Removal of tile system

[Juanrdp]

Outside of the East Coast, the US has an oddly scientific structure of it's cities...

No, it's just the opposite.

In several parts of the world (it's true than in Europe is more noticiable, but don't forget Middle East, Nort Africa, Far East, etc...) the cities are grow over old placements that could be traced two thousand years or more. They have their own logical layout, but the layout is related to old forgotten reasons (access to fresh water, defensive walls, etc.)

For example in my country (Spain) several of the most populated cities could be traced two thousand years, and the oldest are at least three thousand (for example Cadiz where based on a fenician settlement on the 1100ac (3117 years old).

They cientific layout of american cities is due that most of them don't have more than two hundred years, in my country even ninety five hundred of the towns in the country could be traced at least five to ten times that time. You could not compare a citie with one hundred years against one with three thousand.

You could not use modern "scientific" layouts two thousand years before most of the technology that support them where even dreamed.

And it's not only in Europe, Pekin is 3000 yers old, Varais in India 3800, Damasco 4000, several cities in Irak 3800+, serval in Israel, Palestina, Libanum again 3700+....

The oddity is the "new world", etc. not the opposite but those are countries that could not trace their history to three-five hundred years and oustide that is almost just aborigine setlements long time destroyed/abandoned.

 

[Jorgen_CAB]

Where are you exactly from? If it's Europe, then your viewpoint is a bit skewed as most of the cities are built around a less logical/scientific layout. Outside of the East Coast, the US has an oddly scientific structure of it's cities...

Same thing just different layout from different places for different reasons... I don't see the point.

The point is transportation and availability of close services such as hospitals, schools, markets, entertainment and jobs. The major factor of size of urban areas are TRANSPORTATION and INFRASTRUCTURE. As that become better and cheaper so can Urban areas grow and become fewer.

On Earth we have tended toward fewer and larger urban areas as technologies have provided the means for it. This is just a fact you can't deny... there are NO reversal of this effect.

 

[BrokenSky]

Same thing just different layout from different places for different reasons... I don't see the point.

The point is transportation and availability of close services such as hospitals, schools, markets, entertainment and jobs. The major factor of size of urban areas are TRANSPORTATION and INFRASTRUCTURE. As that become better and cheaper so can Urban areas grow and become fewer.

On Earth we have tended toward fewer and larger urban areas as technologies have provided the means for it. This is just a fact you can't deny... there are NO reversal of this effect.

To be fair, if transport got good enough, we might well end up being able to spread suburbs out so thinly it'd look nearly like a uniform distribution (except that there might be fewer, larger houses around beautiful areas, and if the transport were too expensive, there might still be areas of high density, cheap accommodation close to work centers). But if we managed to get something equivalent to "teleport to work" levels of transport (and cheap enough everyone can use it, and also done in a way which didn't raise philosophical implications like "doesn't this just kill the person using it and make a copy at their destination?" which again would dissuade some people) it might be enough to basically render cities pointless since the main reason for them is to get as much important stuff as possible all within walking/driving distance.

 

[Jorgen_CAB]

To be fair, if transport got good enough, we might well end up being able to spread suburbs out so thinly it'd look nearly like a uniform distribution (except that there might be fewer, larger houses around beautiful areas, and if the transport were too expensive, there might still be areas of high density, cheap accommodation close to work centers). But if we managed to get something equivalent to "teleport to work" levels of transport (and cheap enough everyone can use it, and also done in a way which didn't raise philosophical implications like "doesn't this just kill the person using it and make a copy at their destination?" which again would dissuade some people) it might be enough to basically render cities pointless since the main reason for them is to get as much important stuff as possible all within walking/driving distance.

Yes... that is also what I said in an earlier post. If you had Star Trek teleportation technology and it was cheap you could have people spread more evenly. I don't think we see those kinds of societies in Stellaris as far as I know.

 

[Jin_Cardassian]

I imagine that settlement density could be a matter of cultural disposition and biology of the species in question. Some could live in hyperdesnse arcologies, others spread out across worlds in artificial food forests and small pop-up hackerspaces. It's space opera, and there are meant to be vast and stark differences between the ways aliens live (or even different political clades within species).

This is really orthagonal to the tile system, but I don't see any reason you couldn't model this without it.

