Stellaris
- Thread starter lysan
- Start date
Yeah, played it for almost 100 hours. Pretty cool game if you're into sci-fi 4x.
Yep, pretty decent, though I haven't played it for a little while. The problem I have (and this is not levelled at Stellaris per se, more the genre) is that the start of these 4X games is always the best bit - exploring, establishing the boundaries of your empire, building up your science and tech, all that stuff. Once you start bumping into other civs, I find it becomes a war to the death, and that doesn't tend to hold my attention for very long.
I think there's been a patch recently to balance stuff out a bit towards the end of the game though, so this may have improved matters somewhat. A solid 5/7 at any rate.
I think there's been a patch recently to balance stuff out a bit towards the end of the game though, so this may have improved matters somewhat. A solid 5/7 at any rate.
I love stellaris though it has the Elite sindrome of being somewhat boring in the endgame but you can always make a new match
Mu77ley
Volunteer Moderator
Space combat strategy isn't really the point of Stellaris or Endless Space, so you'll likely be disappointed if you buy it just for that.
I love stellaris though it has the Elite sindrome of being somewhat boring in the endgame but you can always make a new match
That's more of a X4 game syndrome really. They all suffer from it in one way or another.
I really want to like Stellaris, but the early game is boring (after you played a couple of games and seen all the little story elements), very little conflict and really nothing for you to do, and the end game is a major grind. Mid game is good. Distant Worlds does a better job with this by forcing you to deal with pirates in the early game.
While other 4x games do suffer the problem of late game it is extreme in Stellaris's case. Takes way way longer to rap up the map, what with the ability to only take over so many planets in a single war.
I am also not a fan of the card tech tree. Sure it makes it so that every game you don't just pick how you want to progress, but then it takes away your option of dictating how you are going to build your empire.
While other 4x games do suffer the problem of late game it is extreme in Stellaris's case. Takes way way longer to rap up the map, what with the ability to only take over so many planets in a single war.
I am also not a fan of the card tech tree. Sure it makes it so that every game you don't just pick how you want to progress, but then it takes away your option of dictating how you are going to build your empire.
Last edited:
Anyone knows a good space strategic game like War of Rom just in space??
MoO2 - the classic. Still king of the hill, imo. Gameplay-wise.
I kinda like Endless Space 2, but it lacks the tactical combat depth and detailed ship design. When most of the games shifted to 3D graphics and RT combat the tactical aspects mostly were done away with. The endgame steamroller problem is common in strategy games - some tackle it by providing victory options to bypass that (cultural vics, wonder vics etc.)
I had some fun with Sword of the Stars (2?) in terms of gameplay, but the UI is truly horrible.
The designers/publishers of the new MoO have secured the license I believe. They offer the old MoO games (Dosbox) under Steam.
Last edited:
I wished there was a game like the total war series just in a space opera settings.
I think the range and 3D battleground is one of the biggest obstacles. The nut how to nail it hasn't been cracked yet.
It just... didn't work for me...
It was a major disappointment, and possibly my biggest case of buying into the hype and pre-purchasing rather than just wait and see. It seemed like the dream game: a mix between the classic sci-fi 4x tropes, the Paradox grand strategy approach to borders and war diplomacy, the galactic scale and detail level of Distant Worlds, all with gorgeous UI and graphics. Sadly, it fell flat very quick for me. And nothing due to one big thing, it's just a number of things adding up. Like some of the micromanagement feeling silly at the game's scale (the planetary grid for buildings), the battles (seemingly) consisting about spamming more ships, an underwhelming economic/resource model, and, I guess, the major lack of personality of the setting. I love the idea of traits, I love the idea of pre-existing Fallen Empires, but do the rest of the empires really all had to start at the same time? And with no history? There's something lacking there where I wish they'd have taken a page from Dwarf Fortress and generated those galaxies from the ground up by simulating a history and giving you access to records describing that history. Asymmetry, historical ties and past are one of the things that makes every single nation/character interesting to play in EU/CK. That's missing here, sadly.
So personally, I enjoy more Star Ruler 2 and Distant Worlds for pausable real-time, and Endless Space 2 for the more traditional turn-based approach. None has everything I'd want, but they each satisfy a specific craving where Stellaris just feels lacking. Still. at the end of the day, it's a fine strategy game, it's absolutely gorgeous, and it'll be updated for a good while, so if you find it at a discount for black friday or winter sales, there's little risk in going for it. And if it resonates with you, you'll be playing it for a long time.
It was a major disappointment, and possibly my biggest case of buying into the hype and pre-purchasing rather than just wait and see. It seemed like the dream game: a mix between the classic sci-fi 4x tropes, the Paradox grand strategy approach to borders and war diplomacy, the galactic scale and detail level of Distant Worlds, all with gorgeous UI and graphics. Sadly, it fell flat very quick for me. And nothing due to one big thing, it's just a number of things adding up. Like some of the micromanagement feeling silly at the game's scale (the planetary grid for buildings), the battles (seemingly) consisting about spamming more ships, an underwhelming economic/resource model, and, I guess, the major lack of personality of the setting. I love the idea of traits, I love the idea of pre-existing Fallen Empires, but do the rest of the empires really all had to start at the same time? And with no history? There's something lacking there where I wish they'd have taken a page from Dwarf Fortress and generated those galaxies from the ground up by simulating a history and giving you access to records describing that history. Asymmetry, historical ties and past are one of the things that makes every single nation/character interesting to play in EU/CK. That's missing here, sadly.
So personally, I enjoy more Star Ruler 2 and Distant Worlds for pausable real-time, and Endless Space 2 for the more traditional turn-based approach. None has everything I'd want, but they each satisfy a specific craving where Stellaris just feels lacking. Still. at the end of the day, it's a fine strategy game, it's absolutely gorgeous, and it'll be updated for a good while, so if you find it at a discount for black friday or winter sales, there's little risk in going for it. And if it resonates with you, you'll be playing it for a long time.
Ya I do too.
A few games that a more tactical feel.
Star Ruler and Star Ruler 2 (real time 4x) Has a really good ship designer, can make ships as large as systems.
Distant Worlds (real time 4x, crazy complected or can set some stuff to automated) This one really makes the universe feel alive what with its trade ships moving back and forth.
Sins of a Solar Empire (RTS)
Last edited:
![[VR] optimal_909](https://forums-cdn.zaonce.net/data/avatars/m/109/109067.jpg?1553781733){kind=avatar}
I was longing for Stellaris, but Europe Universalis is just too complicated for me and it scared me off from buying Stellaris. I've got Endless Space 2, and it appears just about the complexity I'm willing to handle.
Stellaris is far less complected than Europe Universalis.
Black Friday sales right?
correct.