/civ4xg/ Endless, Stellaris, Civilization, and 4X

Its ok, they probably hate women too.

stop phoneposting you fucking faggot

Give me one reason why.

>firefox for android
Nice browser taste

>Criticising our game and the conduct of our staff is against the rules!

Well he's not wrong, they literally made criticising the staff an instantly permabannable offence about a month ago, attempting to spin it as, I shit you not, "Paradox's obligation to protect our staff from workplace harrassment".

There were enough people on the Paradox forums today who didn't get the memo, but they won't be on the Paradox forums tomorrow.
F

That was a different question tho, what did it change?

Is it possible for the starting system to be inside a nebula?

What did what change?
2.0 didn't change anything about the whales. It changed a lot of other things, but not the whales. They still use warp drive when literally nothing else in the game does.

A u r o r a

>points out how developer is lying through his teeth
>time to lock the thread I guess

The first empire to strap guns and a crude piloting system to space whales is going to be rolling in territory

I regret checking out paradox forum

swedish cucks i hope muslims take over your country and impregnate all your women

I like the meme called playing tall
It has ruined several of the games I like

It's a fucking disgrace and they're going to get away with it time and time again.

steamcommunity.com/sharedfiles/filedetails/?id=1315953333&searchtext=

>"So for some reason in vanilla, the AI doesnt get pirates."

Truly, this is the power of Swedish Game Development

The whole concept of a serious contradiction between playing tall and playing wide leads to shit like the disaster we're witnessing now. Developers try to force the system to accommodate one style of play or the other without actually understanding what players want to do. Especially as it's been done here, 2 years into publication in a patch, the attempt to create a new way of playing some vaguely defined empire-style is doomed to suck the fun out of a game. Punishing me for expanding isn't encouraging me to play tall when I can't generate the resources I need to reap the advantages of what is called "height" without initially expanding.

They said it will be fixed in the next game version.

No idea how they forgot to change something from "spawn for ai = no" to yes.

4xes should punish you for expanding carelessly, not for expanding in general.

This isn't a 4x game, it's a failed attempt to combine 4x and GSG elements.

Civ 5 made the casual 4x player want to be able to settle 4 or so places and then turtle until victory.

>forgot
They did it in purpose because they couldn't figure out viable parameters

Civ V created casual 4X player in the first place

Civ 5 tried to fix the cancer that was Infinite City Sprawl

The earlier civ games still had them, V just made it a far bigger demographic

whoops, didn't see the new thread.

this is an another ~10 year later
a grand total of 28 out of ~300 pops converted at the cost of ~700 influence, and the support percentages are nowhere near the attraction ones.

I officially give up trying to understand how this shit works, and i'll just increase the passive influence gain by 2-3 every 100 years.

it transformed casuals from irrelevant to primary target, semantics be damned.

Stellaris and Civ V have practically nothing in common and there's no justifiable reason for an RTS (it isn't a successful 4X or GSG game) to mimic a turn-based 4X.

can you pacifist-shield primitives?

Did you look at the modifiers for pop ethics attraction here?
stellaris.paradoxwikis.com/Ethics

For example decadent pops are more likely to attract authoritarianism.

That .gif in the OP is cursed

spooktastic

Addressing the causes of ethics attraction like says is generally more useful than spending the influence.

Also, the UI here is just generally confusing. The numbers at the top are what your demographics are right now. The numbers under "support" are where your numbers are heading - if nothing else changes and you wait an infinite amount of time, the numbers at the top will converge towards the numbers in "Support". So if the numbers on the top are very different to the numbers under "Support", use the ethics change edict to speed up the convergence.

Also, only races with Full Citizenship contribute to the Support level, so if you happen to know that one race is predominantly voting the wrong way, consider bumping them down to residence. I don't think this actually happens except in cases of Recently Conquered, though.

>Finally get a 2.0 fleet capable of taking on a Fallen Empire
>The FE doesn't even use its fleet against me in the war I declare against it
>Easiest war I've ever fought against an FE
What gives?

if u kill ur enemy, they win :)

So how strong are the Great Khan fleets when he first spawns? Because they went from 3 systems to this.

