2.2 robots are nearly worthless (along with Machine Empires, Mechanist, and Synethic Ascension)

[DasHaus]

Machine Empire Issues lead to me making an account here, so hello everyone!

I do not think this info was already posted, at least I didnt find it. So straight from a reddit comment I made, here we go:

[...]

They [Machine Empires] still only have 2 jobs per energy/mining district (unlike hive minds, who get 3 jobs), and they still dont have better alloy production as announced in Stellaris Dev Diary #124 - Planetary Rework (part 4 of 4) ( reddit version )

>Machine Empires share some similarities with Hive Minds, but rather than being focused on rapid growth, their primary focus is efficient use of resources. Like the Hive Minds, they have their own version of housing district, the Nexus District, and their resource extraction districts also provide three jobs where normal empires get two, but in addition to this they also have substantial bonuses to finished goods production, with obs such as the Fabricator being a more efficient and productive variant of the regular alloy-producing Metallurgist.

Machine Empires still have to deal with the downsides (costly growth job for one growth per job), without the announced upsides.

@Paradox Whats up with machines being efficient with resources?! Did you discard what you wrote in the devdiaries?

 

[Desolator_X]

I'd say Machine Empires are really polarized atm.

One on side of the spectrum you have Assimilators that grow so fast that they can faceroll more or less anyone and Machine Worlds that are second only to the Matter Decompressor in terms of how overpowered they are. On the other side, you have a distinct energy crisis looming during that mid game that cannot effectively be overcome by expansion, which means you 100% have to beeline for those Machine Worls and/or Habitats or lose a lot of momentum.

I don't play MP, but I'd expect machines to be among the strongest rusher (I guess second to Purifiers?), weak during mid game and insanely powerful late game.

*if* you can even beeline for MW and habs, the huge issue is that they just don't have the production if *anything* happens in the early game. They need higher energy income to have any form of flexibility. People keep bringing up this one strat that works, but compare that to the dozens of strats that every other empire has and, well, you see the problem?

Games can differ wildly because of RNG these days, and the issue is certainly more pronounced for Machine empires. I had a game were I ran a -200 E deficit (with edicts) until I got my Habitats and Machine Worlds due to an average 4 E deposits on my planets. Another game I had around 7 per planet - and on top of that I met an agressive neighbor that I managed to leech for dozens of pops early on. You can imagine how far those two empires were apart somewhere into the game. So here you have one factor that is certainly very important to address in the future.

The thing is: Once you know and understand the issue with Machines (mainly their E limitation), you can plan around them and adapt. My first few games with Machines were (and felt) pretty gosh darn bad, but these days I beeline for Habitats and Machine Worlds and pace my expansion around that - and it works fine. The question is if that is really how it should work - and I'd argue having to utilize broken Machine Worlds really isn't really what I'd call "ideal".

The weird thing with machines is that they are more and less flexible than organic at the same times. The E constraints are very, very limiting, but at the same time there is much less overhead in the economy, so everything else is a lot easier to shuffle around in times of need (e.g. war).

Empires all have ways to compensate for RNG, except ME. The whole point of the early game *is* overcoming that RNG, the endgame is the same for everyone, except, once again, MEs can't do that in the early game. They also can't do that in the midgame because they need such specific things: machine worlds and habitats, so again, they can't compensate until the endgame, where the whole point has become obsolete.

Once you know the issues with MEs you can do *ONE SPECIFIC THING* to get around that. That's not good design, interesting gameplay, or enjoyable as a player at all. I don't want all my ME playthroughs to feel the same, which they do now if you want to be successful at all.

Machines are less flexible than every other empire: they have the highest job/pop requirement to function of all races, meaning they have the least flexibility in shuffling around pops as they have the fewest of them free of generating minimum upkeep. MEs probably need a build in more efficient E district to be anywhere near competitive with a normal empire, let alone HM atm.

(also: referring to DA, which aren't really MEs anyway since they have normal pops to make a point about MEs is kinda weak imho)

 

[GAGA Extrem]

I dunno, in theory the Bioreactor is a decent way to overcome that RNG, I think it is just a bit too weak and inconvienent early in the game to be viable (I actually think Bio Reactor Habitats might work particularly well mid game onwards).

