Make auto-survey tech available earlier for Hyper Drives

[Cagliostro]

To me it is just one of the more clumsy aspects of the game as it stands. There are plenty of ways to ensure a 'different' early game besides forced micro-management. The most obvious being some actual reason to *want* to micromanage.

The argument that it is intended to cause a certain kind of behavior is really not a good argument for a mechanic which as you must realize by now (after arguing for a few pages) is really not working for at least a small cross-section of the players. The decision to make the player do more busy work until they develop a technology is at best difficult to justify, and at worst a bad design decision. To many people it feels like an artificial out-of-game punishment. Enough of those kinds of mechanics cause people to play other games.

I understand that for you (and likely for the designers) design intent is important, but I believe it would be more productive to brainstorm ways to make early game decisions more meaningful - to address that design intent, rather than simply opposing a change in the current rules.

 

[kalauer]

I would not call the manual exploration a mechanic, but even so: While it is obvious that some people dislike it (and this is what I said for some pages now, it seems to me that these people mostly dislike the idea of having an unusual early game and just find the feature of manual exploration a nice angle of attack. That's why my point is not defending the feature or claiming it does a good job, but showing what it is supposed to do.

Thus I agree that it is more productive to try to improve the early game by adding motivation instead of arguing what could be scratched. Why I favor this order of things? First, because there is no need to hurry because mods deliver what is asked for to whoever wants it and second because it ensures that the concept is not abandoned gradually for the sake of casualization (or, to have some change left, streamlining). Because, as we have heard often here, some people already don't care for their scientists.

I wish to thank you for coming up with this line of argumentation which I obviously did not manage to convey to other people.

 

[Zaltys]

Mods are not an answer to everything.
Some of us prefer to play in ironman.

 

[kalauer]

Mods are not an answer to everything.
Some of us prefer to play in ironman.

Then do so. But I would call it unreasonable to demand Ironman AND a customized game.

And while mods are not the answer to everything (who said so?) they very well seem to be a viable answer to this.

 

[Everstill]

And I guess this is the point we will not agree upon, with everything else just being the consequence: I want to care and I believe the game is designed that you ought to care. As I repeatedly stated, it does not do a good job to make you care. But this means, maybe in part as the posting I quoted below suggests, adding features to strengthen the idea, not remove them.

I don't want to "not care" about my leaders and scientists, i'm saying that right now, I, and a lot of prople don't care a little bit about their leaders and scientists because it literally does not matter. Forcing me to manually click things don't make me care about them not a single bit more.

And to finish this argument, let's get to the final proof. Have you watched last week Stellaris dev streaming??

Wiz send some ships to explore with shift click and simple don't cared about them. The ship eventually exploded by a bad anomaly, his reaction was "well, too bad" and brought another ship and hired another scientist. After some time a ship entered a system and died for a monster. His reaction? Just cursing his unlucky that a second scientist died. Brought another ship, another scientis, shift clicked everything, done.

How are you trying to justify this thing if the lead dev himself showed exactly how people playing Stellaris react about their Scientists? Don't giving a damn about them.

I will not even talk about the Horizon Signals event where you literally feed scientists to the black hole, because, well, who cares?

Thus I would argue that anyone who dislikes this design decision has the (->) option to use the mods giving him what he wants.

Tell me: what the difference between having that option there, and you can use it or not use it, or having to mod it?? Why they don't remove the crisis on/off option number of fallen empires numbers options and every other option?? You can just mod everything anyway.

This is a so small thing, that it just fucks archivements and etc for no gain at all.

I would not call the manual exploration a mechanic, but even so: While it is obvious that some people dislike it (and this is what I said for some pages now, it seems to me that these people mostly dislike the idea of having an unusual early game and just find the feature of manual exploration a nice angle of attack. That's why my point is not defending the feature or claiming it does a good job, but showing what it is supposed to do.

What the hell? Where you get this kind of conclusion?? I really want the unusual early game with exploration things to do (because there is nothing to do in the early game), I just don't want to click things for no reason at all. Also, maybe we should remove the "Survey System" option?? Let's make people click in every single planet and star to survey, i'm sure it will make a better early game and people will care a lot more about the science ship.

Thus I agree that it is more productive to try to improve the early game by adding motivation instead of arguing what could be scratched. Why I favor this order of things? First, because there is no need to hurry because mods deliver what is asked for to whoever wants it and second because it ensures that the concept is not abandoned gradually for the sake of casualization (or, to have some change left, streamlining). Because, as we have heard often here, some people already don't care for their scientists.

I wish to thank you for coming up with this line of argumentation which I obviously did not manage to convey to other people.

Even the devs themselves don't care about their scientists!

And just one question: what will change for people that like to manually explore, having the auto explore option avaliable since the start??

 

[Thygrrr]

You do know that if you hold down shift, you can enqueue lots of orders in one go?

That limits micro a lot.

I wish I could properly attach a fleet to my science ship, though. I hate to die to a small detachment of pirates or a lone hostile corvette.

 

[kalauer]

And to finish this argument, let's get to the final proof. Have you watched last week Stellaris dev streaming??

[...]

How are you trying to justify this thing if the lead dev himself showed exactly how people playing Stellaris react about their Scientists? Don't giving a damn about them.

I will not even talk about the Horizon Signals event where you literally feed scientists to the black hole, because, well, who cares?

What this proves is that the idea that one should care is not supported by the right features, forced manual exploration being one of them. However, I don' know why you wanted to prove this since it has been granted several times in the discussion. I was hoping we were one step further by now, judging by the last posts.

