Honest Question: Are people having pop issues playing really wide?

[Hyren]

Not trying to be sarcastic or anything, I'm just curious about the issue. I usually play really tall so I have have under 10 planets at most and even that is usually pushing it. Probably closer to 5.

I've yet to have any issues with pops, and I dunno if it's something I'm not noticing or something to do with how I play. I also tend to use robots but even my last game where I didnt use them I still had good growth.

To be fair I do have lower growth then before but with the rebalance to planetary buildings I've had no trouble filling key job positions and getting a really strong economy early. If anything my economic game is way stronger then before and being able to pre build planets is really nice, especially with the convenience of transit hubs.

It makes me wonder if it's an issue with playing wide, since that's basically the opposite of how I tend to play, and I'd imagine having more spread out pops would make hitting the growth cap faster.

As I said, not trying to be sarcastic or dismissive. I'm not saying there isnt an issue just because I'm having none, but I am curious about what exactly the issues people are having. Personally I think this is the best expansion since utopia and it's totally reinvigorated the game for me, so I was surprised to see so many negative reviews.

Thanks for any insight you can give. Whatever the issues are I hope they can get smoothed over and everyone can start having fun again. There have always been new patch jitters with expansions for this game but ultimately they've always been smoothed over. I'm sure the same will happen again.

[RodHull]

Първоначално публикувано от Queltis:

it’s very likely you’ve missed the point of the 4x genre.

Which is filling planets with pops?? Hmm odd I thought it was engaging in emergent gameplay where you set your own goals such as 'wipe out x' 'ally with y' 'emancipate z' thats how I play and enjoy the game, if you enjoy filling planets with arbitrary numbers then good luck to you friend.

Първоначално публикувано от Queltis:

Though your belief that the pre-3.0 pop growth was “insane”, when it was pretty well balanced is more telling about you than the people you’re mocking.

I'm not mocking anyone, if you feel mocked I'm not sure why...

There was nothing balanced about being able to easily create empires which could populate the entire galaxy at a linear rate many many times higher than anything the AI could achieve. The fact a way to prevent pop growth had to be added to planets should tell you there was an issue, even if you enjoyed it.

Първоначално публикувано от Queltis:

and yet today apparently half the player base has decided that was the only reason to play the game and without that ability its pointless playing it as its now 'broken'

It wasn’t the only reason, but it was A reason.

Its the only reason people are mentioning so I just go by what people are feeding back. I cant work with what Im not told.

Първоначално публикувано от Queltis:

Sorry that seems disingenuous to me.

Nobody cares about your opinion on how they play the game..

See that's the beauty of forums, nobody has to care and I am still able to offer that opinion anyway. Good concept isn't it.

Първоначално публикувано от Queltis:

Why would it bother you that people play an empire management simulator to manage empires? That’s like being bothered that people hit little white balls with sticks during a baseball game, or that Harvest Moon involves farming..

I don't recall saying it 'bothered' me, would you like to point out where i suggested such a thing?

Първоначално публикувано от Queltis:

Fundamentally the mechanic does not work.

Explain how it 'doesn't work' and remember saying 'because I cant fill a planet late game' is not an example of it not working. How does it not work specifically.

You not liking it, or not enjoying the playstyle it promotes is not it 'not working'

Първоначално публикувано от Queltis:

And no, a system where the game chokes your ability to develop past the first decade or so of gameplay is not a “good change”.

It doesn't do that. That's wilful hyperbole.

[Queltis]

Which is filling planets with pops??

Empire management, which yes does include developing systems into contributing members of the empire, or “filling planets with pops”, as you so inelegantly put it.

There was nothing balanced about being able to easily create empires which could populate the entire galaxy at a linear rate many many times higher than anything the AI could achieve.

So you think weakening the AI by removing their ability to grow, due to their lack of functional build order and inability to use esoteric work arounds like abusing the vassal system as a population farm, will fix the AI not developing in a meaningful way?

How’s that supposed to work exactly? Even the developers have acknowledged the post-3.0 AI is an even bigger potato than the pre-3.0 AI, which is pretty amazing given how awful the pre-3.0 AI was.

The fact a way to prevent pop growth had to be added to planets should tell you there was an issue, even if you enjoyed it.

