• 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.

Johan

Studio Manager Paradox Tinto
Administrator
Paradox Staff
Moderator
15 Badges
Dec 14, 1999
21.772
240.708
  • Diplomacy
  • Teleglitch: Die More Edition
  • War of the Roses
  • 500k Club
  • Crusader Kings II: Holy Knight (pre-order)
  • Europa Universalis III: Collection
  • Magicka: Wizard Wars Founder Wizard
  • Hearts of Iron IV Sign-up
  • Stellaris Sign-up
  • Imperator: Rome Sign Up
  • A Game of Dwarves
  • Magicka
  • Starvoid
There’s so much more: observation posts to monitor planetbound species, either non-aggressively or with added abductions and invasive surgeries; pre-sentient species that can be genetically modified and controlled; genocide and enslavement.


Anal probe confirmed!

50607451.jpg
 
That’s when you may be able to form or become part of a galactic federation. You’ll also be dealing with trade, alliances, federations and border control, but federations offer grander possibilities. They are led by a president, elected from the member civilisations at regular intervals, and that player (or AI) has control of all foreign policy and of the federation fleet. When you design the ships for that fleet you have access to all the modules from every race in the federation, allowing for combinations unavailable elsewhere. Whether you choose to build a peacekeeping force, an ambassadorial outreach program or a terrifying overpowered fleet of battleships is entirely your choice, but it’s wise to keep in mind that you may lose the next election and cede control of your creations to another leader.

I really love this part, balancing supporting your federation with getting elected, or dealing with an idiotic president who could ruin your federation would be very interesting. Reminds me of my first game of CK2, I had united Ireland as elective monarchy, then I lost the elections and the new leader attacked the much stronger England. It was a challenge :)

Maybe could a very strong president declare an empire, creating a civil war between the federalists and the imperials.
 
Interesting, the ethics/traits of your species play a role in what sort of research your scientists do...

My mind is painting a picture of malevolent bioengineers creating a zombie plague virus. :D
 
I tried my best not to squeal while reading this article, but the non hype I had before is definitely gone.

But if I may can I ask if there will be a generated history like there is in dwarf fortress, where planets will perhaps have remnants of space Rome? Maybe even lost space Roman legionnaires? I'm kinda sadden that there won't be any assymetry, I was kinda looking forward to fighting space Byzantium.
 
So what keeps this from being like spore which was going for open ended but fell short? P'dox hasn't really had the best successes lately in avoiding unintended consequences of even less open ended design in EUIV.
 
TrollCat.jpg
 
Said it another thread, but this does sound really, really good :D. Just the whole 'you don't know which races you'll find when you go out exploring' is a great step forward, and if they can get a decent range of history/lore for each, it could be both enjoyably immersive and wonderfully varied and unpredictable.
 
I am stoked about that, too. You can be playing Star Trek one campaign, and Star Wars in another, while a third one might be closer to Blake's Seven or Doctor Who (minus the time travel, unfortunately). Anything is possible.
 
Does this mean that in some games we could have some pseudo-Borg in a three way war with the Pseudo-Chaos Gods and the Pseudo-Daleks? Also, Chrome seems to recognise Borg as a word but not Daleks or Dalek. Thought I'd share that with you.
 
So what keeps this from being like spore which was going for open ended but fell short? P'dox hasn't really had the best successes lately in avoiding unintended consequences of even less open ended design in EUIV.
Spore failed because it tried to make 5 different games at once and all of them turned out to be okay, if disappointing.
 
So, I can't help but notice the article specifically mentions on several occasions the terms "Faster-Than-Light" and "The Warp"--does this confirm Stellaris takes place in a combined FTL-40K setting, or just a FTL setting (complete with Federations and rebels!) with a warp, or a WH40K setting with FTL travel?
 
The article mentions that each star faring player chooses one of three methods of travel, either the slower warp space, natural star lanes, or created wormholes (like star gates?). Which one you choose determines which stars you can reach.

Edit- I guess combined.
 
Last edited:
So what keeps this from being like spore which was going for open ended but fell short? P'dox hasn't really had the best successes lately in avoiding unintended consequences of even less open ended design in EUIV.

First of all, the lead designer of this is the same guy from CK2, not EUIV. So any design issues that may exist with EUIV won't be carrying over. Secondly, I don't really know what you're talking about with Paradox not having the best successes. Paradox is bigger, more popular, and is making better games than it ever has. Stellaris is definitely super ambitious, and we should definitely be worried whether Paradox can deliver, but I think given how well Paradox has been doing lately and how far along the project seems to be we should at least be cautiously optimistic.
 
Whereas this is 9 games at once?

How so? While a player at the beginning of the game will face different challenges than at the end, the same fundamental mechanics will apply from start to finish. Spore had very distinct, separate sections. The bigger problem though was they dumbed the game down to a ridiculous extent while chasing the mythical casual gamer.
 
Last edited:
  • 1
Reactions:
Now that I think about it, without asymmetry what's to keep the AI from getting steam rolled.

Unless you guys have better AI now. Because you have that now right? Right guys?