 

[Silver-fox]

"This reminds me of a game that is 22 years old!" Exactly and that's the problem. It's a huge step back. It's an admission that they're either to lazy or incapable of making the Ai work and want to decrease their own workload. It's a removal of a vrtual aspect of the game which made planets somewhat unique, gave them character and allowed for more immersion. It's a switch to an extremely simplistic excell esque statistic system that was dated 20 years ago.

And the tiling system was done in Galactic Civilizations 2, a 13 year old game. It too is dated and could be improved - and Stellaris' version doesn't improve on a 13 year old version of it.

As for calling it simplistic, we don't know how the new version will be, but let assume that, yeah it is. As is the tiling system. Plop down a building on the appropriate tile, make sure its occupied and occasionally press a yellow button to upgrade. Lets not pretend the current system is this wonderful, in-depth system - it really isn't. At the very least, its a facade of depth.

I'd also argue that it really does nothing to provide uniqueness to a planet. Red/yellow tiles are to be removed, clear tiles are to be built on. Rinse and repeat for every planet. That's not unique, unless you consider the different placements of several buildings to count as unique and immersive planets. I certainly don't. I'd also argue that removing said red, blocked tiles, you're actually making the planet more generic.

There are so much more fun and interesting ideas that could make a planet seem unique and alive - having decade old systems (which the tiling system is) doesn't cut it.
Personally, i'd have a whole generated map/view of the planet (if Gal Civ 2 can do it, Stellaris should be able to as well) that, instead of having the old tiling system drawn over it, changed over time as the planet got built upon. Literally a bird's eye view of your planet.
Set the planet to be more trade orientated? You'd see more trade ships come and go. More pollution if it was a mining world. Skyscrapers or single dwellings depending on population. Cities that grew. Destruction from orbital bombardment leaving scars and craters on the surface, rather than just tiles to be cleared and forever forgotten about. Or machinery that slowly spread to envelope the planet if you were a machine race hell-bent on consuming all living things.

You don't need to have tiles that show minerals on one tile, and energy on another, and research one yet another. Its arbitrary.

Do i believe for a second Stellaris is going to go this route? No, of course not. We're stuck in the realms of decade old systems, it seems. But its proof there's different ways of doing stuff than a tiling system, especially if you want unique and immersive planets.

 

[Pavo]

I MAY have a solution that more or less pleases everyone and is easier to implement....

Reading through 32 pages these seem to be the main points in favor of removal.
-Removing tiles may "decrease micromanagement"
-A new system may aid the AI by streamlining production
-Some find the new system interesting or even a "better" representation of ruling a space empire

I also mostly read 3 reasons for keeping the tiles (much of which I agree with) and some appear diametrically opposed to the above which is what makes this such a difficult conversation and likely difficult decision. I will list them in coinciding order;
-Many enjoy the management of the tiles.
-The current system could be fixed/improved rather then scrapped.
-Many consider the tiles to be Immersive, artistic etc.

The issues of micromanagement AND streamlining could be fixed with an "auto update" click box on planets, but this would appear difficult to implement....the answer may lie an a mechanic that was placed there from day 1 specifically for this purpose - SECTORS. We already have sectors but they are perhaps not functioning optimally. This is the SAME issue for AI in general. In many play-throughs those who like to micromanage or want to stay competitive will build up every planet in a planned future sector by hand first then set it to a sector - problem is the AI enemies aren't doing the same. I'm not expecting a complete AI rewrite (actually scrapping tiles for a new system would likely require much more work) but simply an adjustment to the current weighting calculations that govern AI building. IMO this has been more or less accomplished beautifully by Glavius's Ultimate AI Megamod as an example. With this mod you already CAN just put everything into a sector and the AI poses a nice challenge, doesn't starve itself build logically etc so I could argue the micromanagement issue is solved that simply. To further streamline for those who want it without removing it for those who don't an AI checkbox on core systems can simply tell them to function as an independent "sector"......
Now for those who never want to deal with a tile again they don't ever need to while for those who love the system is is very much still there to min/max and PERHAPS outperform the AI as a reward for the effort. I say "perhaps" because of my next suggestion.

