Showing 1-20 of 1,285 entries
Heh, I tried what you mentioned, Bozobub. Beelined planets by volume, ended up with 9/6 overexpansion, tanking popularity, and a food supply that made pops every 5 turns because of ash planets burning my food. Then I discovered what was actually causing me to fall behind...

The main reason was since the overexpansion penalty said "Number of colonized star systems and sanctuaries", I thought it applied *per sanctuary planet*. Turns out it works the same way as the rest of the empires, just has a crappy description. :)

Thanks for the info, guys. Now I have something I can work with.
Sep 21 @ 11:04am
In topic Any up to date guides on the Umbral Choir?
I'm fairly new to the game all-around, but I'm having a *hell* of a time trying to figure out how to play the umbral choir. I get the general gist of it: Find high food planets, build sanctuaries, focus pops on those sanctuaries to get more pops faster, let enemy colonize your sanctuaries, stockpile sleepers, invade to generate shadows, etc.

I'm having huge problems actually getting sanctuaries running though. In my current game by turn 11 I found *one* colonizable system (with starting tech) of the ~20 I've explored, with no minors or black holes (which seem like the best beacon systems) to exploit. In a previous game I found a great monsoon unique planet... 17 turns away with hacking. In that time my riftborn neighbor managed to build an outpost in the system and make it into a colony by the time I still had 8 turns left on my hack.

In the games where I've been able to get a decent footing into an enemy empire, they out-tech the hell out of me. Probably the last moderately "successful" game I had, I was rocking 4k power fleets when they got anti-cloaking level 3... with 20k power fleets. So yeah, obviously I'm doing something very wrong, I just can't figure out what.

People talk about getting multiple pops per turn; I find myself getting 1 pop per 2 turns (rolling at 200~300 food at best). People talk about crippling enemy empires with hacking; It takes me like 5 turns to hack a neighbor, and 10+ to hack anything further out.

I'm just having trouble figuring out what I'm missing. My current strategy is to rush xenolinguistics for the industry improvement, rush baryonic shielding for warp, then focus on techs that give me food improvements. For hacking I prioritize finding new planets for sanctuaries (and food planets among them) and black holes for science production. If I need to hack something further out, I build a back-door in the closest planet I can find (though it usually only lasts ~10 turns before it gets destroyed).

Should I be focusing different techs? Should I be trying to get more than one backdoor for the faster hacking speed? I have no idea how much a backdoor improves hacking speed on neighbors, since it doesn't say. I have no idea what utility there is in offensive hacks either, since the only places I can put them are places that also happen to automatically start backtracing, and the +30% speed or whatever bonus never seems worth just hacking from a closer backdoor.
May 2 @ 6:22am
In topic How did we die?
Originally posted by bri:
You wouldn't see anything about voting to approve/disapprove as those votes are automated based on your selected attitude (or auto-generated if you don't set one). Only law change votes are actually sent to you to vote on.

As far as what might have happened:

1) title revoked-there are some limited circumstances where you have no option to refuse
2) overlord lost a war that also lost you your province(s) such as a holy war
3) you inherited a feudal title of a higher rank

Or (especially possible if playing an older version) you ran into one of the numerous bugs that make playing an MR an exercise in frustration at times

I see. I don't think my liege was in a holy war (though he might have been in a tyranny war at the time), and I don't think I got a king-tier title. There could have been some exceptional revocation thing I guess, or if the council approved revocation of my title and I didn't catch it.

Is there any way to find out the next time it happens (even after the fact)? We're going to start from the previous autosave next time and see what happens. I don't so much mind the losing as not knowing why, and if I know why I can at least *try* to stop it from happening.
May 2 @ 6:05am
In topic How did we die?
So, playing a game last night as the republic of Amalfi (I was the duke under the Byzantines and my friend was playing a patrician) we both spontaneously got a game over. No wars, no nothing, and the game over screen freezes the entire interface which makes it hard to investigate the current situation. Anyone have any ideas what might have happened?

