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

[Vanhal]

It doesn't really make sense as a comparison. I could then talk about Capitalism, a similarly old game having even more complex economy, with multiple tiered resource transformation, price setting, logistics, brand loyalty, a stock market, staff management and so on. It was a game about managing a corporation. And The Settlers was a game about managing a small colony. The more focused a game is, the less abstraction it requires, that much is obvious. But in Stellaris we're talking about managing an empire.

Ah yes Capitalism. That was a fine game too. And no, managing an empire or small settlement is of absolute no consequence, because it is in name only. What count is the complexity, unless games like 10 minutes space strategy are also somehow more complex than said Capitalism because you are also managing empire there?

 

[TheAtreides84]

Ah yes Capitalism. That was a fine game too. And no, managing an empire or small settlement is of absolute no consequence, because it is in name only. What count is the complexity, unless games like 10 minutes space strategy are also somehow more complex than said Capitalism because you are also managing empire there?

It's not a matter of overall complexity, it's a matter of what kind of complexity should be in. An eastern front operational wargame letting me adjust the actual munitions count and type of every tank would indeed be complex, but it would also be a terrible wargame, because the genre relies on low-level abstractions to work. It's debatable if an in-depth economical simulation is inside or outside the focus of a 4X space game. It could very well be implemented, but not to point of obfuscating politics and warfare.

 

[Mikhail_Mengsk]

2.2 economic system is hardly in-depth... it's a two-level economic system that a toddler can understand in an hour. The problem is not the system in itself, it's how it's been implemented, the instruments the player has to manage it, and the capability of the AI to use it.

 

[Chthon]

2.2 economic system is hardly in-depth... it's a two-level economic system that a toddler can understand in an hour. The problem is not the system in itself, it's how it's been implemented, the instruments the player has to manage it, and the capability of the AI to use it.

This is the truth.

The player needs better tools in managing their economy. The ability to plan expansions and get projections on their effects. The ability to more easily manage their workers. Better population growth and controls. (the current system is ridiculous)

Balancing needs to be done as well for the machine races.

 

[AlanC9]

It was ok because it was in its place. Stellaris intended to be mainly about politics and warfare..

Source?

 

[Col. W. T. Philmore]

Source?

common sense.

 

[Mikhail_Mengsk]

Stellaris never had proper "politics" to speak of. Both diplomacy and internal factions are barebones and either decided at game start or become meaningless after a while.

Very seldom you manage to make a neighbour stop hating you if he has different ethics, very seldom you'll have reasons to stop rivaling someone, and you will never be able to have diplomacy with a good portions of the nation "types" out there (fanatic purifiers, devouring swarms, fallen empires, marauders, endgame crisis). Federations are just a way to obtain a big upkeep-free fleet. After a few years you already know who will be your enemies and who could be potential allies.

Internal factions are a joke: their only significance is Influence gain. You can safely ignore them 99% of the time.

So no, Stellaris has never been about politics, at least even if it has tried it has failed hard.

 

[Nyrael]

common sense.

The Devs always wanted Stellaris to grow into a complex Empire Management game, in similar style as their other games. It was never supposed to be a game focused mostly on warfare.

 

[Paul93]

Le Guin is far from perfect, but why, for God's sake, people spit onto it in this way? [Rethorical question: people would spit onto it anyway, no matter the quality and amplitude of the changes] Be honest, was "economy" (or whatever that thing was) funny in the pre-2.2 era? Is mindlessy stacking enormous amounts of minerals an engaging activity? Is clashing two stacks-of-doom a totally absorbing strategic experience? Personally I think not, therefore I am only glad to see this new system, even with all its unbalances. Automation and (many) other improvements can and must be made, but saying that 2.2 is pure garbage is an absurd mistification.

 

[osvil]

I like the new system better than the one we had before. It actually adds a bit of depth to the economy. I am now playing a hive mind and the slightly different economy adds some flavour to it. Overall, I think the economy feels ok.

In my experience, right now there are phases in the game now. The way I found that works for me usually means being constrained in alloys. I have to admit that I had trouble in hive mind with energy credits as well, because of the lack of trade. But I guess it is ok and I was able to advance easily. But AI empires seems collapsed (I think more because of overextension than any other thing). Right now my hive is way more advanced that any other "normal" empire. I have yet to locate the fallen empire that seems to be there. But looking at "victory", the second best empire (still more point that me) is at under +3000 in technology, while my hive mind is at close to +6500. That empire is an "advanced start" one.

The AI is sooooo incompetent dealing with the current economy/overextension rules that is not even funny.

 

[Alspego]

Le Guin is far from perfect, but why, for God's sake, people spit onto it in this way? [Rethorical question: people would spit onto it anyway, no matter the quality and amplitude of the changes] Be honest, was "economy" (or whatever that thing was) funny in the pre-2.2 era? Is mindlessy stacking enormous amounts of minerals an engaging activity? Is clashing two stacks-of-doom a totally absorbing strategic experience? Personally I think not, therefore I am only glad to see this new system, even with all its unbalances. Automation and (many) other improvements can and must be made, but saying that 2.2 is pure garbage is an absurd mistification.

Personally, I like the changes in 2.2, but because of the many different problems (e.g. problems with micro, if you have many planets, performance issues in the late game, bad AI, balancing issues) the game cannot really take advantage out of that. I would still argue, that 2.2 is better than the previous versions, but stellaris feels more and more like an early access title and less like a finished game.

 

[AlanC9]

common sense.

So it's something you feel and don't have any evidence for? Well, ... it's consistent, I guess.

 

[Col. W. T. Philmore]

So it's something you feel and don't have any evidence for? Well, ... it's consistent, I guess.

I have a lot of Paradox games and dont remember any, where I must manually count every pile of crap and every worker in every city. Especially in mid-late game. Victoria probably, but there you change politics and population and market reacts. You dont babysit anything if you dont want to.
So yes, i "feel" that with this particular game something went wrong. And something wrong with ppl, whose only argument is "i like to count every pile of crap so no problem here, let it be".

 

[AlanC9]

You don't have to manually count stuff in this game either. You do have to be able to know the difference between, say, -11 and +37, but that isn't the same thing.

 

[Acheron]

While there still is a lot of room for improvement, I believe the new economic system is a HUGE step in the right direction. No more accursed tiles to fiddle with, and the upgrade orgy has been SEVERELY reduced. And yes, I find the new economic system engaging, still getting the hang of it, but as other posters have pointed out, it is all about figuring out what you need more. Gotta satisfy the basics (energy, minerals and food) and then wonder how you will use these exactly.

BTW, my advice, especially for early game: don't over-build. You only have a limited workforce, not only do unused buildings still eat upkeep (I think), moving the workers between buildings is tedious micro I would only even consider in an emergency. So I try and have only a few jobs more than workers on a planet.