>eXplore, eXpand, eXploit, and eXterminate
Exploration is useless because travel time is fucking molasses
Expansion is straight up punished
The only thing being exploited is the playerbase
Extermination is impossible due to war exhaustion

>The only thing being exploited is the playerbase
Funnier than any of the so-called 'humour' in Stellarbitch

>points out how developer is lying through his teeth

What did he lie about? I'm not in the loops.

>marauders keep destroying everything on their path when they go on a raid, and I'm always on the way
>they don't even loot anything they just aggro and KoS
>the only way to make it stop is to completely buy them off
>won't let me because they're always on cooldown from going on raids
this is on the verge of making me uninstall the game

It was literally all we were talking about last thread.

In my game the Khan appeared at roughly the same time I conquered an FE homeworld as detailed in and then someone on the other side of the galaxy near them became a tributary/thrall/whatever it's called
Can you not pay tribute (500 of a resource) to make them fuck off?

They always say they're cooling down from their latest raid.
I guess they immediately start the next raid the very second their cooldown finishes to make them completely unusable, wouldn't surprise me

This is a new thread, how about someone gives a /quickrundown/?
The AI cheats and Paradox devs claimed that 'cheating' and 'AI' aren't really the right words because hard AI hasn't been invented yet.

He said the AI gets the exact same resources as the player and doesn't cheat, and called everyone who expressed skepticism a conspiratard and "I coded the AI I know what it does buddy",
It was then conclusively demonstrated that the AI does cheat, as it only pays 50% of the maintenance that the player does and this has been the case since 1.0,
And then he locked the thread.

Heads up, all corvettes and however many titans you can field is the best way to make your fleets, except against the unbidden. Corvettes basically get 1 shotted so they never get a chance to disengage. The meta is still all battleships with artillery for unbidden.

I hate this game

That's not the pay tribute option, that's different from asking them to raid someone.
Do you not have the option to pay tribute? Because you should, and if you don't then you're just another person who's suffering from this atrocious glitch. I always offer tribute when the Marauders ask me to and I don't have much trouble with them, but in /civ4xg/ I've seen a lot of people claim that they don't have this option even if they aren't playing a Determined Exterminators/Fanatical Purifiers/Devouring Swarm build.

I can't pay tribute because they're not raiding me.
When they raid someone they just send their fleet on the shortest path through their target. This can be through systems with a dimensional horror through it. This can be through the player's systems.
And their fleet attacks ANYTHING they find on the way there.
And you can't pay them to stop.

forum.paradoxplaza.com/forum/index.php?threads/i-say-no-to-removal-of-forced-status-quo-peace.1073030/

Haha, this fucking thread

Oh God it's been almost a week and they haven't fixed this?

>which represents the desire of your people for peace and basically their political pressure on you as their ruler.
Gosh its almost like unity and influence gain being completely removed is a representation of this

>can build trading hubs in systems with uncontacted primitives in them
>they blow themselves up
>trading hubs still work
why the fuck did they feel the need to remove solar panels anyways

>Lets us not allow the vision be changed by the lowest common denominator spamming topics.
It's like a fucking cult.

>why the fuck did they feel the need to remove solar panels anyways
They have to change the names or functions of things in every patch to keep things fresh. Can't have players figuring out optimal build orders and sticking with them over time.

He's right though.
Everyone sperging out about WE is not because it's bad, but because they're trying to port their 1.9 strategies directly over to 2.0 and reeeeeeeeing when it doesn't immediately work.
Play it a week or so, find what new strategies work, and it's easy when you know how.

the numbers at the top are what change instantly when i suppress/promote factions so i think thats the target and the support is the current one (supported by say a pop showing its egalitarian, -which i want to change-, and the factions he has attractions to, and their %, changes instantly too)

>Also, only races with Full Citizenship contribute to the Support level
I'm not sure i understand. if i tally the pops from the support tooltip, it adds up closer to my entire population than jsut full citizens (which is about 1/3), so eveyrone is involved in the proccess, and as far as i know only nerve stapling removes them from it

casuals are primary 4x demographic by definition

Mouse over one of the support numbers.
It'll show you what the contributions are, and non-full-citizenship contributions are always 0%

>Play it a week or so, find what new strategies work, and it's easy when you know how.
Well, I've been playing for a week or so, and the new patch is fundamentally broken, on top of which nobody really asked for most of the changes they've made--your war strategies aren't that important when sending a fleet away from your starbase means dropping to +15 Minerals/month.

