Idea: Redo production mechanics.

[Cyan001]

I am beginning to seriously hate the way production process is implemented.
Waiting to begin any construction until all the required materials are 100% sourced and available is dumb - NOBODY does that. You start with a basic piece of the required stuff, and as production progresses, further supplies are being shipped and the process flows.
The good ol' method (gimme the lump sum!) Stellaris currently utilizes is just too simplistic - it's a hiccup from other RTS games where 'it just works'. But many of those games are also simplistic in their concept, something that Stellaris implies NOT to imitate... What should we have in its place is a process, that enables you to begin construction of anything you are capable of, then the ongoing construction siphons from your stockpiles at a pre-determined rate until it's completed. Naturally, the more you order, the faster your stockpiles go...
This would be regulated by buildings that provide 'construction capacity' (actual factories/shipyards/orbital smelters etc), effectively separating mining worlds from industrial centres. Carelessness in placing construction orders (too many at the same time) could lead to choke points...
The funny thing is, Stellaris already uses a system almost exactly like the above for... Research

Should not be too difficult to copy-code, I suppose?

 

[Dalinski]

I really love the way Hearts of Iron 4 does its production.

 

[terrycloth]

Stellaris has the same consideration as RTS games where you want to queue up a bazillion things at once, though. Punishing the player for that would be really annoying.

I guess ideally you'd want it to work like it does now as long as you have the resources, but if you didn't it'd put in an order for future construction which would suck up the necessary resources as soon as they were all available. Give it a different look than a normal pending order so that you could tell it was happening.

 

[dying0d]

Use the Hoi 3 system then, parallel and serial production lines, then

 

[praftd]

I always hated the way HOI did production; it always felt like nothing was ever finished and you have to keep funneling resources to endless projects. While you are able to produce things, everything was a hassle and felt like there was little pay out. I'd rather not see that come to stellaris.

I like where Stellaris keeps it simple. Save up for things and buy them. No fuss no muss. Instant gratification. No worrying about running out because you know you have enough.

Otherwise you are going to have a million different things siphoning your resources endlessly.

 

[AmpsterMan]

I really love the way Hearts of Iron 4 does its production.

It would indeed be pretty cool to have factories be assigned to production lines of equipment (say, lasers or whatever) and have spaceports assemble those pieces.

EDIT: my favorite, however, would be if we can get interstellar corporations and such producing different classes of goods like in Victoria 2.

 

[Cyan001]

I always hated the way HOI did production; it always felt like nothing was ever finished and you have to keep funneling resources to endless projects. While you are able to produce things, everything was a hassle and felt like there was little pay out. I'd rather not see that come to stellaris.

I like where Stellaris keeps it simple. Save up for things and buy them. No fuss no muss. Instant gratification. No worrying about running out because you know you have enough.

Otherwise you are going to have a million different things siphoning your resources endlessly.

Well, if you insist on putting too many things on queue, this will most definitely going to happen
Matter of self-discipline, I suppose...

Also, under the current system, it always takes extra time to actually get things done: First wait X time to get resources, then wait Y time to get it actually produced.

HoI (or similar) system means that X and Y happen simultaneously.

 

[Cyan001]

Also, cancelling projects.
Currently, you get 100% refund, even if it's almost complete. Need to say this: It is ridiculous.
Even assuming super-duper-efficient recycling, AT LEAST your energy investment should be gone...

 

[dying0d]

I'd love a more in depth logistical production system akin to hoi4, but that would make the game needlessly complex.

I would learn to mod to have npc entities produce wither intermediaries, or finished products, and use the hoi4 system to produce the other (and consumer goods)

But again, that would be a nightmare to code for the ai which is lacking a bit anyways, and add huge amounts of micro to the game.

A hoi3 system, where resources are gobbled up as progression on a project completes, seems more reasonable. Have every world with a build queue that can be filled up with spaceports, upgrades and buildings and/or consumer goods, to be disseminated through the empire.

It would add complexity to the current system and more management problems, but you have a reason to bloat in minerals as your income could go negative if you have enough things building at once, which is a more accurate representation of logistics in production than it is now.

It would open up options for industrial buildings as well to increases in question capacity(if you set a mineral output limit on queues) and additional queues running parallel to eachother (as well as research projects for the same). It would add some depth to the MI'd game beyond stockpile your fleet and start map painting.

