First-time player to Stellaris experience with (apparently) 2.2... just saying

[Siven80]

Posted this in another thread, but it fits here too.
Im slowly getting used to it, but still think some changes were made just to make the game slower and feel more complex than it really is.

Visually i think the planet screen is terrible now.

What i liked about the tile system was how everything was visual.

I could see a pop growing, i could see if a tile or building was being worked. It was all nice and easy to see and read, and pretty much all on 1 screen.

The new system, while it has potential.....loses the ease of use the tile system had imo.

When you build a building then pops will go to that and you lose workers on the lower jobs......but you cant SEE that easily.
Pop growth is on a 2nd screen, i would love that to be on the first screen too as most of the time you dont need to go to the pop screen unless your micromanaging.
The new system also has really small icons for the resources, again not easy to see.

The new system is better in that i dont have to keep upgrading buildings. A lot less useless micro there.

I dont like that i cant seem to specialize in a specific research like i could pre 2.2. While theres a few buildings increase Society research, theres nothing to boost Physics or Enginerring other than the 20% research tech cards which just replaced the old buildings. Which means im constantly behind on Physics and Engineering.
I find the new techs to be really bland too. There seems to be a lot of 20% research techs (just replacing the old building techs), and also i seem to learn every tier 2 building which requires rare resources....before i have learnt how to harvest that resource. Seems very backwards to me.

Im getting used to the new system, but its far from perfect.

 

[lemmox]

I also know I specifically avoid playing CK, EU, and HoI because of their resource systems and complex mechanics that have now crept into Stellaris.

Not to be "that guy", but you're clearly aware of what every other major Paradox game is like. This is obviously their thing - they like complexity and nested systems - and while Stellaris is a different setting and a move in a different direction it's still clearly within the wheelhouse of their other games.

So, what on Earth is surprising about them doing in this new game what they've done with all their previous games?

 

[Losttruppen]

The same could be said of the present system because it is actually quite simple in funtion

My point was the tile system, while poorly implemented with its own issues was different from the well implemented economies from the other PDX titles and despite being well implemented in those games I still did not like them. In 2.5 years the biggest change we saw to the tile system was removing strategic resource buildings and the changes made during Utopia. We never even saw a real attempt at making it work or drastic changes within its existing framework, they just scrapped it for something else entirely.

I just really don't like that PDX finally made something to appeal to those who dislike the spreadsheet style management of their other titles and instead of working to improve it, decided to scrap it and fall back on what seemed to work for the other games. So while they may have gained a small amount of support from existing customers like you who don't mind these features or embrace them, they have alienated a large group that did not want them even if it meant a poorly implemented tile system.

Usually when a company makes bad decisions for their games people just stop playing entirely and move on. It should tell you something that this patch has a number of players new and old creating PDX accounts and steam reviews to fight against the new system. We had something we loved in spite of its issues, and now its been turned closer to the games I personally avoid. Look at the Diablo Immortal fiasco, even if it was an objectively great mobile game(whatever that means) it completely alienated the existing fans of the series who want more of what they came to expect in the Diablo franchise. The only difference is mobile gamers in china don't have a strong forum backing like other PDX games do to come defend it.

 

[Losttruppen]

Not to be "that guy", but you're clearly aware of what every other major Paradox game is like. This is obviously their thing - they like complexity and nested systems - and while Stellaris is a different setting and a move in a different direction it's still clearly within the wheelhouse of their other games.

So, what on Earth is surprising about them doing in this new game what they've done with all their previous games?

Maybe the fact that it was its own game with its own system for two and a half years before these features came in? I didn't buy Stellaris to be segued into their other titles thank you. This isn't some tutorial mission to get new players into their other games, its a standalone game priced at more than $100cdn.

 

[lemmox]

Maybe the fact that it was its own game with its own system for two and a half years before these features came in? I didn't buy Stellaris to be segued into their other titles thank you. This isn't some tutorial mission to get new players into their other games, its a standalone game priced at more than $100cdn.