Maybe to repeat it once more: Yes, the feature of forced manual exploration does a bad job at supporting the idea of enriching early game by (for 4X-standards) unusual relation to the scientists (with the intent to convey the feeling of really exploring, see Dev diary 1). But while your conclusion seems to be to remove the feature without replacement and thus weakening the concept even more, I argue that it is better to replace the feature with ideas to support the concept, as I see it as an important and distinguishing element of the game.

Tell me: what the difference between having that option there, and you can use it or not use it, or having to mod it?? Why they don't remove the crisis on/off option number of fallen empires numbers options and every other option?? You can just mod everything anyway.

Apart from you just starting to rant here, if you don't see a difference, why complain? If I try do take the point of view of a developer here, I just wouldn't like to jump at single features and remove them but instead think of the entire concept. After all, this is no game-breaking bug that needs urgent address. It is a nuisance for some people. One that can easily be relieved.

This is a so small thing, that it just ****s archivements and etc for no gain at all.

What is the "etc." in this instance?

What the hell? Where you get this kind of conclusion??

It is not a conclusion but an impression, hence the "it seems to me". And it does so because the only other alternative to me is that e.g. you do not consider or recognize (or approve) the purpose of the feature you want to remove. So far, I can not remember hearing about how the concept of early exploration can be strengthened (except for the last three/four posts but we seem to be falling behind them now), and at the same time, no one seems to deny that early auto-exploration does detach the player from the scientists.

Even the devs themselves don't care about their scientists!

While this might also be related to the nature of streams, where one wants to use what little time one has, we had this above. Besides, what makes you think they play the game differently? I guess it is a safe assumption that features that don't work for most of us also don't work for them. But they might understand the big picture better.

And just one question: what will change for people that like to manually explore, having the auto explore option avaliable since the start??

I believe we had this some pages ago; I notice on myself that I am lazy enough to still use the auto-explore feature when it is there although I know that it weakens the exploration concept. Another argument brought up was that it might put the scientists at a greater risk in the early game since you lose control about where they fly to some degree.

I would like to add in this regard, that everything you don not like to do is unnecessary micro to you, which is understandable. Maybe one will have to accept at some point, that there are game concepts in stellaris one does not like/understand. Focusing on the scientists and their journey will always involve some micro; even the events and anomalies can be seen this way; and when I just want an ordinary 4X, of course I will call it unnecessary. But the solution is not removing the concept but making it more attractive.

 

[Zaltys]

You do know that if you hold down shift, you can enqueue lots of orders in one go?

I've found that to be a waste of time, because those orders get scrapped as soon as the ship runs into enemies or into an anomaly that needs to be manually scanned. Dunno what most players do, but I tend to scan those immediately. Which clears the queue.

It's also hard to coordinate the queues for multiple science ships, when there's so many systems and the game doesn't show which ones are already queued to be scanned by the other ships.

 

[Cagliostro]

Saying that a feature is 'supposed to' do something is absolutely and totally irrelevant to whether it ought to be kept or scrapped. It is NOT doing what you suggest. It is a failed feature.

That's not a huge terrible thing; games try out a lot of things, and some of them fail.

It is not a good feature but it supports a good concept.

If your position is now 'yes, the feature ought to be scrapped, but it ought to be replaced with something', I do not disagree. But note that that makes this entire thread largely a discussion between people who are saying:

a) the feature is bad, and ought to be removed
and
b) the feature is bad, and ought to be replaced

 

[kalauer]

I would add to this that a)-people either disregard or disapprove the concept, which makes for a bigger and more relevant distinction than you seem to imply. On purpose, I presume .

 

[Cagliostro]

To you, perhaps - to me and to the original poster it is more of a tangential concern.

The value of a mechanic needs to stand on its own, in addition to having a purpose. The mechanic is annoying and frustrates people. The distinction as to whether it is removed or repaired is not primary to me, but it needs to go.

 

[Meneliki]

Autosurvey should not be available day 1(the early game exploration feeling is a large part of Stellaris' charm), but it's current pacing is a bit off. By the time you get it, you've probably explored a good portion of the galaxy, or are boxed in by other empires whom have either closed their borders to you if your an agressive empire, or they're friendly with you and you've probably traded star charts with them. I feel like it should be weighted to be slightly earlier in the game. Or removed altogether. I can see why they put it in the game, surveying can be alot of clicks later in the game, but like I said by the time you get the tech, you don't really need it anymore.. and to give it to us too early would be to ruin the early game experience. So yeah. It's a tricky one.

 

[kalauer]

To you, perhaps - to me and to the original poster it is more of a tangential concern.

The value of a mechanic needs to stand on its own, in addition to having a purpose. The mechanic is annoying and frustrates people. The distinction as to whether it is removed or repaired is not primary to me, but it needs to go.

This seems rather short-sighted and oddly uninvolved for someone being active here. But maybe I did not articulate my former point right: For short-term relief to whoever feels this is an unbearable situation, imo mods are perfectly suited. For anything else that involves the long-term development of the game, the devs are in charge. The latter necessarily includes involving the entire concept in the considerations.

Thus, I conclude that dev-side work on this issue should not be restricted to "remove the feature" but extend to "rethink the game-phase". And yes, in this process, the feature may very well go.

 

[Cagliostro]

I don't think we are fundamentally in opposition, which is why I made the suggestions I did earlier (about making the early game more interesting). I just think we are approaching it differently.

 

[GuardianGI]

I would be disappointed if they don't add autosurvey at the start for Banks. It adds competely pointless and brainless busywork and makes the early game unfun. Kinda sad that some people are obsessed with defending this "feature".