Wouldn't solve the one battle war dilemma though, but could soften it's effects a tad seeing as multiple parallel queues would build faster than a single spaceport

 

[Almond_Brown]

"seeing as multiple parallel queues would build faster than a single spaceport"

Not sure how you see that working. Given we have "parallel" build queues now, with each Space Port building independent of each other given there is sufficient resources present versus having 4 Stations dividing up "some undetermined incoming value of resources, among themselves to produce 4 unit in the same time frame as 1 station with resources allocated making 4 singles in the same time frame...

HOI4 allows parallel build lines but without the required resource income, ALL lines suffer a penalty to production time, it is not set so Line one goes FULL and the other wait thier turns for resources.

 

[dying0d]

Pretty simple, take one planet, you can build in serial one spaceship at a time

Now you have parallel queues per planet, so you can build multiple spaceships at a time

 

[Dalinski]

Pretty simple, take one planet, you can build in serial one spaceship at a time

Now you have parallel queues per planet, so you can build multiple spaceships at a time

And then you could have all sorts of things affecting their efficiency from, pirate activity to, blockades, to factions, to leaders, too using old technologies for a long time to, policies, ethics and government type.......

Rare minerals like crystal plating might also be in short supply and reduce efficiency.

 

[dying0d]

Well if the Hoi 4 system where equipment is built, I guess. But I'd stay away from that system in stellarus. This is an empire management game not a production simulation.

I was speaking more on the lines of hoi3 type production. But you hit on all the extra stuff that could be utilized by assets already central to the game (factions, happiness, tech efficiency leaders, Pirates that are meaningful)

 

[clockworkBabbag]

You're going to have to give a whole bunch more than "I would just like it better that way" as an argument, because there are plenty of people that are fine with not micromanaging resources for production.

Your proposal adds the minor benefit of not waiting to start initial construction, at the cost of a far less intuitive sense of what you can actually afford. This is not a good tradeoff. You try and argue that this is a good thing because it adds complexity, but complexity for the sake of complexity is awful. Complexity is the means to an end, not the end itself. If your complex mechanics don't add a net positive to the game, all you've done is turn people off from the game. There's a reason games don't do it the way you describe - paying a lump sum up-front is hardly an obsolete or archaic way of paying for production.

Furthermore, this isn't even in the scope of the game. Unlike HOI, there is nothing in the premise or the core mechanics of Stellaris that implies that micromanaging production like this even makes sense to include. The places to add depth and complexity to Stellaris are things like exploration/storytelling, pop/sector management, and diplomacy/warfare.

 

[dying0d]

Pressed for time but

They've added (in a future patch) a mineral sink to stem mineral bloat heading into midgame.

Doomstacks bug many players, but more annoying is the one battle victories in war which faster production would help curb or at least allow recovery from if you lose.

It would add another dimension to strategy in more planets to get you're standard space stations production line, to more techs and another thing for the factions/happiness to effect. Which is another grumble for many people (and I can't fathom how the dlc patch will address this)

And at least in the simple system I proposed, all that would be added is another menu, a production ledger for you to queue up ships (or more if doing it for buildings isn't much hassle) which I don't see changing the cost or the time frame of their construction for any reason, just how you pay, and how many can be built at once on a given planet (depends on how many lines one can get thru techs/buildings added in)

 

[clockworkBabbag]

So, I was originally responding to the OP. Could have been more clear, sorry.

That said... no, your idea is full of pretty much the same problems. And honestly, I feel the issue of how to implement production lines is kind of orthogonal to the topic of the thread? Let's just stick to the claim that continuous consumption of resources is a better way to pay for things.

Remember, Stellaris isn't HOI. HOI explicitly has a focus on production and industry because industrial capacity was kind of integral to the ability of nations to wage war in the WWII era. This is not the case in Stellaris. The mechanics I'd say are integral to Stellaris and the apparent vision of the game are exploration/storytelling and pop management, with a side of diplomacy/war to add an element of conflict/competition (and to allow for more of the whole storytelling thing).

You either need to provide a decent argument as to why production micromanagement like this is in the scope of the game, or you need a rock-solid argument as to why this is so beneficial to the game that it should be included even if it's not in-scope. Any time spent developing this is time that could be spent improving already existing features or fleshing out the core features I mentioned in order to make the game a better experience.

So, let's get started:

Doomstacks bug many players, but more annoying is the one battle victories in war which faster production would help curb or at least allow recovery from if you lose.