One thing that I did bring up (and which is at least being considered as an option for a more elaborate rebalance later down the line) is that Machines (and by extend Synth Ascension empires) should probably shift the yield bonus from F to E jobs. Would go a long way to help with the energy issues.

I think DA should be taken into consideration - right now they are roughly at the power level where all other ME used to be before the pre-release nerfs (dev clash, etc.). They are a good reminder why balance needs to find a middle ground and that it is easy to overshoot in either direction.

 

[Arcvalons]

Reposting this from another thread:

I was playing Rogue Servitors, and I grandly miss Servitor Morale. Right now there's absolutely NO reason at all to keep Bio-Trophies, they cost a lot of resources to maintain and the only thing they provide is unity, and the stability bonus they provide is inferior to the bonus a machine world would give, but you can't have a machine world with those squishy meatbags around. Even if the bonus it provides is reduced (40% was a lot) Servitor Morale should most definitely be put back into the game, including the part where you actually get a malus if you don't have enough Bio-Trophies.

 

[Random Players]

One thing that I did bring up (and which is at least being considered as an option for a more elaborate rebalance later down the line) is that Machines (and by extend Synth Ascension empires) should probably shift the yield bonus from F to E jobs. Would go a long way to help with the energy issues.

By yield bonus, do you mean that food currently gets +6 per job, while energy is +4? Then yea, swapping that would do a lot to give MEs more 'wiggle room'. Hell, just making each Tech-drone give +5 instead of +4 would do a lot I think. If they have +5, they are paying for their own 1 EC upkeep and producing the same as a regular empire's technician would.
And if you have twenty tech drones from ten districts, then that's a +20 income compared to current 4EC production you can spend on mining districts, Nexuses, buildings, other pops, etc.

 

[Kronus]

By yield bonus, do you mean that food currently gets +6 per job, while energy if +4? Then yea, swapping that would do a lot to give MEs more 'wiggle room'. Hell, just making each Tech-drone give +5 instead of +4 would do a lot I think. If they have +5, they are paying for their own 1 EC upkeep and producing the same as a regular empire's technician would.
And if you have twenty tech drones from ten districts, then that's a +20 income compared to current 4EC production you can spend on mining districts, Nexuses, buildings, other pops, etc.

Is more energy produce not the focus on efficient use of resources that the ME should have from beginning?

 

[Zentay]

I struggled a lot with machine empires and I think it's in part because I did not micromanage my pops enough. When micromanaged, they are not as bad (and I like the added difficulty).

There are two real problems however. The first is that machine empires will struggle if they get a low amount of generator and mining districts. Converting food into energy takes up precious building slots. The second is that growth speed is too low without a machine assembly plant, which also takes up precious buiding slot. Edit: growth speed of colonies.

 

[Kronus]

The second is that growth speed is too low without a machine assembly plant, which also takes up precious buiding slot.

The assembly plant is a little problem .... The bigger problem is that you must have 80 pops for the Primary Nexus that give you 4 assembling jobs . The max assembling speed should be separated from capital buildings.

 

[Zentay]

Machine empires get a lot of society research points from coordinator drones. I find that I have plenty of society research points but lack engineering points, and there is nothing I can do to change that. The reseach point gain seems a little imbalanced currently.

 

[Kronus]

Machine empires get a lot of society research points from coordinator drones. I find that I have plenty of society research points but lack engineering points, and there is nothing I can do to change that. The reseach point gain seems a little imbalanced currently.

The Coordinator is only a copy from the Culture Worker and have the same points , but it would be cool when they get physik (Signals changes) , Engineering ( When the Pop must be changed for that ) or simply Amenities (because clear orders are good orders)

 

[Foxador]

I mean I could in theory (I am at home with a laptop that barely manages to run a small map size), but I'd argue that wouldn't really help with the issue discussed here anyway.

