
Potentially infinite weapons! It might unbalance the end game, but I think the added interest would be worth it (and it could always be an optional game rule if you wanted to keep tech 'fair').
- 2
- 1
for example, more classes of ships: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_naval_ship_classes_in_service
No. We don't need additional ship classes. Not until PDX figures out how to have more than 2 relevant ship sizes at a time (corvettes for quick response and the biggest ship class you've researched for your battle fleets).
- 3
I don't think there are different classes of ships at the moment, there is currently only one class, it differs only in size.
I mean, for example:
Ticonderoga class guided missile cruiser = cruiser that can be armed with more weapons than a regular cruiser but only with missiles
I mean, for example:
Ticonderoga class guided missile cruiser = cruiser that can be armed with more weapons than a regular cruiser but only with missiles
Last edited:
Problem there is that the current ships aren't always worth while. More ships seems to make it even harder to set up.
Think this is covered with the different hull sections isn't it?
Currently, the problem is that a bigger ship is always better than a smaller one, so the player is always interested in building only the largest
each class should have options that no other class has. only in this way does the player have the motivation to build all classes and not just the biggest ships
They're trying that with Missiles, and I really wish they'd f***ing stop it already. I don't want less versatility, I want more of it. I certainly want the classes to each have roles and purposes, but I don't want to see Torpedoes limited to corvettes-only, or see even more options stripped from the battleships to make them "less desirable." I mean, I admit I don't have a direct suggestion for how to achieve that in a satisfying way, but having the various modules get artificially stripped down to force the use of certain hulls is unreasonable.
As it stands, speed (as in, movement speed) has too little an impact to force Titans and battleships into a heavy bombardment role. Cruiser-lead fleets aren't noticeably more able to respond to small-fleet aggression than a larger one- mainly thanks to the forced use of Hyperlane technology over my vehement objections, allowing heavy use of choke points- so there's no advantage to building them. Speed should be the sole limiting factor required. It was successfully used to force fleet roles in the Homeworld series. It has successfully forced the use of varied fleets in Sins of a Solar Empire. It works in Star Wars: Empire at War, and many of the mods expanded on that to change the hyperspace speed of all ships too, so there was a strategic element to these slower speeds as well as the obvious tactical one.
The simple problem is a lack of proper dedication to this doctrine: the reductions of 16% and 33% for battleships and Titans respectively is far too anemic to actually make me use the cruisers and destroyers as force flagships. There's also the Titans and Juggernaut modules that make these must-haves, which in turn lowers the speed of the whole fleet to match their speeds. The mod "Realistic Ship Classes" offers a usable workaround: Add in their strategic cruisers (effectively fast-moving titan-module-carrying ships) and now we can flag a force with a cruiser and still get the combat buffs of a large fleet. Also, rebalance the evasion stat to favour destroyer and cruiser hulls slightly more than it does presently, and we should have a workable system that uses just speed as a limiter. If my cruiser-lead fleet is twice as agile as my heavy-hitters (a perfectly reasonable speed breakdown; a destroyer in WW II can do 40-maybe-50 knots, a battleship almost squarely half that) then I'd be using them along my borders, and my heavy ships would move almost solely to heavily-protected sites the way they actually would in reality, as wandering them through swathes of lightly-defended enemy territory would be glacially slow and both tedious and wasteful when I can send detachments of light ships to safely claim outpost-held systems. Try increasing the scaling to 50% and 100% in either direction and see if we still build battleship mono-fleets...
I think battles on ships are boring and are always won by the one who builds more ships
There is no strategy for building ships for the weaker to be able to destroy the stronger
in the real world, one submarine can destroy a much more powerful aircraft carrier
There is no strategy for building ships for the weaker to be able to destroy the stronger
in the real world, one submarine can destroy a much more powerful aircraft carrier
I mostly agree with you on these elements. It's frustrating to be simply unable to add some modules to some classes, and I'd prefer if there were incentives to their use instead. I also think evasion is too low to be significant for destroyers and cruisers as it stands, and they would deserve more of it. Most weapons have sufficient tracking stats to completely ignore their evasion.
About speed, I have my doubts. In direct combat, it likely won't have a noticeable effect, so to my understanding it would be an incentive to have lighter ships gather in a fast fleet to do tasks the main combat fleet would be too slow to do, as you mentioned. It won't incentivize balanced fleets and would motivate the player to specialize fleets instead, and I'm averse to the idea, but perhaps that's simply personal preference.
While I do think the most important in Stellaris is who has more ships (scaled to size), it is possible for the weaker side to win, especially if the enemy does not have a balanced fleet composition and/or specializes in one weapon type. By countering their composition with your own, it is possible to have surprising results for an unknowing observer.
Well, I concede that I would like more diverse strategies to deal with an imbalance in numbers.
Regardless, the thread is about adding new topics to the tech tree. About that (and still about combat), I very much like this idea:
I very rarely take the Enigmatic Engineering perk and this would likely change with additional weapon techs randomly generated. It would make for interesting encounters and make empires more unique, some of their fleets having signature weapons. Events could appear when confronted with such alien technologies, depending on how damaging they are to our fleets. I think it could add to the storytelling part of Stellaris (and make warfare slightly less predictable).
Also, I wouldn't limit these techs to the end game, as long as the weapons are somewhat balanced when compared to other weapons at disposal.
Last edited:
I think there should also be some random research to make each game different - to make the player surprised by what can be discovered
- 2
There are already a few Leviathan-specific techs. It'd be cool to have more of those. In that vein...
- Phyllum-specific tech chains, like Molluscs and Avians get some different choices (and Xenophiles eventually get more of these tech chains)
- Government-specific tech chains
- Civic-specific tech chains (this and the above are possible motivations to change government late-game)
- Ethos-specific tech chains (and you can embrace a faction for a mechanical reason)
- Origin-specific tech chains
- Precursor-specific tech chain (after the Secrets of the ______ project)
- Planet-specific tech chains (so you have a reason to war / barter for a planet)
- Enclave-specific tech chains
- Phyllum-specific tech chains, like Molluscs and Avians get some different choices (and Xenophiles eventually get more of these tech chains)
- Government-specific tech chains
- Civic-specific tech chains (this and the above are possible motivations to change government late-game)
- Ethos-specific tech chains (and you can embrace a faction for a mechanical reason)
- Origin-specific tech chains
- Precursor-specific tech chain (after the Secrets of the ______ project)
- Planet-specific tech chains (so you have a reason to war / barter for a planet)
- Enclave-specific tech chains