The State of the Meta

[krios41]

Solution: play with casuals.
These type of players usualy don't use cheesy tactics, and neither are they too concerned with following META.

 

[Dr. Chaos]

- make FTL inhibition a starting tech
- rework the market (until that, use a market disabling mod)
- set your MP rules: no genocidal civic empire allowed (borgs and inward perfection are also doubtful)

 

[Jorgen_CAB]

How do you make Xenophile, Pacifist balanced in these type of games?!?

How big are the maps you play on?

Why not have a fixed mixture of species types where there are only like one genocidal species in any one game or something as the big bad guy?

You could do many things to make these game balanced.

 

[Jiav]

How do you make Xenophile, Pacifist balanced in these type of games?!?

f.xenophile/megacorp is a valid meta strat in MP, go diplomacy first and you can spam all pacts without paying any influence and the trade value helps megacorps a lot

pacifist was balanced before 2.2 as inward perfection was a solid build if you spawned in relative isolation and could tech up in peace

in 2.2 however it is gutted like RS so no longer viable outside of RP reasons

 

[BalefirePhoenix]

Enforcing peace does not fix anything it rules out the entire Play style.

Note, this isn’t about eliminating rushing, it’s about making a particular start the only viable strategy.

I'd argue that ruling out a "playstyle" which ignores 90% of the game's systems in favor of mineral/alloy spam (in 2.1/2.2 respectively) is actually a good thing, both in competitive and casual settings - in the former case it raises the skillcap immensely by making the game's complexity actually come into play, and in the latter... well, being removed from the game by 2215 isn't particularly fun for anyone involved. In the end, making Stellaris play like something it's not - a fast-paced RTS - will never work no matter how hard you try.

If a player only expands, uses alloys entirely on expansion and opts not to build to fleet cap, then I’ve little sympathy for him.

Also, this is once again a people problem, not a numbers problem. If the player in question joined a game advertised as competitive and didn't play competitively, then yes that's entirely their fault. However, if said player joined an alleged casual or newbie-friendly match only to get pubstomped, something somewhere went horribly wrong.

 

[Jorgen_CAB]

f.xenophile/megacorp is a valid meta strat in MP, go diplomacy first and you can spam all pacts without paying any influence and the trade value helps megacorps a lot

pacifist was balanced before 2.2 as inward perfection was a solid build if you spawned in relative isolation and could tech up in peace

in 2.2 however it is gutted like RS so no longer viable outside of RP reasons

Who are you doing pacts with if everyone are genocidal maniacs?!?

To be honest I don't think many strategy outside the ones with aggressive nature are very viable in competitive MP unless you happen to spawn in a game where you manage to get a few people near you that also want to cooperate which seem unlikely in this environment. So luck seem to be the biggest factor for more peaceful strategies, most good players don't rely on luck though.

 

[MrFreake]

@BalefirePhoenix I think you're misunderstanding what the post is all about, which is adding an additional cost to resettling pops/making tributaries, not outlawing rushing.

Also adding a few more mechanics to counter rushing. Rushing is not the problem, lack of suitable counters is the problem.

As for "house rules" that works fine when you have 10 or 15 people meeting several times a week for a game.

When you have 20+ player games starting multiple times a day with different hosts and different rules, the concept of house rules falls out the window when you get into the scale of games we have posted daily.

 

[Jiav]

I'd argue that ruling out a "playstyle" which ignores 90% of the game's systems in favor of mineral/alloy spam (in 2.1/2.2 respectively) is actually a good thing, both in competitive and casual settings - in the former case it raises the skillcap immensely by making the game's complexity actually come into play, and in the latter... well, being removed from the game by 2215 isn't particularly fun for anyone involved. In the end, making Stellaris play like something it's not - a fast-paced RTS - will never work no matter how hard you try.


Also, this is once again a people problem, not a numbers problem. If the player in question joined a game advertised as competitive and didn't play competitively, then yes that's entirely their fault. However, if said player joined an alleged casual or newbie-friendly match only to get pubstomped, something somewhere went horribly wrong.

the problem currently is that prior to 2.2 you had SEVERAL competitive builds. However in 2.2 you only have ONE competitive build/playstyle which everyone agrees upon.

The casual vs competitive players issue is another topic entirely.

This build just highlights a few overall issues with stellaris. Like not being able to design your own star bases. M slots, circling, and damage spread make star bases terrible at fighting against corvettes. Defensive stations would be much better, but their cost hasn't been adjusted to the alloy system (to be honest almost nothing has been adjusted to the new eco system, mining/science stations/discovery events/"space" hostiles).

