Stellaris II: I, For One, Welcome Our New Robot Fungus Hivemind Overlords

[Kaptin Keen]

That's an interesting take to me.

But ... it's a strategy game. Calling it 'grand' strategy doesn't change that. When they 'improve' the game, why don't they make it a better strategy game, rather than making it more of a galaxy sim? Just gimme a few more things I can do to affect the outcome of battles. Thus far, I've discovered precisely one trick one can do before the fleets clash and fight each other on autopilot.

Bah! :p

[Gwyn chan 'r Gwyll]

The Administration Cap is more of a suggestion. It works almost the same as the penalties you used to get for expanding, only the started on the first planet. It's like every game played before this patch was with Admin Cap of 0.

Yeah, I need to get out of the mindset of "stay below your admin cap", it's honestly self-crippling. I keep checking it going "Welp now I have -17% to all these things", but of course that balances out by the huge bonuses I got for expanding in the first place!

[ShneekeyTheLost]

Of note, they got rid of cheezing the robomodding for AI races.

Used to, you could create custom bots for every task. Bots with bonus energy production for working energy tiles, bots with bonus mineral production for working mineral tiles, that sort of thing.

But now, that just doesn't work. You can't micromanage your pops into specific jobs, so you could have a bonus energy production pop working on maintenance/consumer goods and have no way to change that.

It's kind of disappointing, I suppose, but meh. Time to max out the leader caps. Level 10 leaders FTW!

[houlio]

But ... it's a strategy game. Calling it 'grand' strategy doesn't change that. When they 'improve' the game, why don't they make it a better strategy game, rather than making it more of a galaxy sim? Just gimme a few more things I can do to affect the outcome of battles. Thus far, I've discovered precisely one trick one can do before the fleets clash and fight each other on autopilot.

Bah! :p

I never mentioned anything about strategy, but I get your point. I think outside of the HOI series, combat has never been a good mechanic of any PDS game.

I for one like that the game has much more sim aspects to it, but I also really dig that. I just hadn't seen your point on the update (or really considered that) until you mentioned it.

[Narkis]

Of note, they got rid of cheezing the robomodding for AI races.

Used to, you could create custom bots for every task. Bots with bonus energy production for working energy tiles, bots with bonus mineral production for working mineral tiles, that sort of thing.

But now, that just doesn't work. You can't micromanage your pops into specific jobs, so you could have a bonus energy production pop working on maintenance/consumer goods and have no way to change that.

It's kind of disappointing, I suppose, but meh. Time to max out the leader caps. Level 10 leaders FTW!

I think it's just that the job-choosing subsystem is wonky at the moment. My Materialists have built specialized farming and mining robots. Occasionally I see one of them on the wrong job. It's always been fixed by manually firing everyone working these jobs and then rehiring them. The game then generally picks the best pop for the job from the pool of the unemployed, even if it didn't when the robot was freshly made.

Sectors now are now set at game start I believe instead of by the player. I think they wanted to de-emphasize the amount of planets that mattered compared to the actual space you control. With the leader cap now being a soft cap, it isn't terrible, and I have found myself colonizing less planets overall.

Oh, I see. Kinda like CK2's duchies. That makes sense for rebellious sector governors to exist somewhere down the line. This system has potential. I suspect my problem is that I'm playing on huge galaxies and the sectors aren't being made correspondingly larger.

But ... it's a strategy game. Calling it 'grand' strategy doesn't change that. When they 'improve' the game, why don't they make it a better strategy game, rather than making it more of a galaxy sim? Just gimme a few more things I can do to affect the outcome of battles. Thus far, I've discovered precisely one trick one can do before the fleets clash and fight each other on autopilot.

Bah! :p

Well, this DLC focused on the economy. I agree that the combat system needs another pass, but it's at least serviceable at the moment. I'd rather they touched diplomacy next, it's an embarrassment compared to their other games..

[Grif]

Looking at the list of bugs in the PDX forum, I'm now inclined to give this version of Stellaris a few more patches before I start playing it in earnest. I was not pleased to hear that rogue servitor's unique mechanic is now gutted, and robots in general are in a really bad place because there isn't a good way to shuffle pops in jobs that you really need them in.

