- 4
-
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.
It's a lot easier to get said resources if the planet is first divided into manageable pieces. You don't see mining corporations process the whole mountain in one go no? Of course you blow it up to get to the juicy stuff inside. "Oh sorry, were you living there? Well oops, terribly sorry but we need the minerals, have some glass pearls and please sign this document"
Or my old favourite.
- Just because a military target is too far away for a practical demonstration.
Last edited:
- 10
- 1
I recon that the wormholes need to be created well outside of a gravity well and that it collapses quickly enough in any case for any star to start behaving (for example when the wormhole station insta-collapse due to the gravitational pull). Besides a wormhole itself is just heavily curved space. The real potential damage would be gravitational and thermal issues on YOUR side.
Kind of like in Spore where destroying a planet basically causes every nearby race to hate you?
I guess there should also be the option to evacuate a planets population as well.
Such a weapon would definitely need to be balanced so players have at least some defence. e.g. destroying it while it's charging or evacuating the planet/solar system if they are not able to destroy the weapon
Destroying planets is kind of an essential theme in Star Wars. Destroying Stars is also a major plot point of Star Trek VII
Last edited:
- 1
Destroying planets is kind of an essential theme in Star Wars. Destroying Stars is also a major plot point of Star Trek VII
There's quite a step between cracking a planet and destroying an entire star-system tho (which is what he quoted). As 99% or more of most discovered star-systems mass are the star itself the difference in energy required to destroy an entire star-system is quite different from the death-star or genesis device (although the latter has some real technical shenanigans going on being the size of a large fridge and creating an entire planet out of a nebula in less than a day).
Oh no problem with destroying a star system, you just have to manipulate the path of a neutron star to a collision course...
Last edited:
The control panel or the device? I remember the device itself as 1.5-3m tall and up to 1m wide at the base and top (with scaffolding) but I might be wrong.
In any case, a kickass device, so kickass it's strange it haven't made other appearences in the lore.
- 1
Kickass indeed... Though I recall the device fitting on a standard individual transporter pad, meaning it's about the size of a person, but probably a bit taller. Probably a little larger than a freezer side of most US side-by-side fridges. Either way my comment was meant in the spirit of fun and jest, not so much about the accuracy of anyone else's comment.
I love that Stellaris cites shows like Star Trek as a source of inspiration. It's definitely not setting out to be a rigorous science simulator, but a fun and engaging space romp (though one with a dark edge to it as well depending on play style).
I love that Stellaris cites shows like Star Trek as a source of inspiration. It's definitely not setting out to be a rigorous science simulator, but a fun and engaging space romp (though one with a dark edge to it as well depending on play style).
I was talking about game restriction.
Anyways destroying planets or stars outright seems strategically important. But I can't see it anything other than absolution in late games once in the hands of the AIs. Since the research is random, it's likely that there will be more than one super weapon. If planet destroyer is in the game, then I want there to be at least a weaponized terra-former. Kills everyone on it (the enemy empire loses grip on it almost immediately), and can only be repaired by a non-weapon form of terra-former.. and then you colonize, or somebody else.
Last edited:
I do think that superweapons should exist, but I think they should be incredibly time-consuming and expensive to build, requiring a number of rare (and thus difficult to obtain) resources.... Essentially, you either have an enormous Empire, or you basically bankrupt your smaller one building a planet-destroyer.
Then the superweapon should be vulnerable to an opposing force that can be built much more cheaply, so you have to be careful when you bring your superweapon into the field. You can't just bring it forward, blow up everything in sight, then move on to the next system.
It should be the sort of thing that is possible to build, but that is difficult enough to build that one will not appear in every single game.
Then the superweapon should be vulnerable to an opposing force that can be built much more cheaply, so you have to be careful when you bring your superweapon into the field. You can't just bring it forward, blow up everything in sight, then move on to the next system.
It should be the sort of thing that is possible to build, but that is difficult enough to build that one will not appear in every single game.
- 1
If we could, I bet there'd be an achievement to destroy all the stars in the galaxy but one.
Destroying stars doesn't work with the mechanics. Some races (notably mine) will be restricted to hyperlanes. In most galaxies, there will be choke points through these hyperlanes, and if you destroy the star the hyperlane connects to you destroy the hyperlanes. Remember, they said you can't change or add or subtract hyperlanes, which makes me think the hyperlanes were created by a super advanced race that might come back/wake up to destroy you.
- 3
Obviously with all the woo-woo of hyper-advanced technology we could rationalize even things which seem evidently impossible given what we know about physics, etc. I don't think it will ever be possible, as the energy required to disrupt a massive and relatively stable system like a star (stars may not be stable in the very long-term, but in the timeframe of the game, stars are stable for hundreds of millions, to billions of years. The system is largely self-correcting. It would be very hard to disrupt it to the point where it would collapse or explode, and require a stupid amount of energy. And if we have access to that kind of energy, the notion of duking it out oldschool-style with massive ship battles just seems antiquated. So I feel like the concept fits into the game's setting, even if physically possible given some criteria, but that is just my instinct.
So, should you be able to do this in the game? No, probably not. Mechanically all it does is make the game less interesting by removing parts of the playing field. I realize that some people may like it thematically, but it doesn't add anything to the game, and may conflict with other mechanics (as was mentioned by the possibility of hyperlane travelers being 'cut off' from the rest of the galaxy.
Are there mechanical solutions to possible mechanical problems? Yes, probably.
Could we imagine up some future-technology that could blow up a planet or star? Yes, probably.
Is it worth it? Nah, not in my opinion.
So, should you be able to do this in the game? No, probably not. Mechanically all it does is make the game less interesting by removing parts of the playing field. I realize that some people may like it thematically, but it doesn't add anything to the game, and may conflict with other mechanics (as was mentioned by the possibility of hyperlane travelers being 'cut off' from the rest of the galaxy.
Are there mechanical solutions to possible mechanical problems? Yes, probably.
Could we imagine up some future-technology that could blow up a planet or star? Yes, probably.
Is it worth it? Nah, not in my opinion.
- 1
- 1
Now imagine this, your awesome super empire has the military might that makes the galaxy tremble and nearly every empire has joined your federation out of sheer fear you own every system worth owning except that small sector with those weird isolated empire, the fire nation, that gets sun-eaters, while you are just conquering some far fetched planets, 30 of your core star systems go offline in a day.....
Why leave one?If we could, I bet there'd be an achievement to destroy all the stars in the galaxy but one.
Edit- the achievement could be called something like "If I can't have it..."
- 4
Planet destruction should exist to the point where your nukes, nanobot sludge, renegade AI, elder gods make the planet unfit for habitation or even exploitation. But essentially by doing this you're urinating in the communal pool when you do. Making planets uninhabitable for yourself, your enemy but also any other faction around that could colonize such a planet. This should get you a massive diplo hit in my opinion. Perhaps less so with your allies if you're in the process of losing a war but even then there ought to be an intersteller version of "Careful Now" and "Down with this sort of thing"
Two ways around this. First, perhaps the technology to destroy the system doesn't the system, just causes the star to go nova, collapse into a black hole, or something like that. So it just switches to to a new system, with hyper lanes intact. The other possibility is that the hyperlane grid adapts to the loss of a system and automatically forms new connections.
Probably the first would be better, since destroying enough systems would also make warp and wormhole impossible (they also have max range limits...)