Stellaris is a 4x strategy game. So rushing should always be a valid choice of play. In the current literation it is however the very best choice as teching and expansion have been severely slowed down, yet again, in 2.2

Even in Civ you have much more valid options to play in a competitive MP game.

Who are you doing pacts with if everyone are genocidal maniacs?!?

To be honest I don't think many strategy outside the ones with aggressive nature are very viable in competitive MP unless you happen to spawn in a game where you manage to get a few people near you that also want to cooperate which seem unlikely in this environment. So luck seem to be the biggest factor for more peaceful strategies, most good players don't rely on luck though.

Not everyone play a "genocial" maniac. A warmonger empire is still heavily structured. Many players do rush but only a couple manage to transition into a well managed mid/late game empire which is capable to taking on crisis solo. You will still need pacts between players, research agreements and mega corp buildings are always nice to have if you have a 100 pop planet at year 20.

 

[tinculin]

If you think rush builds are ignoring 90% of the games systems, then you are gravely in error.

They take advantage of many of the games systems, starting at species & government creation, through to optimal use of the economy in the current game build as well as a lot of other options available in game to min/Max their starts.

As for joining a none competitive game and using such a build to troll, that’s a different matter and clearly not what’s being discussed in the thread.

 

[Jorgen_CAB]

If you think rush builds are ignoring 90% of the games systems, then you are gravely in error.

They take advantage of many of the games systems, starting at species & government creation, through to optimal use of the economy in the current game build as well as a lot of other options available in game to min/Max their starts.

As for joining a none competitive game and using such a build to troll, that’s a different matter and clearly not what’s being discussed in the thread.

What he means is that competetive MP games make the game into something it is not meant to be which means you ignore almost 90% of the games features as they become somewhat irrelevant.

If you don't have a rich species game environment with diverse ethics and people that actually try to role-play their philosophies and stay true to character the game just is a competition between players and 90% of otherwise viable strategies become moot.

So... yes... most of the games real complexity and dynamic play gets lost that way.

It is important to distinguish these things from each other.

 

[Juboboman]

Sorry to say I think enough of the game has been balanced around MP. Rather than continue to nerf/reduce SP playstyles I would rather leave it up to MP hosts to set their own in house rules to balance their own games.

 

[tinculin]

What he means is that competetive MP games make the game into something it is not meant to be which means you ignore almost 90% of the games features as they become somewhat irrelevant.

If you don't have a rich species game environment with diverse ethics and people that actually try to role-play their philosophies and stay true to character the game just is a competition between players and 90% of otherwise viable strategies become moot.

So... yes... most of the games real complexity and dynamic play gets lost that way.

It is important to distinguish these things from each other.

If you read the game description on Paradox’s website, then nowhere will you see roleplaying as a selling point & arguing people should RP and ‘stay true to character’ simply does not fall into the game description.

I’m not saying that’s a viable way to play as a group of players but it’s certainly not the intended way to play or if it is, paradox certainly don’t sell it as such.

The game is sold as a 4x Grand strategy game & as such disagree with the notion 90% of the game is being missed because someone or some group isn’t roleplaying.

And FYI I’ve absolutely no issue with those that do RP but rather the notion or implication this is the preferred way to play.

 

[Jiav]

Sorry to say I think enough of the game has been balanced around MP. Rather than continue to nerf/reduce SP playstyles I would rather leave it up to MP hosts to set their own in house rules to balance their own games.

uh, tell me please. How exactly does SP suffer if you balance the game? How would the game suffer if paradox would for example give you the option to design your own space port or adjust the alloy cost of defensive stations?! it would have literally zero impact on your solo playing game. Because you are playing solo and the AI is braindead anyway.

What he means is that competetive MP games make the game into something it is not meant to be which means you ignore almost 90% of the games features as they become somewhat irrelevant.

If you don't have a rich species game environment with diverse ethics and people that actually try to role-play their philosophies and stay true to character the game just is a competition between players and 90% of otherwise viable strategies become moot.

So... yes... most of the games real complexity and dynamic play gets lost that way.

It is important to distinguish these things from each other.

