hate these ads?, log in or register to hide them
Page 1 of 3 123 LastLast
Results 1 to 20 of 56

Thread: FHC Stellars #4 MP: Distant Salt!

  1. #1
    Bentguru's Avatar
    Join Date
    April 25, 2011
    Posts
    2,512

    FHC Stellars #4 MP: Distant Salt!

    New DLC = New MP game, lets get goin. We'll be doing a couple extra things with this round, most importantly using some mods from the following list: https://steamcommunity.com/sharedfil...?id=1379957839. We will definitely be using the AI mod which has been updated for 2.1, I'd like to use the others as well but we will see if they are updated in time. I will be force spawning AI empires I have made which have been consistent threats in my SP games, which will both give us real threats and not RNG alternate empires for defeated players to swap into.

    This will be on a large/huge map (depending on # of players) but it will be significantly more thunderdome than previous games. I cannot stress this enough, do not take the AI lightly, it can and will kill you. Also, mid game and late game start times will be moved up significantly, to 2235 for mid and 2300 for late. And the crisis will be 5x. This is a hostile universe, and somewhat more unknown with the new DLC, and it will be up to you to survive.

    Start time is 1pm EST this coming sunday.

  2. #2
    Nobody_Holme's Avatar
    Join Date
    April 11, 2011
    Location
    Swansea, Wales, UK
    Posts
    5,660
    For reference, the improved AI, which it really isnt cheating, is really bad at coping alone, and very reliant on defensive pact blobs (so realisticly like us). It will, however, take any opportunity you give it and press, and its a not a dick with allyblob invasions, I've found, so all around pretty fun, and makes pacifists more viable than usual if you can get enough ground in time to use your +core planets fully.

    That said, I'm in, playing either some crazy religious bullshit, or my personal favourite, Inward Perfection and tell everyone to fuck off.

    We'll see how I feel on Sunday.

  3. #3
    Bentguru's Avatar
    Join Date
    April 25, 2011
    Posts
    2,512
    Quote Originally Posted by Nobody_Holme View Post
    For reference, the improved AI, which it really isnt cheating, is really bad at coping alone, and very reliant on defensive pact blobs (so realisticly like us). It will, however, take any opportunity you give it and press, and its a not a dick with allyblob invasions, I've found, so all around pretty fun, and makes pacifists more viable than usual if you can get enough ground in time to use your +core planets fully.

    That said, I'm in, playing either some crazy religious bullshit, or my personal favourite, Inward Perfection and tell everyone to fuck off.

    We'll see how I feel on Sunday.
    I have had this AI form 3 empire coalitions and invade me where every empire was equivalent. It can be brutal, but it's more like a human in the beginning, focusing on growing economy over early military strength

  4. #4
    Brockosaurus's Avatar
    Join Date
    August 21, 2013
    Posts
    592
    I am interested in this salty event.
    You should only be harsh when, as often happens, kindness proves useless.
    -Prince Eugene of Savoy

  5. #5
    Movember 2011 RazoR's Avatar
    Join Date
    April 10, 2011
    Location
    The Motherland
    Posts
    29,177
    I should really make this.

    What mods exactly? Subbed to all but the debris and musac.
    Last edited by RazoR; May 23 2018 at 02:52:57 AM.

  6. #6
    Bentguru's Avatar
    Join Date
    April 25, 2011
    Posts
    2,512
    Quote Originally Posted by RazoR View Post
    I should really make this.

    What mods exactly? Subbed to all but the debris and musac.
    The 4 core mods are AI, Dynamic political events + potent rebellions, and the MOAR WEAPONZ mod (basically adds on more late game weapons). The rest don't affect gameplay, i just think they're cool.

  7. #7
    Brockosaurus's Avatar
    Join Date
    August 21, 2013
    Posts
    592
    I still think we should play on a Medium if we have a similar number of people. I think it would be less laggy late game, and frankly I just don't like big maps that much.
    You should only be harsh when, as often happens, kindness proves useless.
    -Prince Eugene of Savoy

  8. #8
    Shaftoes's Avatar
    Join Date
    April 9, 2011
    Location
    Ships
    Posts
    1,649
    I prefer small maps with no AI or medium if we get too many people. Single fallen empire (they are less of an issue after the border changes on small maps) and optional mauraders.

