Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[Cruxador]

Yes, let's make stellaris a better game by just copying a better game's design over it.

Doing something unique is good in that it allows for new ideas to arise, but any given unique thing may or may not be good.

And copying over the general mechanics common to EU and possibly Vicky isn't going to make for a much better game in any case, the uniqueness of Stellaris is already going out with the bathwater.

[Retropunch]

And copying over the general mechanics common to EU and possibly Vicky isn't going to make for a much better game in any case, the uniqueness of Stellaris is already going out with the bathwater.

I'd say it was never really unique in terms of gameplay mechanics, the only 'unique' aspect to it was that the story elements were a bit more fleshed out than other games of this type and it's generally quite pretty to look at.

I'd be very happy with them poaching a whole load of mechanics from CK2 - I honestly don't get why they don't just copy and paste the whole character stuff from CK2 as it's so much better than the incredibly two dimensional leaders we have now.

It just seems like we're on a very, very slow road to CK2 in space, and I just wish they'd go all in with it.

[Dunamisdeos]

That is nonsensical. I don't want to play CK2 in space. I want to play Stellaris.

That's like saying I want to play Half-Life 3, so they should just delete Portal from my computer and replace it with HL3, please and thank you.

That said I would enjoy more detail and mechanics around rulers.

[Loud Whispers]

That is nonsensical. I don't want to play CK2 in space. I want to play Stellaris.

So Europa in space?

[Dunamisdeos]

That is nonsensical. I don't want to play CK2 in space. I want to play Stellaris.

So Europa in space?

I did not play that, so unfortunately your undoubtedly clever riposte is lost on my ignorance.

For reals tho I would like to see leaders be more than thumbnails.

[Retropunch]

That is nonsensical. I don't want to play CK2 in space. I want to play Stellaris.

You're taking it too literally. Obviously I don't want just a re-skin, but I do want the deep characters, the ability to play anything from a small barony to a grand emperor, the court intrigue, the spying etc etc.

Stellaris is a generic 4x with some nice stories at the moment - I've got about a dozen of them and so I'd be much happier with two CK2's than another generic 4x. Sure, I'd like them to do so much more with it, but CK2 in space would be a good place to start

[pisskop]

For reals tho I would like to see leaders be more than thumbnails.

Europa in space would still feature vague numbers posing as leaders.  In fact, all a leader is in europa is a collection of numbers.  And a surname that almost never matters.

[Loud Whispers]

I did not play that, so unfortunately your undoubtedly clever riposte is lost on my ignorance.

For reals tho I would like to see leaders be more than thumbnails.

Basically Europa is a map painting simulator that involves colonizing unclaimed systems provinces, claiming existing provinces and then conquering them. Only difference between Europa and Stellaris is that Europa has been developing for considerably longer and actually has a trade system

[Baffler]

CKII style politics doesn't really make sense in Stellaris. Interpersonal relationships still matter, but a more detailed political system would probably end up being more about managing public opinion as much as wrangling the other political factions. I'm not sure how that'd look, but it would feel like a bit of an anachronism to just copy those mechanics if you're not playing an Imperial authority, and even then it probably should focus more on pops and ideologies since those are central features of the game.

[Retropunch]

CKII style politics doesn't really make sense in Stellaris. Interpersonal relationships still matter, but a more detailed political system would probably end up being more about managing public opinion as much as wrangling the other political factions. I'm not sure how that'd look, but it would feel like a bit of an anachronism to just copy those mechanics if you're not playing an Imperial authority, and even then it probably should focus more on pops and ideologies since those are central features of the game.

It'd certainly need to be tailored towards the scale the game is trying to work at - the stuff with heirs and arranging marriages and so on probably wouldn't make sense.

It's more that I'd like to see admirals vying for power, factions with leaders to bribe and control etc.

I remember there was a lot about how they wanted Stellaris to have the 'unfolding stories' that you get in CK2 due to how all the characters work together - Stellaris has none of that; every leader is just a few stat boosts and completely forgettable.