Production time is a terrible argument, because tweaking production time by changing the payment method so you don't need to save up a lump sum up front is incredibly unintuitive, both from a design perspective and from the player's perspective. If production times need to be faster, the right decision is to just change the time it takes to build ships - it's a visible parameter built right into the interface.

It would add another dimension to strategy in more planets to get you're standard space stations production line, to more techs and another thing for the factions/happiness to effect. Which is another grumble for many people (and I can't fathom how the dlc patch will address this)

OK, but... why is this something that should be in the game? Provide an argument as to why Stellaris should have production be a core part of its strategy. This is exactly what I was talking about in the first place: I keep seeing people say they want something without stopping to consider whether it actually belongs in the game or not. You can't just say "This would totally be a good feature to have in the game." Why is strategic depth with production something that should be in the game? Why not have the strategic depth focus on other areas that are more in line with what Stellaris is?

I also don't have a clue what you're talking about with factions/happiness and the new patch. One of the biggest things they talked about for the new patch was the faction overhaul. There's an entire dev diary on it. Factions and unhappiness are definitely not something you can just ignore anymore.

And at least in the simple system I proposed, all that would be added is another menu, a production ledger for you to queue up ships (or more if doing it for buildings isn't much hassle) which I don't see changing the cost or the time frame of their construction for any reason, just how you pay, and how many can be built at once on a given planet (depends on how many lines one can get thru techs/buildings added in)

This is missing something important: with lump sum, you know exactly whether or not you can afford something right now, and how soon it will arrive after you actually purchase it. This knowledge is not as clear with a queued production mechanic. Say you've queued up just enough that you can afford with your current minerals, and now you want to build something else. Clearly it won't arrive at the earliest possible time according to how long the base build cost is. But this information is something the player has to remember rather than be explicitly told (a decision/pitfall that has its place in a game focused on production, like HOI, but does not necessarily have a place in Stellaris). The player also explicitly loses information that they knew in the lump sum model: they no longer know exactly how production will be affected. How long will it take to produce the new ship if you will be running a resource deficit? Will the system try to evenly distribute resources, thus slowing down everything equally? Will it just do everything in the queued order? Should the player have control over this queue (which is inherently more micro)? If the player does have control over it, how cumbersome would it be to manage such a queue for purchases such as ships, buildings, and all sorts of space-based structures (if you're seriously suggesting this, you have to go all the way. It does not make any sense to have some things be queued production and some things be lump sum).

There is a reason games have worked this way in the past and the idea that it's obsolete, as the OP claims, is ludicrous.

 

[Cyan001]

You're going to have to give a whole bunch more than "I would just like it better that way" as an argument, because there are plenty of people that are fine with not micromanaging resources for production.

Your proposal adds the minor benefit of not waiting to start initial construction, at the cost of a far less intuitive sense of what you can actually afford. This is not a good tradeoff. You try and argue that this is a good thing because it adds complexity, but complexity for the sake of complexity is awful. Complexity is the means to an end, not the end itself. If your complex mechanics don't add a net positive to the game, all you've done is turn people off from the game. There's a reason games don't do it the way you describe - paying a lump sum up-front is hardly an obsolete or archaic way of paying for production.

Furthermore, this isn't even in the scope of the game. Unlike HOI, there is nothing in the premise or the core mechanics of Stellaris that implies that micromanaging production like this even makes sense to include. The places to add depth and complexity to Stellaris are things like exploration/storytelling, pop/sector management, and diplomacy/warfare.

You missed the point, buddy.
This is not complication for complication's sense, as the system I suggested is hardly a complicared one. And why did you left out the part, where I said that such process is actually already implemented in Stellaris, but for other things (research)? If this can clearly work and you have no problem with it, why the negativity towards virtually the same system being copied to a different part of the game? Also, there are games that clearly prove this is a workable system (Total Annihilation, Supreme Commander series to name a few).
The need for clarity (how many X can I afford?) is a moot point. Compare with EC maintenance: Are you concerned (like, constantly monitor) how many X (battleships, labs, etc) can you afford to have at a point? Of course you're not. And how many times do you 'explicitly' know the exact amount of X's, Y's and Z's you can build at any given time? Nobody plays with a calculator on their lap and a spreadsheet open in the background. All you worry about is to maintain a positive EC balance. Something you can check anytime on your 'expenditures' list - having a progressive construction system would bring exactly the same.
Current system is clearly more suited to RTS. Stellaris deserves something better. It does not have to be HoI system, but why does it have to be current simplistic, either?
Being 4X, constructing (eXpanding) is as vital as eXploring, particularly mid to late game, where there is little to no exploring left.
The reason some games worked 'this way' is because 'this way' suited their simplified game rules. Honestly, the only difference between games like 'Dune', 'CnC', 'Starcraft' etc... is the graphic sprites and map aesthetics. But when boiled down, they are all the same in nature.
As I said earlier, there are games that manage production flow instead just production cost. The idea is neither as complicated as you imply, nor ill-suited for 4X game.
Basically, anyone who can manage a positive EC income, would be able to manage flowing- cost production system.