- My friend originally thought he died, and maybe I died at the same day, but my portrait was fine and neither of us were sick.
- I originally suspected the emperor revoked my title, but again my portrait was fine, and I never got the option to refuse it and go to war. He does have religious revocation enacted, but it also requires council approval and I never saw anything about it despite being on my liege's council.
Apr 29 @ 2:46am
In topic What lack of content
I'm a relatively recent player of paradox games, as my first at-launch game was EU4. Between those releases though (EU4, Stellars, HoI4), this game is by far the most underdeveloped. There's three reasons for this I think:

1. So many things are the same no matter who you play. Everyone has the same unit types, same trade goods, etc. Even religions are all basically the same, you can get omens from the war god or the food god, etc., but invariably it's all the exact same actions with a different paint job. Hell, even Paradox admitted as much, passing it off by arguing that religion wasn't super important during this time or some such ♥♥♥♥♥♥♥t, but we all know that argument for what it is: ♥♥♥♥♥♥♥t. Screw this, I'm gonna go out to sea on my one boat type.

2. The UX is unbelievably awful. Hey, I've got an idea! Let's move an army on to another army, but if you happen to right click over the other army's icon instead of the province underneath it, let's make sure nothing happens and give a really grating sound effect instead! While we're at it, why don't we make it so said icon is absurdly large too. Sounds fantastic! I don't remember if EU4 had these kinds of issues at launch; I vaguely recall it might've, but it's absurd for a game to have this half a decade later.

3. Probably the biggest one, the game lacks any real identity. HoI4 may have launched with an anemic amount of content, but it unapologetically stood for what it was; a WW2 combat simulator with fantastic dynamic mechanics. Sure, it was hopelessly unbalanced and half the world had zero playability, but what was there was unique and memorable. Stellaris brought in 4X mechanics and with them, a beautiful custom tech trree and dynamic civilization growth full of flavor and fun (even if it did get old fast in its first iteration). EU4 was very straightforward and simplistic, but full of high-level agency and strategy, with things like a complex trade system and all kinds of crazy idea synergies. CK2 (though I didn't quite play launch, I did play pre-old-gods vanilla) had all kinds of cool RPG mechanics and dynastic intrigue.

Imperator, by contrast, tries to put its hand into many of those pots at once, and fails to really deliver anything of substance. The character mechanics are anemic compared to CK2. Trade mechanics are dull compared to EU4, and the different playable states have less diversity than *any* of their games (sans launch CK2 I guess).

And this is really damning because, while the other two can be fixed with typical paradox DLC, the third is trickier. While it's not impossible (look at stellaris for an example of a total overhaul coming from DLC) it's very unlikely for them to change a game so much its underlying core concept changes, and even their biggest DLCs haven't done something of that level.
Apr 19 @ 6:31pm
In topic Up-to-date svitjod 767 strategy?
Thanks for the advice, everyone.

So if I *don't* go for denmark or saxony (them being way too strong), what's a good target for my non-ambition subjugation war? Just burn it on someone in finland? I feel like I need to use it on *someone* or else I'm wasting it, because declaring a subjugation war in your kingdom with the become king ambition burns the freebie for some stupid reason.
Apr 18 @ 7:46pm
In topic Up-to-date svitjod 767 strategy?
I've read a lot of strategies on svitjod starts, and all of them involve subjugating sjaelland. I *think* all of them are out of date though:

- Raising tribal armies; can't do that anymore.
- Revoking vassal titles and direct-controlling everyone; revocation requires legalism 1 (I don't know if this ever used to not be the case).

Someone else mentioned using raiding armies to kill his stacks before declaring a war, but sjaelland always attacks one of the other big swedish dukes well before I can even get my raiders there and has a consolidated army (which is usually around 2x mine).

Is there a better strategy these days?
Mar 20 @ 5:05am
In topic Epic Games Exclusive
You could just get the epic launcher. For free.