So far I believe I found a compromise that answers the first two points in favor of removal while answering all three in favor of keeping the tiles. It isn't a perfect solution though as Paradox already seems invested in changing to a slider type system and there are certainly many in favor of this. I would beg here to take the idea of adding and improving rather then completely changing the current game and scrapping a system many like and find unique. So....why not ADD a more streamlined slider on top of the tile system. I propose the following

-While tiles can represent populations employed in state controlled industries sliders can represent the entire rest of the population.
-Moving one industry's slider up or down can give a flat income and a bonus/malus to the tile system
-A tax slider can increase or neutralize this bonus/malus and effect happiness and growth

For example on a 10 tile planet I built 3 research, 3 mining, and 3 energy buildings making 9 plus my capital for sake of simplicity. Let's say I want more research at this stage of the game. While I CAN change out tiles if i choose I can very easily adjust the slider to put more of the people into the general research industry Let's say by sliding two up bringing my energy and mineral sliders down 1 each....The BASE energy and minerals would go down by let's say 3 while research goes up by 6 (2 for each tech) All tile building will still make their own income but now a bonus 20% will be applied to tile research while a 10% malus is applied to mining and energy tiles.

This allows changes to be made fast and easy while building on the current system and still allowing as much micro as desired for those that want it but perhaps making it less important over all. In my example above i'm assuming that the planet makes on its own (separate from tiles) 3 minerals, 3 energy, and 3 research (1 point per tech) at neutral sliders and default tax...this can be increased by increasing tax against happiness and/or favoring one industry over the others but at worst can go to zero in production. This should make AI even better on top of the weighting and to offset this bigger income we can either just increase expenses across the board for ships/stations and even more so for the tiles which are now an investment for those that care.

But I haven't mentioned food! It can certainly just be added to the planetary income as X number of points and change the above example to a 13 tile word with 3 food to even it out for simplicity but I prefer keeping food Tile based for expansion and state business (maybe make colony ships require large initial food cost!) and instead let the food slider for the non tile general population effect happiness and growth- for example increase the food slider to offset the tax slider or grow the planet quickly at the expense of "free" minerals etc and perhaps a malus/bonus still towards tiles.

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

I urge that we try to BUILD on current systems to make the game better, not just different. I want to point out that with a slider only system there is still plenty of potential to have less then optimal AI, be less unique then many similar games etc.... but most importantly for me and I believe many others the tiles are one of the central ACTIVITIES to the game. What makes Paradox grand strategy special is the huge scope and open ended evolving gameplay but with this comes down time. It's not a case of maxing out the turn as with turn based (where micromanagement gets very tedious) not is it the frenetic time management system of most real time which is usually non stop action.....Stellaris is for me about watching and participating in the slow evolution and epic story of my species but with that comes down time. I'm one who adds as many mods as possible to INCREASE my management participation and honestly I still find downtime playing with more core planets, market laws, drug policies, tons of traditions, extra ship components more events etc etc etc....What makes this game for me is AFTER a long drawn out war where I frantically fought for survival I get to come back to the tiles and make them "just a little better". When I load up a save after a few days I feel I'm taking over the government from my predecessor as I take another look at my tiles.

I understand the need to improve the game but I believe better answers can be found without scrapping systems....

As another example of how the game can improve while avoiding divisiveness I go quickly back to the heated topic of FTL removal. While I miss the options I also see some improvement with the new system....I avoided getting involved in the debate then and though I was put off initially I have come to accept the changes....with 2.0 it seemed to be perhaps "needed" however ironically with 2.1 Niven galaxy generation with hyperlane clusters I can see that perhaps it could have all been simply accomplished in hindsight without removal. Picture a 2.1 where Hyperlane is the "fast" ftl with chokepoints playing a huge role while now warp or wormholes would have a huge advantage in not worrying to much about the paths but could simply be made SUPER slow to counteract making even more diverse and interesting tactics as playing against hyperlane means defending chokepoints with bases etc while playing against the others could mean you have plenty of time to respond with as many fleets as you know where they are warping to far in advance but they can avoid your defensive installations.....IMO this would give the best of both worlds - maybe it can be looked at again in the future but for now I'm only suggesting that if the 2.1 system was thought of before 2.0 all division would have been basically avoided and the game would simply be better....Let's try this ideology moving forward!

Give us MORE and charge us for it! The previous expansions have been about the apocalypse - big war big ships new tactics, and the distant stars - more events etc respectively.
Make the next one about the populations and management...ADD the slider and then take a look at federations and vassals and this patch can come with a must have DLC. Improve the game rather then "fixing" it

 

[Jorgen_CAB]

I would just say no to most of that...

