You can have 1/3rd of the galaxy and only 20 colonies, or 15 sectors and 50 habitats. Currently in 2. You can either choose to have lots of colonies spread out across lots of system, or lots of habitats contained. I would say it's not even extra steps anymore, since there's no way you'll get enough leaders to effectively sector an integrated vassal. This may promote a "tall" growth of your empire, certainly helped by the presence of the Ecumenopolis, however this is a strategy that still has to find its place in the Stellaris meta. Playing tall has genuine benefits in terms of potential mid to late game expansion. Tall vs Wide. Bureaucrats killed tall. One thing you can watch out for is that each precursor has areas of the map where their events can spawn. Mind you, even when playing tall, I don't build them, I'd rather. . Going wide has been always been better than tall outside of one patch where you could rush science nexus. There are many other strategy games where this is a very applicable concept, as there are penalties and downsides to growing bigger that can make your empire less. This guide was made for basic Stellaris Version Adams 1. Top 1% Rank by size. ago. (influence tries to do this, but it doesn't do a good job of it at present) You just do both. 3 comments. like clone army origin - can make some viable tall builds, but ultimately playing tall is intentionally handicapping yourself at this point (including in the 3. ChronicallyDepressed. 0, we had several tall builds. This system warps the game and the way we play it in an unhealthy way. If you want to be able to play Tall, play Endless Legend. ago. There are Stellaris gurus that will tell you that by building up pops in preference to acquiring systems is playing tall. 4; 4; 3; Reactions: Reply. 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. Your main species is fine for gaia worlds and relic worlds, but anything else will require a different species. 3 was plenty to tackle every unmodded challenge available. Get a migration treaty immediately so you can get access to other species. This mechanic of diminishing returns leads to two distinctly different play styles, wide and tall. I'm a poor guy, can't afford the DLC. It doesn't stop people from trying to shoe-horn it into Stellaris, but it. RodHull (Banned) Apr 22, 2021 @ 2. Stellaris. Now it could be said if your wide with a tall build you have succeed so can tank the drop in efficiency. I was playing stellaris and got bored of losing, so made a perfect species, necrophage, demigods. In practice this means you build Habitats, Ring-Worlds, Dyson Sphere and Science Nexus. I explored my immediate area, only went after systems that were "behind" chokepoints (from an outside perspective), and tried to get the basic strategic resources (motes. 0 growth). Both can do it well as planets are not the bottleneck any more for science generation. ago. ago. With shattered ring, you get 3 big ring sections in your starting system, great for tall play. for civics, mechanist is pretty good, syncretic evolution is great too, technocracy is ideal. This is really very unplayable for me, i hate playing wide, and playing tall I just. 3 is a bad idea. This has fundamentally altered a few things about gameplay, but fear not; Things are arguably better for tall builds in the long run, now that large empires have been nerfed and pop growth is no longer quite so exponential. I keep seeing stuff around the internet about 2. For tall since you aren't conquering pops you MUST grow them. Sorry mate but it kinda sounds more like you are just being a sore loser here. 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. Tall doesn't mean you can't expand. (So your space is tall; not your planets)The only tall builds that can be considered good right now are Void Dwellers (which is actually wide under your definition since it has lots of colonies) and the Nihilistic Acquisition raider which is a very aggressive build that is constantly a war to steal pops. It is great for high difficulties because you don’t have to attack the really powerful empires and can get them to pathetic by mid to late game. walter. But it’s basicaly giving yourself a handicap for little to no reason. OP, there currently is no such thing as a tall build for this game. You can do quite well by building a few colonies on nice big planets, and using wars to establish a lot of vassals and tributaries. The game has been around since 2016 and they. 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. Yeah, it would be nice if the game supported playing tall. Paradox, Please Let Us Play Tall. 1 rules, the best way to play Tall was to reduce the number of systems you controlled. Is there any viable way to play void devellers besides commerce-tech build P. They now cost twice as much and are roughly half as effective as they used to be. Actually there IS a perfect answer. He plays stellaris and stands above 6’5 Reply Modo44 •. 