Nope.

It ended one of my games when my capital was the only route through that sector of the galaxy.

I was fucking furious.

>make claim to x systems
>conquer 75% of them, last 25% offers some resistance but nothing significant
>war exhaustion eventually reaches 100%
>whoops I guess we're better giving up everything we've conquered, guess we didn't conquer it hard enough, you can have it back, no worries :)

>try to vassalize a member of a federation
>occupy (as in land armies and shit) his entire empire
>rape his fed buddies and occupy some of them too
>still wont give
>"lel your unstoppable empire built around war and worships destruction and mayhem got fed up with war and mayhem, lets call the entire thing off with nothing gianed"

I admit the claim-occupy thing is good if morbidly influence expensive, but the rest is just bullshit

>Building Starbase in system between 2 systems that I've already got Starbases in
>Pirates spawn there and then blow up my construction ship before it has a chance to escape
>Ragequit
I don't know why it infuriated me so much but it did. Maybe it was the combination of that and the fact that my economy ground to a halt when I sent a fleet to take out that pirate base.

>nobody really asked for most of the changes they've made
1.9:
"Please make it so every war isn't an all-or-nothing affair which always results in 100% victory or 100% defeat but nothing in between"
2.0:
"REEEEE why aren't I winning every war 100%!?!?!?!"

>"Please make it so every war isn't an all-or-nothing affair which always results in 100% victory or 100% defeat but nothing in between"
I for one never asked for this and never complained about 'blobbing,' and people who complain about 'border gore' have clearly never looked at a map for more than a few seconds.
>"REEEEE why aren't I winning every war 100%!?!?!?!"
Whom are you quoting?

The whole war system needs to be changed. It should always end in a "conference" (like HoI4) where you parcel out the spoils based on your war goals, your performance in the war, the current state of the war, your ability to continue the war, the wider diplomatic context, and domestic politics. These factors should all be meaningful, but none decisive. War conferences should be about territory but you should also be able to impose other things, like forced disarmament, technological exchange, and so on, as well as things like "weapons of mass destruction" inspectors to stop them getting e.g. colossuses and ringworlds, where if they build them at any time for the duration of the inspection treaty you get a random chance of a casus belli depending on how much you spend on the investigations. Treaties like disarmament and so on should have adjustable lengths, too. If you win a total victory you should be able to demand a permanent disarmament treaty. Doesn't mean they have to obey it, it just means you get a casus belli when they break it. If they beat you in a war (or you don't prosecute the war) they "break free" of the treaty.

War should end as:
>Total Surrender
You surrender and they can demand anything and everything. This CAN be forced by a coup in your own government, but you get plenty of warning and it's not just based on war exhaustion.

>Negotiated Peace
HoI4 style conference with treaties. Both sides can make demands, and you can for example give up your occupation of some sectors in exchange for sectors you don't occupy. Basically maximum flexibility.

>Ceasefire
Starts a timer which ticks down, but doesn't stop the war. If no combat happens during the timer, the war ends. Minor combat delays the timer.

>Total Victory
They surrender and you can demand anything and everything.

In addition, wars should have a "bitterness" factor. If enough ceasefires are broken and lives lost, your people refuse to accept anything other than total victory etc.

I don't get why he was trying to deny it, AIs are always given cheats in strategy games, you'd have to be braindead to not walk circles around an AI on a level playing field.
What a piece of shit thinking he could just lie to people like that though, Paradox really is jewish on every level

>like HoI4
Stop suggesting solutions cribbed from other Paradox games

To be honest I think most of the complaints come from the mechanic being badly named. Calling it "War Exhaustion" comes bundled with a lot of implications about what it's abstracting, and cue special pleading for exemptions from murderbot/hive/f.militarist RP-ers.

If they'd just called it, idk, "Logistical overextension" or something, 99% of these objections would be moot.

