Hey @Wiz, did you ever get chance to look into reducing how often Ironman mode saves? Or even a way to reduce how often it does? Every month makes trying to play that way pretty clunky on my PC.
-
We have updated our Community Code of Conduct. Please read through the new rules for the forum that are an integral part of Paradox Interactive’s User Agreement.
I couldn't see "In Banks, your flag color will affect the coloring and lighting of your ships, as well as the color of the engine trails they leave." I read only about the engine trails?
"Countries that cannot normally conquer planets are now able to conquer Fallen Empires, Awakened Empires and Hive Minds"
STOP calling it countries
STOP calling it countries
Someone on reddit did a summary: https://www.reddit.com/r/Stellaris/comments/5t48ww/speculationstream_tooltips_banks_v15_ascension/
As I've said, 3 core systems in 1.4 could be as few as 3 planets or as many as 18. I don't understand why people continue to read "core systems" as "core planets" when there's a massive difference. 1.5 will basically make it so the minimum late game without upgrading your core system limit is 9 (home system without any terraformable barren planets, three systems of Ringworlds).
I was wondering about that. First, what are countries in this context and secondly what kind of 'country' cannot normally conquer planets? I do not understand this comment at all."Countries that cannot normally conquer planets are now able to conquer Fallen Empires, Awakened Empires and Hive Minds"
STOP calling it countries
A country will be an Empire. Perhaps this comment implies that there are some empires that aren't allowed to declare wars because of ethics, civics etc. However, these empires will be able to have it out with the folks listed above.
Yeah - I, too - I mean, There are What ? - Up to 3 colonizable Worlds in a single System and a Bunch of possible Habitats (later) + Government-Forms/Civics/Techs, Which are increasing the Cap even further - It's currently more interesting to know, How many Worlds are possible, Which I could or have to manage in the End.
Mentioning that there will be a 1.6 update in a 1.5 patch notes thread fills me with dread.
So can I expect a buggy/broken launch of Utopia or will the 1.5 release build actually be stable with no overtly broken systems (i.e. slavery / purging) or game breaking bugs?
Also, on a minor note, did that "Survey Minerals" quest ever get fixed? The one where if you'd already surveyed or explored or traded galaxy maps to reveal the area then the quest just didn't register that you'd surveyed the minerals, leaving the broken quest just hanging there all game.
So can I expect a buggy/broken launch of Utopia or will the 1.5 release build actually be stable with no overtly broken systems (i.e. slavery / purging) or game breaking bugs?
Also, on a minor note, did that "Survey Minerals" quest ever get fixed? The one where if you'd already surveyed or explored or traded galaxy maps to reveal the area then the quest just didn't register that you'd surveyed the minerals, leaving the broken quest just hanging there all game.
In 500 hours with the setting at 100% habitable planets, the highest number were 3 colonizable planets per system, maybe there was a 4 planet system but if so it is so very rare i can´t remember it. Most systems have no planets (which is fine). After that most systems have only 1 colonizable planet, 2 planet system drop significantly in their number and then there are 3 planet systems, which are in my actual 1000 stars vanilla game there are less than 10.
Regardless of that, unless the increase core limit techs are available right from the start, it really makes fast expansion more difficult.
In late game when everything is built up it doesn´t matter. Then i could live easier with 3 cores than early game where i could make easily use of 10+ core worlds.
It shouldn't. Multiple releases shows that the dev team is both excited and keen about what they are working on, and focussed on serving their users. It works this way:
- If you are developing something, especially if it is something intended for entertainment and it is big and complex, you are never fully finished. Assuming you maintain enthusiasm for the basic "thing", you always have ideas about how it could be made better or how the subtle "proud nails" that you see could be eased.
- If left entirely alone, you could easily carry on developing, tweaking and buffing your creation until the cows come home of their own accord. Even if you haven't got any cows.
- In order to share your creation (and get reward for it, get feedback about it and a host of other good stuff), you need to pull off an act of supreme discipline and freeze the development at some point. To hold up all the other ideas you have and pick some "interim model" that is, in itself, complete and fully functional, to share with others.
- This interim version should, of course, be as bug free and balanced within itself as you can make it. But that doesn't mean you have to be fully happy with it. You will still have loads of ways you can see how to improve it. If you don't, then either you lack creativity or your motivation for the product has worn out. A lack of new ways to improve your creation is a failing - perhaps the worst possible failing - you can have.
So, wanting the devs not to have ideas for the next version is wanting them to fail. To lack enthusiasm for their product. Personally, I am delighted that they have the enthusiasm and care enough to want to keep improving the games they make. Add to that the fact that they listen to feedback here on the forums and have a proven record of good judgement in picking the "commercial" features for their games, while making the games moddable enough for enthusiasts to cater for more "niche" tastes - Paradox deserve the success they are having!
i didn't understood the difference because this is not my native language, now i understand , they buffed system improvements giving them chance to have multiple planets in small space directly under theyr controll ( habitats, ringworld , posibility to terraform barren worlds) to make some midgame focus, you want to wage wars, or upgrade your sistems ?
1° i'd like to say that even in ironman you can change the % of habitable planets , 125% it's usualy great.
2° you can expand however you want, you have just to put sectors on planets that you have already build up and manage the new colony.
3° expansion decrease your research speed, and if you use your research time to increase your core systems , you will fall behind , reduciong the rush and strength of tall builder .
Because if you care about managing the planets in your empire, rather than letting the sector AI set the all up bar perhaps 5 (which a lot of people don't), you have to use around 1-2 of your core system cap for your new colonies, at least until they reach planetary administration, so you can build all the buildings you want built where you want them, before putting them in sectors with the instructions not to redevelop.
The thing is, if you only have 3 core systems, that means 1 for your capital (which will almost always be alone in its system until you move it to a ringworld) and either 1 or 2 for your colonies, which will be alone in their system unless you run the colonisation of all planets in the system simultaneously (depends on your empire capacity, but often not worth doing early game anyway - you want to be spreading your borders rather than concentrating on development).
Also this is an early game problem. Late game the system cap will be back to 5 anyway.
Even if you set it to 500% this is still rare, which is what I said earlier in the thread, but the fact that it is possible with any sort of settings means we need to account for the possibility of running across such a system as well as someone basing their capital on a world in such a system. The changes to 1.5 make it clear that we're more likely to see stars with 4, 5, or even 6 inhabitable worlds at 100% if you get lucky to have three inhabitable ones spawned in there and then barren worlds turn out to be candidates for terraforming, on top of constructing habitats.
By your logic you'd have to hold those systems until you could colonize all the planets anyways if you don't like the sector AI, which is pretty suboptimal in that it prevents you from colonizing more systems unless you immediately give them over to the sector AI anyways. No matter what you do, every playstyle forces you to have to deal with the Sector AI and all that matters is when.
We know those are no longer accurate. Expansion is completely wrong, for instance.