The way I anticipate the new system to work is that you are still going to be able to have buildings on the planets but through districts... populations will be divided up through the different job types which then get different values depending on the districts, policies and building you have on the planet. Most likely jobs are something pops now will choose based on what they like or what is needed on the planet in a more dynamic way. This will reduce micromanagement allot and allow for the system to be tied into many more game mechanics and also remove the need for one pop per tile and building type system which is very limiting.

Perhaps planets will finally also have several habitat zones for different races to inhabit, this would make more sense than the current model.

You will be allot more rewarded managing planets when the decisions you make are strategic more than tactical and that other systems such as politics, trade and culture can have far more interaction with the planes as a whole.

My hope is that planets also get a local store of resources to use for its economy with an overhaul of the trade/economic system, this would make for internal politics/trade so much more important...especially during wars.

 

[LaurelinRe]

I've been playing for a long time and this is my first time posting because the tile system is very important to me and a crucial part to my game! I've been keeping up with this thread, and I love this idea.

I MAY have a solution that more or less pleases everyone and is easier to implement....

Reading through 32 pages these seem to be the main points in favor of removal.
-Removing tiles may "decrease micromanagement"
-A new system may aid the AI by streamlining production
-Some find the new system interesting or even a "better" representation of ruling a space empire

I also mostly read 3 reasons for keeping the tiles (much of which I agree with) and some appear diametrically opposed to the above which is what makes this such a difficult conversation and likely difficult decision. I will list them in coinciding order;
-Many enjoy the management of the tiles.
-The current system could be fixed/improved rather then scrapped.
-Many consider the tiles to be Immersive, artistic etc.

The issues of micromanagement AND streamlining could be fixed with an "auto update" click box on planets, but this would appear difficult to implement....the answer may lie an a mechanic that was placed there from day 1 specifically for this purpose - SECTORS. We already have sectors but they are perhaps not functioning optimally. This is the SAME issue for AI in general. In many play-throughs those who like to micromanage or want to stay competitive will build up every planet in a planned future sector by hand first then set it to a sector - problem is the AI enemies aren't doing the same. I'm not expecting a complete AI rewrite (actually scrapping tiles for a new system would likely require much more work) but simply an adjustment to the current weighting calculations that govern AI building. IMO this has been more or less accomplished beautifully by Glavius's Ultimate AI Megamod as an example. With this mod you already CAN just put everything into a sector and the AI poses a nice challenge, doesn't starve itself build logically etc so I could argue the micromanagement issue is solved that simply. To further streamline for those who want it without removing it for those who don't an AI checkbox on core systems can simply tell them to function as an independent "sector"......
Now for those who never want to deal with a tile again they don't ever need to while for those who love the system is is very much still there to min/max and PERHAPS outperform the AI as a reward for the effort. I say "perhaps" because of my next suggestion.

So far I believe I found a compromise that answers the first two points in favor of removal while answering all three in favor of keeping the tiles. It isn't a perfect solution though as Paradox already seems invested in changing to a slider type system and there are certainly many in favor of this. I would beg here to take the idea of adding and improving rather then completely changing the current game and scrapping a system many like and find unique. So....why not ADD a more streamlined slider on top of the tile system. I propose the following

-While tiles can represent populations employed in state controlled industries sliders can represent the entire rest of the population.
-Moving one industry's slider up or down can give a flat income and a bonus/malus to the tile system
-A tax slider can increase or neutralize this bonus/malus and effect happiness and growth

For example on a 10 tile planet I built 3 research, 3 mining, and 3 energy buildings making 9 plus my capital for sake of simplicity. Let's say I want more research at this stage of the game. While I CAN change out tiles if i choose I can very easily adjust the slider to put more of the people into the general research industry Let's say by sliding two up bringing my energy and mineral sliders down 1 each....The BASE energy and minerals would go down by let's say 3 while research goes up by 6 (2 for each tech) All tile building will still make their own income but now a bonus 20% will be applied to tile research while a 10% malus is applied to mining and energy tiles.

This allows changes to be made fast and easy while building on the current system and still allowing as much micro as desired for those that want it but perhaps making it less important over all. In my example above i'm assuming that the planet makes on its own (separate from tiles) 3 minerals, 3 energy, and 3 research (1 point per tech) at neutral sliders and default tax...this can be increased by increasing tax against happiness and/or favoring one industry over the others but at worst can go to zero in production. This should make AI even better on top of the weighting and to offset this bigger income we can either just increase expenses across the board for ships/stations and even more so for the tiles which are now an investment for those that care.