[Eldan]

My current problem is that population growth seems to far outstrip jobs I can build. I'm frantically offloading as much pop as possible from my main world to the colonies, but I still get unemployment everywhere. Hope I get rare resources soon so I can upgrade a few buildings. They seem to go from 2 to five jobs, that should help a lot.

[Aotrs Commander]

But ... it's a strategy game. Calling it 'grand' strategy doesn't change that. When they 'improve' the game, why don't they make it a better strategy game, rather than making it more of a galaxy sim? Just gimme a few more things I can do to affect the outcome of battles. Thus far, I've discovered precisely one trick one can do before the fleets clash and fight each other on autopilot.

Bah! :p

You're not going to get that with a Paradox game, not matter how much you might like it, I'm afraid... MAYBE in Hearts of Iron IV (I've not played that yet); but if you want something for actual tactical-level starship combat... Look at Swords of the Stars or something (which is still the gold standard). Same if you wanted groundside tactical combat, you'd play Total War. While I would very much like proper starship combat in Stellaris, the long and the short of it is that's not what a grand stratagy game (which is what Paradox calls it particular batch of games and it's as good a name as any) aims for. It's just not what they do.

(I mean, if you want to get pedantic "stratagy" is not particularly pertaining to battles, "tactics" is - regardless of the not-entirely-accurate label "RTS" appended to itself - strategy is the larger picture; and logistics is the most important part of that.)

For my part, with this expansion, Stellaris is finally starting to feel like a grand strat and not a poor hybrid of grand strat/4X which is was when it started.

[Silverraptor]

Stellaris III: Shop at Megacorp Paradox!

[Guancyto]

Man, being the galactic trade hub (-10% market fee), Diplomacy Traditions (-10% market fee), and an import/export leader mandate (-5% market fee) = 5% market fee. All goods are essentially interchangeable to me now.

Anybody manage to get it down to 0?

My current problem is that population growth seems to far outstrip jobs I can build. I'm frantically offloading as much pop as possible from my main world to the colonies, but I still get unemployment everywhere. Hope I get rare resources soon so I can upgrade a few buildings. They seem to go from 2 to five jobs, that should help a lot.

The thing I found that really helped with unemployment was Commercial Zones, which give you 5 Clerk jobs for 1 building slot without requiring resources. Then as you get upgraded buildings (10 researcher jobs for one building slot? Don't mind if I do!), you replace them with other things.

[factotum]

Looking at the list of bugs in the PDX forum, I'm now inclined to give this version of Stellaris a few more patches before I start playing it in earnest.

What with Xmas coming up and being away from home, plus needing to finish Far Cry 5, I doubt I'll be able to play it properly myself until sometime in January.

[Kaptin Keen]

(I mean, if you want to get pedantic "stratagy" is not particularly pertaining to battles, "tactics" is - regardless of the not-entirely-accurate label "RTS" appended to itself - strategy is the larger picture; and logistics is the most important part of that.)

... that's not true? Strategy is concerned with the movement and deployment (and supply and so on) of armies. Tactics is concerned with the ditto of individual units.

Other than that, I quite agree. But I'm still annoyed at a strategy game without actual strategy =)

[ShneekeyTheLost]

So I fired up the old Stellaris wagon, to check out the new planet system. I find it annoying. It's way, way less intuitive than the old one, and I can't see it brings anything interesting to the game, it just makes it feel more like work. I have to spend much more time on the part that really never wasn't interesting at all, and on top, they made it less interesting.

I guess I'll just much rather do diplomacy and fly fleets of spaceships than micro manage an empire of little planets.

Not sure what you mean by that. Planets now have almost zero micromanagement, other than occasionally needing to buy a building or district. Unless you are complaining about them removing the micromanagement aspect, in which I'd respectfully disagree.

I suppose it depends on how we define the word 'Strategy', because that word does not imply micromanagement. Quite the reverse, in fact. Sergeants handle Tactics, officers handle Strategy. And, up until VERY recently in human history, once a General sends out his orders, he has precisely zero control over what his troops do after that. This is the essence of strategy. And it is carried off brilliantly in this game. You can maneuver your fleets around to whatever system you want, set them into whatever stance you like. But once they are engaged in combat, you really don't have any control over the outcome anymore. Which is... extremely realistic.

[Aotrs Commander]

... that's not true? Strategy is concerned with the movement and deployment (and supply and so on) of armies. Tactics is concerned with the ditto of individual units.

