I think I tried it once, and my station count went to -1 out of 4. But probably you could do it once the previous mandate was completed and before the new mandate started.
I think I may have painted myself into a corner. I started a federation, and to get another empire to join I switched my policy to only allow defensive wars. It looks like the only way to win is to either get enough empires to join your federation or to have the federation take over enough planets. One empire that I wanted to join had a hegemony penalty to their desire to join the federation, and I couldn’t get their opinion to be high enough to overcome it.
So, there isn’t really a peaceful way to win, right? You need to get like 60% of the planets? If so, I guess I need to wait the 10 years to switch my policy to allow offensive wars again, but that may piss off my current member.
Just my opinion, but you don’t play Paradox games to “win”. You set some goals for yourself and try to achieve them. Or just defeat the endgame crisis or whatever.
There is some gene in my make up that requires me to try and achieve some win condition that the game designer has created :-)
I don’t know that an entirely peaceful win in the Stellaris setting makes that much sense. There are going to be groups with diametrically opposed philosophies that don’t want to join in the hug fest. Maybe if they had more mechanics for fomenting rebellions or influencing the ethics of other empires?
They do intend to extend the mechanics of Federations, to be more like the HRE (e.g. allow progressive integration, more complex leadership, etc). That would allow you to lock states into the federation better before turning it to a more warlike path.
Peaceful? Nah - but perhaps you can do things to “encourage” your disliked neighbor to attack?
Cant you do liberation wars? Free the opressed!
I havent tried that since my last playthroughs im the one opressing the galaxy.
I think I played far enough into this game to determine this still isn’t for me I think. I looked at a tech tree some person created and determined I’m pretty far on most of the tech tree paths.
A part of me thinks maybe I just don’t ‘get it’ as far as the game goes. Another part thinks that the game mostly appeals to people who enjoy role playing an empire and are able to fill in details of the game using their imagination. I don’t fall into that category. For me, the systems themselves aren’t particularly interesting. There is some balancing required of resources - keeping energy income in check with expansion, keeping influence income high enough to be able to hire leaders, issue an edict if need be, grab that new colony.
For the most part developing the planets don’t have difficult choices to make. It seems to work out fine to just put down the improvement that utilizes the resource on the tile. Now due to energy or mineral constraints it can be important to prioritize the order things are developed.
The military aspect isn’t very engaging either.
I think the part I may not ‘get’ the most is maybe using the diplomatic options - but for all the choices there weren’t a lot that were that useful or interesting. I made some trade / research deals, but for the most part I was self sufficient. I do like the wargoals system that Paradox uses in their games. You can insult to piss them off. Try to keep people at peace. It feels more fleshed out in a game like EU IV, and maybe one of the strongest features in that game, but in Stellaris it feels kinda watered down and not really as vital a system.
Based on my comments, is there something I’m missing or don’t understand? Does it just seem like it just isn’t for me. I want to make sure I give STellaris a proper chance before I move on.
Your comments are almost exactly my thoughts on the game. I think you’re spot on.
I liked your comment about roleplaying. With Utopia, that’s an aspect of the game I’m really enjoying. I’m not playing to win, I’m playing to do as well as I can within a certain theme (not much different than how I approach EU4. It’s never about world conquest or anything for me).
My current game, I’m playing a race of benevolent fungus. They’re fanatical pacifists and xenophiles, and they’re also rather naive and underestimate the dangers in the galaxy, which affects my choices in events as well as overall strategy.
I started with Harmony as my first tradition but moved on to Diplomacy next so I could found a federation: The Concord of Harmony, I think the game named it. I think sent out my exploration ships far and wide to find other species to bring into the federation and live in peace and harmony with each other.
I quickly found a race of like-minded federation builder foxes to the “west”, and they were the first to join. I also ran into a race of peaceful but isolationist mushrooms on the “northern” rim of the galaxy. The foxes and the mushrooms really disliked each other due to the former being merchants and traders while the latter was a very spiritualistic empire. I was able to convince the foxes to grant them Associate status, though, and our relations began to improve. We eventually overcame our differences and the mushrooms joined the federation, bringing a substantial fleet of their own and advanced missile tech that we lacked. This tech was quickly integrated into the mighty Federation fleet which kept the peace.
And boy was that fleet needed. A dark power was rising in the far southern reaches of the galaxy. The Or’lok Divinity was a race of ultra-religious xenophobic bigots, not unlike today’s Republican party (ducks and runs for cover)! They began to enslave their neighbors and the Foxes, now assuming the presidency of the Federation, sent out a call: the enslavement and purging of the Divinity among their vulnerable neighbors must be stopped. And thus the first War of Liberation began.
The war began badly. The Federation Fleet, comprised of the finest officers and the best technology our races could provide, was destroyed in the Shinra system. The enemy was armed to the teeth with missile launchers, and the fleet was lacking in point defense. Our shields were quickly overwhelmed and our cruisers atomized in a hellish barrage of missiles.