But I haven't mentioned food! It can certainly just be added to the planetary income as X number of points and change the above example to a 13 tile word with 3 food to even it out for simplicity but I prefer keeping food Tile based for expansion and state business (maybe make colony ships require large initial food cost!) and instead let the food slider for the non tile general population effect happiness and growth- for example increase the food slider to offset the tax slider or grow the planet quickly at the expense of "free" minerals etc and perhaps a malus/bonus still towards tiles.

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

I urge that we try to BUILD on current systems to make the game better, not just different. I want to point out that with a slider only system there is still plenty of potential to have less then optimal AI, be less unique then many similar games etc.... but most importantly for me and I believe many others the tiles are one of the central ACTIVITIES to the game. What makes Paradox grand strategy special is the huge scope and open ended evolving gameplay but with this comes down time. It's not a case of maxing out the turn as with turn based (where micromanagement gets very tedious) not is it the frenetic time management system of most real time which is usually non stop action.....Stellaris is for me about watching and participating in the slow evolution and epic story of my species but with that comes down time. I'm one who adds as many mods as possible to INCREASE my management participation and honestly I still find downtime playing with more core planets, market laws, drug policies, tons of traditions, extra ship components more events etc etc etc....What makes this game for me is AFTER a long drawn out war where I frantically fought for survival I get to come back to the tiles and make them "just a little better". When I load up a save after a few days I feel I'm taking over the government from my predecessor as I take another look at my tiles.

I understand the need to improve the game but I believe better answers can be found without scrapping systems....

As another example of how the game can improve while avoiding divisiveness I go quickly back to the heated topic of FTL removal. While I miss the options I also see some improvement with the new system....I avoided getting involved in the debate then and though I was put off initially I have come to accept the changes....with 2.0 it seemed to be perhaps "needed" however ironically with 2.1 Niven galaxy generation with hyperlane clusters I can see that perhaps it could have all been simply accomplished in hindsight without removal. Picture a 2.1 where Hyperlane is the "fast" ftl with chokepoints playing a huge role while now warp or wormholes would have a huge advantage in not worrying to much about the paths but could simply be made SUPER slow to counteract making even more diverse and interesting tactics as playing against hyperlane means defending chokepoints with bases etc while playing against the others could mean you have plenty of time to respond with as many fleets as you know where they are warping to far in advance but they can avoid your defensive installations.....IMO this would give the best of both worlds - maybe it can be looked at again in the future but for now I'm only suggesting that if the 2.1 system was thought of before 2.0 all division would have been basically avoided and the game would simply be better....Let's try this ideology moving forward!

Give us MORE and charge us for it! The previous expansions have been about the apocalypse - big war big ships new tactics, and the distant stars - more events etc respectively.
Make the next one about the populations and management...ADD the slider and then take a look at federations and vassals and this patch can come with a must have DLC. Improve the game rather then "fixing" it

 

[Madzai]

Okay. Another week without any news on tiles rework. I'm not asking for a DD, as we're in "post release support phase", but what was the point of "dropping the bomb" and absenting from any explanation at all?

 

[Sarno]

I would just say no to most of that...

The way I anticipate the new system to work is that you are still going to be able to have buildings on the planets but through districts... populations will be divided up through the different job types which then get different values depending on the districts, policies and building you have on the planet. Most likely jobs are something pops now will choose based on what they like or what is needed on the planet in a more dynamic way. This will reduce micromanagement allot and allow for the system to be tied into many more game mechanics and also remove the need for one pop per tile and building type system which is very limiting.

Perhaps planets will finally also have several habitat zones for different races to inhabit, this would make more sense than the current model.

You will be allot more rewarded managing planets when the decisions you make are strategic more than tactical and that other systems such as politics, trade and culture can have far more interaction with the planes as a whole.

My hope is that planets also get a local store of resources to use for its economy with an overhaul of the trade/economic system, this would make for internal politics/trade so much more important...especially during wars.

More and more I read comments like " the new system will be a lot more strategic/tactical" yadayada...

The way I understand your post, the system will probably work pretty much the same way as the one in Endless Space 2 with slight flavor from the new MoO, i.e. you have a bunch of pops, you have X slots for Y types of jobs that generate appropriate resources, and you can build one type of each building, that apply buffs to the planet/increase resource production etc...

Now let me tell you, how the whole thing works in practice. In ES2, you generaly rush the cheap buildings for material and money (or in Stellaris case it would be minerals and credits), since this will allow you to churn out rest of the buildings and ships pretty quickly. Once that is done and the population grew a bit, you then open the building list and shift + click the whole list to build all of the buildings.
And since in Stellaris, you do not produce ships in the same queue as buildings, or you do not produce them on planets at all you do not have to care about not being able to build ships on those planets. In ES2, you at least have to make a decision, where to pause the building chain to churn out a few ships from time to time. Here? Naaaaah.... Shift + click the whole list, never care about the planet any more.

Tiles at least force you to compare pop traits with the building they are assigned to, allowing you to create dedicated agrarian/mining/energy worlds, and before PDX for some unknown reason removed all of the adjancency bonus buildings except for the colony capital, you could specialize the hell out of them.

So no, the tile system is much, MUCH more strategic/tactical than this nonsense.

 

[dav77-b]

I love this new concept!

 

[Ensaine]

I prefer the present Tiles system we have.....

 

[Strykezero]

I think the current system works but there is scope for improvement.

Being able to build multiple of each building like you can with pops will speed things up considerably as well an option to enable the automatic upgrade of buildings if the planet has a governor. Having to go through 20x25 tile systems clicking upgrade on each tile is tedious and doesn't add anything to the game. Clicking 500 times to upgrade all structures in my empire is unnecessary.

If anything I want more choice when it comes to planetary buildings. It's too easy to mindlessly fill the planet without having to make any hard choices regarding buildings.

 

[Jorgen_CAB]

More and more I read comments like " the new system will be a lot more strategic/tactical" yadayada...

The way I understand your post, the system will probably work pretty much the same way as the one in Endless Space 2 with slight flavor from the new MoO, i.e. you have a bunch of pops, you have X slots for Y types of jobs that generate appropriate resources, and you can build one type of each building, that apply buffs to the planet/increase resource production etc...

Now let me tell you, how the whole thing works in practice. In ES2, you generaly rush the cheap buildings for material and money (or in Stellaris case it would be minerals and credits), since this will allow you to churn out rest of the buildings and ships pretty quickly. Once that is done and the population grew a bit, you then open the building list and shift + click the whole list to build all of the buildings.
And since in Stellaris, you do not produce ships in the same queue as buildings, or you do not produce them on planets at all you do not have to care about not being able to build ships on those planets. In ES2, you at least have to make a decision, where to pause the building chain to churn out a few ships from time to time. Here? Naaaaah.... Shift + click the whole list, never care about the planet any more.

Tiles at least force you to compare pop traits with the building they are assigned to, allowing you to create dedicated agrarian/mining/energy worlds, and before PDX for some unknown reason removed all of the adjancency bonus buildings except for the colony capital, you could specialize the hell out of them.

So no, the tile system is much, MUCH more strategic/tactical than this nonsense.

I'm 100% sure the new system will be much more in depth and inline with other Paradox systems. First of all I don't think you will be able to move Pops around through jobs, that is in my opinion a silly mechanic. I think pops will instead seek jobs based on what is available and what they are good at. This will create some interesting ways to build your planets and give them more of a character. This will also give migration a new function in the game where pops will move around based on what jobs and planet environment or political climate suits them. Pops that can't find planets with jobs, environment or political climate they like will not be as happy etc...

I'm sure the new system will start to tie more into the rest of the game such as politics, sector mechanic and trade in a way we have not had before. The point is to make planets less of resource mine into a more interesting place where things evolve and change over time based on its infrastructure and location in your empire. You will have your outlying mining or food colonies and then the inner economic powerhouses where all the trade and political power lies.

Currently planets are just not interesting and you NEVER care what is really built on them. Currently all that's interesting is that planets develop whatever resource you need to balance your overall empire needs. Pretty much nothing is local to the planet and there are NO local economy or political power what so ever, this is so boring. Faction are all empire wide, there are no planetary parties or powers to rule it etc.. I presume this will change in the future too to make things a bit more interesting.

In vanilla Stellaris empires never fraction into smaller pieces, it is WAY to easy to keep a big empire running, especially the dictatorial ones... it should be very difficult to keep these empires as one large empire without constant internal warfare or political scheming and rivalries. The religious empires are even worse in some ways. They have too much unity and happiness buffs to be realistic or interesting, these should probably splinter even more than most other empires. Keeping a coherent and unified dogma around a set of hard to define religious beliefs is really hard to do without intelligent beings having their own ides and eventually splitting said religions in many different camps. Egalitarian societies should also eventually break up as worlds grow in political power and create their own identities even if they can still remain in the same loose alliances and trading circles. But I find it hard that you could keep one huge democratic empire with one unified ethic for very long. Just different cultural or civic laws should suffice to split a democratic empire eventually even if they keep the same ethical believes. But they don't have to separate through war, not everything have to be settled through war. These could eventually be more of an autonomy system in the game that govern how self governed planets and sectors really are (with benefits and drawbacks).

Anything that can help with these mechanics is a good thing, more autonomy on a planetary scale and a local economy will go a long way to achieve such things.

The tile mechanic does not really add anything to the actual game but something to do in between wars. It is just busy work with no real depth to it. I get that some people like to solve puzzles which the tile system is, a separate puzzle game. But it has nothing to do with anything else the game has to offer in terms of future feature content.

You should reduce the puzzle game and introduce real interesting things to do in the game, that is the whole point.

They have already said that the initial Stellaris was more 4x than Grand Strategy... they are now focusing on the Grand Strategy part and that is what will be added to the game. In my opinion this is a good thing... I'm sure there are those that don't agree that this is a good thing. Opinions are opinions...

 

[Nerisande]

The problem is not tile system itself. The problem is interface and upgradable buildings. Adding "Build Multiple" button (it is already realised with robotic pops), allowing to construct building and clear tileblocker at the same time, reworking/deleting upgrades for buildings will be great and will massively reduce amount of micromanagement.

 

[Flick Montana]

I admit I did not read through the previous 32 pages (I read 1-2 and the last page). But I'll cast my opinion into the void anyways.

I don't particularly like the tile system in Stellaris. It's far too simplistic to have any strategic joy to it. I much prefer GalCiv3's tile system. But I also notice that in GalCiv3, the AI builds planets like a toddler. They make no sense half the time. I would like to think the AI could be improved rather than a fun downtime system simplified. I already lack things to do during a lot of the game when I am at peace. While I don't like micromanaging, per se, there is something to be said for designing custom worlds to best fit my needs.

I read mention of Districts in a previous post and I think the idea of an Endless Legend-style city-building system could be immensely fun on a planetary scale. I'm not much of a Eurogamer (my board gamer side terminology) and so I would really love to have more visual appeal to the world building. The colonization and building in the new Master of Orion doesn't do much for me. Oddly out-of-scale buildings and a few ships flying around looks cartoonish. I'd love to see planets really come to LIFE when you build them up. As my machines populate the world, I want to see the points of light from early colonization turn into glowing rivers and seas of habitation. As my plant people colonize, I want to see world trees, thousands of feet tall, surrounded by lush vegetation. Etc etc.

I get very bored between wars and after initial exploration (I intentionally don't use auto explore). One of the real joys of empire building games is fleshing out cities, each with a vibrant personality all its own. I think there is a big opportunity here and I would gladly shell out $10-15 for an expansion that gave us more interesting planetary development.

 

[Jtheq]

I think if you reduce too much micromanagement without giving us something to do instead stellaris will just become a waiting game. After all building singular mining stations, upgrading buildings and similar stuff is what i do for the majority of the game. Stellaris is a very slow rts ( way more so than other paradox titles) and if the empires "build themselves" players that enjoy the rts aspect of stellaris will likely be bored waiting for x to be researched and truce y to run out. I think there is a split in playerbase ( very noticable in multiplayer) of people with a rts backround that are quick enough to optimize and build while the game is going on, and others for which it is a chore that requires them to pause and interrupt their game flow. I personally got bored really quickly by the turn based 4x as those ( after aquireing a certain amount of game knowledge) boil down to just pressing next turn x times till y is done.

 

[AlphaAsh]

Okay. Another week without any news on tiles rework. I'm not asking for a DD, as we're in "post release support phase", but what was the point of "dropping the bomb" and absenting from any explanation at all?

Tsk Madzai. Because you get this thread, without influence. It's (good) market research chap.

edit - Put good in brackets

 

[Fjolsvid]

Or Martin was excited to share something he did, only for it to explode publicly.