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. If you aren't trying to min-max, you'll be happy, and if your empire is big enough, it wont matter anyway However you decide to play, have fun!Stellaris Galactic Paragons DLC has given us the Crusader civic and the Under One Rule Origin. What I do at the. ;-) Most of the wide drawbacks come in the form of population. Empire sprawl is still used by the community, and the terms are interchangeable. At the very beginning of the game you can get some pretty good growth by putting your homeworld into capacity bonus territory, but as your empire-wide population grows the pop growth penalty just gets bigger and bigger. I'd like to see Stellaris travel down this route with a focus on corruption and general population unrest the farther out a colony is settled to the point where your fringe worlds need a constantly police or military presence to keep subdued unless you. Always play on max star count. On easy difficulties though, wide is better than tall most of the time. 4) playing tall was always a losing strategy and only something you do for roleplay or challenge reasons. I've seen a lot of people point out that playing tall in Stellaris has often basically been synonymous with just playing suboptimally, since for a long time now it's basically just meant not expanding to fill as much space or colonize as many planets as you could fill, and thus collecting less resources, all while confering little to no benefit in. Essentially, tall and wide shouldn’t be wildly different as far as pop count goes. 2. 1" patch out on the 14th shouldn't really change habitat. These changes will force players to decide whether to focus on fully developing what little. Megacorps are a solid empire-type. Going tall is a meme. By Obsidian Shadow. Pacifism also allows the player to pick an exceptionally powerful Civic, Inward Perfection. In Stellaris I can use my influence to grow wider by building starbases or settling colonies. r/Stellaris. Use the outpost cost ethic and build plenty of outposts. Though to be honest, it doesn't really change my strategy in Stellaris all that much. Okay, first things first, if. I remember one of my really long games I ended up basically becoming a fallen empire. growing pops requires going wide and in stellaris pops are everything. It is how the terms have worked for the majority of games since I was paying by the minute to access the internet. ago. 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. Since then I have won a few more times using a Megacorp. #7. As tall you need one. Any void dwellers build with militarist. My 2 cents: tall and wide is a bit nebulous. 0 making playing tall a viable strategy. There is still no better or more successful way to play the game than tech rush, expand like a virus and maxing out your fleet. In Stellaris, some people play tall by only using a single planet, some go for a small number, like your starting 3, etc. TLDR, I think tall isnt dead, it is just more gradient. Building Tall Pacifist Empire. Playstyles are how a player plans to tackle playing or even winning the game. Corporation (almost mandatory for a tall empire) With aquatic + agrarian + thriffy = maximum performance for food and trade value. Stellatis is tough. It does make sense in stellaris to play as a "Tall" empire. In previous patches, especially before 3. Wide shouldn't be better 100% of the time. Also, I have never played with catalytic treatment. Overlord has changed a bunch of things when it comes to vassals and such. Planets are capped in tiles, jobs and housing. If you play habitats you can get more resources from jobs without actually taking up more space. 0. The truth is there is no “tall” build anymore. You can still be strong with this build if you manage to survive the early game. !remindme 1 day. It depends on your definition of tall. To combat sprawl, if you have the overlord DLC, you can claim these systems but then release the sector as a vassal. Here's what I personally like to do, and it works for me playing tall. OPS is an excruciatingly tall play-style, but I do promise you'll pick up interchangeable skills that'll enhance your tall play. So for Tall vs Wide in Stellaris, your start location matters a lot more than your empire build. My favorite is fanatic militarist/authoritarian with Stratified Economy but no slavery. 6. This is because it's more efficient to have one production-boosting building affect 10 buildings than 2. Making this a great strategy for beginners to try out. This is the truth. Playing tall may make that a waste of a perk though. Once you complete your unity traditions hopefully around 2300-2320 (or earlier) ascend your trade world to level 10. Honestly you should know better too. In 5 hours I will play Stellaris with my friends. Especially if you've been away for 1-2 years. 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. Today I have the first new basic build in a while. To add to this, both implemented systems of empire sprawl, both post and pre 3. "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. Acquire nihilistic acquisition (requires apocalypse dlc) and then try to fight long wars where you capture as many pops as possible. that's the cure. S Tier Origins in Stellaris. Wide was nerfed, but it's still "better" than Tall. are vassals just a prerequisite of playing tall. HappySack Mar 25 @ 3:07am. Thanks. S. "Tall" in Stellaris isn't doing more with less, it's just having less. What does this mod encompass Play Tall trait Limits Core Systems Allowed2. Discussion. However, nihilistic acquisition allows you to take other peoples pops to absolutely FILL your planets. Tall since well, ever, hasn’t been a great option but now more. If you're spamming habitats, you aren't playing tall. While playing tall was pretty much building a lot of frontier outposts and having at most 3-4 planets. for many many hours straight. Playing tall is more viable now, there will be buildable habitats which are basically small planets and the new unity mechanic will also favour smaller empires. -1. 