It's more than that though - CK2 lets you play as either the head of an empire or a little dutchy somewhere for instance; I'd love to see that replicated on a galactic scale, along with all the cults, religions, etc etc.

 

[Karnewarrior]

I feel like making Stellaris incorporate CKII mechanics is a mistake, because CKII mechanics are designed to encourage behavior that mimics (to some extent, and they aren't always successful) the political behavior of individuals and entities in the Middle Ages.

What keeps Stellaris feeling bland and non-descript is two things:
1) There's no "canon" storyline, so there's no behavior to tailor the mechanics towards mimicing, there's few recurring enemies/meme nations that appear frequently, and basically no good way to flavor the game like the Grand Strategy titles. People notice when China explodes, or France eats western europe, because we know that's strange. People laugh at marrying your daughter in CKII because we know old kings actually used to do that, and now we kind of understand why. We can pick sides between capitalists, communists, and fascists, because we already have a history with those ideologies. In Stellaris, there's no history, so you can't implement weird stuff or lose your audience, and can't keep all the old stuff or it's boring.

2) They want the game to allow the player to tell too many different stories. CKII and EUIV allow you to pick any one of hundreds of countries, true, but in the end there's only so many real differences between them. Either you're playing a European Nation and colonizing or conquering, your playing a Asian civilization and trying to fight off invading Euros with trade money, your playing a Native American civilization and desperately fighting not to get conquered, or your playing an African civ and trying to overcome a slough of challenges. The dev can then design each area of the map to allow for geographical differences. Asia has a mess of valuable trade zones everywhere. Europe has all the endpoint nodes, encouraging them to go afield and try to direct trade home, and it's nearest to North America. North America has nations tailored to be pathetically weak until some time after the Europeans arrive, and ideas to reward players who survive.

The real way to fix Stellaris is to derandomize things and give the galaxy texture. Right now it's just a flat disc of stars, every section of the galaxy the same. Changing to hyperlanes only made a difference on a very local military and logistical scale. It just added chokepoints - which don't matter to things like trade and diplomacy. Or politics.

[Nelia Hawk]

some random ideas...:


right now its "you as leader of a space empire against other space empires"

if you instead the leader of a faction inside an empire.... and the other 7 factions are lead by npcs... then each empire is made of 8 individual factions. well hiveminds etc are exceptions i guess)
at game start the empire civics would say who start as strongest... with the strongest 1-3 leading the empire (like you can chose 1-3? or 1-2? civics atm for your empire... i.e. fanatic militarist+ materialist. the militarists would lead teh empire.. the materialists would be allied.. the others neutral? and the opposites "hostile/opposing")
the starter ones would start with the homeplanet... but all other planets would be owned by whoever faction has the most pops on them.
each faction has their own sector (planets they own) and their own fleet... they could fight against each other for outpost resources inside the empire (more difficult the bigger they get?)
the leading factions vote for wars etc all the empire stuffs like federations do?
the factions who do best in wars (adding to enemy warscore, taking over outposts/planets, destroying ships) get some boni at the end of the war... maybe pops join their faction from other factions or they can claim some of the new conquered outposts etc...

i feel this all would work best in bigger maps where there is enough "other stuff" for 7 other npcs in your empire to fight about.
and then there would be some sort of diplomacy between interempire factions... a bit like the whole vassal etc chaos goes on in ck2 etc

the faction naval capacity would be split between all factions.. maybe the militarists would get 2x?
and the "empire fleet" similar to the federation fleet is controlled by the leading factions.
that would also make less deathballs as the whole empire isnt one or two fleets anymore but 8-10 or so each controlled by different ai. all trying to expand and defend their sectors.