    Anything larger and the mid game stretches into forever and people lose interest. Ideally you want to get to the stage where everyone has borders with their neighbours by the end of the first session so you can start the patented FHC DIPLOMACY phase.

  9. #9
    Bentguru's Avatar
    Join Date
    April 25, 2011
    Posts
    2,512
    Here's why i want larger maps:

    1) FHC Diplo is boring as shit, we get into 2-3 large hugboxes and sit doing nothing until one side attacks and wins the game in a single war. yawn. The AI will spice it up.

    2) Lots of challenging AI keeps the mid-game chugging, as players will have other non-player targets to fight against, thus keeping more players engaged for longer.

    3) We're going to need the industrial capacity of a bigger map to fight off these crisis.

    4) Last game we had trouble finding spots for players after they died, even in the early period. I want to keep the map big so when people die they have somewhere that's not shit right off the bat to go. That's the same reasoning behind me force-spawning good empires as well.

    5) As pointed out before, I'm setting the "mid-game" year to 2250, and the "end-game" year to 2300. Things are going to get interesting and stay interesting fast.

  10. #10
    Movember 2011Movember 2012 Nordstern's Avatar
    Join Date
    April 10, 2011
    Posts
    9,002
    Quote Originally Posted by Bentguru View Post
    5) As pointed out before, I'm setting the "mid-game" year to 2250, and the "end-game" year to 2300. Things are going to get interesting and stay interesting fast.
    Cripes. This is going to be more intense than Mad Max: Fury Road.
    "Holy shit, I ask you to stop being autistic and you debate what autistic is." - spasm
    Quote Originally Posted by Larkonis Trassler View Post
    WTF I hate white people now...

  11. #11
    Brockosaurus's Avatar
    Join Date
    August 21, 2013
    Posts
    592
    Quote Originally Posted by Bentguru View Post
    Here's why i want larger maps:

    1) FHC Diplo is boring as shit, we get into 2-3 large hugboxes and sit doing nothing until one side attacks and wins the game in a single war. yawn. The AI will spice it up.

    2) Lots of challenging AI keeps the mid-game chugging, as players will have other non-player targets to fight against, thus keeping more players engaged for longer.

    3) We're going to need the industrial capacity of a bigger map to fight off these crisis.

    4) Last game we had trouble finding spots for players after they died, even in the early period. I want to keep the map big so when people die they have somewhere that's not shit right off the bat to go. That's the same reasoning behind me force-spawning good empires as well.

    5) As pointed out before, I'm setting the "mid-game" year to 2250, and the "end-game" year to 2300. Things are going to get interesting and stay interesting fast.
    1) Stellaris diplo is bad fundamentally and tends towards hugboxes

    2) There was plenty of pvp in all game stages. Why take that away? The point of MP is to play with & against other players, isn't it? Also, player engagement - we only lost Caldiron and DC (sort of)

    3) Crisis scales with map size, so 5x is 5x whatever that scaling base is.

    4) There were lots of spots, DC just ruined them all

    5) If anything, I think larger maps will make the crises more deadly, in that players will be less likely to reach critical mass to be able to deal with them. Also they will be coming before tech milestones. Not sure getting rolled by multiple crises+FE is "interesting" but I'll try it

    IDK, i just feel like smaller is better, or at least worth trying for a change - we've done large. Maybe put it to a vote? Presumeably will still be packed with AIs to a similar density either way.
    You should only be harsh when, as often happens, kindness proves useless.
    -Prince Eugene of Savoy

  12. #12
    Approaching Walrus's Avatar
    Join Date
    March 8, 2013
    Posts
    6,994
    If you want bigger maps just max out the empire spawns (so 30 on a 1000 star map) and 5x habitable worlds so there's systems worth fighting over instead of dozens of empty and ultimately irrelevant outpost systems, but if we have to have a smaller map i'd prefer to have lots of worlds worth fighting over either way

    Also I'm in.

    we only lost Caldiron and DC (sort of)

    There were lots of spots, DC just ruined them all
    THROUGH NO FAULT OF MY OWN

    its ok I know how to play now also the empires I took over were legitimately fucked
    Last edited by Approaching Walrus; May 24 2018 at 01:45:50 AM.