Competitive multiplayer features a lot more viable strategies than RP ever has. RP is RP. RP doesn't include a lot of viable strategies because its RP. You play a role, you don't necessarily play a valid strategy. What makes you think a meta strategy does ignore 90% of the game? Thats hilarious. We were talking about game opener, a RUSH. You obviously don't rush the whole 8 hour long game, as it is already indicated in the description of the strategy provided by mr.freake.

 

[Jorgen_CAB]

If you read the game description on Paradox’s website, then nowhere will you see roleplaying as a selling point & arguing people should RP and ‘stay true to character’ simply does not fall into the game description.

I’m not saying that’s a viable way to play as a group of players but it’s certainly not the intended way to play or if it is, paradox certainly don’t sell it as such.

The game is sold as a 4x Grand strategy game & as such disagree with the notion 90% of the game is being missed because someone or some group isn’t roleplaying.

And FYI I’ve absolutely no issue with those that do RP but rather the notion or implication this is the preferred way to play.

The fact remains though that this is how the game is balanced... the game is not balanced for competitive play and never will.

You will need to use house rules to balance it in a way you think is appropriate.

Balance the game around a minority way of playing is not that wise to be honest.

In SP these kind of strategies are not stronger than most other strategies.

 

[tinculin]

A few points:

Subjugation cb is being abused - a few options exist to fix this:
Subjugation wars: remove the shortcuts that this cb allows.
1) Only allow subjugation vs adjacent nations or those adjacent to your vassals/tributaries

2) In subjugation wars, do not allow the attacker to capture planets - surrender should mean the target becomes a subject, status quo should mean the target becomes as vassal if their homeworld is occupied.

3) ship upkeep - adjust upkeep so that being drastically over fleet cap or running a large fleet is going to have a significant impact on an economy.

4) not sure how this would be implimented but make it só claims have to be adjacent, I.e you can’t just claim the centre of a players empire

 

[Jiav]

The fact remains though that this is how the game is balanced... the game is not balanced for competitive play and never will.

You will need to use house rules to balance it in a way you think is appropriate.

Balance the game around a minority way of playing is not that wise to be honest.

In SP these kind of strategies are not stronger than most other strategies.

Wrong. In SP it is also the best strategy if you want to win the game. You can defeat a small map of grand admiral AI's in under 40 years and then chill/afk until the crisis hits and wipe that one out as well. Literally the most easiest way to win.

Also scroll up. If anything balancing the game for human vs human interaction would make the game better, as humans are actually able to play and understand the mechanics to discover broken and abusive tactics or methods or otherwise overlooked game issues. You seem to be afraid that somehow your solo player carebear experience gets diminished if the game would be properly balanced. How so? I'am asking you the same question as I did ask the guy above. How would any suggestion made in this discussion have a negative impact on your solo player RP heroism?

 

[tinculin]

The fact remains though that this is how the game is balanced... the game is not balanced for competitive play and never will.

You will need to use house rules to balance it in a way you think is appropriate.

Balance the game around a minority way of playing is not that wise to be honest.

In SP these kind of strategies are not stronger than most other strategies.

I disagree & you don’t get to speak for Paradox - however this is really going off topic and isn’t addressing the OP, so best to leave it there.

 

[Mikhail_Mengsk]

Countering meta tactics is usually really hard, but in this case there seems to be multiple, non-invasive ways that wouldn't "ruin" anything bar the current meta. Rushing is fine, but not if there is only one way to do it and no real way to counter it beside doing the same exact thing.

 

[Jorgen_CAB]

Competitive multiplayer features a lot more viable strategies than RP ever has. RP is RP. RP doesn't include a lot of viable strategies because its RP. You play a role, you don't necessarily play a valid strategy. What makes you think a meta strategy does ignore 90% of the game? Thats hilarious. We were talking about game opener, a RUSH. You obviously don't rush the whole 8 hour long game, as it is already indicated in the description of the strategy provided by mr.freake.

Wrong!!!!

If you make the rules as such... If you join a game and the rule is you forfeit your real life if you loose but you can cooperate and so it is possible for all to live if you cooperate. How do you think people would play... you only play the way you describe because YOU as a player don't reap the consequence of your possible failures.

Competitive play is artificial and role play is just playing efficiently under a different set of rules and goals.

I'm sick and tired of people thinking role-play means you don't play efficiently or optimally which is bullshit.

 

[Jorgen_CAB]

I disagree & you don’t get to speak for Paradox - however this is really going off topic and isn’t addressing the OP, so best to leave it there.

They said on this forum that cooperative MP between a few friends is the most common MP in Stellaris. I can't help that is it this way...