My point is that if you hate all their other games, you done goofed by buying this one, because all of their games evolve considerably over their lifespans, all of them tend to do so in the direction of greater depth and complexity, and I have no idea where you got the idea that this game wouldn't do that. I think you're also dramatically over-stating the similarities between this economics system and that in their other games beyond "it's complex" which, again, is kinda Paradox's thing, so if you were expecting something else...maybe do more research before your next purchase?

As for your claim that you're part of some massive majority of Stellaris players that dislike Paradox games and don't want this to be like their other products, we have absolutely no way of knowing that. If that makes you feel better about being a minority on this forum, whatever, but don't pretend you've actually got any rational basis for it.

 

[morangias]

So while they may have gained a small amount of support from existing customers like you who don't mind these features or embrace them, they have alienated a large group that did not want them even if it meant a poorly implemented tile system.

You must have access to some amazing data to be able to determine the bolded parts!

That, or you're attributing popularity to opinions based on how they mesh with your own...

 

[Losttruppen]

My point is that if you hate all their other games, you done goofed by buying this one, because all of their games evolve considerably over their lifespans, all of them tend to do so in the direction of greater depth and complexity, and I have no idea where you got the idea that this game wouldn't do that. I think you're also dramatically over-stating the similarities between this economics system and that in their other games beyond "it's complex" which, again, is kinda Paradox's thing, so if you were expecting something else...maybe do more research before your next purchase?

As for your claim that you're part of some massive majority of Stellaris players that dislike Paradox games and don't want this to be like their other products, we have absolutely no way of knowing that. If that makes you feel better about being a minority on this forum, whatever, but don't pretend you've actually go any rational basis for that claim.

Please try to be less condescending in your posts. I bought this game at release in spring 2016. I own and have played the other paradox grand strategy games, they are not my cup of tea. Stellaris despite its flaws, was unique in comparison to their other titles. Stellaris was its own game with its own playstyle for 2.5 years and now in one patch its been brought closer to those other titles.

I don't have any illusions about being a part of a "massive majority", only a less vocal minority who have to wade into the lion's den of the paradox forums and contend with the established PDX fanbase to have some semblance of a unique playstyle in a game and not just another PDX grand strategy game that happens to be in space.

 

[iniudan]

Worry about the requirements of that planet (amenities/housing/etc) and your total incomes.

Indeed, avoid specialist and ruler job on low habitability world for example, unless you have share the burden, been one of the easy rule.

 

[lemmox]

I bought this game at release in spring 2016. I own and have played the other paradox grand strategy games, they are not my cup of tea. Stellaris despite its flaws, was unique in comparison to their other titles. Stellaris was its own game with its own playstyle for 2.5 years and now in one patch its been brought closer to those other titles.

Stellaris still is its own game with its own playstyle. They've just made it more complex. Beyond the fact that there are resources I don't really see the similarities to any of their other games beyond the insanely superficial. Yes, the game is developing and evolving along parallel lines to every other game they've made - i.e. gradually adding more depth and complexity. You expected they would just magically become some completely different developer for this specific game?

Listen to yourself. A company that makes nothing but very complicated grand strategy games made a grand strategy game and are now making it more complicated. You are upset about this. Maybe the issue is with you expecting them to behave in a way they've never done before, and really have no reason to start behaving like now?

I don't have any illusions about being a part of a "massive majority", only a less vocal minority who have to wade into the lion's den of the paradox forums and contend with the established PDX fanbase to have some semblance of a unique playstyle in a game and not just another PDX grand strategy game that happens to be in space.

*ahem*. To quote:

So while they may have gained a small amount of support from existing customers like you who don't mind these features or embrace them, they have alienated a large group that did not want them even if it meant a poorly implemented tile system.

So apparently there's some massive group of Stellaris players that are aware of Paradox, hate their other games, but for some reason chose to invest themselves in this one because they thought this one wouldn't do what every other one of their games has done because [reasons]. I find this hard to believe, and even harder to understand why Paradox should act like some other development studio to appease people that aren't their core fanbase.

