How come in stellaris you cant control ship combat and troops during planetary invasions?

How come in stellaris you cant control ship combat and troops during planetary invasions?

Why is every paradox game just UI and rolling dice and why do people still play them?

  1. 2 months ago
    Anonymous

    If a game has random element in it, it's by definition rolling dice

    • 2 months ago
      Anonymous

      theres significantly more gameplay in old total wars than just dice rolling

    • 2 months ago
      Anonymous

      I prefer drawing cards.

  2. 2 months ago
    Anonymous

    Because Paradox's whole origin was porting wargames to pc and they've refused to move past that

  3. 2 months ago
    Anonymous

    Why do you want to play 3 shitty games crudely bolted together with even worse performance and AI?

  4. 2 months ago
    Anonymous

    It is, in fact, possible to have great combat with a wide variety of options in a 4X game.
    The bad news is that the last time this was done properly was in Master of Orion 2.

    • 2 months ago
      Anonymous

      Star Wars Rebellion was fun

    • 2 months ago
      Anonymous

      Was Fading Suns: Noble Armada 4x too?
      Can't find much about it on the internet anymore.

    • 2 months ago
      Anonymous

      theres also Sins of Solar Empire but its not really 4x game

  5. 2 months ago
    Anonymous

    I just want there to be a purpose to building armies. As it is, building armies on defense just sees you realize that the enemy will have build hundreds of them to prepare for an invasion (something they can only afford because of AI bonuses).
    Building them on offense will just see the enemy having landed many of their own attack armies and force you to bombard past 25% anyway (the main point of having military superiority in a landing is to not have to completely fuck the planet).

  6. 2 months ago
    Anonymous

    In theory Paradox games are supposed to have better campaign, economy and diplomacy by sacrificing actual simulation of battles. This is not the case of course and they are not really any harder or more complex than Total Wars or 4x games, except for having shit UI. And are as war focused as all those other games anyway. So in practice they are half of the game that Total War games are and paragarden gnomess don't even have to bother with making any actual assets or designing actual gameplay mechanics to simulate battles. Basically it's a very convenient excuse to not do anything.

  7. 2 months ago
    Anonymous

    yeah but imagine both ship battles and planetary/solar system conquests in stellaris instead of just muh dice rolling combat of watching numbers on screen that is supposed to represent soldiers of both sides fighting eachother

    • 2 months ago
      Anonymous

      Because such a game would cost far too much money and time to make and would be played by no way near enough people to be justified. Face it retards your dream game is not economical viable to make.

      • 2 months ago
        Anonymous

        but total war exists though

      • 2 months ago
        Anonymous

        Bro?

    • 2 months ago
      Anonymous

      your example was never designed to be proper planetary conquest to begin with
      it's just skirmish maps with extra steps
      and i do mean literally just extra steps

    • 2 months ago
      Anonymous

      >rolling dice
      it's actually not rolling dice. there are so many dice rolls in the average stellaris battle that any random element is effectively removed

      >play a game of risk every time you want to capture a planet
      do you know how fucking long that would take? it's out of the scope of stellaris

      Why do you want to play 3 shitty games crudely bolted together with even worse performance and AI?

      he's an idiot who thinks that every game should be total war because total war is a good game. stellaris is a good idea, it's just that it's poorly done for a number of reasons that have been described a hundred times on this board. making battles more detailed is the last thing stellaris needs. if anything, pops, ships, and armies could be reduced to floating-point numbers to make the game tenfold more performant without changing game play

      • 2 months ago
        Anonymous

        >pops, ships, and armies could be reduced to floating-point numbers
        At that point you might as well just play Aurora.

      • 2 months ago
        Anonymous

        commanding actual battles on medieval 2 total war is more fun than shitlaris will ever be

  8. 2 months ago
    Anonymous

    Confused? Good.

