Tim_Ward said:



After 2.2, all being well, the 'lack of features' critique is going have been pretty much blown out of the water. Maybe you could make a case about diplomacy and a lack of espionage but that's it.



But the 'lack of polish' critique? Still very much in play.



Off the top of my head:

The war in heaven (paid feature) never fires, and doesn't often work properly when it does

The machine uprising (paid feature) dies instantly, and even if they didn't they'd never really work as intended because of the AI transport bug.

The contingency almost always fires

The AI doesn't work right with the new war system, it can't move transports around, can't capture planets and therefore drags wars out indefinitely because it also won't peace out until everyone is at 100% war exhaustion. This messes a lot of stuff up.

AI's take the colossus ascension perk, then don't build colossi.

I've never seen an AI empire synthetically ascend.

Ground combat is just bollocks. The UI is atrocious. It doesn't tell you how many armies are on a planet. It doesn't tell you which armies are currently fighting. The counters all overlap in this really stupid way and you can't see what the health of everything is at a glance*.

When you wipe out a marauders, they send you a cross message and say they're coming to attack you but it never happens. It seems as though a lot of these issues have been neglected in favor of pushing forward, adding new features and generally filling out the gaps in Stellaris. Not a crazy decision, given where we can from (1.0) but after the economy is reworked, maybe it's time to stop with the mega-patches that add or change like 2 or 3 major features, but instead maybe add 1 feature, make sure it works right and focus on making sure what's already in the game also works as it should.



* And no, they shouldn't make it so you capture a planet just by showing up in orbit Stellaris 1.0 was a empty shell of a game. Is that a fair criticism? Debatable. I've seen worse launches. Seen a hell of a lot better, too.After 2.2, all being well, the 'lack of features' critique is going have been pretty much blown out of the water. Maybe you could make a case about diplomacy and a lack of espionage but that's it.But the 'lack of polish' critique? Still very much in play.Off the top of my head:It seems as though a lot of these issues have been neglected in favor of pushing forward, adding new features and generally filling out the gaps in Stellaris. Not a crazy decision, given where we can from (1.0) but after the economy is reworked, maybe it's time to stop with the mega-patches that add or change like 2 or 3 major features, but instead maybe add 1 feature, make sure it works right and focus on making sure what's already in the gameworks as it should.* And no, they shouldn't make it so you capture a planet just by showing up in orbit Click to expand...

There are some fair points in there but some are exagerated or outdated:- The war in heaven fires quite reliably in my experience, as long as you start in a galaxy with all FE and you ensure the FEs are not killed too early. I had my problems in early versions and in smaller galaxies (with less FEs), but this is clearly not an issue anymore.- Endgame crisis spawning ratios have always been an issue that has been tweaked back and forth... This has not been ignored, but probably they tried to make it to much dependent on the individual game. Maybe they should just make the triggers way less complicated and put it to 1/3 chance for each crisis and have some slight increases in chance if certain triggers are present (jumpdrive, synths, ect.) but always have a lower limit on the chance for each crisis (e.g. 1/6 at least for each crisis no matter how many synths / machine empires there are).- I have seen AI empires do all kinds of ascension, but usually only around lategame and only a small fraction of them. Bio Ascension and Psi Ascension do happen more often though and synth ascension is quite rare. I am guessing a lot of this comes from the bad economic AI that results in a too low unity production.Apart from that, I think the devs will most likely do exactly what you said AFTER the diplomatic / espionage revamp has been done. In my experience a lot of the current problems of the AI simply stem from the fact that it falls behind more and more during any game, because it cannot use the tile system effectively and can only keep up for a while in some games because of the upkeep discounts. If it is done properly, the new economic system will most likely make the AI much more compeditive.Of course you are right, the military AI also needs another rework, but that will hopefully become much less obvious after the next patch.Ground combat is still boring, but at least you loose some armies now in most invasions. A rework would be nice at some point, but I don't think it is high on the priority list.