I have been getting back into this game for the past few weeks and i am still unsure how some things work. It doesn't matter how enlightened your culture or how advanced your technology is because imperium's bloated army can burry yoy under sheer size of it's manpower and resources with guns outdated by ten thousand years. 8 ‘Gemini’ release during Q2. You can make the argument that 2. Versus AI its possible to play tall but its harder than wide. But I think there's another, even more key reason why Stellaris should enable tall play, ideally without diminishing other playstyles in the process: Stellaris has a goal to accommodate a variety of story experiences, and to let the player enact a variety of classic sci-fi tropes. Playing tall infers having fewer and more productive planets instead of a ton of mediocre planets. The 3. It's a playstyle meant for defense and not offense. But don't sweat it if you play tall (few systems lots of tech) Don't piss off advanced neighbours. 06c (updated 11/14/05). I played Stellaris for at least 200 hours before I won my first game. Tall empires are easier to defend from. Playing tall is a long-term strategy, so players should generally start using it. Tall builds are barely viable with DLCs, without them they're basically impossible. The problem with that is the ai manages resources terribly so you’ll need to play on a higher difficulty in order to have an even fight. The winning strategy was always to expand as widely as possible because doing that. The bonus of it is you can probably defend your entire space with one fleet. I'd argue no, due to the nature of population growth and the general lack of bonuses for small empires. RELATED: How Developers Plan to Further Improve the Stellaris AI Empires. On the plus side, we get more unity faster without explicitly focusing it. For example, a well-placed machine uprising could kill the galactic emperor and end the imperium, or a rebellion could end up vassalizing its parent state, and forming its own bloc. Stellaris has generally only encouraged "wide" play (largely because wide empires always have more pop growth, which leads to more of everything else). Sero Mar 25 @ 2:18am. You stick to yourself, and they like it. 4 planets that are high ascension level and low empire sprawl is tall, since in current Stellaris, each planet is basically the equivalent to an entire city in a game like Civilization. If you're spamming habitats, you aren't playing tall. It was never viable, and it's not even possible now with the new empire size changes. Now, the Hives that eat people have it easier: Expand like the fckn spanish flu and produce food by eating people. Toggle signature. Playing tall helps with the overwhelming amount of micro that Stellaris sometimes requires. Admin cap is super important since you're more sensitive to sprawl penalty. In 5 hours I will play Stellaris with my friends. large empire size) at present. Remember, planet growth slows when you are expanding, so a constant early game expansion slows your making use of said things. Stellaris Real-time strategy Strategy video game Gaming. It would mimick a wide. 20 comments. If you want to be able to play Tall, play Endless Legend. Tall since well, ever, hasn’t been a great option but now more. Early on, the universe is filled. The faster you can fill up your planets the better, as you're going to be going wide VERY fast and grabbing every planet you can see. It's okay to limit yourself to a smaller, more defensible slice of space, at least initially. That's a 70% increase. the new plant trait of "budding" is pretty good in this scenario as the total size of planet will increase assembly speed but that does mean you can't build machines. You can still play that way. Tall is NOT Pops over Systems. Playing "Tall" in Stellaris: a criminally misunderstood term I love Stellaris and this community! Sometimes I see people in the comments talking about how a player is trying. On top of that bio trophies will count towards your pop cap, so if you don't play super tall your essentially short 100 robo pops compared to another machine empire. Flashbacks to Vic 2 sphere system. walter. Planets and habitats within the same system counts as one system (but all there pops go towards pops penalty) The 0,01 penalty is the 1% penalty to research for each pop over 10 you have in your kingdom. If you play tall right, you can get more than 15000 tech per month mid game. Imo the best definition of play wide is a lot of systems. 0 has a severe unity bug) - when it comes to both unity and research, more planets is always better. It was never viable, and it's not even possible now with the new empire size changes. If I'm playing tall, I'm aiming to keep my empire size below 100. The pop growth bonus in particular is also augmented by the bonuses of xenophobe, for a possible 30% base pop growth. If you want to play a Machine Empire with a special starting world, you could pick the origin that starts you on a Machine world. I would say your focus should instead be on securing defensible chokepoints against your neighbors and grabbing any important resources in your vicinity. Grand Admirals cannot stop you. Each planetary ascension level is a 25% increase base, so with all of those three boosts that becomes a 43. Small. for many many hours straight. 