 

[RagingMonkey]

Please try to be less condescending in your posts. I bought this game at release in spring 2016. I own and have played the other paradox grand strategy games, they are not my cup of tea. Stellaris despite its flaws, was unique in comparison to their other titles. Stellaris was its own game with its own playstyle for 2.5 years and now in one patch its been brought closer to those other titles.

I don't have any illusions about being a part of a "massive majority", only a less vocal minority who have to wade into the lion's den of the paradox forums and contend with the established PDX fanbase to have some semblance of a unique playstyle in a game and not just another PDX grand strategy game that happens to be in space.

Megacorp development went on for quite some time and Wiz and co. were pretty clear about what all the changes were. No one should be surprised by now about the changes. Also, the Pop system IS quite different to any other PDX title bar Victoria, and the ethics/species setup is unique in PDX titles.

 

[Gavagay]

I suspect that a major source of OPs problems is the fact that once a pop is promoted to a specialist, it would refuse to take a worker job, preferring to be unemployed instead. It means that if you have overbuilt specialists buildings, you do not really have a neat way to "revert to the previous version" of your economy. Pretty much the only way out for you is to sell advanced resources on the market while buying basic ones while waiting for new pops to grow and fill up worker jobs. I actually like this mechanics as it makes mistakes in planning out your economy actually matter but I can see how it may be unforgiven for new players. I suspect that it is very easy to make a simple mod which sets the time needed for a pop to demote to a lower caste to zero. Such mod would immediately make learning the game much easier. Another option is to play a Hive mind, they do not have this problem and are generally very easy and rewarding to play in the current version (from what I read, did not actually try Hive mind in Le Guin).

 

[Losttruppen]

Megacorp development went on for quite some time and Wiz and co. were pretty clear about what all the changes were. No one should be surprised by now about the changes. Also, the Pop system IS quite different to any other PDX title bar Victoria. Also, the ethics/species setup is unique in PDX titles.

I'm not referring to individual mechanics or systems when I say Stellaris has moved towards the other PDX titles, more that the simplicity of the pop/tile system allowed it to be put in the background (unless you had 100s of planets to manage) and let you focus on things like exploration and border management, things you did on the galaxy or system maps.

Now in 2.2 the vast majority of my time is spent looking at the planet management screen deciding how best to allocate my pops and resources. Sure this is more complex gameplay in how you balance it all, but the game is now focused on the popup windows and feel a bit like organizing spreadsheets which is where I draw the parallel to their other titles. Before 2.2 it didn't really matter that you had a slightly inefficient economy or had invested too much into research because it was all less important. Now you can lose games because you built a building before you had unemployed pops to staff it and you took from your worker pool.

As for everyone asking where I'm getting numbers, remember you are on a forum populated mostly by people who play other PDX grand strategy games. Forums are always populated by a small subset of enthusiasts who do not represent the average player base, most people play the game they don't read and discuss it's nuances. If it doesn't suit their fancy they don't come here to rant unless there was something keeping them playing. They just don't come back. As for why the average player avoids forum discussion you could probably look to your insulting replies and "respectfully disagree" brigading on posts voicing a different opinion.

 

[lemmox]

Now you can lose games because you built a building before you had unemployed pops to staff it and you took from your worker pool.

You will not lose a game because you build one building at the wrong time. Min/maxing is no more necessary than it ever was, you just have a new set of rules to learn to figure out the bare minimum to get by.

And since you've confirmed that Stellaris has not lost any of its uniqueness, but just become more complicated, I'm still flummoxed at how you somehow thought that this game wouldn't become more complex as it evolved, in direct contrast to everything else they've ever produced. You've bought how many Paradox games and decided they aren't for you...at what point do you just realize that maybe Paradox games aren't your cup of tea, rather than continuing to buy this tea you don't like and complaining about the flavour?