All it says is they misattributed their poorly optimized game engine’s performance troubles on 8+year old computers to the population numbers, rather than an error in the AI build queue (specifically their obsession with habitats), or the fact that people are playing their game on a machine whose CPU constituted copper wire shoved into a potato.

Its the only reason people are mentioning

Yeah, because it’s been removed.

I don't recall saying it 'bothered' me, would you like to point out where i suggested such a thing?

That would be when you said it was gameplay you thought shouldn’t exist, and constantly refer to it derogatorily (that it’s insane, “just filling planets with pops”, that people enjoying that gameplay is illegitimate, and so on).

Explain how it 'doesn't work' and remember saying 'because I cant fill a planet late game' is not an example of it not working.

It’s been explained to you, and even now you said you wouldn’t acknowledge any explanation for how it isn’t working as a valid explanation so why bother asking the question when you have made it clear that you’re not asking in good faith?

It doesn't do that.

It does exactly that. There’s some wiggle in the number of years before it happens that’s dependent on how bad you are at Stellaris, but if you’re competent your empire’s internal development stalls flat incredibly quickly.

[Ertwin]

Първоначално публикувано от Queltis:

Първоначално публикувано от Ertwin:

Isn't that contradictory. If someone only has 10 planets total for the whole game, you said they'll be fine, but in the next sentence said they'd notice it after the first 10 years in the game. Which is it?

It’s both. If you stop developing your empire in 2210 no, you won’t have a problem. You’ll see the difference if you decide to proceed into mid-late game where every planet beyond your initial 10 has the population of wyoming and a reproduction rate straight out of Children of Man.

I've had late game games with less than 10 planets plenty of times. You seem to be under the very false impression that building tall involves more than 10 planets. To me 10 seems excessive.

[Queltis]

Първоначално публикувано от Ertwin:

Първоначално публикувано от Queltis:

It’s both. If you stop developing your empire in 2210 no, you won’t have a problem. You’ll see the difference if you decide to proceed into mid-late game where every planet beyond your initial 10 has the population of wyoming and a reproduction rate straight out of Children of Man.

I've had late game games with less than 10 planets plenty of times. You seem to be under the very false impression that building tall involves more than 10 planets. To me 10 seems excessive.

Yes, the AI in Stellaris is such a worthless potato that you can get a victory condition using nothing but your capital planet on GA because of how easy it is to cheese diplomacy.j

Not really relevant here since I’m talking about actual empire development and not just running out the clock until the crisis happens.

[Ertwin]

Първоначално публикувано от Queltis:

Първоначално публикувано от Ertwin:

I've had late game games with less than 10 planets plenty of times. You seem to be under the very false impression that building tall involves more than 10 planets. To me 10 seems excessive.

Yes, the AI in Stellaris is such a worthless potato that you can get a victory condition using nothing but your capital planet on GA because of how easy it is to cheese diplomacy.j

Not really relevant here since I’m talking about actual empire development and not just running out the clock until the crisis happens.

There was still empire development going on. I just wasn't spamming pops as if my life depended on it. I was able to build comfortably, explore, expand my borders, all without spamming pops. I even built plenty of megastructures.

You seem to be so locked in on your pop spamming playstyle that you can't even conceive of playing differently.

[Queltis]

You seem to be so locked in on your pop spamming playstyle that you can't even conceive of playing differently.

I can conceive of playing differently, but when I do I play games that are designed for it. When I just want to lay the groundwork and leave everything else on autopilot I have Banished and Dawn of Man for that particular itch.

[Ertwin]

Първоначално публикувано от Queltis:

You seem to be so locked in on your pop spamming playstyle that you can't even conceive of playing differently.

I can conceive of playing differently, but when I do I play games that are designed for it. When I just want to lay the groundwork and leave everything else on autopilot I have Banished and Dawn of Man for that particular itch.

Yet here you assume I leave everything to autopilot, which is not the case. You literally cannot wrap your head around my playstyle and are making huge assumptions about it,

[Duder]

All I know is so far the game seems more difficult now and that is a welcome addition for me. I have yet to experience any real issue with pops if anything they grow much more quickly in the early game which helps

[RodHull]

Първоначално публикувано от Queltis:

Empire management, which yes does include developing systems into contributing members of the empire, or “filling planets with pops”, as you so inelegantly put it.