2. How to play tall in stellaris: Switch your game version in the steam launcher to something from 30 years ago before admin cap jobs were added. 75% boost to the planetary designation on. If you rely on the bastion for defense for the latter half of the. And Ringworlds would still have that drawback. Give me the most broken empire you have. Playing tall is using the minimal amount of worlds, rather then the minimal amount of systems. Because Stellaris is so bad about preventing snowballing, it’s way easier to play wide than tall. 1. I've had several starts go right down the drain immediately because none of my surrounding stars have a single mineral in any of them, while neighboring empires have stars with 6-8+ minerals per. HappySack Mar 25 @ 3:07am. Clone army with the Ascendant path since you get 100 pops with +40% ruler output and +20% specialist output. The game design of Stellaris will always favor wide over tall. I feel that nihilistic aquisition is the KEY to playing tall. This mod makes all the special systems in stellaris have a 100% chance of spawning. i would appreciate any other tall empire build advice, not minmax but maybe with some roleplay. 1 energy. you can gain a significant advantage in tech and traditions by focussing on a small number of large, well developed worlds. 724Unfortunately there is no current way to play the way you want. Take the ocean paradise origin, for the traits take thrifty, agrarian, repugnant, and nonadaptive. #12. Pick the difficulty level that matches the challenge you want to face. Also, I'm the Custodian. Introduced with the title's Utopia expansion, habitats act as a tool that enables playing tall. Step 1. We have "wide with many systems" and "wide with few systems, but those systems contain thirty billion habitats". So today we're going to take a look at a general overview of how to play a Tall empire. For example the governors, and the space station. But then when I open it I can't close it for hours every time. I played Stellaris after the release, but that is long time ago and since EU4 became "RTS grand strategy with historical flavour, too streamlined mission trees for some countries and way too RNG-dependent in some cases", I would like to give Stellaris a shot. Techno Necro. Wide players would probably be running more like +400% costs and +200% tech/unity costs (I consider myself a traditionally wide player though my recently completed Le Guin game was a bit more. ago. He noted one of the paradox devs in the Stellaris Devs clash was playing as a tall pacifist empire. I'm a poor guy, can't afford the DLC. Discovery is super important when playing tall. Even if we never get a way to truly play tall, we still need to fix the current pop growth model (dominated by how many worlds contribute their base 3. If you stick to 10 systems and spam a bunch of habitats you are playing tall. The truth is there is no “tall” build anymore. A 25k bastion requires 0 minerals per month. Playing tall is using the minimal amount of worlds, rather then the minimal amount of systems. I personally think thats fine, because I think that playing tall SHOULD be a challenge. Other good tradition trees for Void Dwellers include Domination (more influence and housing), Prosperity (more minerals, more specialist output, another building slot). Since you dont have many planets, you cannot match the natural pop growth of wide empires. Not coincidentally, it’s also the biggest driving incentive toward playing wide. What's your strategie to play Tall. . ago. In some updates, it was a very effective strategy to get ahead technologically and get early ascensions - it's much less the case now. I too like to normally play wide, but I'll switch it up with a tall megacorp. If you play at lower difficulties, then the game is designed to be a chill roleplaying experience. Toggle signature “The middle of the road is all of the usable surface. If for Civ 5 difference between small and tall does not matter, it is fine, it is a different game. Wide and Tall isn’t a stellaris definition, it’s used in many strategy games. However, I am interested in playing tall, since maybe this is the best strategy for me. Compare Stellaris to a game where you can play tall, and playing tall is strong: Civ 5. This is in part due to victory conditions which allow a "tall" strategy to work throughout the game, but also because you can leverage your "tall" advantages into a temporary tech advantage at the right times to break out as a large conqueror -- you don't need to. Void Dwelling Megacorp is strong but unless you can balance the Influence (Not as bad now but still tight) and alloys early game. Play Tall Trait for Stellaris. Get a migration treaty immediately so you can get access to other species. This ironically makes the Expansion tradition really good for tall builds, since it gives bonuses to both Admin cap and pop growth speed. Playing tall may make that a waste of a perk though. Enemies might scoff at you and