/civ4xg/ - Strategy/4X General

BTW Guys.
Can you normally purge or send some part of the conquered species to butchers but not all?
Like can you divide them and make some slaves some battle thralls etc.
Or it all is now ruled by population/specie menu?

hahaha no one has time or patience for it, that's the problem. but it is objectively the superior genre.

Well, turn based games usually have more depth to them, and since you get to stop and look at details, you can actually see the effects of optimizing your units loadout or a new hero, and that's pretty cool.

It's just, you know. You wait, you spam that new turn button to get that trebuchet built, and then you see that while you focused on your trebuchet, a town was infiltrated by slavers who raped the men, abducted the widows, and killed the childrens.

Would any anons be interested in a multiplayer Stellaris game? I'm curious to see if it's as fun as HoI4 ends up being against humans.

I don't know, I only play with retards and scrubs.

I thought they used "ab urbe condita" for proper dating

> Turn based you have Civ Beyond Earth but it was very bad I heard.

Man who sunk too many hours into Beyond Earth here.

It is not VERY bad, it's just that once you get into it in any depth you realise how shoddily designed and unbalanced it is.

It's better than Stellaris in the sense that it remains fun for longer than "the midgame of your first playthrough" but once you come to realise the squandered promise of the game you are left feeling viscerally angry, unlike Stellaris where you just end up feeling bored.

Lollllll xDD I fell asleep glug glug glug

Are habitats going to make building tall viable?

No.
In 1.5 you can't elect to purge single pops. It's the whole species or nothing.
Which is annoying as I always let the ayy lmaos that have my ethics live.
My Stalinist Penguins are interested in politicide, not genocide. But, of course, >Swedes only understand two poles, "Fanatic xenophile live-and-let-live hippies" and "Suffer Not The Xeno To Live Literally Hitler".

I fucking hope not.

Tall SHOULDN'T be viable in a game about space imperialism.

There's already not enough strategic reasons to go to war in Stellaris. If you can literally build your own lebensraum at home there'll be even less.

On the plus side my understanding is that the devs say the answer to your question is indeed "No". Tall won't be as good as wide. Habitat construction is construed more as "something to do while you wait for the treaty cooldown to hit 10 years" rather than an actual strategy.

>what I don't like shouldn't be viable
>only MY way of playing is viable, everything I dislike doesn't make sense

Yes

Hey, if you think a frozen diplomatic sutuation where nobody has any reason to DoW and you just sit there turtling for 300 years is a fun game, then power to you.
Unfortunately, I am not a droid.

Not him, but you missed the point. It's not about playstile in a vacuum, it's about it being part of the whole of the game.

Truly "tall" playstyle encourages you to sit in your base and do nothing but build it up. That means you might as well not be part of the enviropment but a shitty version of fallen empire.

Good implementation of "tall" either encourage interaction trough non-standard means or simply function as a more top heavy wide empires that use "tall" as a way to outdo their more reckless and expansive opponents and take their shit.

not quite sure what you're talking about. when i think of a strategy game, i think of something where a military genius would excel once he understands the mechanics of the game. But you can have the most brilliant strategy, if you don't have the reaction speed or whatever it is that you need to micro hundreds of units simultaneously, then you won't be good.

with turn based strategy, you can win based off superior strategy, hence the name STRATEGY game. RTS has strategy elements but it's more who can click faster, which i find less entertaining as I get older.

don't get me wrong though, I do play RTS (starcraft, warcraft, age of empires etc.), but it just doesn't satisfy me the way a nice game of age of wonders 2 does, for example.

why do people pretend to be retarded on the internet?
do they not realize it is detrimental to everyone in the long run

>Not him, but
So you're him. Gotcha back, senpai.

>dyson spheres are four times worse in terms of mineral cost per energy per month than worst energy mining station
WHAT WERE THEY THINKING

Hm I do think there are some loopholes like purging only peopel that are in a certain caste-with that said it is borderline retarded.

I'm saying that I find turn-based games interesting in theory, but a pain in the ass to play and that they're boring as fuck.

Tall shouldn't be literally just turtle in your first 1-3 systems and win the game after X amount of turns. If the resource system was revamped, as many Anons have suggested before, then trading or war would be important to grab those resources for tall playstyles.

However if you honestly can't imagine a game world where expansive aggressive armies can win through size and power but there are some utopian worlds where beings have advanced their culture and mastery of their own space that they go beyond the warmongers then I pity you. Both should be totally valid playstyles.

I don´t agree with everything WIZ does... but thank god, we are on the same page regarding soft/hard lock.

Giving everyone, everything is horrible design. Same type of peopel that would want factions in Total War be nothing but reskins.

I won't be able to have robots AND psi at the same time?

Will I still be able to build megastructures if I go full psionic?

Megastructures are their own thing.
The only exclusive ones are the 3 ascension paths.

Tall is a meme but it's a grand meme.

The issue is that people like to replicate the real life successful "tall" empires like Venice or Netherlands or Papal state and what not. But in real life those entities only existed because unlike games, real life doesn't have a nation wide win condition. If such a thing existed no tall nations would have never existed as neighboring blob would have just absorbed them ages ago.