Games can differ wildly because of RNG these days, and the issue is certainly more pronounced for Machine empires. I had a game were I ran a -200 E deficit (with edicts) until I got my Habitats and Machine Worlds due to an average 4 E deposits on my planets. Another game I had around 7 per planet - and on top of that I met an agressive neighbor that I managed to leech for dozens of pops early on. You can imagine how far those two empires were apart somewhere into the game. So here you have one factor that is certainly very important to address in the future.

The thing is: Once you know and understand the issue with Machines (mainly their E limitation), you can plan around them and adapt. My first few games with Machines were (and felt) pretty gosh darn bad, but these days I beeline for Habitats and Machine Worlds and pace my expansion around that - and it works fine. The question is if that is really how it should work - and I'd argue having to utilize broken Machine Worlds really isn't really what I'd call "ideal".

The weird thing with machines is that they are more and less flexible than organic at the same times. The E constraints are very, very limiting, but at the same time there is much less overhead in the economy, so everything else is a lot easier to shuffle around in times of need (e.g. war).

It's hard for me to compare them to regular empires, though, given that 99% of the time I play with my Fanatic Pacifist Inward Perfection build that is by default more efficient than pretty much anything out there when it comes to economy. I can say that machines are certainly less flexible than that empire in the early game, probably also a bit weaker. Mid game is... sorta difficult to estimate atm because of all the recent changes. I'd again say that machines are less flexible, at that point because Machine World terraforming is very costly. What I can say with certainty, however, is that in the late game machines are absolutely insane. When their E limitation is overcome, they will outperform any organic empire and the only thing you could do to equalize the field is building a Matter Decompressor - which the machines could just get as well.

The problem with this is that if machine empire REQUIRE habitats or machine worlds they no longer become a choice, they're now mandatory. The ME's shouldn't be designed around having these are required or you're screwed. If they can't work without them then they're broken as those are suppose to be optional choices, not forced upon you

 

[icon41gimp]

The problem with this is that if machine empire REQUIRE habitats or machine worlds they no longer become a choice, they're now mandatory. The ME's shouldn't be designed around having these are required or you're screwed. If they can't work without them then they're broken as those are suppose to be optional choices, not forced upon you

Machine empires have relatively few good options given the ascension paths are not available for them. So I view this as less of a problem. I think the bigger problem is that you're locked behind 100 years of tech just to access a state where you're competitive. I'm still not sure what the basis is for GAGA stating that ME with Machine Worlds are OP, Hive Worlds seemingly have the same underlying mechanics but will be far, far ahead of similarly skilled ME play.

 

[Kronus]

The 2 biggest problem from the ME is :

The upkeep from the drones or to less energy from drones and to get the assambling speed to max .

With more energy you could more focus on better economy and when you could earlier get to assambling max (without 80 pops for Primary Nexus) you could make new colonies without so much problems .

 

[Strich]

@ GAGA Extrem: Thank you for your answer. I wont reply in detail because everyone else (who quoted you) has already done that, so that my reply would only be a repetition.

I didnt find the pop grow that much of a problem. The moment you have some spare E+/month you can simply shift 4 pops to your newly aquired colony and start building an assembly plant. rince and repeat for every other colony.
The problem ist E.

 

[Black_Shade]

I'd say Machine Empires are really polarized atm.

One on side of the spectrum you have Assimilators that grow so fast that they can faceroll more or less anyone and Machine Worlds that are second only to the Matter Decompressor in terms of how overpowered they are. On the other side, you have a distinct energy crisis looming during that mid game that cannot effectively be overcome by expansion, which means you 100% have to beeline for those Machine Worls and/or Habitats or lose a lot of momentum.

I don't play MP, but I'd expect machines to be among the strongest rusher (I guess second to Purifiers?), weak during mid game and insanely powerful late game.

Do you think MW are actually that good for DA, though? As a normal ME, MW are really crazy good and all your worlds get terraformed to MW. Similarly, as a hive player all your planets will get terraformed to hiveworlds. As DA, you can only terraform a few of your planets to machine worlds because it prevents you from farming. Given that at least 50% of your pops (but probably more like 70-80%) are going to be cyborgs, that's not so good. You basically go through your list of planets and leave all the heavy food production planets as is, and terraform half to MW. That's really not all that big of a boost compared to something like MW for ME, hiveworlds for Hives, and Ecumenopolis which completely transforms your economy.