You still do empire management, arguably more so if you wish to fill new planets later into the game as you have to use a bit more planning and resettling your pops to do so. So you still do that, you just miss out on 'filling the planet with pops' bit which is why I air quoted it, as that is functionally the ONLY aspect of empire management which is now harder, though equally is not required as pops produce more resources so you don't need to fill the planets in the first place. But good job trying to twist that point around...

Първоначално публикувано от Queltis:

[
So you think weakening the AI by removing their ability to grow, due to their lack of functional build order and inability to use esoteric work arounds like abusing the vassal system as a population farm, will fix the AI not developing in a meaningful way?

How’s that supposed to work exactly? Even the developers have acknowledged the post-3.0 AI is an even bigger potato than the pre-3.0 AI, which is pretty amazing given how awful the pre-3.0 AI was.

I don't recall saying the AI is better now. In fact if you bothered to read my posts you'd see I have pointed out the AI is awful in this patch. But that wasn't the thrust of what we were discussing. I merely mentioned that as an aside to point out how easy it was to abuse the previous pop growth system to steamroll the game, something I am sure you well aware I meant but chose to be obtuse and go off on a tangent.

Първоначално публикувано от Queltis:

[
All it says is they misattributed their poorly optimized game engine’s performance troubles on 8+year old computers to the population numbers, rather than an error in the AI build queue (specifically their obsession with habitats), or the fact that people are playing their game on a machine whose CPU constituted copper wire shoved into a potato.

No its a sign the population levels possible pre 3.0 were so high you had to have tools available to prevent pop growth because overcrowding became an actual issue late game. Now there is an argument they have swung to far the opposite direction, and I think we all know the numbers will be tweaked, but the system they have picked fundamentally fixes the issue of overpopulation rather well.

Първоначално публикувано от Queltis:

That would be when you said it was gameplay you thought shouldn’t exist, and constantly refer to it derogatorily (that it’s insane, “just filling planets with pops”, that people enjoying that gameplay is illegitimate, and so on).

None of which I explicitly said. But sure if you want to pretend I did just to argue with me, go ahead.

I never said any gameplay 'shouldn't exist'
I never said filling planets with pops was 'insane'
I never said the way people enjoy their games was illegitimate.

You are tilting at windmills my friend.

Първоначално публикувано от Queltis:

It’s been explained to you, and even now you said you wouldn’t acknowledge any explanation for how it isn’t working as a valid explanation so why bother asking the question when you have made it clear that you’re not asking in good faith?

No you explained why you like filling planets up and why this patch prevents that (a fact I openly accept and acknowledged was a shame for people who like doing that) you have not explained why its 'broken' which is what I asked for.

Първоначално публикувано от Queltis:

It does exactly that.

I respectfully disagree as I am literally playing two saves now which refute the claim. Both saves are much more than 'a decade' into the game and both empires are flourishing, one more so than it did pre 3.0 go figure...

[[FuFo] Mortucus]

i still get the same end game lag every year on tick at mid game on large 1k maps
ive played 2 games 1 with the pop mech in place and one with it modded out

performance is 100% the same in both games buy the year 2350 the tick lag starts

i play hive empires and being told my 12.3 growth rate pop will take 8 years to build because i have 2 other worlds at hi pop is not only stupid but didnt even fix the very problem it was put in place to fix

geee remember when this game had 10k STAR MAPS and worked i do

to anyone thinking this makes ZERO sence just mod that ♥♥♥♥ out dont bother talking to these white knights that eat parradox turds and say its love
they have been defending the many garbage changes made for REASONS they claim have made the game better
1.9 and the TILE system was better then this ♥♥♥♥

only thing that saves this game is the modders

[Queltis]

You still do empire management

For all of thirty minutes as you settle into the only handful of planets that will have the population for development.

arguably more so if you wish to fill new planets later into the game as you have to use a bit more planning and resettling your pops to do so.

You can’t run planets with population that don’t exist. The system is set up so that anything more than 1000 population, which is ~10 planets worth of population, takes nearly a decade to get new population to spawn. If you’re playing an empire that relies on assembly, instead of growth, the time between pop increases is even worse.