Which is what PDX grand strats do - you have control to the point the battle starts (when it would become tactical). I'm not sure what else you want out of "stratagy" that's not... that battle control?

Not sure what you mean by that. Planets now have almost zero micromanagement, other than occasionally needing to buy a building or district. Unless you are complaining about them removing the micromanagement aspect, in which I'd respectfully disagree.

I suppose it depends on how we define the word 'Strategy', because that word does not imply micromanagement. Quite the reverse, in fact. Sergeants handle Tactics, officers handle Strategy. And, up until VERY recently in human history, once a General sends out his orders, he has precisely zero control over what his troops do after that. This is the essence of strategy. And it is carried off brilliantly in this game. You can maneuver your fleets around to whatever system you want, set them into whatever stance you like. But once they are engaged in combat, you really don't have any control over the outcome anymore. Which is... extremely realistic.

Exactly.

[Kaptin Keen]

Which is what PDX grand strats do - you have control to the point the battle starts (when it would become tactical). I'm not sure what else you want out of "stratagy" that's not... that battle control?

I do not control any armies. That's what I want. I merely control positioning up until battle starts. Controlling an army in battle is still strategy. Also, I'm not having a discussion with you on the meaning of words, so that's the end of that.

Planets now have almost zero micromanagement, other than occasionally needing to buy a building or district.

No.

Before, you had a clicker game within the grand strategy game, where ever so often, you had to click on every single instance of a certain type of building. But built correctly, you never ever had to move anything.

Now you have the opposite. You rarely need to click to upgrade, but you often have to dismantle and replace, when your demands shift for something new.

But that's actually beside the point. I find planet management is now more complex, and requires more actual brain power. I wouldn't mind that, if I'd bought a sim game, but I did not. I bought a space strategy game. I want my brain power invested in designing ships, moving fleets and controlling battles.

Frankly I find that should be obvious.

[houlio]

I
But that's actually beside the point. I find planet management is now more complex, and requires more actual brain power. I wouldn't mind that, if I'd bought a sim game, but I did not. I bought a space strategy game. I want my brain power invested in designing ships, moving fleets and controlling battles.

Frankly I find that should be obvious.

I’ve never found I really had to put much thought into the military side of the game honestly, but I agree that the new update has shifted a lot of the focus on to a more abstract thing happening on your planets.

Granted, I actually like that shift in focus. I have other space games where I can put a lot of brain power into designing spaceships and making them more effectively pew pew against other spaceships. There aren’t very many space games that really let me do what Stellaris does now.

This reminds me a lot of how there was a ton of vitriol when 2.0 came around removing warp and wormhole drives. With the degree/level of changes done, players basically get left with a way different game. If you’re like me and onboard with the changes overall, it’s great. If you aren’t behind those, I can see why it would be frustrating.

[Eldan]

I'm mainly waiting to see what the modders are going to do with this. (I mean, this is the first time in probably a year I'm playing without Tradition tree mods, I forgot how few there are in the base game.)

[Kaptin Keen]

I’ve never found I really had to put much thought into the military side of the game honestly, but I agree that the new update has shifted a lot of the focus on to a more abstract thing happening on your planets.

Granted, I actually like that shift in focus. I have other space games where I can put a lot of brain power into designing spaceships and making them more effectively pew pew against other spaceships. There aren’t very many space games that really let me do what Stellaris does now.

This reminds me a lot of how there was a ton of vitriol when 2.0 came around removing warp and wormhole drives. With the degree/level of changes done, players basically get left with a way different game. If you’re like me and onboard with the changes overall, it’s great. If you aren’t behind those, I can see why it would be frustrating.

I don't particularly mind the changes - I'd just have liked some other changes more =)

My interest in micromanagement is strictly limited - I'm also kinda objectively bad at it - which is why I'm worried about buying Rim World, for instance. So I want more of what I'm actually good(-ish) at, which is controlling units in combat. Done right, I can beat horrible odds. But in this game, it's depressingly hard to make any actual difference.

[houlio]

I don't particularly mind the changes - I'd just have liked some other changes more =)

My interest in micromanagement is strictly limited - I'm also kinda objectively bad at it - which is why I'm worried about buying Rim World, for instance. So I want more of what I'm actually good(-ish) at, which is controlling units in combat. Done right, I can beat horrible odds. But in this game, it's depressingly hard to make any actual difference.

Yeah, there is quite a bit micromanagement going on, especially as sectors no longer roll in and limit you to like 5-10 planets. I think a good characterization is that it is we might have less overall clicks, such as upgrading buildings or switching pops around on tiles, but we definitely now need to spend much more of our attention on our planets. Your comparison to Rimworld is pretty apt. I find that's also a game where you almost constantly have to pay attention to what's going on to get the most out of your colony.

I would love to have seen some policies in place that encourage pops towards certain jobs within their social class. For example, having a policy that has all your workers fill up technician jobs first would certainly make the planning a lot easier I think.

I've noticed the AI is in a really rough shape. In my current game, I'm building my first titan, repairing the Cybrex ringworld, and slowly filling out the districts on the ecumenopolis I just finished (really wanted to pump out those alloys). I caught a glimpse of my neighbor's fleet and they were still on tier 1-2 ship components and nothing bigger than destroyers. I'm gonna start up the Glavius AI mod and see how that changes things (apparently they've got like 10+ updates to it already).

Also as a warning to everyone, habitats no longer produce raw resources at all like they used to be able to do. Instead, they get districts a lot like ecumenopoles do which provide a chunk of housing and fancy jobs, although they do get a research district. It made me a bit sad when I couldn't build big old space stations to collect asteroids to fuel my forge-world.

[Kadesh]

Homeworld does space battles better than Stellaris. Total War, Dawn of War, Battle for Middle Earth, Supreme Commander, Mech Warrior all do Ground Battles better than Paradox.

Maybe Stellaris isn't the game for you? I prefer the game in its current state, and the removal of the micromanagement aspects to extent of moving individual pops to a building is a gameplay improvement we are just going to have to disagree on. That is something I shouldn't have to care about, and now that I can't, regardless of how unfitting some might be, I'm not longer shuffling that +5% Mineral guy onto a specific tile.

You won't catch me complaining about wanting to return to that stage.

[Kaptin Keen]

Yeah, there is quite a bit micromanagement going on, especially as sectors no longer roll in and limit you to like 5-10 planets.

Which reminds me: Why is the game making sectors on it's own initiative now?!

Your comparison to Rimworld is pretty apt.

Nooo! Well since it's basically dwarf fortress in space, I suppose hoping it would be low on micro management was ... optimistic at best =D

[Eldan]

It does make sectors by itself now, yes. It seems to be based on the star clusters on the map. I currently have three planets and three sectors. BUt I'm not sure if sectors actually do much except need separate governors.

How do people ever get more than a handful of planets? Do you just settle really low quality planets? I pretty much don't go for anything under 15 size and 70% habitability, it doesn't seem worth it.

[GloatingSwine]

How do people ever get more than a handful of planets? Do you just settle really low quality planets? I pretty much don't go for anything under 15 size and 70% habitability, it doesn't seem worth it.

It hasnt been worth being picky about planet size for ages.

Especially not in 2.2 where your empire size is based on number of districts plus systems, so two size 12 planets are the same as one size 24.

Colonise anything yellow or better used to be my rule, though I haven't played much of 2.2 yet because Smash and Path of Exile.

[Eldan]

Oh. Well. I guess I'm still about in the 1.5 mindset.

That's a good solution to my unemployment problems, then. One crazy colonization spree coming up. (I don't know what to do with all my minerals and food anyway, except sell it.)

[Aotrs Commander]

Oh. Well. I guess I'm still about in the 1.5 mindset.

That's a good solution to my unemployment problems, then. One crazy colonization spree coming up. (I don't know what to do with all my minerals and food anyway, except sell it.)

As a fellow on the Stellaris forums pointed out, unemployment is actually not really a problem; the tendancy to over-build is the big danger. Whereas prior to 2.2, you colonised a planet as just set up all the tiles in advance, in 2.2(he reckons) you're actually better off letting the unemployment getting ahead of the jobs a little bit, so that you don't tank your economy where all the workers migrate up to specialists. I am starting to concur.