  9. 2 months ago
    Anonymous

    >start another TW campaign
    >fight first like 10 battles
    >every other is auto-resolved
    Why indeed

    • 2 months ago
      Anonymous

      That's only the case in Nutotal War with general only armies and magical auto replenishment.

  10. 2 months ago
    Anonymous

    Grand strategy should never involve tactical micro

  11. 2 months ago
    Anonymous

    Their games are shit and yet people still play them.
    That's the real paradox.

    • 2 months ago
      Anonymous

      The Shit Paradox

  12. 2 months ago
    Anonymous

    fuck micro, there's already too much planet management once you get big enough
    I want stories, not spreadsheets

    • 2 months ago
      Anonymous

      Yeah pop management can eat shit.

      Because the focus isn't there, it's on large-scale operations and strategic choices, bogging the game down in micromanagement of specific events slows the pace with relatively minor decisions which are of limited relevance to the game as a whole.
      Both as a grandstrat/4X cross, both its constitute genres run counter to individually controlled combat. In a quasi-realtime game like most grand strategies, demanding focus in one specific area while the clock ticks down globally would be a control nightmare, and even with the capability to swap back and forth nobody plays these games because they want to be balancing micro and macro like they're playing an RTS; it'd turn into a pause-fest very quickly. You could go with a modal approach instead and instantaneous battles but that would be retarded and needlessly slow the game down.
      As a 4X game direct battle control is also a bad idea. The games thrive off limited discrete actions having large opportunity cost and an ever-expanding set of options available to the player, neither of which is helped by manual battles. Look at any other 4X game with direct battle control, it's almost always the worst part of the game.
      >b-b-b-but Stellaris has loads of pointless micromanagement elsewhere
      Yes and it's retarded and bad there too.

      Was about to rant until read the spoiler.

      Personally, i created mini mod that have one unlimited job that gives a little bit of everything to sustain a pop on itself.
      Fuck planet and job micro.

  13. 2 months ago
    Anonymous

    Because the focus isn't there, it's on large-scale operations and strategic choices, bogging the game down in micromanagement of specific events slows the pace with relatively minor decisions which are of limited relevance to the game as a whole.
    Both as a grandstrat/4X cross, both its constitute genres run counter to individually controlled combat. In a quasi-realtime game like most grand strategies, demanding focus in one specific area while the clock ticks down globally would be a control nightmare, and even with the capability to swap back and forth nobody plays these games because they want to be balancing micro and macro like they're playing an RTS; it'd turn into a pause-fest very quickly. You could go with a modal approach instead and instantaneous battles but that would be retarded and needlessly slow the game down.
    As a 4X game direct battle control is also a bad idea. The games thrive off limited discrete actions having large opportunity cost and an ever-expanding set of options available to the player, neither of which is helped by manual battles. Look at any other 4X game with direct battle control, it's almost always the worst part of the game.
    >b-b-b-but Stellaris has loads of pointless micromanagement elsewhere
    Yes and it's retarded and bad there too.

    • 2 months ago
      Anonymous

      No anon, I want a game that like uuhh like does like uhhh EVERYTHING? Wouldn't that be so cool, like uhhh the best game ever?

      • 2 months ago
        Anonymous

        how about a paradox game that does what total war does? Controllable land and ship battles

        Wasnt too hard for creative assembly

        Paradox can and should make the gamemap turnbased as well since it is less resource intensive on cpu and their game stellaris cannot handle "large" galaxies

        • 2 months ago
          Anonymous

          Because then you just want a different genre of game.

          • 2 months ago
            Anonymous

            retard cuckold paradox makes shitty no effort games they can sell a gazillion dlcs to retard cuckolds like yourself

        • 2 months ago
          Anonymous

          Go play Total War, then? This isn't difficult.

      • 2 months ago
        Anonymous

        Dude that sounds awesome, you should start, like, a kickstarter so we can fund this thing!

    • 2 months ago
      Anonymous

      No anon, I want a game that like uuhh like does like uhhh EVERYTHING? Wouldn't that be so cool, like uhhh the best game ever?