Instead games should focus on centralized vs decentralized as their primary differentiation. More land and resources should always be better but the way each nation exploits those resources.

>WHAT WERE THEY THINKING

"Players are calling us out on our shit implementation of economics, how in the late game they literally can't spend their money fast enough because there's nothing to spend it on once planets are upgraded other than dakka"
"Hmm. Maybe we should add diverse internal trade mechanics? More interesting external expense options? Provide better civil war mechanics so blobs don't get so big that they snowball so easily? At least we should rebalance the current time-distribution of resource acquisition."
"Nah, fuck it, that sounds too much like hard work. Just put the Kiel Canal in and call it a day"

Tall only makes sense if there are very advanced economy system, with production of high tech goods and so on.
Stellaris economy is more primitive than in Starcraft

Well economy is one thing.
The other one would be culture.

>implying that Venice or Netherlands wasn't wide
Venice trade net spread from South Africa to India, when Dutch were all over the world from Baltic to Indonesia.
They weren't sitting on their asses at home building 'advance technology' they spread over the world to trade and gather monopolies on rare resources. Not even mention fleet size.

>1 more day

Anyone know how kill the Armageddon Bombardment fleet stance is going to be?

Yes tall empires are quite commonly seen having great trade power.
Venice is literally the definition of a tall country

I can't really remember any particularly small but efficient country with strong culture
Japan is not really small
Most prominent examples of "tall" states - Hong-Kong and Singapore aren't exactly famous for their original culture

But they were wide.
Not on land but on sea.
Venice have plenty of islands, military bases and trade posts under control everywhere and their agents even work in India competing with Portugal.

>Anyone know how kill the Armageddon Bombardment fleet stance is going to be?

...

So you just pretending to be retarded?

It was only after I hit "Post" that I saw that I typed "kill" instead of "killy".

Basically I want to know on a scale of 1 to Exterminatus how fucked the surface of a planet and its denizens will be with the Fanatical Purifier exclusive bombardment option is gonna be. Though I think you can get it by spending unity into the Supremacy tree as well.

I guess I was being nebulous.
I feel culture could be great (regardless of the tall/wide)
For tall religion could be massive. Things like Holy Worlds or the seat of a living prophet etc.

That said, I don´t think religion should be something they should focus on (with so much other stuff still missing)

I think he means "killy," an Orky way of saying "deadly." As for his question, I've got no clue. I hope it can make worlds into tomb worlds.

so can i rely on you fine folks to post the DL link for Utopia when it releases? that way i don't have to go through a wild goose chase to find it

Something like space Vatican?

Nope but do you?
Tall in Stellaris gonna sit on their asses and do nothing because there is no real trade or diplomacy or spy game.
Tall in real life rely on trade to gain power.
Look at all of this trade republics - all of them have wide trade ports/bases network even if they do not belong to them directly.
Venice controlled plenty of ports in Mediterranean, islands and have their own districts in plenty of not controlled cities.
Can you do that in Stellaris?
There is no religions so you can not become Vatican either.
You do not produce any high advance goods, heck you can not even sell ships so no today Japan/SK.
The only way to become tall in Stellaris is to exploit the lack of pop/planet tech penalty.

Yes Space Vatican,Space Meca,Space Jerusalem etc. That said not every species should be religious- some should be pretty much impossible to convert as well.

Founding your own religion could be neat.
Especially if they go down the route that your species could have some level of warp gestalt.

What are you even talking about? I haven't even mentioned stellaris but just talking about general concepts
How is Venice a tall empire when compared to France or Russia or literally any European power trough the ages.

Wiz said it was orbital bombardment++, with no special events. So just a faster bombardment

What bothers me with Civ is that the most developped towns have all the stuff. You never get a great artist being born in a small town, it's always the capital.

Are you just ...talking past each other ?

I mean regardless of the historical side.
Stellaris needs more of ..."everything" to make tall really worthwhile.

It seems like a simple fix too, just make great person civ-wide instead of city-wide

Yeah. Wasn't Jerusalem kind of a shitty place before Jesus appeared there?

Well he quotes my posts but talks about something else, it's hard to say what he means.
I'm just talking about how the very idea of "tall" is retarded and should be shifted to centralized vs decentralized.

Centralized vs decentralized.
Decentralized could be amazing... IF sectors would work in a satisfying manner.

I really, really like the idea of having almost indpendent sectors.

Could add a lot of flavour as well. You know sectors trying to break off ...or sucking up to the core worlds.

why are you quoting my post?

You mean like provinces and autonomy in EU4?

not unless you mod it, which I'm sure people will quickly do since there are multiple scifi that have both robots and psi(star wars to dont look far).

I am talking how idea of tall is retarded because 'tall' empires were really wide just in other way than normal wide empires were wide.
Well so there is nothing to fight about.
You are still a faggot.

>scifi
>star wars
Citation Needed.

But seriously it seems to be such a strange thing to break tech tree over. Of all the space fantasy tropes Stellaris employs, it's so bizzare to see this one bit be so deterministic.