maybe the empire leading factions would upgrade "empire owned spacestations" (really big ones... and anchorages etc count to empire naval capacity) where factions could build smaller stations for themself to defenc and boost their faction planets against other factions (them faction stations naval capacity would go just to the faction.. or mabey 50%50% faction-empire)


each faction could have a special empire specific mechanic... maybe the spirituals could do the traditions? the materialists research? pacifists trading? militarist ship designs? xenophobe intelligence/spying? xenophile... no clue.. scouting-first contact? autoritan-egalitarian pops and buildings?   or factions vote on what all them do and the faction with that civic gets a bonus to their votes? like all propose spaceship designs but militarists get a bonus in votes on that?
no clue something around each faction having a special role in the empire.
and each faction having different goals they want to achieve, similar to what factions like atm.

and if you play as one of the "weaker factions" you can try to ally up with others or sabotage teh stronger ones... well or just "do better" overall and slowly grow from pops switching to your faction or so.
even in wars you wont be "useless" as other empires also have stronger and weaker factions and faction fleets.

maybe there are faction specific anomalies too... where you might have to fly some ships through "hostile faction" space so the empire can research an anomaly... maybe the "leader" could demand that one faction lets some ships through... and if you refuse the empire leader gets - opinion of you... on the other hand maybe a "hostile" faction bribed the empireleader to demand they let some of your ships through you can also use to maybe send a infiltration squad on a different faction planet to start propagandas that might lead to revolts later and the pops switching civics and you take over the planet... who knows...
so overall if the empire wants to prosper the factions do have to work together after all (like vassals in ck2 more or less)

of course a ton of numbers for everything would have to be changed for balance reasons.

but just throwing out this as an idea how it could work as spaceempire.


-------
or imagine warhammer 40k empire... the xenophobes leading the empire (+ fanatic purifiers?)... and each of the other factions are a different spacemarine order... the militarists are the most aggressive ones...   maybe the pacifists are the imperial army? the spiritualists leading all the religion stuff.... the materialists the tech and constructions.
-------
or:
at game start the empire starts with 8 planets... each facton has one.. and the "normal gameplay" would work then as normal for each faction... but they all start in a "empire"(a permanent "federation") and vote on "empire matters" like tech and empire fleet designs and where to build new outposts and all that. maybe you could do your own research.. but get a 50% bonus when one of the empire factions already got it before you. or if someone else also researches it you both add to it. who knows how it could work all then.

[Ludorum Rex]

A character-focused space strategy game would be awesome, but I think it would have to be an entirely different game. There'd need to be a focus on houses/lineages/dynasties over empires, there'd need to be greater granularity of control (systems, ships, fleets, armies, bases, planets, sectors, etc) and intrigue/politics at the center stage, with 4X elements somewhat more at the fringes.

I think there's a lot of great games to be made with a focus on characters, but I don't think Stellaris can, or should, be molded into one. Settings like BattleTech, Dune, Fading Suns or even W40K, would work well as backdrop for such a game. I have a feeling it will work best in a non-generic setting, as the various cultures, houses, organizations, institutions, etc. in the world can be given much more interesting mechanics and relationships, than if it has to work with a completely randomly generated universe.

Another aspect of "regular" space stratey games, including Stellaris, which is hard to mesh with a character-based design is the focus on many different space races and usually with empires divided by race (at least initially). Unless they're simply humans in suits, which is an option I guess. Aliens can still exist, but as non-player elements and not intended to play by the same rules as the core characters.

Leaders and characters in Stellaris still have an important role to play - I really enjoy their inclusion, would love to see them expanded mechanically, but they're a supporting feature for the core gameplay, which is empire management. I would not at all mind certain governments having a downside in being forced to utilize rather poor leaders, characters being more than swappable stat modifiers, etc. Especially the way characters and factions are currently linked could use some work. But I'd prefer a focus on improving the empire management and grand strategy bits over making characters central to Stellaris.

As for the announced changes, I'm very excited, and I think they will make the game better and more suited for future expansion.

[ChairmanPoo]

... or France eats western europe, because we know that's strange.

...welll actually...

[Descan]

Yeah, but normally they lose it pretty quickly. EU4 and CK2, France could be hegemonic over the entirety of Europe for centuries.