Episode 355: Stellaris

[Turrican]

Orwellian Newspeak LOL. Thanks for confirming my reading. For me it means that I am presented with aliens that challenge anthropocentric preconceptions, for instance "insectoids" = "hive mind" = "inflexible". Or that every Space 4X game needs to a sandbox to re-enact for the umpteenth time the same tired space opera tropes with planets blowing up, great galactic evils being vanquished, and so on.

Limited combinations? Would you please run some numbers to see how many different combinations you can generate with Stellaris sets of ethics, traits and FLT propulsion methods? There's 4 ethics dimensions and 4 possible levels, that's 256 different "personalities" for you. If you multiply that by the number of FTL propulsion methods, then there's 768 possible different races. If one starts counting possible combinations of traits, positive and negative, that number goes into several thousand (here I am assuming 2 traits max per race). If all your games have 32 empires, I wouldn't be surprised that your neighbours look pretty similar, after 6 or 7 games.

One of Chick's complaints is that each race is an arbitrary set of values with an icon attached, rather than an easily recognisable and logical personality. That's not a problem for me because I never liked the old Civ effect of "oh, Alexander's my neighbour, so it'll be war no matter what then" or "the aliens next door are Bears so they will be aggressive and like war". I prefer the idea that every strange new race you encounter could be anyone.

However, Stellaris does have Chick's complaint covered in part because I've read that when the player creates a new race and plays a game with them they are added to the pool of races that appear in future games. So, if you want consistent species, just create them.

[spacerumsfeld]

Hey, can we talk more about conception of aliens in sci-fi? Because that's fascinating. The score argument thing has been done to death. Let's just all agree that the sooner Tom is taken to the International Criminal Court at The Hague to pay for his crimes, the better.

The example of the planet in Solaris is a great one: in most SF 4x games this would be treated like a one-time event, and you'd send a science ship, and you'd spend some time and eventually get +15% research and you'd either colonize the planet or not and that would be that. Are there any games where the planet itself could be a major game point that lasted longer than the time it took to read the event log? I haven't played a lot of Stellaris, but this is what I feel it really missed: the ability to actually make events an organic part of the gameplay, rather than something you just read and discarded. There would have to be some way to interact with the planet over the course of the game, and for small changes to be meaningful. In Stellaris, your scientists would all go insane. But Stellaris doesn't make you care about your leaders, and there is no way to make them do things other than just be attached to ships.

Of course, there are a whole bunch of problems - most players would want to just nuke the planet or something.

I'd love to hear about some game that goes more in the Solaris direction.

[sclpls]

In Alpha Centauri the game has an interesting story to tell about the planet you are colonizing. I'm struggling to think of any games on an inter-planetary scale that are like that though. I think we should keep an eye on No Man's Sky and see if people will care about those procedurally generated planets, and if so maybe there will be some lessons strategy games can draw from it.

[Turrican]

Hey, can we talk more about conception of aliens in sci-fi? Because that's fascinating. The score argument thing has been done to death. Let's just all agree that the sooner Tom is taken to the International Criminal Court at The Hague to pay for his crimes, the better.

Agreed on all counts.

I'd echo that Alpha Centauri is both phenomenal and possibly features the alien world as a character in the narrative to a greater degree than other space 4x games. However, I'm not a big player of space 4x generally and I'd imagine it's far easier to make the planet have a story when there is only one planet and you are on ground level as opposed to in its orbit or beyond.

I do think the fact you can observe a planet and the development of its superior species is quite a nice bit of flavour in Stellaris.

[paradi6m]

Are there any games where the planet itself could be a major game point that lasted longer than the time it took to read the event log?

It's not uncommon for certain tech advances to have a profound, or at least significant impact on how a game plays out, but I struggle to think of examples of games where random events have the same effect.  It's not random, but I remember Emperor of the Fading Suns having some really unique planets with special tactical considerations.  There was a mod for that game (I think the Hyperion mod?) that among other things added an uncontrolled planet Earth overrun by rebels and space aliens and filled with advanced technological artifacts.  The fact that every planet was basically a self contained civ-like map made the game a pain to play, but really made it feel like you were actually visiting worlds with their own identities.