You are just misusing words. You create an impossible definition and then argue that no such things existed which is pointless in itself.

And with a higher propability to kill pos right?

I'm reminded of Emperor of the Fading suns which had two NPC factions, Holy Terra (religion) and The League (merchants). Holy Terra was made up of many sub-factions based around different sects of a religion while The League was a massive merchant guild that supposedly was the supplier of high tech goods and military equipment. Diplomacy in that game was a huge component because of how the main victory condition was gathering enough votes to become declared emperor and promising favors to the minor factions was how to get their vote.

I wonder how this could be done in Stellaris. Religion for one but merchant guild? Maybe the option to sell ships and armies for the other? They're adding consumer goods in 1.5 so maybe some kind of tech or arrangement of factories that increases the efficiency of consumer good production so they can be sold at a profit. If wormhole generators could be built in larger sizes and allowed to be used by other factions then permission of wormholes could be traded. Like a "large" wormhole station consuming 4x power (1.0) and having twice the range, a "huge" station consuming 4 energy and having 4x the range. Other factions paying twice the energy cost to use it.

But user a faggot is a real word.

>'tall' empires were really wide just in other way than normal wide empires were wide.
lmao you mean 'tall' empires were wide in the vertical sense

Dont think wiz said anything about that.

>star wars
>not sci-fi

what other film has a realistic depiction of what translight speeds would actually look like?

The "Tall" empires rely/ied on monopolies, production, trade and control of trade routes.
Which is impossible in Stellaris as none of above exist.
No trade
No production of goods
No trade routes
No monopolies
You can make tall in CK2 or EU4 but not in Stellaris.

No one is talking about stellaris

Now I'm sad

None.
Translight is non realistic.

>whats is the fi in scifi

Star Wars is certainly scifi. It isnt hard scifi but Stellaris isn't one either.

Nah, man, star wars is space fantasy. There is nothing wrong with being space fantasy, but calling it scifi is misleading, because there is nothing scientific about it.

Exactly scifi is a VERY broad term.
I would argue the majority of scifi in popular culture is not hard scifi.

You have to actually look for realism in sci-fi.

fanatic pacifists
materialists

intelligent
thrifty
weak
sedentary

idyll agrarians
machinists

---
seems like a better way to push for the national unity + superstructure build

Is stellaris sci-fi?

The game where it's easier to build an FTL engine than a rail gun? Of course not.

So there doesn't seem to be any benefits of making ring-worlds instead to making several habitats., besides alien-phallic-appendage waving. You can't even repair broken ring worlds you find.

On point, is there any news on ring worlds having unique buildings like habitats do or will we still be making mining facilities on our artificial ring construct?

>Sins came out 10 years ago
>too old for Sins

Damn nigga must suck being 50

It is but it's definitely soft sci fi. It's science is technically internally consistent, with vague explainations for how shit works, but that doesn't change the fact that quite a bit of it is outright impossible and makes concessions in order to be a interesting and fun game where it's possible to resolve interstellar wars in the time frame of months and years as opposed to decades, centuries or even millennia.

It's about the same spot Mass Effect is. Instead of Element Zero and manipulating mass in some hand wave way, it's your choice of FTL and ships with enough power to freely maneuver in space with no regards to orbit and crossing solar systems in a couple of weeks. It also has some soft sci fi staples, like psychic powers or ships closing and firing directly on each other without light lag being a thing, while ignoring hard sci fi stuff like relativistic kill vehicles that could obliterate whole planets or how any meaningful trade between planets would be ludicrous without technology that would essentially render such trade moot.

>within the last decade
none
not a single good space 4x has come out in the last decade.

AOW2 is shit. Shadow Magic and 3 are better.

Give Sins a try. It's a significantly slower paced RTS with a neat setting and mechanics.

I just want to say that whoever mentioned The Deathworlders when I said I was genemodding my humans to be strong, it was much appreciated. I've never read it before and I'm really enjoying it.

Wide means they've got a lot of land or a lot of planets you fucking idiot

It was always shitty

It just happened that 3000 years ago a wandering nation of semites claiming their god wanted them to own it appeared and made it their capital. And then thousands of years later people distantly related to those semites worshiping what may be the same god now have their capital there, and several other religions and nations claim that city as being equally holy for them and desire it despite it not having any real value.

And this brings us an important thought- you probably shouldn't be allowed to make your capital your holiest city when founding a religion, or it should unlock specific traits like having a centralized priesthood.

patreon.com/HamboneHFY

>1500 dollars per chapter released

Fucking hell

>Japan is not really small
"Tall" is basically about density of productivity.
So germany and japan are classic "tall" examples because they are the most productive given their land area.
And they export culturally because they are strong economically

I'm doing everything all wrong

>deathworlders

Sounds like that one HFY story about how earth was located in a part of space called the "zone of madness" or something where all intelligent species engaged in suicidal wars that wiped themselves out due to being fucked up by space rays or something and that humans were mysteriously the only species not to be affected.

I guess it also sounds like he's read Zombo, the story about space zombies that attack humans because of sentient "Deathworlds" that fucking hate sapient creatures.