The problem with Tall

[Badesumofu]

The problem with 'playing tall' is that it doesn't really exist. 'Wide' empires that control a lot of space and planets are just as capable of developing the space they do own as 'tall' empires. Widening your empire doesn't hinder your ability to develop the space you already have beyond the first 10 or 20 years where colonising new planets will tank growth on your capital.

So it's not wide versus tall, it's big versus small. Surprise surprise - bigger is better.

 

[Jon Severinsson]

Woah, what is going on? What's your net alloy income and fleet power? Those numbers really surprise me. Doesn't look like a tall game to me, at least. I have +85 net alloys each month and 10k fleet power at 2300.

Well, I said tallish.

I went in hard for pop growth, and was lucky and found a Gaia world 2 jumps from my home system, in addition to my two guaranteed colonies, so I pretty soon had four planets growing at top speed. Then I got even luckier and found two black holes with a hyper-lane connecting them. So I dedicated a science ship to going back and forth. After half a century of one poor guy doing nothing but that, I got the Horizon signal. A few decades after that I got 10 newly habitable planets in my home system, so in 2298 I queued up six colony ships, building 3 in parallel, jumping me from 7 to 13 planets a few years after that. By now (2335) I have 29 star systems, 8 colonized systems, 17 planets, and 868 pops. I guess that qualifies as "what is going on".

As to whether it qualifies as "tall", right now I'm 65 over administrative capacity, but early game I kept to strictly no more than 20 over. All my star systems and those 7 pre-Loop planets was obtained under that rule, though at some point in the 2280s I started building district in excess of that.

My alloy gain is 348 (+451 produced, -53 ship upkeep, -50 monthly trade). My current fleet power is only 14.5K, and I haven't built anything bigger than a cruiser, despite having researched titans, but I've also got 3 citadels of 35K fleet power each protecting the only entrances to my space (wormhole included), so I'm pretty safe against anyone without jump drives, which as far as I can tell only I and the fallen empires got...

 

[OrigamiPhoenix]

Yeah, playing tall just isn't really feasible right now. You have to bite the bullet and rush for mining stations or you're playing catch-up with other empires the whole game.

Spoiler: This is my response to a similar thread about the lack of miner jobs.

There really should be.
The main reasons why hydroponics farms are balanced is that, besides for their requisite research, they don't give housing, have -2 energy upkeep instead of the farming district's -1, and have otherwise low slot-value.
We already have Commercial Zones that blow up your energy generation as the game goes on.

Minerals are the only thing we're missing and with the insane consumer goods and alloys upkeep... You can get gimped by low mineral systems and planets very easily.
With the requisite research (magma extraction, nuclear fusion/fission, nucleosynthesis, whathaveyou) , a +2 Miner building with a relatively high energy upkeep would balance things out.

 

[Shadowstrike]

As long as pop growth is per planet, and not per population, then "tall" is suboptimal. If pop growth were based on the number of pops you had, and more developed worlds had advantages beyond simply being being more populated (i.e. if there were buildings that were accessible only at higher pops, or bonuses that stacked with more pops), then tall becomes much more viable.

 

[ArmChairAttila]

I think people still equate tall play as Venice in CiV V one city challenge. Even playing gaia start requires you to spread out some. Tall play in Stellaris seems to be having several rural worlds pop feeding a few urban (tech, industry) worlds. Wide play seems to be a bunch of rural worlds with a forge or university sprinkled in here and there.

 

[orlykthxbai]

OK, looks like we are talking different scales here. By 2334 my current empire converts 1150.00 minerals into 594.78 consumer gods, 424.87 alloys, 19.42 volatile motes, 19.22 exotic gases, and 21.74 rare crystals every month. My stations only provide 110.40 minerals, one tenth of what my industry needs...

Year 2386 Medium galaxy.I have around 850 mineral income and +620 alloys per month. Around 300 minerals come from monthly trade deals off the market. Less than 15 systems. I was on 3 planets +1 habitat(doesnt really seem worth it to build honestly) for most of the game. I got a lucky event that gave me a system with 3 planets on it, that helped a bit for mineral income. I have a partial dyson sphere and i don't have a matter decompresser.

~100k fleet power with everyone else being pathetic. Also at repeatable techs. I think it could have been a much easier game with a matter decompresser or getting a much earlier dyson sphere.

One thing that someone else pointed out is selling alloys for minerals is extremely good. I sell ~150 alloys a month and my "monthly trades" energy income, just from selling alloys, is ~2k energy per month. Try to get market leader and the diplo unity idea for market fee reduction. It helps a lot.

 

[Scorpio_Shirica]

It was my understanding that Wiz and crew wanted this expansion to help tall players. Lot of y'all's feedback seems to suggest they failed spectacularly in this and just made bigger better even more.

 

[ArmChairAttila]

It was my understanding that Wiz and crew wanted this expansion to help tall players. Lot of y'all's feedback seems to suggest they failed spectacularly in this and just made bigger better even more.

Well with the market, city world and new wonders (esp black hole mine) I can build a very powerful empire with just 10 planetary systems. I would have needed way more than that or a ton of Habs to equal the power I can get now. So they didn't fail in that regard. There are some UI/interface issues that defiantly need to be ironed out and I am sure they will work on that. The late game AI on the latest beta patch also needs some work.

 

[Scorpio_Shirica]

Well with the market, city world and new wonders (esp black hole mine) I can build a very powerful empire with just 10 planetary systems. I would have needed way more than that or a ton of Habs to equal the power I can get now. So they didn't fail in that regard. There are some UI/interface issues that defiantly need to be ironed out and I am sure they will work on that. The late game AI on the latest beta patch also needs some work.

Yeah, I was just remarking on how everyone here seems to think it's completely RNG reliant (a la destiny of geography via the entire galaxy) and that bigger will always be better because the tools that help tall empires are even better in the hands of wide empires who are not really punished at all for going wide. Just based on the feedback in this thread.

 

[ArmChairAttila]

There is RNG with how the planets spawn resources. The market fixes that though. Just trade a excess for a shortage. I think a lot of people are playing without using the market much. It is actually very strong in many ways once you get used to it. Again the UI/interface is probably more of a problem than the actual mechanics.

 

[Wolfgang I]

The main plus tall play has now is the fact that it is not micro hell.
I have not played much 2.2 but I can't imagine conquering most of a galaxy with the current mechanics. I only got to 40 planets so far in the one game that did not bug out completly but even such a small empire(at least by my own standards) is incredible tedious to manage.

 

[ArmChairAttila]

Ya I agree with that wolfgang. I love the genociders pre 2.2 but I have been playing authoritarianism now exactly because of the new micro. So I get to 10-15 planetary systems then I just vassalize everything else. I am going to play a syndicate tomorrow and try the same strategy but with subsidiaries.

 

[Losttruppen]

Habitats are actually pretty great for getting you research without costing Gases, which is where a lot of my minerals go when playing on Life-seeded. 3 Hab districts, 5 research, plus a research institute nets me 150+ to each science with t5 science job tech. Only downside is the influence costs being 2/3 of a full megastructure.

Mineral job and station output are also very important techs to pick up whenever they appear.

For those with Apocalypse you can break worlds to get at the chewy center as well.

I think it's time to look at removing some of the restrictions on megastructures as Matter Decompressors rely on you not only having the resources/influence to build but having black holes and Ring Worlds are now niche enough that building multiple won't give you insane buffs across the board. Would be cool if the simultaneous construction of megastructures was based on the number of specialists in your empire as the text implies.

 

[GAGA Extrem]

Yeah, pre 2.2. I could manage this with just enough planets to fill out my core sector and then going habitat/ ringworlds after getting a science nexus to continue boosting tall. I am wondering how many others who now see habitats/ ringworlds as extremely nerfed see this because they can't really fulfill the needs of tall empires like they used to and there isn't really a replacement.

I rarely get more than 6 planets these days - but that is more than enough to get by. The key is adapting to the situation at hand.

If there is no black hole within reach to mine for easy minerals, the economy needs to take a to a low-density, trade-focused approach. More resource extraction and commercial districts on planets, more science district on Habitats.

The real problem with tall vs. wide is, imho, that the empire sprawl penalty was nerfed so much that it doesn't really matter all that much past the early game anymore.

 

[roman566]

If there is no black hole within reach to mine for easy minerals, the economy needs to take a to a low-density, trade-focused approach. More resource extraction and commercial districts on planets, more science district on Habitats.

In my game on a medium galaxy, minerals cost about 4 energy and alloys were around 22-24. One clerk might be able to generate enough trade to buy one mineral. You need more than five to get one alloy. Trade cannot compete with a standard empire in the long run.

Sure, if your only opponents are fanatic purifiers and gestalts that do not use the galactic market then you are the king of the world. But then again, if you roll 10 planets with 15 mineral districts within 2 jumps from you, you are an emperor of the galaxy. It's all situational.

The fact is that the empire does not have a way to generate the most important resource via artificial means. Bringing back Matter Replicator would definitely help. It does not have to be as good as it was, but an option for unlimited mineral production has to be there.

 

[HappyLizardMan]

There used to be a cool building before 2.2, I forgot what was it called, the one that converted 45 energy into 40 minerals. It was invaluable if you played tall, had plenty of energy but low mineral income. Matter decomposers are cool and all but you can only build one(Duh, why does this restriction even exist?) and can not get more without abusing the game(losing system with the first decomposer, building second decomposer platform, taking the original back). More mineral generating options would definitely help.

 

[Scorpio_Shirica]

In my game on a medium galaxy, minerals cost about 4 energy and alloys were around 22-24. One clerk might be able to generate enough trade to buy one mineral. You need more than five to get one alloy. Trade cannot compete with a standard empire in the long run.

Sure, if your only opponents are fanatic purifiers and gestalts that do not use the galactic market then you are the king of the world. But then again, if you roll 10 planets with 15 mineral districts within 2 jumps from you, you are an emperor of the galaxy. It's all situational.

The fact is that the empire does not have a way to generate the most important resource via artificial means. Bringing back Matter Replicator would definitely help. It does not have to be as good as it was, but an option for unlimited mineral production has to be there.

This can be worse on a huge galaxy with 15 AIs killing the market repeatedly. lol

 

[ArmChairAttila]

I like the so/so mineral cap. There should be more. It makes the end game sane, probably easier to balance also. If you are that worried about future mineral production then you should prioritize securing a black hole.

Base resource limits is a good thing. It adds strategy and important decesion making. Add infinite resources back and the game just becomes another builders bore fest.

 

[Scorpio_Shirica]

The question is less about base resource limits and more about how tall empires can be competitive at all with wide while lacking any of the previous tools they had to supply for their economy now that megastructures have changed.