They’re working on the 21st major update. They’ve put in 3.5 years of post-release development, which may be longer than it took to develop and release the base game!
I think it does, for example when i got a psionic researcher in my materialistic empire (cant get psionic) i started getting access to psi techs on the social tree i had him at.
I was kind of low-balling it, but figured someone knew the exact number. My point remains the same, though. A lot of post-release development!
Absolutely! I hope the context of my post came across correctly, @MisterMourning. It was intended to support what you originally said… there’s been a lot of work done post-release! It will be interesting to see where Stellaris is 3 years after its initial release date.
The scientist type also increases the chances of getting the rarer techs of that type. Take mega-engineering for example.
The base chance of it showing up to be researched is 3% but there are modifiers:
Base: 3
Modifiers
20x if has an existing mega-structure (or frame) within borders.
2x if has ascension perk Master Builders.
0.25x if scientist has none of:
Expertise is voidcraft.
Trait is curator.
so if your scientist doesn’t have the voidcraft skill then it drops from 3% to .75%. The traits that give +10 or +5 to all areas count as having the indivdual skills btw.
This tech tree lists it out the best:
Shit, i wasnt aware of this at all, how awesome
That tech tree info is pretty cool.
It is a cool system. It seems like if they actually displayed stuff like that within the game it would make for a better strategy game. I think hiding it makes it better for role players because the game then adapts to your actions without the player knowing the details - you just play what feels right.
Personally I wish they made it a stronger strategy game as I don’t really role play a game like this. I like to make informed decisions to try and play to the best of my ability.
I had the vague hope that scientists would research in their area of interest; good to know that’s how it works. I agree, it would be better if the game told us that (or told us more clearly).
I also agree that diplomacy, while functional, could use more fleshing out. Also, I kinda wish there were a circular diagram of who’s got what agreements with whom. Or, better yet, a mockup of the galaxy map with red lines connecting empires at war with each other, blue lines indicating research agreements, etc. Maybe that would be too cluttered. One of the earlier Civ games did have a circular diplomacy screen, as I recall.
Above all, this game really cries out for the CK2 treatment.
Still and all, I remain pretty addicted to my largely peaceful game.
Wiz updates the TODO list that they posted after they launched Leviathans.
Here’s the remaining items on the list that they haven’t touched yet (not in order of priority):
But where’s my “more space-brother endungeoning and space-mother plotting”???
If they can get Federations, war and galactic politics sorted, they’d have me. We’ll see.
I kind of hope they aren’t done with factions. It’s in some ways an interesting system, but sort of easy to game, and by extension it feels very “gamey”, for lack of a better word. It might be because with Harmony Tradition giving 10% on unlock, Symbol of Unity and Paradise Dome giving another 20, and the Enclave merchants giving 5%, unrest is a non-factor and happiness is just a meter of how improved your population is.
Also, having Hive Minds not be terrible would be nice. They are like an awful version of Fanatic Purifier.
There’s a Devouring Swarm civic coming for the hive minds in the upcoming patch which was described as being fanatic purifier-ish, so they seem to be getting attention at least.
Interesting! The new civic is:
Cannot engage in Diplomacy with other species!
Xeno Pops will always be eaten and have no effects on Tradition Cost.
Gains Society Research from eating Xeno Pops.
Ship Hull Points increased by +10%.
Monthly Hull Regenerations increased by +0.5%.
Army Damage increased by 40%.
Research Speed(I think) Biology increase by 20%
And a general buff of +10 habitability and -15% growth time to ALL hiveminds. Which is good. They are super underpowered at the moment. Paradox is generally pretty good about responding to this stuff.
After playing since Utopia I have concluded that the late game is almost unplayable, at least if you are going the space hitler route.
It’s the combination of wars that involve such excessive amounts of micro and clicks just to capture planet after planet, the fact that recently conquered planets will just rebel and as soon as the defensive garrisons are dead they automagically recede back into their previous empire (no rebel occupation like in EU4 etc.), and most importantly the late-game crippling slowdown which I am surprised to see is still in Stellaris.