  13. #13
    Brockosaurus's Avatar
    Join Date
    August 21, 2013
    Posts
    592
    Quote Originally Posted by Approaching Walrus View Post
    There were lots of spots, DC just ruined them all
    THROUGH NO FAULT OF MY OWN
    uh huh keep tellin yourself that

    its ok I know how to play now also the empires I took over were legitimately fucked
    THAT TOO amirite


    But yeah I'm split either way on more planets. I kind of want less micro, so will defo be using sectors, regardless of how crap they are.
    You should only be harsh when, as often happens, kindness proves useless.
    -Prince Eugene of Savoy

  14. #14
    Bentguru's Avatar
    Join Date
    April 25, 2011
    Posts
    2,512
    Quote Originally Posted by Brockosaurus View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Bentguru View Post
    Here's why i want larger maps:

    1) FHC Diplo is boring as shit, we get into 2-3 large hugboxes and sit doing nothing until one side attacks and wins the game in a single war. yawn. The AI will spice it up.

    2) Lots of challenging AI keeps the mid-game chugging, as players will have other non-player targets to fight against, thus keeping more players engaged for longer.

    3) We're going to need the industrial capacity of a bigger map to fight off these crisis.

    4) Last game we had trouble finding spots for players after they died, even in the early period. I want to keep the map big so when people die they have somewhere that's not shit right off the bat to go. That's the same reasoning behind me force-spawning good empires as well.

    5) As pointed out before, I'm setting the "mid-game" year to 2250, and the "end-game" year to 2300. Things are going to get interesting and stay interesting fast.
    1) Stellaris diplo is bad fundamentally and tends towards hugboxes

    2) There was plenty of pvp in all game stages. Why take that away? The point of MP is to play with & against other players, isn't it? Also, player engagement - we only lost Caldiron and DC (sort of)

    3) Crisis scales with map size, so 5x is 5x whatever that scaling base is.

    4) There were lots of spots, DC just ruined them all

    5) If anything, I think larger maps will make the crises more deadly, in that players will be less likely to reach critical mass to be able to deal with them. Also they will be coming before tech milestones. Not sure getting rolled by multiple crises+FE is "interesting" but I'll try it

    IDK, i just feel like smaller is better, or at least worth trying for a change - we've done large. Maybe put it to a vote? Presumeably will still be packed with AIs to a similar density either way.
    In regard to 2) I fully expect the AI to murder at least half the people playing. Hence why i want lots of spots.

    For 5) Khan spawned WAY too late last game to be a credible threat, and ditto for the contingency. If it hadn't have been for the galaxy-wide endwar they would have been instantly crushed. Their start times needed to be moved up a lot.
    Last edited by Bentguru; May 24 2018 at 04:35:25 AM.

  15. #15
    Nobody_Holme's Avatar
    Join Date
    April 11, 2011
    Location
    Swansea, Wales, UK
    Posts
    5,660
    Just going to point out that with those start times and AI that'll be able to stop anyone blobbing up much, if the Khan spawns next to a couple of people who are willing to satrapy instantly, or the awakened roll a couple of AIs/people (good AI applies to them, and is MEAN to fight against without 5* modifiers applying...), they may actually game over us all.

    (I'm fully behind maxed out size map for this one, and yes it'll probably lose us a couple of people midgame, but we always lose a couple in midgame anyway, so meh.

  16. #16
    Movember 2011 RazoR's Avatar
    Join Date
    April 10, 2011
    Location
    The Motherland
    Posts
    29,177
    a dozen people is mos def enough for 1000 stars

  17. #17
    Bentguru's Avatar
    Join Date
    April 25, 2011
    Posts
    2,512
    I will also point out that the awakened empires are using the mod's end game weapons, not the vanilla ones.

  18. #18
    Caldrion Dosto's Avatar
    Join Date
    November 19, 2011
    Posts
    2,036
    Im gonna try a vanilla game with crisises moved to 2250 and 2300 and see how badly i die in a fire :P

  19. #19
    Joe Appleby's Avatar
    Join Date
    April 9, 2011
    Location
    in front of the class
    Posts
    13,796
    I'm in?

    Tapapapatalk
    nevar forget

  20. #20
    Bentguru's Avatar
    Join Date
    April 25, 2011
    Posts
    2,512
    5x contingency is terrifying, this is going to require all of us.

Bookmarks

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •