Zones; what is good, what needs to be fixed before 4.0

[Calvax]

Right, but that's how I'm saying it's an experiment.

It's on the same level as breakthrough techs, solely except that the devs aren't willing to remove it if it is bad. It's the same untested massive change that needs refinement or removal, and refusing to remove it doesn't change what it is.

I don't think they need to remove it, but the first time I mentioned this problem they replied to my post and ignored the part that mentioned this so we'll see. If they don't fix it, it's going to be a miserable experience to micro every planet after every construction and then hope your pops demote back into the appropriate jobs before economic collapse.

I don’t think it is on the same scale as breakthroughs. They were a minor feature, this was clearly in development a long time. I’m doubtful they can just drop zones and have a 4.0 that has all the changes and works with the current district/building system. At least in time.

So it is an important distinction that this isn’t an experiment in the sense it can be dropped before release.

 

[WoodenP]

They were a minor feature, this was clearly in development a long time.

Nonsense. You keep repeating this idea of yours like there is any evidence for it.

What demonstrates that zones are some super old, well thought out idea exactly?

 

[Thiend]

I don’t think it is on the same scale as breakthroughs. They were a minor feature, this was clearly in development a long time. I’m doubtful they can just drop zones and have a 4.0 that has all the changes and works with the current district/building system. At least in time.

So it is an important distinction that this isn’t an experiment in the sense it can be dropped before release.

Absolutely, I'm just saying that if it was too late to just not do it from the second they announced it, they should have announced it sooner so if it was hated it COULD be stopped.

It being a more major feature just increases the degree to which getting this far without testing if anyone actually wanted it was a really bad decision. I do think it can be made to work, but they have a lot to get done and they haven't even acknowledged this is a problem yet.

 

[Kataclyszm]

What demonstrates that zones are some super old, well thought out idea exactly?

Because we had teasers about them for quite a while?

 

[Thiend]

Nonsense. You keep repeating this idea of yours like there is any evidence for it.

What demonstrates that zones are some super old, well thought out idea exactly?

They've definitely been thinking about it for a while, but that still doesn't mean it would actually be a lot of work to scrap it.

In fact, it would undoubtedly be less work to scrap it and adjust districts a little to compensate than it will be to fix this to not be worse than the old system. If they do fix it, I believe it can be good enough to excuse the pointlessness for future releases that will actually work better with it. So far, they haven't acknowledged the problem, so thats not a great sign.

 

[Calvax]

Nonsense. You keep repeating this idea of yours like there is any evidence for it.

What demonstrates that zones are some super old, well thought out idea exactly?

Well there’s the fact that several times last year the devs teased the custodians were working on something big and in the announcement they confirmed they have been working on this for a while. They typically work on yearly cycles too, something they’ve stated multiple times.

If you don’t believe that and think it is a simple case of pressing the delete key and everything will work with the current system that’s no skin off my nose.

 

[Kataclyszm]

Absolutely, I'm just saying that if it was too late to just not do it from the second they announced it, they should have announced it sooner so if it was hated it COULD be stopped.

God bless you, Captain Hindsight!

 

[Calvax]

Absolutely, I'm just saying that if it was too late to just not do it from the second they announced it, they should have announced it sooner so if it was hated it COULD be stopped.

It being a more major feature just increases the degree to which getting this far without testing if anyone actually wanted it was a really bad decision. I do think it can be made to work, but they have a lot to get done and they haven't even acknowledged this is a problem yet.

Tbh I feel like part of the problem is there’s a lot of emotions flying around. There’s not even an agreement on what the problems are. I can’t say I’m super sold on zones but I’m also not sold that the sky is falling, everyone hates them, and the devs are nefariously refusing to acknowledge an obvious fundamental problem.

At this point I’m happy to keep testing, providing feedback, and rolling with the knowledge it’s not going to arrive perfect (no major update has after all).

 

[WoodenP]

Well there’s the fact that several times last year the devs teased the custodians were working on something big and in the announcement they confirmed they have been working on this for a while. They typically work on yearly cycles too, something they’ve stated multiple times.

If you don’t believe that and think it is a simple case of pressing the delete key and everything will work with the current system that’s no skin off my nose.

Ahh yes I think it's just a minor misunderstanding. I skipped the day in english class where they explained "something big" = "zones".

(Clearly a reference to 4.0 as a whole.)

As for your neatly made strawman in the last sentence: I never said that.

 

[Calvax]

Ahh yes I think it's just a minor misunderstanding. I skipped the day in english class where they explained "something big" = "zones".

(Clearly a reference to 4.0 as a whole.)

As for your neatly made strawman in the last sentence: I never said that.

Last response to you because relentlessly negative people are quite tiring.

1) If you don’t think the zone system is a major change then I don’t know what to tell you.

2) That’s last point was about you. Almost nothing I’ve written is about you because I have no desire to engage with you. If you thought it was that’s a you problem. I do think the part I mentioned about a lot of emotions flying around applies to you, but I was not specifically thinking of you.

In any case, hope you’re playing the beta and filling out the surveys so your feedback is heard.

 

[Thiend]

Tbh I feel like part of the problem is there’s a lot of emotions flying around. There’s not even an agreement on what the problems are. I can’t say I’m super sold on zones but I’m also not sold that the sky is falling, everyone hates them, and the devs are nefariously refusing to acknowledge an obvious fundamental problem.

At this point I’m happy to keep testing, providing feedback, and rolling with the knowledge it’s not going to arrive perfect (no major update has after all).

I'm basically happy other than the originally mentioned problem, which will significantly downgrade my enjoyment of the game and hasn't been acknowledged yet. The moment they say they'll be fixing it with [something] for 4.0, we're essentially good to go because there's easily enough time for them to do it. I don't think it should take much work to fix, whichever way they want to fix it.

There's a lot else that I don't quite like, but it's all on the refinement level that isn't expected to be great right now anyway. This is more of a core design problem, even if it isn't a major one to actually fix.

 

[WoodenP]

Last response to you because relentlessly negative people are quite tiring.

1) If you don’t think the zone system is a major change then I don’t know what to tell you.

2) That’s last point was about you. Almost nothing I’ve written is about you because I have no desire to engage with you. If you thought it was that’s a you problem. I do think the part I mentioned about a lot of emotions flying around applies to you, but I was not specifically thinking of you.

In any case, hope you’re playing the beta and filling out the surveys so your feedback is heard.

I do apologise if you interpret things as "relentlessly negative"! All I did was ask for evidence that you don't have. I know it hurts when someone holds you accountable but it's important for honest discourse.

To reiterate the situation as I see it (and stay on topic):
4.0 is doing a lot of cool stuff, zones aren't required for any of it, and the game already has a competent planetary management gameplay loop/UI.

 

[Thiend]

To reiterate the situation as I see it (and stay on topic):
4.0 is doing a lot of cool stuff, zones aren't required for any of it, and the game already has a competent planetary management gameplay loop/UI.

I wouldn't consider the current planetary management gameplay loop OR UI competent, so I'm still down for zones as long as they fix the problems, chiefly the original one mentioned here.

If they don't fix them zones won't be an improvement (actually a significant downgrade). Zones aren't really necessary for the part of their implementation that is an improvement, so if they can fix it and they think zones are a good framework for future content them being pointless is fine and if they don't fix it a massive downgrade for that future potential just isn't worth it.

 

[GN_Fighter]

To me the zone-building-interactions are the good part about the new system. What's annoying is the shared job allocation.

that is the problem though.. the shared job allocation is the pillar of the new zone-system and the main design-intention.

if they wanted us to play around more with zones rather than building's they couldve just added more "zone-options" to the old system..after all stuff like research, amenity, unity and trade-districts already existed for special planet-designation's and special planets like ring-worlds. so they could've expanded on this system while at the same time reworking only the building-(slot-)system .. but they choose not to do that.

 

[Masked Ermine]

Only if you have infante people to throw at a problem. The programmers all have different skills, and if the people you need to work on the zones rework are also the people you need to work on the shroud rework than you can't do both at the same time. So you have to schedule them for different points in time.

Right now, all their teams are working on backend stuff, and stuff for bio-rework. if they need their backend teams to work on the UI elements for the shroud rework and that is the rework they need the zones for--don't know making assumptions--the zones have to be done first.

Also, a large part of this scheduling is getting people to buy the game. Bio-rework and psionic re-work must be done soon, or people will get upset about those two not having the same number of interesting decisions as cybernetic and synth.

Also, they almost certainly don't want every update to include changes to the entire game. they want to keep those changes in as few updates as possible. if this was just pops. and the next one was just planet building you know they would push away people for changing things 'all the time.'

