Tell me do i misunderstand idea of zones or beta-testers are?

[jedavis]

One of the issues of dropping energy is that robots and lithoids become even more braindead easy to play, they dont have to worry about consumer goods/food already so now even energy is removed, also robots are made to consume energy not food. Regardless without the devs admitting that the current system does not work for the amount of different goods Normal Empires have to produce at once idk how we can move forward unless they come up with some bandaid solutions.

I think in absolute terms the addition of trade to gestalts will make machine intelligences less simple to play than they currently are. I don't think the devs have said yet whether calculators will continue to use energy for machine intelligence research or whether they'll switch to trade; I would expect them to stay on energy but... there are a lot of things I wouldn't've expected apparently happening.

(also I think you might've meant hives instead of lithoids?)

I think in relative terms, compared to individualist empires having to produce CGs as an additional intermediate, you may well be right that gestalts could come out ahead from the planetary development changes, at least in the early-game. Once you've expanded to the point where in 3.x you would've been shifting each planet to produce only one thing, though, it seems like it might stop mattering? Being limited by zoning in the number of advanced resources you can produce per planet is only a problem if you don't have enough planets, either because you haven't gotten there yet or because your plan was never to have many.

(Reject Tall, Return to Wide)

 

[ShaTiK]

It's been a week since the open beta started and I keep seeing comments such as "oh this new district-zone-building system will be great when devs implement it and fix the balance". Will this system work well? I doubt it very much. I'm not talking about obvious bugs like broken demotion, unfinished interface or missing building effects because they will certainly be fixed. I'm talking about idea of zones.

My own testing is limited by the sheer number of problems currently - namely the POPs not demoting/moving properly between planets, meaning I have to manually resettle (and that's a level of micro I'm not ready for). Also job prioritization not working. But from what I saw so far I really don't get the idea behind zones. So many questions and no real answers. They seem to be overly specialized and restricting.

Previously, say you want for a planet to a have a bit of everything. A single fortress, precinct (if planet is big enough to warrant it), holo-theater for amenities and a monument for some unity. So you do just that and the rest is filled with whatever you need. Or you super-specialize a planet and fill it with only singular type of building. But this specialization requires quite a few planets, decent income in special resource to fuel advanced buildings (and tech to even make t2 and t3 versions) and also makes you vulnerable in case any planet gets blockaded or taken. So in the end the choice was on player side. And I think players ended doing a bit of both.

Right now it seems game forces you to go for the second approach. And even then it removes a lot of granularity. You place research and CG zone on a same planet - voila, you can't increase the number of artisan jobs without also increasing researches. Or rather you can, but then you have to fiddle with job sliders and then not forget you did that.

For the life of me I don't get it. Zones should be decoupled from the city district and made into their own districts. Support jobs - crime, amenities, soldiers, you usually don't need tons of them and wasting entire zone slot for them seems excessive for most cases.

I think current city district should be remade into a government district as a primary one - having special building slots for government-related things and giving it's own specific jobs - rulers, clerks, enforces and soldiers, you know, jobs about actual governing. So then a 12 size planet won't ever need more than 2 levels of this district, it won't have enough population to warrant it. But a 25 ecu might need 5 or even 7 of them given the sheer number of people. And the rest should be their own districts with their own levels and you would choose which ones you need - base resource generating ones, research, alloy, CGs, unity or army. Number of building slots could be tied to current district level with some upper limits. Then the question what to do with housing though, should it be its own district with amenity-only jobs or include housing district into this government one. That's up for debate.

 

[Mike Louis]

I believe that the idea of zones should be thrown in the trash (it needlessly complicates things for no good reason) and have planets be designed with the following district ui layout (building slots in vanilla need to be expanded to 36 slots):


Urban Districts

1. Government / Housing Districts
2. Research Districts
3. Unity / Amenities Districts
4. Commercial Districts
5. Industrial Districts

Rural Districts

1. Agricultural Districts
2. Energy Districts
3. Mining Districts

I believe that if we keep planet management simple and uncomplicated as it is now, it would be more flexible for both mods and future DLC content.

 

[ShaTiK]

I believe that the idea of zones should be thrown in the trash (it needlessly complicates things for no good reason) and have planets be designed with the following district ui layout (building slots in vanilla need to be expanded to either 36 slots):


Urban Districts

1. Government / Housing Districts
2. Research Districts
3. Unity / Amenities Districts
4. Commercial Districts
5. Industrial Districts

Rural Districts

1. Agricultural Districts
2. Energy Districts
3. Mining Districts

I believe that if we keep planet management simple and uncomplicated as it is now, it would more flexible for both mods and future DLC content.

This idea is so self-evident that makes me wonder why devs went ahead with zones instead in the first place.

And also I have a sinking feeling that, once set on their own idea, devs won't relent, so zones are here to stay. The reason for pessimism is very simple - for years people being saying that POP system have to be drastically change, otherwise it is impossible to have playable late-game and for years devs insisted on leaving POPs as they are. It took years for them to at least partially undug themselves and implement this new version of POPs (still POPs, but manageable)

 

[Mike Louis]

This idea is so self-evident that makes me wonder why devs went ahead with zones instead in the first place.

And also I have a sinking feeling that, once set on their own idea, devs won't relent, so zones are here to stay. The reason for pessimism is very simple - for years people being saying that POP system have to be drastically change, otherwise it is impossible to have playable late-game and for years devs insisted on leaving POPs as they are. It took years for them to at least partially undug themselves and implement this new version of POPs (still POPs, but manageable)

I always felt that the planet management mechanics need to be keep simple and understandable for the sake of the AI (the more complicated a game mechanic is, the more likely the AI would trip itself up).

 

[Kataclyszm]

This idea is so self-evident that makes me wonder why devs went ahead with zones instead in the first place.

And also I have a sinking feeling that, once set on their own idea, devs won't relent, so zones are here to stay. The reason for pessimism is very simple - for years people being saying that POP system have to be drastically change, otherwise it is impossible to have playable late-game and for years devs insisted on leaving POPs as they are. It took years for them to at least partially undug themselves and implement this new version of POPs (still POPs, but manageable)

I mean, the 'people keep saying utterly rework pops' isn't really a good example in your favor. The people saying that are a vocal (super-)minority.

 

[Imp0815]

Same, funny how that has calmed down somewhat albeit it's still happening. Imp argued his post fairly well and didn't say anything bad or wrong. Yet the same group of people who all have private profiles and never contribute or even write anymore seem to just mass downvote him.

I don’t want to shift the discussion too much toward whether the Beta is good or bad as a concept, because I’m not sure that was the point of the argument. But what I can say is yes, there are definitely some accounts here that, no matter what I post, always seem to follow me just to disagree—without ever engaging in real discussion. It’s not many, but they exist. I’ve tried contacting moderation, but they can’t do anything about it. I live with it, but it’s frustrating because I feel like I’m missing perspectives that could shift my viewpoint on topics like the Beta economy, doomstacking, or the overall state of the gameplay loop.


As for this Beta, I fully support change, innovation, and trying something new. I'm thankful and happy that we get to engage with the devs this early in the testing phase. I’ve been eagerly trying it out and giving it a fair shot—I’m really heavily invested in the game. To the point that a multiplayer match with my friends turned into a heated shouting match over how the changes worked and whether they were good or bad.

On the other hand, as an experienced player who’s been around for decades, I can’t fully grasp the fundamentals or goals behind these changes, and that aggravates me. The new patch just dropped today, so I’m going to test it and see if it improves the system.

To enter speculation territory and add a bit more vitriol: it doesn’t feel like there was any clear vision or well-thought-out concept behind the planet build changes. It wasn’t all written down, theorized and evaluated—a simple pros and cons list would’ve shown the first implementation already had issues. At least, that’s how it looks from my outside perspective. I don’t want to attack the designer behind it or discourage development in new directions, but sometimes it’s better to can a controversial idea early if the cons outweigh the pros. Sorry.

 

[Miridan]

I believe that the idea of zones should be thrown in the trash (it needlessly complicates things for no good reason) and have planets be designed with the following district ui layout (building slots in vanilla need to be expanded to 36 slots):


Urban Districts

1. Government / Housing Districts
2. Research Districts
3. Unity / Amenities Districts
4. Commercial Districts
5. Industrial Districts

Rural Districts

1. Agricultural Districts
2. Energy Districts
3. Mining Districts

I believe that if we keep planet management simple and uncomplicated as it is now, it would be more flexible for both mods and future DLC content.

