• We’re currently investigating an issue related to the forum theme and styling that is impacting page layout and visual formatting. The problem has been identified, and we are actively working on a resolution. There is no impact to user data or functionality, this is strictly a front-end display issue. We’ll post an update once the fix has been deployed. Thanks for your patience while we get this sorted.

Stellaris - Paradox Space Grand Strategy

Page 3 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.
What DLCs are going to be released that the modding community cant create?

Perhaps none (maybe a better AI would have to wait on the Devs). So you could amend my statement to be "wait for either DLC or Mods to fix the problems).

So in other words, this is basically just like a Warlock: Master of the Arcane, but in space?

I never played that one so I don't know.
 
Loving this game so far. Only thing I am really missing is SOTS 1 style combat and it would instantly be number 1 for me in the space empire game group.

So far I have lost my first two games and much like DF losing is FUN!
 
In my first game I'm not convinced the empire management AI is all that hot either. I'm sandwiched between 2 neighbors with nasty personalities but they've only managed to expand to two worlds each and have completely stagnated out. Not quite sure what their issue is. They appear to have reasonable buffers on their far sides as well. I'm on a quad ring system and the other two empires I've encountered seem to be doing alright, but I've not observed any powerhouses yet. My core economy is extremely well developed but otherwise I've been passive and probably haven't expanded appropriately.

I think the problem with combat is it's basically the same type of number rolls system abstracted in EUIV. The problem with this is the player visually sees ships fighting it out so we think it should be doing more. Ideally I'd like to see some degree of fleet formations, auxiliary support fleets, and individual ship engagement stances that are set in the designer (crash, standard, standoff; ship target size priorities). The options they give you in weapon types and modules beg for this, I'm just not sure the way combat actually works would ever support this.

All said this game is still pretty fun. It's interesting comparing this to Distant Worlds. While playing you see some elements (especially economy) that you think wow, DW did this so much better. At the same time, Stellaris just introduces so many good concepts that make the game so much less fatiguing to play and presents most of its information so cleanly that you don't get bogged down in management hell.
 
Last edited:
Picked up the game last night. Really really wish it could use two monitors. It would be awesome to push all the status windows to my 2nd monitor so I could always interact with the map. Only had an hour or so with it so far though.
 
What DLCs are going to be released that the modding community cant create?

I'm a modder (well, very amateur but still). Basically in Paradox games like Crusader Kings 2 and Europa Universalis 4 (and Stellaris uses the same engine so the same principle applies), games are VERY moddable, you can change many numbers in the game and add many things that the game already has, but you can't change core mechanics. So, as a modder I can add new races, new naming groups, I can change how much bonus you get from events or even add new events, but I can't change how the AI does its job, I can't change the combat system, etc. Sometimes you can fool the system around with clever use of events and decisions, but this is very complicated and the source of many bugs (plus it potentially slows down the game depending on implementation). So yeah, for a better AI you need to wait. On the plus side, you don't have to buy DLCs for that, AI improvements are always part of the free patches.
 
Last edited:
After 5 hours I was really loving this game, but after 20 hours I realized that it needs another year of development to be worth the price of admission :/

There isn't much reason to keep playing it at this point until its finished.
 
After 5 hours I was really loving this game, but after 20 hours I realized that it needs another year of development to be worth the price of admission :/

There isn't much reason to keep playing it at this point until its finished.

And do you think Paradox Interactive was thinking about this exact same thing when they were developing the game?
 
After 5 hours I was really loving this game, but after 20 hours I realized that it needs another year of development to be worth the price of admission :/

There isn't much reason to keep playing it at this point until its finished.

Yah, I've really kinda stalled out in mid game. Reading a few reviews it seems a common complaint.
 
That reminds me that it seems that most of the work done for the Witcher 2 was in the beginning, especially for the prologue. A huge set piece, and its only used for a tiny part of the game. The next 2 sets are good for what they are, but neither has as much detail or attention. The 3rd act just kinda seems like there was not much work done on it at all.

That also reminds me the game ending after the 3rd act was so sudden the first time I played it. It was like I felt I was just getting to the middle of the game. But nope, game ends just like that.
 
In my first game I'm not convinced the empire management AI is all that hot either. I'm sandwiched between 2 neighbors with nasty personalities but they've only managed to expand to two worlds each and have completely stagnated out. Not quite sure what their issue is. They appear to have reasonable buffers on their far sides as well. I'm on a quad ring system and the other two empires I've encountered seem to be doing alright, but I've not observed any powerhouses yet. My core economy is extremely well developed but otherwise I've been passive and probably haven't expanded appropriately.

I think the problem with combat is it's basically the same type of number rolls system abstracted in EUIV. The problem with this is the player visually sees ships fighting it out so we think it should be doing more. Ideally I'd like to see some degree of fleet formations, auxiliary support fleets, and individual ship engagement stances that are set in the designer (crash, standard, standoff; ship target size priorities). The options they give you in weapon types and modules beg for this, I'm just not sure the way combat actually works would ever support this.

All said this game is still pretty fun. It's interesting comparing this to Distant Worlds. While playing you see some elements (especially economy) that you think wow, DW did this so much better. At the same time, Stellaris just introduces so many good concepts that make the game so much less fatiguing to play and presents most of its information so cleanly that you don't get bogged down in management hell.


Am I reading this correctly, they're doing a Gal Civ II type deal where they basically just play a video clip for combat determined by firepower/Dice roll, and that there is no actual combat (tactics)?

If that's the case . . . wow, did they miss the boat on this one, at least for me.
 
Am I reading this correctly, they're doing a Gal Civ II type deal where they basically just play a video clip for combat determined by firepower/Dice roll, and that there is no actual combat (tactics)?

If that's the case . . . wow, did they miss the boat on this one, at least for me.
Sort of... I haven't played this in a while nor am I completely familiar with GalCiv3 so I can't fully comment. My understanding was at the end of the day GC3 is basically a calculate combat system and that's the end of it. Stellaris plays out in real time and takes some time for larger battles to unfold. You can make some minor tweaks to what the fleet is doing and there is time for reinforcements to show up. Additionally, they seem to be working toward giving the player more direct and tactical control over combat, but we'll have to see how far they take it. Regardless, I would shelve this one until the first real expansion comes out and then reevaluate the game.
 
I still want the same thing I wanted before this game came out, SotS style tactical combat. I'm not a fan of this abstracted battle system it feels like Distant Worlds fleet combat but missing something I cannot put my finger on. But I still enjoy it. Though I do wish there was a little more diversity between empires but I'm sure that will come in time.
 
It has a really great "just one more turn" type of hook to it. Yes, I know there are no turns. I love the exploration, the planet building, the resource collection. But it never really expands on itself. The same thing you do in the first minute of a game is the same thing you do at the 4 hour mark, there's just more of the same. None of the systems, techs, or game mechanics really build on themselves.
 
You could say that about just about any strategy game, especially RTS's. I just finished wiping out the scourge in my current game, now I have to finish off the rest of the other races. I've got 80 hours in so far. Yeah, there's dry spots, but no different than any other large scale strategy game I've played.
 
Can I run Stellaris if my laptop runs a second generation i7 and a 485m gpu card?

Sent from my SM-G928T using Tapatalk
 
I just tried it out yesterday on a Gigabyte Brix with an AMD A8-5557M yesterday and it was running fine at 1080p with all settings on low. I doubt that would hold up late game, but I'd say you'd likely be fine on your laptop.
 
I just tried it out yesterday on a Gigabyte Brix with an AMD A8-5557M yesterday and it was running fine at 1080p with all settings on low. I doubt that would hold up late game, but I'd say you'd likely be fine on your laptop.
Thanks

Sent from my SM-G928T using Tapatalk
 
On sale again, same price as August, $23.99 - but $21.59 on humble bundle for monthly subscribers. Worth it? Seems likely.
 
I'm still playing multiplayer games with family members semi-regularly, not really any single player which is unusual for me for strategy games. I've definitely gotten my monies worth out of it but I'm running modded as well. Steam shows me at 329 hours played. I've got 454 hours on Endless Legend, 350 hours on Civ V, 218 hours on Fallen Enchantress, all of which are older so it stacks up pretty well in my book.

Sale is because they've got the first "major" expansion/DLC coming out this month.
 
Back
Top