Then you have the other big problem. They only have so many programmers and they can only do so much work each day. And its not like any one programmer can do every job that needs to be done either. For all we know if they don't do all the reworks now, they simply won't be able to do the pop one for another year, because the people with those skills will have to be used somewhere else. for example, maybe the people reworking bio-ascension and related mechanics are the one's doing the pop rework. and so the people doing the zone rework are either doing that or nothing at all.

That makes sense to me, because if you are changing up pop-modding to allow for the clone version, then you probably want to make that less annoying for everyone. And if cloning means you have multiple species reproducing, then you probably want that pop group rework for everyone else at the same time.

The worst thing for a company to do is to have some of their people without a full days worth of work.

I guess my point here is that we don't know everything that goes into these decisions so shouldn't be second guessing them based on things we don't know about. especially the order of things. For all we know, they are in early design stages of latter reworks and can't start programing on them yet. And thus can't combine biogenesis with something else.

I'd be complaining about having to go into my management tab every time I built a new job and it 'free all jobs' or scroll around to find a new one. clunky and annoying, I think. There should be a solution out there somewhere. but that is not it.

Then maybe they shouldn't attack a burning house with fifteen flamethrowers and a half filled fire extinguisher....

 

[Tisifoni12]

Assume everyone is waiting to see what the next Beta update brings.

I've unintentionally created two zones of the same type on a planet. I had assumed you wouldn't be able to do that.
Although you can have more than one zone of the same type you can only, as far as I can see, have one building of each type.
Some buildings can go into more than one zone type; think there will need to be some advice about which can go into which.
If you can only have one type of a building then if you want it in a different zone then you need to destroy one instance of it before rebuilding it elsewhere. Though if zones are an administrative concept rather than a geographical concept then you could conceivably 'move' a building from one zone to another; drag and drop.
The display isn't finalised, maybe end up with a buildings display more like before and alongside it a zones display ?

Trade income seems insane at the moment . . .

 

[Calvax]

I've unintentionally created two zones of the same type on a planet. I had assumed you wouldn't be able to do that.
Although you can have more than one zone of the same type you can only, as far as I can see, have one building of each type.

Yeah buildings now modify job output so having multiple of them isn't necessarily/doesn't make sense anymore.

Some buildings can go into more than one zone type; think there will need to be some advice about which can go into which.

This is one of the things that I think has a lot of potential. Being able to put buildings into different zones, but only one per planet, could really help making worlds feel different. Maybe on one world it's your urban district workers that produce amenities, but on another you have that building in your agricultural district so it's farmers doing it. I could even see a potential for specialised science buildings to go in the resource zone so you could get some physics research from technicians, engineering from miners, society from farmers etc.

If you can only have one type of a building then if you want it in a different zone then you need to destroy one instance of it before rebuilding it elsewhere. Though if zones are an administrative concept rather than a geographical concept then you could conceivably 'move' a building from one zone to another; drag and drop.

The devs mentioned on stream wanting to be able to keep buildings if you swap zones and the new zone can take that building. That might mitigate some problems.

 

[Masked Ermine]

that is the problem though.. the shared job allocation is the pillar of the new zone-system and the main design-intention.

if they wanted us to play around more with zones rather than building's they couldve just added more "zone-options" to the old system..after all stuff like research, amenity, unity and trade-districts already existed for special planet-designation's and special planets like ring-worlds. so they could've expanded on this system while at the same time reworking only the building-(slot-)system .. but they choose not to do that.

The problem with that argument is what makes those 'special' worlds special now if they don't get special districts?

I would argue if there needed to be a full fledge rethink on planetary resources, it would've gone much more like you, give us more district types, make building amplifiers (which sounds like the core of what they did with this new system). The primary problem late game I think is A: populations and their individual calculations, and B: ships, ships and their individual animation and calculations unquestionably burn up resources to the point they can crash the game to desktop, especially if you're in a weird system that adds to resource draw.

 

[Kataclyszm]

The problem with that argument is what makes those 'special' worlds special now if they don't get special districts?

I thought they were still in the process of actually adding special stuff to them? Aka they're just not done yet.

 

[Masked Ermine]

I thought they were still in the process of actually adding special stuff to them? Aka they're just not done yet.

I meant to the argument of just giving all worlds the special resource districts (like research or trade). Not what is whatever nonsense Paradox is rebreaking the wheel with in this update.