 

[Desolator_X]

you need 10k energy for a MW, while MEs have huge energy issues... so clearly they lack to build what they need to get what they lack. MEs have more of these circular problems.

Also, if you play DE and you get *any* form of aggressive empire next to you, you're dead. There's nothing you can do to stay in the game for the first 100 years. Even the AI can (and will) run you over on higher difficulty since you lack the production that has grow exponentially on their planets, while you're still trying to get your basic resources in order 60-80 years into the game.
Balance wise MEs and HMs need to be separated. MEs need 6E/pop, HM have 6F/pop (and 3 slots per district...). Fixing this would be an ok first step, though I feel that MEs would probably need the same increase on minerals to compensate for the large mineral drain from growth as well. Furthermore I think that the colony stage needs a second replicator job, and the replicator jobs themselves can probably use a 50% efficiency boost to balance out their growth. HMs can easily get 6-7 growth within 5 years, normal empires have around 3-5, MEs have ~3. On colonies HMs have ~4 until they get 5 pops, then it becomes the same 6-7, normal empires have ~3 and MEs have 1, so yeah, not competitive at all.

I dunno, in theory the Bioreactor is a decent way to overcome that RNG, I think it is just a bit too weak and inconvienent early in the game to be viable (I actually think Bio Reactor Habitats might work particularly well mid game onwards).

One thing that I did bring up (and which is at least being considered as an option for a more elaborate rebalance later down the line) is that Machines (and by extend Synth Ascension empires) should probably shift the yield bonus from F to E jobs. Would go a long way to help with the energy issues.

I think DA should be taken into consideration - right now they are roughly at the power level where all other ME used to be before the pre-release nerfs (dev clash, etc.). They are a good reminder why balance needs to find a middle ground and that it is easy to overshoot in either direction.

Bioreactor is shit in 2.2 because they take building slots for mediocre energy gains, compared to either +15% energy or food (for normal normal empires) for a building slot, and you need to build multiple of them, compared to only 1 of the +15% buildings. If they took 20E and gave ~30E it might be interesting, right now it's a waste of space. So I agree they need quite some changes.

I really hope that "later down the line" doesn't mean months from now, but the first week of January instead. I'd rather have balance err on the side of *fun* (a bit on the stronger side) than *unplayable*, which is the current state of, well, basically a $20 DLC race (the entire DLC feels so pointless right now that I actually advice my friends to not buy it till balance is fixed).

DAs serve as a point of reference, *not* as a valid argument in the balance of MEs, since they're not MEs for the purpose of economy, they use food and CG, just like a normal race. At best they're inverted mechanists (who also have problems, but that has to do with pop assignment and is for another thread).

 

[Bki]

Are Habitats really any good for ME? Or am I missing something? Reactor district are just worse energy district. The science one is not bad, but I can do science on planets. Or is the point to convert every planet in machine world for resources and have the science be done on habitats?

 

[Nakkivene]

It's really annoying that solar collector bases are just named as Starbases as when you check which stations need upgrading, you inevitably have to click a bunch of bases that do not need another module. Also kinda weird that there's not an equivalent to the trade booster on machine intellects.

 

[Chthon]

It's really annoying that solar collector bases are just named as Starbases as when you check which stations need upgrading, you inevitably have to click a bunch of bases that do not need another module. Also kinda weird that there's not an equivalent to the trade booster on machine intellects.

Ok, so there isn't now? In 2.1 there was one that added +1 EC per solar collector.

 

[Arcvalons]

It's really annoying that solar collector bases are just named as Starbases as when you check which stations need upgrading, you inevitably have to click a bunch of bases that do not need another module. Also kinda weird that there's not an equivalent to the trade booster on machine intellects.

Well, solar energy does come from stars, so starbases is technically correct.