If i get your idea right, you want planet management to be roughly the same way i wanted:

Districts are the main source of all jobs. All buildings that were spammable before are 1 per planet now, and they work similarly to Alloy Foundries and Civilian Industires - they increase upkeep and output of the jobs.

 

[ShaTiK]

If i get your idea right, you want planet management to be roughly the same way i wanted:
View attachment 1269216
Districts are the main source of all jobs. All buildings that were spammable before are 1 per planet now, and they work similarly to Alloy Foundries and Civilian Industires - they increase upkeep and output of the jobs.

Pretty much, but I think giving that much building slots is a tad too much. Some limits should be there, for the sake of meaningful choices.

 

[Ryika]

Same, funny how that has calmed down somewhat albeit it's still happening.

Sorry if this is off topic, but I think a large reason for why you were so heavily downvoted is the attitude with which you engaged in those threads.

Some samples:

It also looks, very messy. Sure it's early alpha for this but the new UI looks way worse than the currently existing one. But nothing anyone says will keep Eladrin from wrecking havoc on the game as he has so far to the applause of a small but very vocal group on the forum who wanted this game to be CK2 in space since it came out.

...dismissing people who disagree with you as a small but vocal group...

Nothing anyone says is going to change Eladrins mind, that's already been shown with the leader rework and reintroduction of the cap. Which then took ages to fix because it didn't work in any way shape or form.

...making overgeneralized statements about the designers...

Which is absolutely ridiculous. Taking away the ability to redevelop and change planets, how does that make sense? Even worse. What does this mean for taking planets from the Ai. Are you effectively stuck with their atrocious planets now when you conquer them?

...making overreaching assumptions based on a limitation of a very early beta...

Why do you guys keep implementing changes such as the original reintroduced leader cap that revert things back to how they were when they were abandoned for a reason?

...intentionally oversimplifying things to make an arguably nonsensical comparison...

etc.

I was trying to find a few posts of yours where you've discussed the changes in a less loaded tone and brought up issues in a more reasonable manner because I was trying to see whether those also were showered in dislikes, but... I could not find a single post of yours that actually fulfilled the criterion there. It's all in a hyperbolic and often accusatory or reactionary tone. Not that I'm trying to tone police you, but it's no surprise to me that you get showered in dislikes if that's your approach.

I did find other posts even in those early beta threads being cautionary about the changes, and they too received some dislikes for sure, but they also received a ton of agreement. I think if you approached the topic differently, you'd have far more success in reaching people.

 

[Miridan]

Pretty much, but I think giving that much building slots is a tad too much. Some limits should be there, for the sake of meaningful choices.

It's just a mockup, all numbers are not final etc. And I believe that you wouldn't be able to use all 36 slots anyway because if you build 36 city districts for 36 building slots, then you effectively have no useful jobs. On top of that you need to find a planet that can support so much districts. if I'm not mistaken most planets have 12-18 size, 25 is very rare, 25+ are unique.

 

[Imp0815]

If i get your idea right, you want planet management to be roughly the same way i wanted:
View attachment 1269216
Districts are the main source of all jobs. All buildings that were spammable before are 1 per planet now, and they work similarly to Alloy Foundries and Civilian Industires - they increase upkeep and output of the jobs.

Hey, this idea has merit!
But with that amount of building slots, wouldn't it be too easy to have all planets do the same at the same rate?
Well, it could balance out with the limited number of districts per planet, and there could be more planetary features that clearly benefit certain types of districts/buildings.
Overall, I support ideas that allow for more freedom in planet design, rather than overly limited zone/slot types that create rather boring planets.

 

[Thiend]

It's just a mockup, all numbers are not final etc. And I believe that you wouldn't be able to use all 36 slots anyway because if you build 36 city districts for 36 building slots, then you effectively have no useful jobs

In a model with buildings all being unique and all modifying jobs, it isn't really necessary to limit them in total as long as their cap comes from something not providing the effected jobs.

Every additional city district is one fewer district actually using the buildings. That kind of works out.

At this point, I'm in favor of just ditching the zones concept entirely pending an explanation of why we need it by the devs. I see no real advantages, and huge disadvantages. The beta has a lot of major improvements over 3.14, not one of which zones are necessary for.

The only positive of the system that relates to zones is that I like buildings all changing output instead of adding jobs (add a limit per type, keep them the same, done).