Install Steam
login
|
language
简体中文 (Simplified Chinese)
繁體中文 (Traditional Chinese)
日本語 (Japanese)
한국어 (Korean)
ไทย (Thai)
Български (Bulgarian)
Čeština (Czech)
Dansk (Danish)
Deutsch (German)
Español - España (Spanish - Spain)
Español - Latinoamérica (Spanish - Latin America)
Ελληνικά (Greek)
Français (French)
Italiano (Italian)
Bahasa Indonesia (Indonesian)
Magyar (Hungarian)
Nederlands (Dutch)
Norsk (Norwegian)
Polski (Polish)
Português (Portuguese - Portugal)
Português - Brasil (Portuguese - Brazil)
Română (Romanian)
Русский (Russian)
Suomi (Finnish)
Svenska (Swedish)
Türkçe (Turkish)
Tiếng Việt (Vietnamese)
Українська (Ukrainian)
Report a translation problem
Discussions Rules and Guidelines
Report this post
"Honestly, to me it seems like you should lower the difficulty or become modest and realise you arent very good at your attempted playstyles."
There is no such thing as being "good at expansion" enough to clear through a Fallen Empire that holds the only route in and out of your space.
There is no "find other empires" when you are blocked off behind genocidals.
"I'm not going to give up just because the circumstances arent ideal or perfect for my intended playthrough."
We aren't talking about "not ideal" were talking about it being completely incompatible.
The RNG needs fixing, desperately. In my latest game, it left long periods of nothing happening, followed by Extradimensional Invaders and L-Cluster at the same time, both spawned in a place that meant they had to completely wipe my empire to even reach any others. It'd been a peaceful galaxy, so no one had a fleet even close to being able to take on both those crisis at the same time.
The game before that, they'd just released a broken patch, where the Prethoryn Scourge didn't even advance, because the devs had forgotten to code it properly. And the other empires didn't even upgrade or repair their buildings because the devs had pushed a broken update and then gone on holiday. Another dozens of hours down the drain.
How was I to know that they'd then buffed the pitiful end game crises that I faced before, to instant curb stomp fleet wipes the next time around.
Just because you were lucky and didn't encounter the game braking bugs and appalling balance that the rest of us have had ruin our playthroughs, does not give you the right to just tell everyone else to 'be better'. It's rude in the extreme, think before you speak.
- decrease the hyperlane density in the settings: this should ensure more choke points, and less corridors between galactic arms.
- play with the Non Clustered Start mod that ensures that empires spawn roughly evenly throughout the galaxy, as opposed to vanilla clustered start (several empires in the same area as yours), or non clustered start (random spawning, possibly still close to you). This allows you to expand and develop quite easily in the first decades.
There is no way you could be bad at something, right? Noone could be better then you and have a better experience as a result.
Dont you realisehow extremely rude that assumption is?
It presumes theres no need to learn anything because everyone whos more experienced or skilled in your perspective just straight up doesnt exist. Since you are already the best, it automatically means any fault must lie with another party. In this case the game, and now me.
You dont agree with my arguments therefor I must have been lucky. Because there is no way I could actually have a right or qualification that equals or supersedes your own.
People like that do not exist!
I would say 2,500 hours in this game gives me plenty of right to talk about the game's balance and its RNG or lack thereof and how it effects the game.
And whether or not you needing to get better at the game is relevant or not.
Tho ironically this is not an argument I would actually use in a deep discussion between peers as those people also have many hours in the game. (perhaps even several times my own) But it does serve rather well when it comes to people that dont argue but just complain without decent arguments to base those complaints off.
Plus, even someone newer to the game could potentially make some really good arguments. Perhaps ones that someone like me didnt think of.
Exceptional rare to the point people make posts about it on reddit, complete with screenshots just to farm karma.
Which happens how often? This is also something you can influence by forcing empires to spawn. The game gives you the option to effect this to large extend.
That is what you seem to think you are talking about, but from my perspectives what you describe is either ''not ideal'' or unrealistic. (only going to happen once in a blue moon)
I have seen nothing to suggest that. In fact the opposite. RNG in galaxy creation can create a variety of situations and alter the playthroughs so they dont all feel identical even with different builds. But not to the extend it heavily limits variety in builds.
Again, the only place where I would agree that variety is limited is against high modifier crisis on lower endgame date. Because at that point skill and experience only means so much. Builds that are very inefficient just wont cut it anymore. Some RNG factors can make too much difference at that point.
If you have not played at that level of difficulty, then yes its your skill and experience level that is getting in the way of your enjoyment. There is no shame in dropping down the difficulty when that is the case.
If you arent competing for being the best player at a game I dont see why you would care being told to become better so you can have a better experience.
What is the point in having false pride?
Most my last games were peaceful. In one of them I even took part in not a single war. I was still able to handily beat a 5x Crisis. The Grey Tempest is also FAR weaker then the endgame Crisis is, so I dont see why these 2 together would be a problem.
The L-Gates are spawned from the start of the game. Meaning you can account for the threat they pose. Especially if they activate late enough to coincide with the endgame crisis.
Bugs and balance issues are something a lot of people critise the game for. Me amongst them. I dont see how you could think using that as an argument against me is supposed to help. That aside, that game must have been a while ago as I dont remember these particular bugs.
By playing the game more? Why are you surprised that when the game changes a lot, you suddenly have different things to learn? Its no different for the rest of us.
Also, keep in mind that Crisis strength has a multiplier in game creation. Are you sure you didnt just set it higher, then didnt encounter the Crisis for a few games and forgot you changed the setting? (because settings persist between games if not changed again)
What makes you think you have the right to say that everyone else had the same experience you did?
I'm somewhat intrigued. Im not beyond making a statement like that myself, but personally I always feel like I can make atleast a decent argument to support my claim in that case.
It might just not be for you OP, but there are plenty of us who enjoy spending dozens of hours on ironman games that can go south at a moments notice due to lack of planning, missing something vital or sometimes just plain bad luck.
Remember: Losing is FUN
The both of you seem to be arguing past one another to some extent. I get that randomness is basically "part of the package" and can even be desirable. A compelling argument can be made that the "true" experience of the game is creating your own faction, then adapting them during gameplay to deal with whatever universe they happen to be stuck in. It certainly helps with replay value.
But, on the other hand, what is so wrong about having additional, optional control over a game's singleplayer settings? In a game that is going to be a significant time-sink, why shouldn't players be able to customize it to the point of having a specific, desired scenario?
Not to mention a bunch of game settings to tweak and customize your playing experience
By making new players lose every game, 100%, no RNG involved, is that accurate?
More options are usually good, but it's not universally so. Options that allow players to take hurdles out of the game are always something to be careful with.
You aren't researching quick enough crisis spawns and i easily have enough tech to absolutely stomp MID game. keep beefing up create vassals that feed you and you are set. i find solo games rather boring it feels to easy
Its good to resist the urge to respond to posts like that. Dont become like me who can never succeed that Willpower check. You just end up wasting a lot of time on talking to a wall.
Could you perhaps link what imaginary posts you saw that gave that impression in your head?
I thought it was clear enough that my advice to get better at the game was just that: advice that would end up helping them. After all, to reitterate my earlier point: their skill/experience being relatively low compared to their difficulty level is core to most of their issues with the game.
Their posts are about playstyles in the game being too dependent on RNG. And that is just not the case. Relying on RNG is a sign of not being good enough to comfortable play casually on that difficulty level. Or with that specific build.
Which are all arguments ive already used before. So if you are really eager to argue that further, I suggest reading those posts that you apparently skipped.