My fleet wasn’t quite so vulnerable, however, and I ordered our shipyards to provide another dozen picket destroyers. The foxes were being invaded, but our mushroom allies were striking deep into Or’lok territory, destroying a major starport and landing heavy assault troops on the planet. I used this opportunity to send my fleet along with an invasion force of Borathi marines (a very strong plant-like Iron Age primitive that I enlightened, vassalized, and later absorbed into my empire) and struck their homeworld. This caused the Or’lok fleet to withdraw their invasion and return to defend, but my admirals had learned from our first engagement. Their missile barrages were still powerful, but they were blunted by the dozen newly constructed picket destroyers. I opened up with my kinetics and left the Or’lok fleet a smoking ruin above their homeworld.
Peace wasn’t long in coming. The Or’lok Divinity was forced to liberate three planets, which promptly joined the Federation. I wanted to force them to abandon their policies of slavery and extermination, but alas, the Federation was weary. Peace was signed.
Of course, having left things unfinished, this led to the Second and Third Liberation Wars, the last of which finally forced them to abandon their slaving ways. In the meantime, I had uplifted a species of desert lizard, which has allowed me to colonize the many arid systems (my race’s natural climate is tropical) in my territory. They’re brilliant merchants and are responsible for much of the power generation in my empire. I’ve also enlightened a couple other races of primitives, which have been integrated into my empire as full citizens.
All is going well, but something is stirring in the east. I think my golden age might be coming to an end…
For me it’s the choices that come at the strategic level of getting the “balances” to my liking. Resource Base vs. Military Security vs. Technology Base vs Expansion (Denying opponents choices systems etc.). I think Stellaris does a great job of always wishing you had more of something and not being able to have it all. That said, I haven’t ever played a lot of late game content.
In the game I just started I decided to go “extremely adaptable” and forgo sectors just focusing on a bunch of core worlds. I staked out my territory and build up a decent fleet to survive the inevitable pirates etc. But as much as I wanted to focus on internal economic development and the spiritual well being of my fanatic spiritualist star kingdom, a bunch of xenophobe neighbors made life difficult. I ended up fighting a bunch of defensive wars instead of building temples.
I find that the choices are more about focus rather than details. They are tough but not agonizing because it’s not discard this card that you will never be able to use again to choose to play this one… like another favorite space game of mine.
I also get a lot of enjoyment in getting my core planet engine tuned up. I like to build “food” or “mining” worlds if I can instead of every system being a jack of all trades. The new global food system is awesome for this.
There is also a lot of stuff to discover or stumble across. I ran into a special even leviathan around a black hole just recently and was really surprised at the outcome.
This game has come a long way from where it started and I’m optimistic about where it is heading.
That’s a great story Kevin! I’d want to play that game! I think it illustrates how Stellaris is definitely different things to different people. Much of what makes your story appealing to me is what you filled in yourself and my guess if I were the one actually playing that session I wouldn’t see the events unfolding with such imagination and color. I wish I could, but my mind focuses on what I think I need to do to succeeding the game from a mechanical standpoint.
I find the same thing happens to me when reading some of Tom’s articles. I absolutely loved his series on Conquest of Elysium 3, and thought it had to be one of the greatest games ever. But then I played it and while it was an OK game, I didn’t find the same joy in it that Tom did.
It’s at least good to hear I’m not alone in my thinking.
I agree Vic that from a mechanical standpoint it’s about the balancing and prioritizing of resources and development. I also think that because the game is more about the focus rather than the details (as you say), it can feel a bit bland to a non roleplaying / imaginative player. I was all about grabbing up planets and having a good economy, but it all felt bland.
I did get further than I did at release, and I think the game has made some steps towards being a better game, but it still needs something more for me. I don’t know if Utopia adds that something that would give me a more positive opinion or not though.
I had the same feelings about Cities: Skylines. A good city builder for those with some imagination or creativity, but not a great game from a strategy game perspective.
I really like the themes and RP potential of Stellaris, but I agree that mechanically it has some issues. I think the low-level “busywork” of assigning buildings, mining space resources, and moving pops around tends to obscure the bigger strategic choices in play. Wars tend to be too frenetic and not operationally interesting.
That said I am having a lot of fun, and I have some faith that Wiz is driving the ship in the right direction and they will gradually undo some of the design choices that have turned out to be a problem.
EUIV is on something like the 10th major expansion of the fourth iteration of the game. It’s definitely a more refined product.
I really like it. I’m about 10-15 hours into a game so far and really enjoying all the changes.
First, they fixed the problem of everyone getting in a Federation with everyone else, which created a tangled web of alliances so thick it was stupidly ludicrous. It was almost impossible to declare war on anyone because you had to get your partners to agree, and if you managed to do that, you kicked off some galactic-wide struggle as your opponent called in their allies.
No such problem this time around. My Sovereign Worlds found itself in a great start position and began the race to expand. In short order, we ran into a rival to our south, the Kingdom of Havo, a bunch of sluglike molluscoids that hated me instantly. Meanwhile, to my north, there loomed the fungoids of the Qlorvinserian Concordat. They hated me too. Not good.