What is ludicrous is to insist that there is no further improvement possible to a given aspect of Stellaris. We know the game will grow, it will change.

 

[dying0d]

You missed the point, buddy.
This is not complication for complication's sense, as the system I suggested is hardly a complicared one. And did you miss the part
When I said it's actually already implemented in Stellaris? Just for other things (research). If this can clearly work and you have no problem with it, why the negativity towards virtually the same system being copied to a different part of the game? Also, there are games that clearly prove this is a workable system (Total Annihilation, Supreme Commander series to name a few).
The need for clarity (how many X can I afford?) is a moot point. Compare with EC maintenance: Are you concerned (like, constabtly monitor) how many X (battleships, labs, etc) can you afford to have currently? Of course you're not. And how many times do you 'explicitly' know the exact amount of X's, Y's and Z's you can build at any given time? Nobody plays with a calculator on their lap and a spreadsheet open in the background. All you worry about is to maintain a positive EC balance. Something you can check anytime on your 'expenditures' list - having a progressive construction system would bring exactly the same.
Current system is clearly more suited to RTS. Stellaris deserves something better. It does not have to be HoI system, but why does it have to be current simplistic, either?
Being 4X, constructing (eXpanding) is as vital as eXploring, particularly mid to late game, where there is little to no exploring left.
The reason some games worked 'this way' is because 'this way' suited their simplified game rules. Honestly, the only difference between games like 'Dune', 'CnC', 'Starcraft' etc... is the graphic sprites and map aesthetics. But when boiled down, they are all the same in nature.
As I said earlier, there are games that manage production flow instead just production cost. The idea is neither as complicated as you imply, nor ill-suited for 4X game.
Basically, anyone who can manage a positive EC income, would be able to manage flowing- cost production system.

What is ludicrous is to insist that there is no further improvement possible to a given aspect of Stellaris. We know the game will grow, it will change.

To be fair, I was citing HoI3 since it is literally the same thing I put forth expounding on your idea, they use ic and resources in Hoi but using just minerals (the simplified version of all the wierd industrial materials a Sci fi civ might need) in the same vein as HoI, is basically as you said, a more natural progression to build things.

It also would add to the overall give/take of empirean age mentioned as you sacrifice future stockpiling to start construction of things now. The other side of that coin being you cam run a huge deficit for a bit if you need things now, and dip into the stockpile for short term production boost.

Both can be expanded to interact with factions (rather than just -% to an output on a pop or planet, you can also limit production capacity ie minerals per day or what not,) and also add a few more things for factions to whine about (labor unions?) To further define an empire.

These types of additions would flesh out some of the same-y governments, and allow a more tangible system that is more than just a 'build' with options (though I have no problem with that, but certain governments should be better than others in areas, as well as the tie in with ethos and future dlc stuff concerning ethics drift)

EDIT: by governments I mean government types. Ie materialist based are good at science etc, wouldn't that also lend to production being a tad more efficient? They are materialists after all...

 

[jalapen0]

It would indeed be pretty cool to have factories be assigned to production lines of equipment (say, lasers or whatever) and have spaceports assemble those pieces.

I like this idea. As long as managing the logistics are fun and easy. Automated cargo ships would be required.

 

[rcasale]

I am beginning to seriously hate the way production process is implemented.
Waiting to begin any construction until all the required materials are 100% sourced and available is dumb - NOBODY does that.

I agree. Mostly because having to save up adds needless micro. If I want 10 destroyers, I should be able to queue up 10 destroyers and have the resources automatically deducted as production goes. As it stands currently, I have to wait for the resources to stock pile, then build a destroyer, then wait for the resources to stock pile, and then build a destroyer. I could wait around until I have the resources to queue up 10 destroyers at once, but then I'm wasting time that could be used for production.

A production project should consume resources from your stockpile over time as it's being built.