only spare you because of your bigger friends. Ryika Jan 29, 2022 @ 11:08pm. In just one year, that's 3600 minerals conserved. Paradox, Please Let Us Play Tall. I really love stellaris and want to try something new, but run out of ideas, also Stellaris has great communityTall vs wide use to be about science before 2. Tall in stellaris is weird, since planets just exist nothing really stops you from conquering some big planets, and building ecumenopolis or ringworlds. Often multiple playstyles apply and synergize. the best ways to play tall are either: a trade empire (megacorp would be the best) because the best planet types (ecumenopolis/ring world) are the best for generating trade and trade does fully cover energy, consumer goods and unity production. Hi everyone, I'm challenging myself playing Tall and I'm looking for good tips from more seasoned players. This can boost its trade value over 80%. ago. it's important to understant that this advantage is a temporary thing. And yes, having only say, 10-15 systems and using habitats and stuff to build them up is playing tall. Business, Economics, and Finance. I think it would be cool if there was a terraformable slider. R5: I just love having vassals and building a hegemony over conquest. Expand at all costs! Wide in general, less-wide if you intend to do an early war of conquest. After playing a couple variations of necrophage, I started organizing my thoughts to try and learn what worked best for me and why. I usually play "tall" by keeping my empire rather small, and instead subjugating as. There's wide and then there's wider. If you play as a non gestalt empire you can invest your influence into arcology projects for city planets. The Hegemon is easily the best Origin in Stellaris, and with good reason. 2 or 1. In previous patches, especially before 3. Empire size has changed a lot over the years in Stellaris. TLDR, I think tall isnt dead, it is just more gradient. So in Stellaris this would probably be a habitat/megastructure heavy playstyle and trying to do things that give you extra districts on your planets. I felt like I wasn't playing Stellaris, I felt like I was playing high elo StarCraft match. Friendly-General-723 Collective Consciousness 8 mo. Title says it all. Meaning it was a lot easier to out-tech wide empires. 7. Currently, playing tall is neither fun nor competitive if you ask me. 2 and before) because a wide and a "tall" empires will grow at the same rate, to about the same cap, with only some minor buffs for "tall" like mastery of nature that don't even come into play until later. That depends on what you mean by playing tall. Making this a great strategy for beginners to try out. Yeah, I actually agree I don't think Stellaris really has 'tall' playstyles because of the way pops and economics work, I don't think you so much as play tall, but as varying levels of efficient. Hey guys, I'm not very good at this game, i played 3 times on ensign now and i have not really become more powerful than other civilizations. What Stellaris Does Right, for now. Midgame though if you want to play tall, definitely transition into habitats in the systems you wish to develop. You. This gets into the debate about what people mean by "tall". Tall since well, ever, hasn’t been a great option but now more. The bad news is that you start with one, and to. Stellaris is probably the best paradox game to play tall because stellaris. . However its not completely ridiculous as a way to differentiate play styles. A small mod that actually re-balances the Tall vs. Since you play pretty much the same if you have 50 habitats rather. Playing tall is a strategy among others, it's not really a playstyle as it can be in some other games (well, mostly Civ5 in fact, and it's really just another word for turtling). Are you using the -dx11 option and borderless window, because trust me Stellaris is NOT single threaded, there was a dev blog post specifically discussing this in the past. 0 playing "tall" was nebulous at best. There is the playing tall strategy. 3 update is attempting to make playing "tall" more of a thing by changing some systems, like empire sprawl, so that a well developed tall empire is closer in power to a wide empire. You use the early bonuses to advantage early-mid game expansion and transitioning into a wide. Top 1% Rank by size. This includes systems such as the Sanctuary ringworld system, the system with the planet Zanaam and any special systems in the DLC (if you have the appropriate DLC). others will catch up sooner or later. You can still play that way. It is a very rough start. "Tall" in Stellaris isn't doing more with less, it's just having less. It's not about having few planets - in fact you should still get as many ( properly developed!!Stellaris Real-time strategy Strategy video game Gaming. Traits wise, probably grab the usual Deviant Unruly Intelligent Natural Engineer combination. Also without guaranteed worlds if your unlucky you're forced to go to war or go tall. Tall isn't viable nothing in the beta makes tall viable. . For tall, your best bet is a megacorp. Thus, this guide is divided into three parts. You need