[Gormongous]

Limited combinations? Would you please run some numbers to see how many different combinations you can generate with Stellaris sets of ethics, traits and FLT propulsion methods? There's 4 ethics dimensions and 4 possible levels, that's 256 different "personalities" for you. If you multiply that by the number of FTL propulsion methods, then there's 768 possible different races. If one starts counting possible combinations of traits, positive and negative, that number goes into several thousand (here I am assuming 2 traits max per race). If all your games have 32 empires, I wouldn't be surprised that your neighbours look pretty similar, after 6 or 7 games.

I am playing two Ironman games, about 16 hours in total so far, and I have barely reached the "mid game" on any of them. How many games have you played already to the bitter end? 100?

Actually, most of those permutations amount to distinction without difference. There are only sixteen AI personalities in the game, twenty if you count those exclusive to Fallen Empires, and everything else is just bonuses and maluses to diplomacy and economy: http://www.stellariswiki.com/Artificial_intelligence

You're still getting the inflexible hive mind every game, it's even on that too-short list! It's just that sometimes, that hive mind is made up of pandas now, and that makes it different but also more generic, because there's less impact when anything can be a hive mind.

I don't know, I only played one Ironman game to thirty hours and stopped after the Zerg endgame event bugged out, but I was already seeing repeats: meet the new Hegemonic Imperialists, same as the old Hegemonic Imperialists, except these ones are lizards instead of bugs. It's underwhelming, the Brownian motion of design-through-randomization.

[Roderick]

Good podcast! More than anything it got me curious to try out Stellaris, especialle because of the discussion about how non-agressive the game apparently is. That's a plus to me. I'd love to explore the galaxy without being forced into tough spots all the time.

[Turrican]

In the new beta patch (released today) I believe you can alter the aggression of the AI

[Arathain]

Sword of the Stars has some wonderfully diverse alien species. There's a lot of good sci-fi writing and conceptualisation that went into each of them, and it informs how each of them plays. While they're not as inhuman as they might be, they all have societies with very distinct character, without removing the role of individuality within them.

 

I like the ant-like insect hive race- there's no hive mind or non-sentient drones. Even the lowliest worker is a sentient individual, albeit one tending towards fierce loyalty. They make art. They get drunk on human cheese. The telepathic whale species go through a social ritual viewed as being like death when they become spacefaring. They're pacifistic until they decide someone else lacks compassion, at which point they'll use any means to wipe them out.

 

There are strange leftovers from earlier times. These range from annoying obstacles to monstrous entities that threaten all the races. Those tend to have very obscure past and motivations. The Peacekeeper, for example, is a huge, massively powerful ship that can zip just about anywhere in a turn. It shows up for fights and destroys both participants, when it's not tracking down the biggest fleet and destroying that. It's stay for a good few turns, then leave, and you don't know when it'll show up again. 

[HMHAMz]

In the new beta patch (released today) I believe you can alter the aggression of the AI

That's good to hear; that's one of the reasons I haven't played much of Stellaris. Love the game; just not quiet challenging enough!?

[zaldar]

So just listened to this and it was great.  As someone who loves things like endless space it looks like I would love this but I doubt I would have time to play it ever but will see as my life unfolds.  One question did they ever play the MP game group wise they mentioned in the end of the podcast?  I would love to hear about how it went if they did, and if they haven't ... I would love for them to do so.

[Marchettus]

All- 

Is it time to revisit this game?  Or just record Rowan calling everyone sweet summer children for 2 hours?  I have never personally spent more hours playing such a middling game but there is something about the combination of graphics, ease of use, and dumb AI that keeps me coming back.

May I be so bold as to suggest looking at it after the 2.0 patch?  That patch really could put this game into a good path or make it completely unplayable.

 

Best,

[Michael]

Yeah, 2.0 is going to be changing some pretty fundamental systems. We'll definitely be revisiting Stellaris but it will be after the big update and after everyone on the panel has gotten some time in.