I merely mentioned that as an aside to point out how easy it was to abuse the previous pop growth system to steamroll the game

And I was pointing out that problem is not fixed by neutering the AI’s ability to develop population. One of the reasons why players could manhandle the AI is because they knew how to grow population efficiently and direct it to planets strategically. Now that problem is exacerbated because the fastest route to population growth is to end run around the population cap, specifically through mechanics abuse that the AI can not participate in (vassal farming), while the AI won’t even build its own requisite growth/assembly buildings.

No its a sign the population levels possible pre 3.0 were so high you had to have tools available to prevent pop growth because overcrowding became an actual issue late game.

I’ve had empires where my population total rivaled the total population of every other empire in the game combined without so much as a hiccup.

The problem was not the raw population numbers.

I respectfully disagree as I am literally playing two saves now which refute the claim. Both saves are much more than 'a decade' into the game and both empires are flourishing, one more so than it did pre 3.0 go figure.

You can disagree with it if you want to, but the population cap makes any empire development beyond the first decade or so pointless. Anything more than the first ten planets will cost more in upkeep than they generate because the current cap stalls you to a point where there isn’t enough total population for the planet/habitat to create a positive return.

[koimeiji]

4X (which stellaris is) literally means Explore, Expand, Exploit, Exterminate. Those are the four core tenants of any 4X game.

The hard empire-wide population cap directly affects the Expand and, arguably, Exploit tenants of 4X. It artificially stops your expansion because you, for no thematic reason, are now unable to make any new pops in a reasonable time frame. This directly affects your resource exploitation as you now can't build more miner/generator/industrial/etc worlds because they'll never get populated...without, of course, removing pops from other worlds which defeats the whole purpose.

Along with this, as I mentioned there's absolutely no thematic reason for such a cap to exist. Carrying capacity already covers things like overpopulation, birth:death rates, et cetera. There's absolutely no reason, in universe, that my brand new Ringworld grows in population at a snail's pace because my other planets are already populated. It's, frankly, unrealistic and hard to suspend your disbelief if you like to get into character.

The only reason such a cap exists is, as the devs said iirc, to curtail late game lag. I do not know the solution to end-game lag; I'm not an expert. However, it's pretty safe to say that this is not a reasonable solution. It's not fun. It makes no sense in universe. It's not the correct solution.

Hopefully it's only temporary until they figure out something better to remedy end-game lag. Until then, I'm gonna do what I'm sure many will and just mod the cap out.

[Kover Livernov]

The end-game lag is not really fixed and still happening, which pop doesn't seem to be the major reason for the lag. There is only one thing I can 100% confirm after the release of patch 3.0 is that the game developers of Stellaris NEVER EVER play their game or they will never make such brainless changes on everything.

[rob.inconformista]

At around 2275 my mid-game start I had double the pops/tech/economy/fleet of every other standard empire, I didn't really notice an issue but realised growth had slowed on my home world so ACTUALLY used Mastery of Nature perk to add capacity, in preparation for becoming an ecumenopolis.
Later around 2300 I saw growth/assembly was becoming slow & expensive, though colonies were still filling, so I decided to spin off a sector as a vassal for efficiency.
The auto management features worked, I was able to balance the sector and give the AI a solid basis for economic growth as pops re-filled it's worker jobs; it took a while but my vassal made the junior member in the Galactic Council.
Now from 2.6-2.8, I gave up on handing over anything to the AI, it ALWAYS resulted in mismanagement and disaster, hordes of unemployed bots, auto-build spammed holo theatres, luxury housing or precincts .. the game was totally broken.

But ultra-wide pop spam guaranteed victory, so now the game is better balanced, giving a point to Galactic Wonders and the ascension paths to improve your specialists and require less workers, we have a horde of frustrated people who learnt one way to play being very vocal because they aren't using delegation or auto settlement features. If you focused on even development for cost efficiency in the past, you would win on sheer pop count and basic production enabling military.

[Kover Livernov]

By the way, there is no actual solution to fix the end-game lag unless Paradox remakes this game using the game engine in CK3 (which solves the problem of single-processor)