Calling storefront exclusivity "anti-consumer" is ridiculous. Is it annoying? Sure, I don't terribly like the epic store all that much, but it's about as much of a transgression as some retailer choosing to exclusively sell their stuff at <brick and mortar store here>. You know, stuff that's been going on since before you were born, will continue to go on after you die, and which the rest of the world is entirely okay with. It costs you literally nothing to grab the epic store, other than an incredibly marginal management annoyance. But hey, vidjagames, and how dare they cause me minor inconveniences with their anti-consumer practices!

And don't even get me started on the whole nonsense about monpolies. There's nothing more ironic than FUDding about a monopoly on the most dominant games marketplace io the history of the world.
Mar 14 @ 8:28pm
In topic Dwarf Fortress or RimWorld?
If you must choose, pick Rimworld. Dwarf Fortress has amazing complexity and depth of gameplay, but it sorely lacks in a lot of important quality-of-life aspects; the UI is hot garbage (even by text roguelike standards!) and the game has serious performance issues that keep you from scaling very high. Rimworld has much better polish on that front and the game is better designed as a complete package.

DF is still in development, but the speed of updates is absolutely *glacial* nowadays, probably owing to the significant amounts of tech debt and complexity the game has accrued over the years. Rimworld on the other hand is "done" as far as I know.

Don't get me wrong, DF is still a good game, and honestly I prefer it to Rimworld. However, while I can generally say a DF fan will like Rimworld, I can't say the reverse is true. DF is a much harder sell, and as sad as it is to say, that's mostly due to the terrible user experience.
Feb 20 @ 8:37pm
In topic What's the appeal?
To clarify, I'm not saying the game has no appeal.

I played a lot in the beta, got burned out, and never really got back into the game while frequently entertaining the idea of dipping my toes back into it. I'm entertaining that idea yet again (because god knows if I don't, I'll end up playing GE or something, and that sounds like all kinds of regret), but I'd like to ask: For those of you who enjoy the game and are playing to a high level, why is that? What about the game keeps you in? I haven't really followed the progression of content as this game has been out, so I don't really know what the focus is on now.

Is it PvP? PvE? Grinding progression? Social elements?
The A-10 was a godsend in the early game when you need to kill loads of ground-based targets and haven't unlocked the more advanced stuff, since not many early craft have multi-target ground weapons.

That said, I only used it once or twice. Once I unlocked the F-35 I never looked back.
Originally posted by TheRibbonRed:
Except that's what some of us wants.

Saying that "it's required" would mean that Air Combat, Ace Combat 2, and Ace Combat 4 shouldn't exist in the first place.

To be honest, my take on this is to alternate between the two. Maybe do two cheesy ones and then do two straight-to-missions kinda deal? Having 7 of them back-to-back going on about how serious [insert conspiracy war here] only to follow up with another nonsensical conspiracy war is just tiring, and not very good for the world building--so much so that 'Strangereal' (a term coined by ACS) might as well just be 'Strange' for how its economics form through continuous wars yet still have the majority of its residents not be war-mongering aliens instead.

A lot of the AC5 fans would argue that they haven't seen a proper AC game directed at them since 0. 6 was very much the cut-and-dry mission-to-mission thing, and the story was basically just a backdrop. Why do you think so many AC5 fans are so excited about this one?

And yes, it's "required" in that if you're going to have a story in a game largely about dogfights, that story is going to need to provide some kind of in-world justification for the gameplay (that justification being larger-than-life "aces"). If you're not going to have a story, then no it doesn't matter all that much.

You can have your cake and eat it too, though. AC5 had arcade mode for a reason, to satisfy people like you who want that experience. Why not ask for that instead?
Jan 12 @ 7:18pm
In topic This or PS4 version?
Originally posted by Aya Shameimaru:
I mean, i personally plan on getting it on PC because the price of not buying it is too high

What do you mean by that?
Jan 12 @ 7:17pm
In topic This or PS4 version?
Thanks for the info, everyone! I'll probably get the PC or PS4 version depending on whether I run out of things to play in the two-week interval before releases.