Around the time I got to about 4 or 5 worlds, the wars kicked off, as both Havo and the Concordat basically tagteamed me. We were at rough parity, so I it was a decidedly defensive war on my part. The goal was to keep the fleet intact, and at home, where they could use the firepower of the spaceports for an edge. Still, the enemy managed to take a few of my worlds, destroying spaceports and mining stations. It was difficult to get fleet engagements where the odds were favorable to me, so it was a lot of hit and run.
In the middle of all this, some poor slaves on the planet Raxycodium Primum, located in the distant High Kingdom of Juss, revolted against their overlord and declared independence. They then contacted me and said that they admired my democratic ideals and wished to join my Sovereign Worlds. How could I say no? Unfortunately for them, their world was beyond my wormhole range, besides which, I couldn’t spare any ships at the moment. But I did my best and invested in the planet. All for naught, though, as the High Kingdom of Juss decided to take matters into their own hands and declare war on me.
Finally, after about 10 years, and after I managed to smash a portion of their navy, they decided to sue for peace. My captured worlds reverted back to me, save for those poor fuckers on Raxycodium, and it was status quo antebellum. I spent the next 10 years rebuilding my economy, spaceports, and fleet, and slowly expanding.
Then, after the 10-year truce timer expired, those Havo and Concordant bastards declared war once again. Rinse and repeat. I did a bit better though, as I had a larger fleet, and I was slowly getting an edge on the enemy in terms of fleet size and technology. After about 10 years, they sued for peace once again after some tug-of-war over my worlds.
This time around, I spent the better part of the next 10 years on my navy. I boosted the fleet size to the point that I gained numerical and qualitative superiority over them. After the truce expired, neither attacked. That gave me the cushion I needed to really push my expansion outward. I invested in a bunch of ascension perks that accelerated expansion. Frontier Outposts were established upon distant systems, and the resources in and around those systems were exploited.
Once I had a nice cushion, it was time for payback. First up: The Kingdom of Hova. This time, I declared war, and my Grand Fleet immediately began wiping a swath through their worlds, destroying spaceports and stations and pummeling ground defenses so my armies could land and seize the world. Once the world was seized, move on to the next system and do it again. Eventually, the enemy fleet came out to fight, and I smashed it in the open with minimal losses. At that point, it was all but over. I just had to keep squeezing until they surrendered and became my vassal.
I then turned to those fuckers in the Concordant. Same tactics, and I crushed them. However, in the middle of this campaign, I researched jump drives and immediately began to use them. And, as you know, jump drives bring the Unbidden. Those fuckers just showed up on the far side of the galaxy. Thankfully, I had a spare ascension perk in reserve, so I immediately chose “Defender of the Galaxy”, which gives you a 50% boost against those existential threats.
I’m now racing to bulk up the Grand Fleet for the showdown that’s about to come. I control about a 5th of the galaxy now, but I need to get bigger. It’s all about assimilating my vassals and using their numbers to boost fleet size even further. The race is on.
For any EU vets in here complaining that Stellaris isn’t as deep, I think you’re right. But Stellaris was sorta meant to be a more accessible EU-like game for people who aren’t hardcore grognards like us to get their feet wet, wasn’t it? :) Also I agree with the roleplaying comment. My current game I’m playing some crazy slaver guys and I’m having fun just imagining the situations that come along. It’s more about seeing where the “story” of my empire goes than it is driving solely towards an end goal.
Yep, it’s not as complex as EU4, but I’m still really enjoying it, in the same way that I enjoy the EU games (and Distant Worlds, for that matter). I just like seeing what happens next.
It’s interesting to read that you guys all have had wars. I have been playing for days and I’ve just had skirmishes with pirates and space critters. (I don’t mind the combat at all so far; my fleet follows a pirate and kills it without any intervention from me. I imagine it would be much more difficult with multiple battles going on at once.) My diplomatic position is good enough that I’ve been safe – so far. That’s fine with me; I play these games to build an empire and roleplay and enjoy a story, not to fight wars.
My empire is two blobs, separated by a void of space that has no habitable worlds. I think it’s sorta cool that my territory isn’t contiguous; I feel like I’m playing Indonesia or something. In theory I could connect the blobs with stations, but I can’t afford the energy credits or the influence hit. And I just think it’s cool I’ve got a separate sector off in Borneo, away from my main islands.
:)
The game keeps throwing little story arcs at me, and they’re well-written and interesting. But then I like sci-fi!
I can understand why some people might not care for this game. I doubt I’ll ever see the victory screen. (I’m not sure I’ve seen it in EU4, either.) Me, I don’t care; but goal-oriented gamers might.
I have never seen anything beyond the vague it is being worked on. Paging @BrianRubin, any idea what the status of Distant Worlds 2 is?
Beyond the fact that it exists, that is all I know.