Haven't played in a couple of months. Is the game ACTUALLY broken? Can't say I keep up much so I wouldn't notice small things

The worst part is that almost all of the infrastructure for this already exists. The conference system would need to be ported across from HoI4, but everything else is minor tweaks at most. "Technological exchange" is just a forced one-sided research agreement. You could even have a different type where you "raid" there technology and just straight up get some of it - hardly difficult to add. They already track and compare fleet sizes so the disarmament treaty just hooks into that data. And so on. It wouldn't be trivial but it's eminently doable and it would make war so much more meaningful. You'd be able to actually do interesting shit, rather than just grab systems.

What I suggest goes beyond the HoI4 system quite a bit.

>habitats cost 10,000 minerals
AAAAAAAAAAAGHHHHH WHY WOULD YOU DO THIS THEY WERE BAD ENOUGH ALREADY AAAAAAAAAGGGHHHHH

The first war me and my friend got into in multiplayer was with exterminators, which work like fanatical purifiers. We feel like that is how wars should happen, and to be fair, it does when you get a colossus.

A bigger issue is not being able to declare war on someone who isn't touching your borders, so you can't rape a fallen empire before it wakes up, or even after it wakes up to stop it from taking their neighbors.

Also for some reason(granted this was on very hard) a empire with 3 systems with 3 planets had SUPERIOR naval capacity than me when I had 10 planets and 14 spaceports and several of those spaceports with anchorages. This made them "equivalent" overall even though they were pathetic in fleet power so I couldn't vassalize them without taking some of their crap planets.

Holy fuck is this system retarded
This annoying fuck attacks me and is being annoing running shit, finnaly get his 2 fleet and completely obliterate them. I start bombing his worlds to invade them and NUH UH BRUH WHITE PEACE it was a draw, totally man!

>If they'd just called it, idk, "Logistical overextension" or something, 99% of these objections would be moot.
Regardless of the name it's retarded.
I don't care, stop suggesting solutions cribbed from other Paradox games

I agree with you, but it does feel like there's something wrong about the new system. I don't think people should just be able to vassalise someone with a snippitysnap of their fingers, but they should at least be POSSIBLE to do it.

>I don't get why he was trying to deny it
He was trying to deny it because "How dare people besmirch the name of the great Paradox devs by implying they can't code an AI that can win without cheating, these guys are technical experts in their field you know"

>stop suggesting solutions cribbed from other Paradox games
y

>I don't care, stop suggesting solutions cribbed from other Paradox games
Man I hate this guy.

STOP WHINING YOU CAN'T WIN EVERY WAR ANYMORE IT IS BALANCED NOW FUCKAROO

except the devs literally said its your people getting tired of fighting

Because there's no reason to think that it would solve anything.
I hate you, too

>Because there's no reason to think that it would solve anything.
ur wrong

>Aquatic species when?
>Proper Insectoid species when?
>Parasitic species when?
>Retro sci-fi species when?
>Gas Giant dwelling species when?
>Celestial species when?

The war shouldn't immedietly end when your logistics network starts to fail, you should start seeing combat penalties instead.

Why am I wrong? HoI4 is the only Paradox game I've played that competes with Stellaris for the title of 'lamest waste of processing power.' Most of their games suck. There is literally no reason to take your ideas seriously.

Well... that's what I mean. The problem is that they named / abstracted / conceptualised / flavoured it incorrectly, not that it is a bad mechanic.
It doesn't do a good job of representing what it says it represents, but it does do a good job of preventing the "All wars are 100% wars" effect that dogged 1.9.

Machine city and ship design when?

>Why am I wrong? HoI4 is the only Paradox game I've played that competes with Stellaris for the title of 'lamest waste of processing power.' Most of their games suck. There is literally no reason to take your ideas seriously.
What does this have to do with adding proper peace negotiations to the game?

>The problem is that they named / abstracted / conceptualised / flavoured it incorrectly, not that it is a bad mechanic.
>I don't care about substance, I only care about the way people talk about substance
Kill yourself, you're an idiot.
>It doesn't do a good job of representing what it says it represents, but it does do a good job of preventing the "All wars are 100% wars" effect that dogged 1.9.
So you're saying that it was impossible to lose a war in 1.9? I don't understand.
You referred to one of their other garbage games as a point of reference.