      Imperium Galactica 2 was a thing and did what Stellaris tried to do better. It is honestly amazing how decades old games consistently manage to shit on modern derivatives time and time again.

      • 2 months ago
        Anonymous

        >Imperium Galactica 2
        based, I still have my old CD somewhere
        probably impossible to run it on a modern machince tho

        • 2 months ago
          Anonymous

          Steam and GOG copies run out of the box just fine. My favorite 4X game.

    • 2 months ago
      Anonymous

      This. People who want more micro in grand strategy are missing the point. It's not supposed to be TW. Whatever micro the game currently has should be purged and be replaced by in depth macro mechanics instead.

      how about a paradox game that does what total war does? Controllable land and ship battles

      Wasnt too hard for creative assembly

      Paradox can and should make the gamemap turnbased as well since it is less resource intensive on cpu and their game stellaris cannot handle "large" galaxies

      Just play Sword of the Stars

  14. 2 months ago
    Anonymous

    1st it already has been done and worked (moO2 and SoSE)
    2nd nobody is asking for stacraft level of involvement you fucking retards, but it would be nice it it wasnt just clicking 2 buttons and watching numbers change based on dice rolls.

  15. 2 months ago
    Anonymous

    Because Paradox games are about macro-scale strategy and decision making. Your ability to win wars is meant to be about your ability to build up a powerful economy, use that to support a powerful army, and strategically engage in or avoid wars so that you fight on advantageous terms.

    • 2 months ago
      Anonymous

      paradox games are about being as unfun and as cheap to make as possible to maximize profits then

  16. 2 months ago
    Anonymous

    The biggest problem with Battlefleet Gothic is that it doesn't have a random campaign map generator. There's no real replayability.

  17. 2 months ago
    Anonymous

    i miss the old tile system
    i know why it was removed but it was nice being able to actually micro and enslave individual pops
    they should add a hybrid tile-job system back where each tile can support multiple jobs depending on the improvements/type but make tile adjacencies matter again
    and then make all the resources local (maybe except energy credits) and have trade actually effect the amount of resources you can export/import so trade routes actually matter

    • 2 months ago
      Anonymous

      >tile adjacencies
      dumb mini game

  18. 2 months ago
    Anonymous

    If Stellaris 2.0 ever happens I want fewer planets but each has basically terra invicta type map, have most of current planet management be relegated to those mega provinces. Instead of constructing 6 mining districts on earth you construct them in Southern Balkans, for example.
    Same goes for ground combat, but fortifications and terrain affect it. More units as well, with different bonuses
    Space combat is fine, especially with later changes. It could use some more complexity, like more damage types, heat management or different armor/shield types. Plus more doctrines

  19. 2 months ago
    Anonymous

    Not every developer can be Pavonis

  20. 2 months ago
    Anonymous

    Stellaris is like the Rated PG of strategy games, i had to mod the game to play is in a way i like it better, stellaris the only thing is random is the map and locations of things, other than that is like, ive seen it all and the last time i played a session was two years ago because the dlc's dont bring something different specially with warfare.

    War is a joke in that game, the game depends on numbers, its so bad that i literally shattered a planet and the galaxy didnt have a fit against me, the scoring for diplomacy went red, -100 , and only one tried to go to war against me but that was it, no tensions, no war against the half of the galaxy because i did something atrocious. And the game doesnt let you do genocidal bombardments of planets and exterminate the people in it, , reached to a point and thats it, the enemy doesnt loose control of the planet nor it turns in to a nuclear wasteland plus the game slaps you in the hand if you push things too far.

  21. 2 months ago
    Anonymous

    >you cant control ship combat
    You could on release
    People hated it

  22. 2 months ago
    Anonymous

    Because everytime paradox allows you to micro something manually vs an ai, it gets piss easy since their ai is braindead. So they also make ai to play for you as well

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *