This economy ruins all the fun and active part of the game

[Col. W. T. Philmore]

I recently started a dozen of games and failed every one of them, because something dropped in deep minus - food, or energy, or civilian goods... Not minerals or alloys, there are always plenty of them. Who said that it is hard to build fleets and stations? It's easy. It's hard not to trash everything else. I have no patience to watch for population raised on planet Ololo, so I will have food shortage, so I have to build farm, so I will have happiness drop, so I need to build a theater, so I will have goods drop, so I will need factory, for which I will need to transfer workers from planet Trololo, where are too many of them unemployed. And so on. Situation gets worse if I have slaves or robots or diffirent gene modified species. After being busy in war, it's easy to find one planets full of slaves, which cannot make science or money, and other planets full of white males, which can do nothing useful in mines. And I need to sort em manually, for which there may be no resources. Meh... And sectors are completely unplayable in current state. Since my own brain explodes from such economic fuss, electronic brain will obviously do the same.

So when it's time for wars and politics, I feel like I already completed a game and there is no point to go on. For what? Looking at enemy's territoly don't make me feel a spirit of conquest and bloodlust. It makes me feel that I will have a hard time manually fixing a complete mess in newly acqured territories, and I wanna drop this "interesting" task on someone's strong shoulders and go make something funny like opening L cluster or fighting a leviathan. Or start a new game and explore mysterious space again. Early game is definitely a best part of Stellaris for now.

 

[Mavkiel]

I disagree that the economy ruins the game. I do agree that the early game is the most fun. Exploring, contacting new species, anomalies. I also agree that sectors are annoying at the moment.

As for population growth, not really had much of an issue for it. But, I b-line for expansion tree, for 10% buff, then get gene labs and etc asap. What really grinds my gears is when some filthy xeno spawns in my empire and hogs up the *single* damn growth slots on the bloody planet.

What can they do "fix" the issue? I think they are onto the right idea with mid game crisis. Only instead of making them large threats, throw in some unique fun things. I think of the precurser empires, how cool would it have been to stumble into a neighboring empire in such dire straights? Example would be a first league knock off thats in an economic death spire and helping/finishing them off. Reward could be nabbing up planets on the cheap, or creating a fairly permanent ally.

 

[KingAlamar]

It's too bad that we can't give the sector AI "hints" as to what we want to do ... I.E. we make the decisions but the AI implements those decisions "at the right time". It would certainly take a lot of back & forth off of our plates.

I'm surprised that there aren't a lot more "respectfully disagree"s here. If you bring up the busy work that it often takes to keep things rolling you're often shouted down.

 

[Col. W. T. Philmore]

"Busy" work is not bad. "Annoying" work is bad. Even if it is very easy. When you know that what you do can be made in more convenient and logical way, you begin to frustrate.

 

[KingAlamar]

"Busy" work is not bad. "Annoying" work is bad. Even if it is very easy. When you know that what you do can be made in more convenient and logical way, you begin to frustrate.

Well when I wrote busy work I was thinking of "needless" busy work. While I couldn't trust the sector AI in prior versions of Stellaris I could at least lay the groundwork for what I wanted and then could hand over the planets to the sector AI to finish off any required work. This combined with vital but lots of overly easy work adds up quickly.

I like making decisions but easy-decisions aren't really decisions at all.

 

[Losttruppen]

I disagree with your reasons why this is a problem and how you have presented it, but the new economy has certainly done little to meet the promises it was meant to fulfill. This economy ruins the game because the AI has no clue how to run it, and the old method of throwing production bonuses at the difficulty levels actually just helps them build a deeper hole to fall in once the initial territory grab is over.

I also agree that the early game exploration is one of the best things Stellaris has going for it and 2.2.x has nerfed a lot of anomaly awards while the new economy makes space based resources very noncompetitive until you research 5x +10% techs, and even then a single additional planet will provide almost as much as your 50 systems do. The market is also a huge crutch that nullifies any difficulty the new system brought.

I'm with you on the feeling that conquest gives very little incentive where either I amalgamate an additional 500 pops and work through trying to get them all where they are best suited from an egalitarian perspective or dealing with 10planets being purged for 10 years and having to manually remove all buildings and districts to reduce the upkeep and sprawl. Unless there is a leviathan or really nice planet in their borders, I find I am very disinclined to mess with my neighbours. I remember a long time ago with one of the many reiterations of strategic resources that Paradox said they wanted to make them worth going to war over, and yet here we are with version 22 of these resources being broken and rebuilt from the ground up, that only 3 of them actually matter and the really rare ones give a single edict with a single use(if you even go for megastructures or late game tech). The trader enclaves, a paid feature, are now just a fixed cost version of the market that you have to go out of your way to find the right one depending on your needs.

By making planets the be-all end-all of both basic, advanced, and strategic resource production there is no real reason to be anything but isolationist and turtle on a few worlds. No reason to step outside your borders until the very end game when you are looking for FEs to steal from or leviathans to kill. You just get one mineral world, one farm world, an ecumenopolis/forge world, a research world, and wait for megastructures. Anything more will just be overkill. All the other empires are speedbumps on the way to a late game that barely runs and has 2/3 of the crises not functioning at all in the current release, and with how they use the current economy in vanilla they aren't even that if you don't gimp yourself with an RP built empire.

Maybe a balance patch will solve some of these issues but 2.2.x has added so many problems and broken a lot of things that worked in the old system there are bound to be a lot of things that slip through the next few patches unaddressed. I like what the new system could be, but that's how I felt at 1.0 launch and here we are with a new load of potentially good features that only time will tell if they fulfill it before being axed in favour of more potentially nice things.

 

[honestade]

Like others here, I agree that the first phase of the game is the most interesting, and I hope the anomaly buffs weren't scaled with the new economy because of a lack of time, and that they'll be redone in another patch. I disagree with you about the economy, though - I've been finding I enjoy the mid-game much more in the new version.

The way I see it, the economic optimisation part is the second phase in a three phase game, where the first is the expansion, and the third is domination/invasion and the crises (sorry if this is just assumed knowledge in the forums, I'm not terribly active here).

In the previous version, this second stage would turn into a long slog waiting for technologies, then an upgrade click-a-thon, and that was it - pretty much no brain power required. This was when I'd usually quit the save and start a new one. Now, though, you have to be constantly thinking, optimising, planning - do I need unity high for my victory path? alloys? research? And how do I plan the basic resource supply lines for these so I don't drop into the negative? Then what about the more advanced materials I can produce? When will I need them? And how many? Add the planet specialisation bonuses, and I'm happy spending hours tweaking, rebuilding here, resettling there - because it's so easy to have a bunch of minerals and energy it doesn't feel like a waste to rebuild or resettle a lot to get perfect optimisation. Finally, if you do mess something up, you have the market there to smooth out any rough edges while you fix it.

I totally understand that this kind of economic simulator isn't everyone's cup of tea, but I wanted to give my 2 cents. I was originally skeptical of Leguin - beforehand, I was sad about the pops going, and the first game I played I felt that they had added a load more resources just to add superficial complexity, which I now think was a false impression. For me, the economy changes have been a huge success, adding meat to the mid-game that was completely lacking before. There could for sure be improvements, to the way the UI is presented, the amount of information you have (better long term predicting information based on pop growth, for example, would be super useful), and changes to the AI (which of course is another story), but all in all I feel that this is a real change for the better.

 

[SectorsAreOkay]

Remember when war in Stellaris was fun and engaging and required skill and cleverness? Me neither. The people who say that the economy changes get in the way of building fleets and going to war really ought to just play another game. The exploration, expansion and economic phases are far more interesting than building whatever the latest meta says is a good fleet and then having the bigger number beat the smaller number. I'm glad I have something to do other than build a couple big fleets and then slowly take over AI empires (because they are there, I guess -- the game really provides few reasons to actually go to war).

 

[AlanC9]

I'm with you on the feeling that conquest gives very little incentive where either I amalgamate an additional 500 pops and work through trying to get them all where they are best suited from an egalitarian perspective

Wouldn't a real egalitarian not care about moving pops around? You're not supposed to be able to do that, although last time I checked the policy is bugged.

 

[Losttruppen]

Wouldn't a real egalitarian not care about moving pops around? You're not supposed to be able to do that, although last time I checked the policy is bugged.

I meant getting them in the right jobs after you rebuild the entire planet from scratch.

I don't play anything except Xenophobe purgers because the jobs screen is such a mess in 2.2.x when you conquer planets I just don't want to deal with it. I guess I did pick one of the only ethos' that wouldn't care about min-maxing.

the game really provides few reasons to actually go to war

That is the point I think OP was trying to make. Sure the wars sucked, but going wide to claim territory through them was effective, now it is completely unnecessary and actually results in a bunch of tedium for the conqueror. I think it could be good, as purging billions of aliens off worlds or reestablishing order over newly claimed planets would in real life probably cause a couple headaches and years, but right now it's not a very fun experience for the user and I personally find it very gamey in it's implementation.

 

[AlanC9]

Sounds like you do more work on captured planets than I do.

 

[SectorsAreOkay]

I meant getting them in the right jobs after you rebuild the entire planet from scratch.

I don't play anything except Xenophobe purgers because the jobs screen is such a mess in 2.2.x when you conquer planets I just don't want to deal with it. I guess I did pick one of the only ethos' that wouldn't care about min-maxing.



That is the point I think OP was trying to make. Sure the wars sucked, but going wide to claim territory through them was effective, now it is completely unnecessary and actually results in a bunch of tedium for the conqueror. I think it could be good, as purging billions of aliens off worlds or reestablishing order over newly claimed planets would in real life probably cause a couple headaches and years, but right now it's not a very fun experience for the user and I personally find it very gamey in it's implementation.

So the OP is complaining that an update not targeted at fixing diplomacy/inter-empire dynamics failed to fix diplomacy/inter-empire dynamics? And yet it also made another weak part of the game actually interesting? It's not much of a complaint.

Also, you can totally conquer planets without tanking your economy. I do it all the time. Some types of empires may not do as well due to their limitations. I support balancing that out somewhat.

 

[Col. W. T. Philmore]

Read some comments here, and I can agree, that this economy can make midgame better, if it will be well presented. I also play Europa Universalis, and it have much better tools to rule big empire. You dont need to click every province and see how much building places are there and how much unrest. You just open a sorted lists and menus, that allow in a couple of clicks do things in a different parts of the map. You know, it feels like you are emperor, surrounded by advisors, which tell you @building temple here will make a good profit", or "you want 10 regiments? okay, just pay money and we will bring em to rally point". Not like an accountant, buried in his books and tables, figuring out how many slaves to transfer from A to B to make mines work.

Also, Stellaris simply have no victory conditions, related to this overextended "peaceful" work. It's about wars and conquest, so economy is an extra weight on player's legs, not an extra tool for clever and beautiful victory. And AI is not competitive in terms of economy at all, so you may build perfect world if you want, AI will anyway beat you with his infinite resources, or beat himself by its awful management. Not really interesting.

 

[grandad1982]

I've got to say that 2.2 was released about 2 months early imo. They're needs to be a lot of ui and polish work done. The basics are a great step in the right direction (except sectors, what were they thinking?) but how you as the player actually interact with the new systems is very poor indeed.

As noted about eu4 provides you with the awesome macro builder so you can feel like a high level manager, not stuck in the trenches bogged down in every detail. The option to dive into the details and really min max if you want us great just steam line the ui so that effective play isn't a chore past the first handful of planets.

 

[Mikhail_Mengsk]

You don't bother learning the economy, so you fail at it. You don't like the new complexity. Fair, but it's your taste. The new expansion/update is ALL and has always been presented as a mean to make the economy more detailed and meaningful instead of spamming 3/4 buildings in every planet and upgrade them as soon as the tech showed up.

Yeah, having meaningful sectors that could take care of it would be neat and useful for everybody, no doubt.

But aside from assigning all your empire to sectors, even with a fixed AI the economy would stay complex. So if you just don't like the new economic system you have to revert to 2.1.x because there is no way to avoid the issue.

Also, Stellaris simply have no victory conditions, related to this overextended "peaceful" work.

It has. The victory score can be filled comfortably without waging a single war. It uses pop numbers, economic power, federations, technology, all of which you can "farm" without needing wars. Of course conquest is a faster and more efficient way, but Stellaris does indeed rewards "peaceful work".

 

[Losttruppen]

So the OP is complaining that an update not targeted at fixing diplomacy/inter-empire dynamics failed to fix diplomacy/inter-empire dynamics? And yet it also made another weak part of the game actually interesting? It's not much of a complaint.

The point of the update was to reduce late game lag and to make the AI more competitive in all aspects of gameplay, which it has not done a very good job of in my opinion. It may have made managing planets more interesting(up to a certain number before it becomes a chore) but in doing so it made a lot of other parts of the game redundant outside of roleplay purposes. You can't change things in a vacuum, the effects of changing the economy affected all other parts of the game without consideration for balance, which I think should have had more time spent on before it was released.

Pre 2.2 Stellaris certainly had its shortcomings, but there was a reason to claim systems or a really nice planet from your neighbours because the value of resources was higher per point. Now you get from a single mining district on one world the mineral output from 4 or more good systems. One research building gives more science than the best outcome of some leviathans. They also cost only twice the EC maintenance for significantly more output from stations. I really like the new planets but they have made a lot of the fun things to do in this game lack any value or strategic purpose and I'm worried it will be a while before they put the pieces back together again.

 

[AlanC9]

The OP's got a real point, but it's not very persuasive to start a post by proclaiming your own incompetence.

 

[Col. W. T. Philmore]

Well if suddenly your mechanic put square wheels on your car and you cannot move it, does it mean that you are "incompetent" driver?
If you try to keep stone face and accept every changes, no matter if they are failure, because you fear that your friends will call you noob, it is not good for developers and their game in perspective. And for you too, because at some point you just become tired of overtaking bad mechanics and drop it.

 

[Mikhail_Mengsk]

The problem is that EVERYONE knows that currently the "wheels" of the new economic system are square. But a lot of people think the solution is not to set fire to the car and go back walking.

You don't like the economy being complex AT ALL, not the (clunky, badly balanced, whatever) way it was introduced. If PDX solved every 2.2 issue tomorrow you'll still be displeased.

 

[maxp779]

Remember when war in Stellaris was fun and engaging and required skill and cleverness? Me neither. The people who say that the economy changes get in the way of building fleets and going to war really ought to just play another game. The exploration, expansion and economic phases are far more interesting than building whatever the latest meta says is a good fleet and then having the bigger number beat the smaller number. I'm glad I have something to do other than build a couple big fleets and then slowly take over AI empires (because they are there, I guess -- the game really provides few reasons to actually go to war).

I think the economy in its current state ruins a lot of the fun. It needs a lot more optional automation like we had in all the previous patches aka sectors. They essentially don't work anymore as of 2.2.