As for everyone asking where I'm getting numbers, remember you are on a forum populated mostly by people who play other PDX grand strategy games.

That doesn't actually answer the question. Everyone knows that forums are largely populated by diehard fans. That doesn't in any way imply that some massive group of people are out there who fundamentally disagree with the diehards. Everytime Paradox makes a significant change the forums are flooded with people claiming to represent some silent majority who hate the changes and will abandon the game in droves. Paradox, somehow, continues to flourish.

 

[Losttruppen]

And since you've confirmed that Stellaris has not lost any of it's uniqueness, but just become more complicated, I'm still flummoxed at how you somehow thought that this game wouldn't become more complex as it evolved, in direct contrast to everything else they've ever produced. You've bought how many Paradox games and decided they aren't for you...at what point do you just realize that maybe Paradox games aren't your cup of tea, rather than continuing to buy this tea you don't like and complaining about the flavour?

Maybe because I bought Stellaris and played for over 2000 hours in 2.5 years without dealing with most of the issues I had in their other titles, now in one patch I'm faced with 4 screens to deal with planet management that was essentially forgettable in the old version. You argument essentially boils down to Paradox being a one trick pony who should only appeal to a single subset of gamers, and now we had a game that has brought in a number of my friends in spite of the publisher only to have that new accessibility thrown out in favour of their established playerbase.

 

[Challenge]

Stellaris before 2.2 was not unique. IMO is was just one more standard format 4X game. Explore the neighborhood, plop down colonists, build stuff where you get the most + modifiers, research to build the same building type to get more + modifiers, build spaceships, go fight enemy, take over their space. Rinse and repeat. I stopped playing it because I have three other 4X varieties on my computer -- each with features unique to it, but not really all that much different. There was no real challenge except building enough crap to win the Boss fight at the end.

The changes mean I now have to plan for growth. Over build, as one person mentioned, and the snippy experts would rather starve on unemployment than take a job beneath them (I wouldn't think this is a problem for hive minds, however). Pops want to improve themselves so they tend to move to the better job rather than keep working in the coal mine... go figure. Economic decisions can make or break your empire, just like RL. This is how GRAND STRATEGY is supposed to work.

I understand a lot of people may have a preference for the basic 4X format, but to me Stellaris is finally starting to look like a real Empire Level Strategy Game and not some click for bonus shell.

 

[lemmox]

Maybe because I bought Stellaris and played for over 2000 hours in 2.5 years without dealing with most of the issues I had in their other titles,

So? Stellaris was way less complicated at launch than it is now, so were all their other games. When I think about what CKII was like at launch compared to now it's like a completely different game. This is what Paradox does: they continue to develop and add and expand features in their games, making them deeper and more complicated. You for some reason expected this game to follow a different path, despite there being absolutely nothing to indicate that. You made a bad call and now you're mad about it. I can commiserate, but I don't see how that's anybody's fault but your own.

You argument essentially boils down to Paradox being a one trick pony who should only appeal to a single subset of gamers, and now we had a game that has brought in a number of my friends in spite of the publisher only to have that new accessibility thrown out in favour of their established playerbase.

I mean, yeah. Paradox makes complex grand strategy games. It's what they do, it's an extremely unique niche in the market, nobody else does it like they do, and it's made them a ton of money. There is nothing to suggest that you and your friends represent some significant chunk of their playerbase - certainly not enough to make up for the loss of their core players who are expecting the standard Paradox Treatment to be applied to Stellaris - and you've already gotten 2.5 years and 2000 hours for the money you paid - you certainly haven't been shortchanged.

Finally, you're really overselling how much more difficult this new system is. It's deeper and requires a bit more attention, but really it's different from what you're used to. If learning new systems doesn't interest you, that's just another question mark in my head around why you'd buy into a Paradox game in the first place.

 

[Losttruppen]

That doesn't actually answer the question. Everyone knows that forums are largely populated by diehard fans. That doesn't in any way imply that some massive group of people are out there who fundamentally disagree with the diehards. Everytime Paradox makes a significant change the forums are flooded with people claiming to represent some silent majority who hate the changes and will abandon the game in droves. Paradox, somehow, continues to flourish.