Originally posted by Bookkid900:
If you preorder the PS4 version, you also get a code for Ace Combat 5: The Unsung War as well.

Neat, I didn't know that. I still have my AC5 PS2 disk, but having another copy would be nice since that'll eventually go kaput eventually.

Originally posted by The Moon:
you get less performance and no joystick on PS4, and playing online will cost money

why would you even consider that

Oh yeah, PS plus. I always forget that's a thing because I don't really play any online multiplayer games on my PS4, but it's definitely a strong point.
Jan 9 @ 1:41am
In topic This or PS4 version?
Originally posted by TheRibbonRed:
If you're looking for Multiplayer only, then PS4 it is. Why? Because Bamco games never have anti-cheat (except Dark Souls, but even there it was due to From Software going out of their way)--they rely too much on console encryptions for that.

Add free AC5 and VR portion and you really can't go home less than the PC version. They even accept joysticks, albeit only Thrustmaster so far.
Originally posted by SlyCooperFan1:
You should be aware that AC7 will be locked to 30fps on the standard and slim PS4s. If you have a Pro, this won't be a problem as you'll be locked to 60fps instead. Just something to keep in mind.

These are both good things to know, thanks. I'm rocking an older DirectInput Saitek joystick, so it definitely won't be compatible with the PS4, but I'm glad it has some support. Disheartening to hear there's no anti-cheat on PC though.

Doesn't make the decision any easier, but c'est la vie. :)
Jan 8 @ 7:34pm
In topic This or PS4 version?
I'm having a bit of trouble deciding what platform to buy AC7 on. I figure:
1. PC will let me use my joystick, if I even still have it.
2. PC will have marginally better fidelity (hopefully).
3. PS4 doesn't have Denuvo.
4. PS4 will probably be more stable, because TRCs are a thing.
5. PS4 comes out earlier.

What do you guys think? Obviously there's going to be a bias here for steam, but I'm coming into this question aware of that fact.
Unless you're trying to cheese a tech rush with debris research, you have like 5 research options at the most, and 3 at game start. That's not the kind of numbers game where sorting has any effect on readability whatsoever.
This is a common problem in paradox games -- they like to chase features because that's what makes them money in their DLC model, but it can leave their fundamentals in the dust.

This is why every paradox game has a laundry list of needed UX improvements. Worse still in stellaris because they've spent so much time reimagining the game that not only is the AI terrible, but the multiplayer is basically unplayable past 150 years or so (at best, gets worse with more than two players).

So I guess the intended gameplay is uh... space sim city? Play inward perfection and pretend you're alone in the galaxy?
Dec 24, 2018 @ 12:32pm
In topic Does pop growth ever stop?
My hive mind game definitely had a "stop all growth indefinitely" planetary decision, but I'm not sure if that was because of playing a hive mind or because of some other tech I picked up. Normally, you only have a decision to slow growth (that penalizes your pops' happiness.
Dec 24, 2018 @ 12:26pm
In topic Good progress milestones for 2.2?
Originally posted by pete3great:
Doomstacks and naval capacity are meaningless if you design your fleet to deal with the specific threat it faces. For et raw power, by 2500, you should have a technological advantage.

Interesting, I was well into the recurrent techs (x10 or so) when I was attacked, but I'm sure my fleet composition could've been better. I haven't played stellaris super-heavily since the old days of spamming torpedo corvettes everywhere (No, I didn't try that :) ). Can fleet comp really overcome a 2:1 fleet power disadvantage now?

That said, the question was more directed towards things like technology and mineral production, something like "1k science by 2300" for example. I have a good handle on what kind of milestones I target in games like EU4, but I always feel like I'm running blind in stellaris.
Showing 1-20 of 1,285 entries