about 100 complex drones on a single planet (IE ring worlds or Ecumenopoli) for each bio trophy to be equal to a single robot and that is the RS's biggest issue. Stellaris. Enjoy your stratified society. Thanks. Weekly PSA: Habitat spam is the definition of playing wide. It depends on your definition of tall. I think my problem is that i am too eager to expend. tall mechanism, so you are not forced to conquer new territories to become stronger. Habitats are incredibly bad now. Well it depends. Worth noting that the "drag" on research from empire size is pretty much the most negatively impactful (mechanically-speaking) aspect of a galaxy-spanning empire (i. 3 beta). mining guilds is a lot better as the. 4; 4; 3; Reactions: Reply. Being able to work a wider variety of jobs is far more important than the small bonuses the other types of slavery get. A “tall” game usually involves investing in and building up your local empire rather than focusing on expansion. You could try to beat the Fallen. self. Sure, a 1000-pop tall empire with 25 planets/habitats isn’t big by Stellaris standards, but that’s still 500 billion people. There's also the issue that Stellaris really hasn't had a defined tall playstyle throughout its history. Tall empires. Fluffy-Tanuki Agrarian Idyll • 4 mo. Tall builds could opt for a characteristic that gives them a tech boost but at the cost of maybe doubling the influence needed for outposts. This is an inescapable reality that makes Tall a challenge run and not a legitimate strategy in most situations: fewer systems = fewer planets = fewer pops = weaker economy. Typically playing tall only "works" early game and it's only a temporary situation. The benefit from playing Tall should be that you make amends, and strong alliances with nearby neighbors, you're not a threat, and they like that. When I play tall, and only conquer like 10-12 systems, and find good chokepoints, and focus on tech and development on my worlds, I end up with 100s of each resource per month, and by midgame every non-FE empire is 'inferior' to me. You can either choose to have lots of colonies spread out across lots of system, or lots of habitats contained. . The faster you can do it, the less likely other corps can get them from you. Top 1% Rank by size. How to win at Stellaris: Play Wormhole only. Sadly, space gnomes have not been confirmed, so we'll probably be forced to play tall. Generally it's not really practical to play tall without the Void Dwellers origin as you would need insane luck to have a good. This is a synergy-guide, not a min-max guide, for playing Necrophage origin. . Playing tall or playing wide, which is better!? Most players start by building and advancing their empires in stellaris with a typical : expand, then build out planets and other parts. I've read on here that playing tall in 2. Going into the fir. [deleted] • 5 yr. So really it's up to you. While Tall empires aren’t currently competitively viable, there are some features that lean towards a tall playstyle, and can be used as starters, points for praise, or references for further development. but a bunch of people would scream bloody murder about how they “nerfed” wide play styles so I doubt it will happen. also if you're mass vassalizing that's not really tall play, that's just playing wide with extra steps. When I look at some people's screenshots here, I see that some have naval caps in the 300's and 400's at the same time as I'm playing (early 24th century). It would mimick a wide play power curve, but with a tall looking empire. z0rbakpants • 2 yr. You could pursue a line of having wide and tall have non-comparible benefits - the problem is that stellaris fundamentally only has one positive end state - total galatic domination (i. Your ability to make long term decisions is tied to Influence. While I do know some general aspects of playing tall and I also know that in 2. They are more diplomatic than a typical empire, as you'll want at least a couple friends to establish commercial pacts with and build branch offices on their places. 2 and before) because a wide and a "tall" empires will grow at the same rate, to about the same cap, with only some minor buffs for "tall" like mastery of nature that don't even come into play until later. Egalitarianism + fanatical spiritualism + corporation for unity. If you happen to trigger a certain precursor, but then the areas where their events can spawn end up occupied by other empires, you can be left with 0/6 hints. The meta has shifted a lot throughout Stellaris’s life cycle and will likely shift a lot more in the future. I then played UNE (completely normal peace loving federation builders), and a fairly decent sized starting empire worked, we even colonised a couple systems. Playing tall works. playing tall or wide doesnt matter if you play in singleplayer BUT playing tall in. Highly stable, unified group thats close proximity keeps together. So a big issue with the proposed addition of sprawl penalties to pops (in addition to systems, planets and districts) is that it is a huge nerf to the tall strategy, which is bad since wide is already the clearly dominant strategy (since the tech/tradition penalty directly benefits "tall" play vs "wide" play, but is widely regarded as being. It is relatively. As I understand, the point is to focus on research and traditions and less so on economy, but I'm trying a tall run now and it feels like everything's sorta slow since my research speed is at 10, 7. Tall Machine Empire, what to spend influence on? Thread starter roboemperor; Start date May 17, 2018; Jump to latest Follow Reply Menu We have. And it can help a lot of your species has traits like intelligent or strong to take advantage of the bonuses, every plus 5% can help your empire survive longer. Very high output per system for when your packed in. RodHull (Banned) Apr 22, 2021 @ 2. The angler build is still a solid choice. I would however definitely recommend getting Utopia as soon as you can though, the sheer volume of content across all game phases. These changes will force players to decide whether to focus on fully developing what little. are vassals just a prerequisite of playing tall. Two strategies stand out when we talk about empire size. The problems with Stellaris, tall empires, 3. Since tall isn't a particularly viable long-term strategy, however, skipping those structures and investing the resources into widening your empire is likely more optimal. 416K subscribers in the Stellaris community. The bad thing is all/most your vassals will hate you because you are so small and they might try to fight to get free, even if you have a far superior fleet. building tall is more of an opening strategy, not a long term playstyle. Your main species is fine for gaia worlds and relic worlds, but anything else will require a different species. growing pops requires going wide and in stellaris pops are everything. . 6 did: it removed the single functionality that provided a mechanical incentive. 0 anglers got stronger. I had 2 victories in approximately 360h of playtime. It doesn't mean it must be. If you end up in an empty corner of the galaxy with a lot of space to yourself, playing tall is just a pure handicap. Here's what I personally like to do, and it works for me playing tall. It does not really do much for Tall vs Wide development patterns. Relic world start is pretty good if you can get a few planets to fuel. One of the biggest changes is the name change from Empire Sprawl. In Stellaris, some people play tall by only using a single planet, some go for a small number, like your starting 3, etc. Wide dichotomy (or at least attempts to). Stellaris Real-time strategy Strategy video game Gaming. Megastructures aren't the only way to succeed when playing tall. 3 never actualy encouraged tall play in the slightest, the ability to create administrative capacity only encouraged a wide playstyle and the inneffective linear maluses of the current static "empire size" modifier is laughable. "Tall" as compared to "wide" is generally presumed to be going really high development on a low number of cities/planets (depending on your game), rather than low development of a high number of cities. Yeah, I actually agree I don't think Stellaris really has 'tall' playstyles because of the way pops and economics work, I don't think you so much as play tall, but as varying levels of efficient. Method 1: Find a local AI, preferably one that is considerably more powerful, and between you and the baddies. By mid- and certainly in the late game you should have a resource extraction planets feeding production and research planets. 0 there is no difference between science going tall or wide. 17th century high fantasy setting and 9th to 12th century sword and sorcery setting that’s not 5e, pathfinder, dungeon world, or AGE, or DCC (i run that a lot and love it but looking for more structured skill system) that has support! 5. Less pops equals less resources. . 0 wide was getting as many planets as possible while taking the large tech negatives from having those planets. With wide you need a ton of governors, and must be replace them constantly. Jun 14, 2021 2. You will be slightly less ahead, as the AI here is much better at tech, but still a massive lead. Though to be honest, it doesn't really change my strategy in Stellaris all that much. Machine, Hive Mind, Megacorp, Regular - Which are best for Tall play and which for Wide play?. Which requires lots of claimed stars and colonized planets. Kind of wish there were multiple assembly slots. It is viable to for example use diplomacy and just build shit loads of habitats to grow populations and form alliances and federations and mostly invade to create new versions of your own empire and include them in your federations. Unlike Civ, we don't really have a hard dichotomy that swings one way or the other. Fast Breeders - This perk give +25% growth. What I do at the. It's not about having fewer planets, but about having less directly controlled space. GameStop Moderna Pfizer Johnson & Johnson AstraZeneca Walgreens Best Buy Novavax SpaceX Tesla. It takes years with a 200+ sized fleet to get literally a handful of pops. In Stellaris, it would be really nice if there was a way to convert to tall play after the game starts, because