(Mind you, I've not being playing with fiddling with the open jobs yet, and I'm now at my 130 admin cap and I'm not going to go over that now until I've done load more research. I suspect this game is going to end pretty much when the crisis shows up and spanks everyone dead - fear my mid 2330s fleet of maybe 7k - but as the machine empires (what I wanted to do for a "proper" playthrough) and stuff are kinda out until a balance patch, which is why I've stuck with this one.)

It is WAY more interesting, though, to actually have to think very carefully about planet building than just to go "right new planet, fill all squares with resources with appropriate buildings, fill everything else up with eiether enrgy, mine or research buildings, never touch again except to cue upgrades." You actually have manage your planets now - the "micro-management" prior to this patch wasn't really "management" it was "click a list of no-brainer decisions."

[Artanis]

It does make sectors by itself now, yes. It seems to be based on the star clusters on the map. I currently have three planets and three sectors. BUt I'm not sure if sectors actually do much except need separate governors.

IIRC, they changed their minds and removed the thing about star clusters determining sectors. As far as I can tell, what it current does is, if you settle a planet that is not in a sector, it will create a new sector extending 2 jumps outward from that planet.

And yeah, sectors don't do much beyond making you hire more governors.

[ShneekeyTheLost]

Before, you had a clicker game within the grand strategy game, where ever so often, you had to click on every single instance of a certain type of building. But built correctly, you never ever had to move anything.

Now you have the opposite. You rarely need to click to upgrade, but you often have to dismantle and replace, when your demands shift for something new.

But that's actually beside the point. I find planet management is now more complex, and requires more actual brain power. I wouldn't mind that, if I'd bought a sim game, but I did not. I bought a space strategy game. I want my brain power invested in designing ships, moving fleets and controlling battles.

Frankly I find that should be obvious.

I'm sorry, but I have the exact opposite experience. Colonies are now almost completely hands-free, other than occasionally building a building or a district when the need occurs. I have yet to need to destroy a single building. I spend far LESS time, like magnitudes less time, micro-managing my colonies with the new update than before. Before, I was in a colony tab probably roughly a quarter of my time. Now I just pop in from time to time and go on with my game.

If anything, it has gone too far the other direction into lack of control, but that's just me wanting to get the most out of my robomodding, and I'm willing to sacrifice that in favor of not needing to always be in my colony tabs.

[Kaptin Keen]

Colonies are now almost completely hands-free.

If that's so, I see only two possible explanations: Either A) you're wasting tons of ressources getting +50 a month with a full storage, or B) you can see into the future, and your demand always magically matches your supply years down the line.

If it's B, I consider that cheating :p

[The Glyphstone]

If that's so, I see only two possible explanations: Either A) you're wasting tons of ressources getting +50 a month with a full storage, or B) you can see into the future, and your demand always magically matches your supply years down the line.

If it's B, I consider that cheating :p

Or C) you make frequent use of the Galactic Market or a Trader's Enclave to avoid capping out. Sure, someone could write a spreadsheet showing exactly how that is 18.49252% less efficient than continually changing your colony buildings in terms of net long-term output, but that's the premium of convenience.

[ShneekeyTheLost]

If that's so, I see only two possible explanations: Either A) you're wasting tons of ressources getting +50 a month with a full storage, or B) you can see into the future, and your demand always magically matches your supply years down the line.

If it's B, I consider that cheating :p

There's a market now, you can sell things off or buy things if you get close to your resource cap. Perhaps not quite as efficient, but quite suitable for my needs.

As for the second, I make predictions based upon my current and anticipated future needs. For example, gases and motes are really only needed for maintainance on higher-tier buildings. So if I know how many of those buildings I will want, I know how many of these I will need. And that's really and end to those resources.

Alloys, of course, you will want in bulk. Probably more in bulk than you will realistically be able to build on your own. This is also where the market comes in really handy, because if you are floating energy or minerals, you can just convert to alloys.

There really isn't anything that will cause a sudden and unanticipated demand of resources that I could realistically do anything about by changing up my buildings. I already know I'm going to need a ton of alloys if I want a fleet, or multiple fleets, worth fielding. And it is a given that I do, in fact, want a fleet, or multiple fleets, worth fielding. Therefore, Alloys are going to be a high-demand need pretty consistently throughout my entire game. If I start floating close to a cap, I can always sell them off, but I rarely do. I'm more likely to need to be in the market to purchase them in the event of Suddenly Invasion.