Why does it have to be some "massive" group of dissenters for it to be a valid opinion? 2.2 has fractured the playerbase by alienating those who enjoyed the simple carefree, exploration focused space game Stellaris has been for 2.5 years and replaced it with tedious planet management. I'm only trying to be a voice for those who disagree with those changes because right now all I'm seeing are forum veterans with 100+ posts and huge libraries of PDX games bashing on people who just want their game back. I was having a lot of fun with the gameplay of Stellaris and now since 2.2 I am not and it seems I'm not alone.

 

[lemmox]

Why does it have to be some "massive" group of dissenters for it to be a valid opinion?

Because if the vast majority of players appreciate the new system, that means that the fracture is miniscule and the game simply isn't for you anymore. If 70% of the player base agrees with you, that's a problem for Paradox and they'll need to adjust their vision for the game. If it's just you and your group of friends then, sorry, you need to roll-back to an older version or find a different game. And based on past experience with these "outcries" during other updates, my money is that it's closer to the latter than the former - you aren't alone, but it's a real small party you're at.

replaced it with tedious planet management. I'm only trying to be a voice for those who disagree with those changes because right now all I'm seeing are forum veterans with 100+ posts and huge libraries of PDX games bashing on people who just want their game back.

And an extremely large portion of the player base have been decrying the boring and shallow nature of Stellaris for some time and waiting for it to become a game with actual depth. This is what Paradox does. Since day one they've been telegraphing a desire to continue to expand and deepen this game, it's been a major focus of their public communications the entire way along. If what you wanted was it to stay at 2.1 forever then this was never "your" game, because Paradox games are always evolving, and always in the direction of greater depth and complexity.

Also, complaining about long-time Paradox fans dismissing people who want them to change into something else? You really think that's a winning battle or even a logical line in the sand? Paradox has done very well being Paradox, don't expect fans to jump up and down for them to become just another generic 4X developer.

Paradox games may not be for you. That's fine. But it's not an argument for the game to change to suit the wishes of what is, by all indications, a very small minority of the player base.

 

[HamHamJ]

This is all very good (thanks all for the head ups and tips), what I don't understand is why the more I clicked on the pluses and minuses in the planet/pops/priorities screen, the worse it all became and there was no way to go back to the values I saw before I started clicking on the pluses and minuses. This is a bit tongue in cheek, but I'm also serious; any game mechanic that penalizes a player for just trying things out is probably not a fun mechanic - why would I touch the pluses and minuses ever again?

I am being deliberately simplistic in this specific post to illustrate the point better; I'm a relatively experienced strategy games player, otherwise I wouldn't be trying to micromanage in the first place.

I'm pretty sure lots of game punish you for trying things out if you try the wrong things. That's how you know they are the wrong thing. Like if you took all your citizens off food and onto production in Civ and your city starved to death.

But then sometimes you want to do that to rush a Wonder.

If you need to set a planet to work one particular job zero out all the other jobs and then the one left open should fill up. And then add the next most important job until the number of open jobs equals the number of pops. And then if necessary wait a few months for specialists to demote down to workers.

 

[Eled the Worm Tamer]

A system in a game having fail states is not in itself a mark of a flawed system, its a mark of a system that allows mastery, wone with actual gameplay.

I mean is Super mario Bros flawed because you die if you run up and hug goombas? Or becase the possibility exists to miss jumps? Is tentris flawed becase if you mistime a rotation you would be left with an unmanagle stack? Is Chess flawed because you have to concider placement and think beyond the preesnt move to win?

A better and more legitamate criteque at present is that the fail states are not clearly comunicated in advance, and that some features are not quite as effectave at what they try to do as they should be. For example pops going to the job where their traits are moast effectave.

The UI is a mess but the system it is giving access too is not a bad one just needing fine tuning.