I want to finish this game, but wars are so dull and you spend much of your time staring at something to happen because the game is stuttering between every game day now for some reason (that’s with an i7-4770k, of course it’s maxxing one core and the rest are barely touched).
I also don’t understand resettlement. I have an empire that comprises more than half of the galaxy, 500+ pops of my native species, and yet to resettle 1 out of the 500s to another planet (which is a nice planet too!) I spend 5% of my political influence. The Huggle government needs to learn a thing or two about totalitarianism.
A counterpoint to my pessimism above: the save is now going fast again. I have no idea why!
I mean to be fair, anything with the name “Huggle” would have to try pretty hard to convince me to move too. Not exactly intimidating, you know? :P
Ok so I’m curious what the verdict is now. Is Stellaris worth playing after the latest patch?
Do I need to get the DLC? Or is the patch good enough? I was disappointed in the initial game, so I’m reluctant to throw good money on after bad. But on the other hand, Moo is one of my favorite games ever, so the genre is great.
To me, worth playing means the beginning is still pretty fun. The sector automation isn’t brain dead stupid. The middle game is somewhat challenging with the potential for other empires to declare war and conduct the war in somewhat competent fashion.
The middle game would need to be significantly improved from the early versions.
I so seldom finish a Paradox game, that really don’t care if the end game is unplayable.
I was asking myself the same question when the update + Utopia came out and my conclusion is that there just isn’t enough interesting gameplay mechanics for my tastes. The beginning is OK as the player is building up their economy, but I felt it was lacking stuff to really get excited about. With the Civ games, nabbing that good location and building a wonder that really wanted provided needed motivation to really care about my decisions. Stellaris just seems rather blah - not horrible or anything, just blah.
The diplomacy seems much less developed than EU IV (maybe as expected). But, if you’re looking for more of a roleplaying experience and playing for flavor rather then mechanics then I can more easily see people coming to a different conclusion. I’d suggest giving it a try just with the update and if you think it is strong enough to then get Utopia. I just played with the update.
My verdict is that the game is improving, but not enough.
After my little list of complaints earlier, I ended up going back and having another brief shot. Full disclaimer, I was up until 4am one morning playing, and up to around 2 the following night. Part of it is stress management thanks to other events at the moment. I had a bit of a think about why I was playing so late and the only reason I can determine is that exploratory desire to see where the game heads from a technological perspective and also game events. Looking at my technocratic race that I developed, nothing can really stand in my way. Even a Fallen empire got chewed to pieces against my fleet when I dared to settle a tomb world.
One series of events was interesting. I employed a theme with my race about how they were insectoid slaves fighting someone else’s wars on a planet, genetically altered and turned on their masters. So imagine my delight when I had the events that allowed me to further genetically alter my species for some reason or other (this was the 4am session) and my race turned from the bright fanciful butterflies into the more ugly looking insect race that resembles a beetle of some description. It is only by chance of course, but it did add a lot of flavour to the game.
When it comes to the game:
I have no desire to war anyone, too fiddly and frustrating. I’d rank EUIV as being the best, most enjoyable way to war, CK II as somewhat annoying and Stellaris as the worst of the lot. The best part about war is how pretty combat is, mostly when lasers are lighting up the area. The game chugs a bit though when I zoom in, so Sins of a Solar empire is still the clear winner there.
Diplomacy is boring. I’ve tried to engage with it. What is difficult is that the names of the empires feel meaningless. When I’ve got France, Bohemia, Papal state etc, I know what I need to do with them. No offense to the Welsh language intended, but the names in the game almost seem to come right out from their dictionary. When I have the Welsh sounding Technocracy and Welsh sounding Democracy and Welsh sounding autocracy, it gets a lot more jumbled and difficult to visualise. I haven’t explored enough, but I wouldn’t mind just renaming nations to nicknames that I can ascribe too - eg: Greedy pigs, Space France and Religious nuts.
The exploration and the beginning game is great with the amount of potential that exists, but I find the path is pretty much the same - blob out and get big. No real point growing tall as far as I can tell.
@Strollen I encourage you to wait longer. The game has potential, I agree with sentiments about comparing to the EUIV (and also CKII) development. I agree with @robc04 the game is just blah.