sometimes your start location just doesn't prevent peaceful expansion. Stack research until you burst, playing tall without Megacorp or Inward Perfection is tricky, and the problem is that going wide will almost always work out better for you, even with DLC. Best. Megacorp fits very neatly for tall empires, given trade's (somewhat) reduced reliance on planets and pops, and their penalty to empire size. Play tall on the short term, get bio ascension, make sturdy and strong pops, then start a conquering spree. On easy difficulties though, wide is better than tall most of the time. But it doesn't. 419K subscribers in the Stellaris community. Jump to latest Follow Reply. Though 25x crises was a serious challenge. Some used one planet. !remindme 1 day. He is punching well above his weight, and would be a strong player in multiplayer. How to Manage Empire Size in Stellaris. All in all though I think this build I'm playing is more static than I like. NB: this is system not planet. Throw Energy. Playing tall has genuine benefits in terms of potential mid to late game expansion. There also needs to be a way to join and white peace in-progress wars when you aren't the primary target (say, costing influence). Everyone is talking about “playing tall” but what does that actually mean in Stellaris? Are we all on the same page about what it means?. Then set your fully enslaved, indentured servitude species to social welfare for the best stability and production/upkeep efficiency. So an interesting build: Play tall (ten systems and 2-3 planets). The player "developed" these systems to the heights of their abilities, using Habitats and Ringworlds. To combat sprawl, if you have the overlord DLC, you can claim these systems but then release the sector as a vassal. In stellaris many consider playing tall means few systems. There are several reasons for this but the primary factors are how pops are obtained, how resources are produced, and the way new things are created. Megacorps are a solid empire-type. You get 20% from level 3 holy covenant, 25% from finishing the Harmony tradition tree (required to form holy covenant) and 25% from the civic. . Jul 10, 2023. (influence tries to do this, but it doesn't do a good job of it at present) You just do both. having the biggest, most. In 3. Those would be some of the most basic types of non-linear mechanic which could make Tall play start to exist. The S Tier only features the best of the best Origin available in Stellaris. I think the whole tall vs wide dichotomy is dumb. 2, I must say that I enjoy 3. Just, because something is. Ascendant clones get crazy huge specialist bonuses, so what you want to do is pack them into forge and factory worlds. 0 changed that, claiming systems increases tech cost as well as planets, but now population doesn't increase tech cost. Considering the asking price I suggest of buying this DLC only if you are interested in playing as a Megacorp or if you already have a good selection of DLCs. Wide strategies focus on having lots of cities and territory, often with each city having minimal upgrades. How to play tall (yes again) Alright so I've been doing a little research and i know there is a bunch of threads about this already but hear me out. Go for Bio-Ascension for cloning vats. Even a faction with a single city all game. ) Tip. The biggest reason Wide is better than Tall is growth related. The wide playstyle embraces sprawl inefficiency like a friend absorbing everything it can, heedless of the diminishing returns. Pros: Very flexible, allows for a degree of dabbling in tall play for otherwise wide empires. First things first, let's talk definitions - I describe 'going tall' in Stellaris as simply restricting oneself to never having sectors. habitats as well as branch offices contribute to empire size. While playing tall was pretty much building a lot of frontier outposts and having at most 3-4 planets. Wide. Wide still has better overall throughput and is. I would say the same happens playing tall. Playing tall means you concentrate on maxxing out a small number of planets and systems, but I just find it inferior to playing wide, winning aside you just miss out on a tonne of content like the architectural digs, leviathan's, etc. CK2 took around 8 years until the release of ck3. #56. I was watching quill18's latest series on stellaris. 1 rules, the best way to play Tall was to reduce the number of systems you controlled. 2 I would venture to say the consensus is wide game play is going over the administration cap and tall is staying under it. Terraforming to be 100% habitable for your pops. If you play tall right, you can get more than 15000 tech per month mid game. Rather there is a gradient from "more wide" to "more tall" without any hard defining point where you stop being one and become the other. I agree that this change makes habitat feeder worlds less desirable, I just don't think that's a nerf to what I'd consider "playing tall", or. I don't know what version you're playing, but population growth is glacial in 3. In practice this means you build Habitats, Ring-Worlds, Dyson Sphere and Science Nexus. Going into the fir.