3 and my solutions for it. 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?. A big part of the goals behind this update is to also make the “tall” playstyle a viable option again. Given that in civ you can win without conquering anything, a tall empire doesn't have to transition to a wide empire, but in stellaris there isn't much to do if you don't conquer people, and given the way how the research and productions currently work, playing tall is not a very valid choice unless you become boxed in very early on. Building slots don’t expand from population anymore and city districts do not expand them; so, every habitat will be a few slots big until end game. The Modding Den is a server dedicated to Stellaris Modding invite to our discord server. Having every planet in a system with a habitat or colony. 1. I've taken the society tech for a 10% naval capacity increase once or twice. You have games like EU IV, Imperator, and CK2 where playing "Wide" comes with growing problems. Other good tradition trees for Void Dwellers include Domination (more influence and housing), Prosperity (more minerals, more specialist output, another building slot). You'll have to resettle, buy slaves or aquire more pops later to fill this world. By mid- and certainly in the late game you should have a resource extraction planets feeding production and research planets. Also a way to request/provide economic assistance and ships when you are attacked would be really good. Tall since well, ever, hasn’t been a great option but now more. Though I do think it will be similar to other gs games were playing wide is by far the best strategy and building tall is more something to do while waiting for the next war or something. With voidborne, you can build multiple habitats in a. Stellaris is a game I fall in and out of love with every few months and one of this games biggest flaws and probably what stops me from playing it regularly is having to micromanage 50+ planets every few minutes to build homes and create jobs. 8 tall isn't as viable anymore, can anyone give me a fleshed out strategy/perspective?If you're playing wide that sprawl is very low. Thus, this guide is divided into three parts. Empire sprawl is still used by the community, and the terms are interchangeable. R5: I just love having vassals and building a hegemony over conquest. #9. Wide strategies focus on having lots of cities and territory, often with each city having minimal upgrades. For Stellaris I tend to prefer the term "Dense" as in few systems, but densely populated with habitats. I like my little bubble of about 20-25 systems, depending on what is in them or what they are. Tall strategies focus on having a few cities packed into smaller territory but much more heavily upgraded. ) Playing Tall is a very special type of empire. walter. Playing tall has genuine benefits in terms of potential mid to late game expansion. The extra difficulty in higher difficulties is getting to where you can get to late game. The problems with Stellaris, tall empires, 3. The problem is that it wasn't obvious because of. Low empire size penalties mean that; your empire will be researching and unlocking traditions faster than your neighbors. The 3. A “tall” game usually involves investing in and building up your local empire rather than focusing on expansion. How to win at Stellaris: Play Wormhole only. You got two species that started (a robot and cyborgs), and you needed land on the hostile worlds (aka primitives or enemy empires worlds) with ground armies, Assimilate the pops then you basically have a new world under your name. Very high output per system for when your packed in. For how to: watch some of montuplays newest guides regarding playing tall. large number of poorly developed planets. JangoBunBun Blood Court • 1 yr. Playing tall is more viable now, there will be buildable habitats which are basically small planets and the new unity mechanic will also favour smaller empires. In Stellaris, some people play tall by only using a single planet, some go for a small number, like your starting 3, etc. Give me the most broken empire you have. You can mix and match whatever civics, ethics, and traits as you wish but fanatic xenophile will significantly help if you’re going down the trade route, and functional architecture helps void dwellers if you choose to go. RELATED: How Developers Plan to Further Improve the Stellaris AI Empires. The player "developed" these systems to the heights of their abilities, using Habitats and Ringworlds. (Not super-tall though, as in one planet, but only 8 planets and about 16 systems at present. Currently, pretty much the whole galaxy is my vassals and also members of my hegemony, except for one who has been my ally since the very beginning. Stellaris has generally only encouraged "wide" play (largely because wide empires always have more pop growth, which leads to more of everything else). Build Starbase at choke points, not on all outposts. Stellaris Tall vs. That is, you stay small for some time so you can: - focus on science. and the edicts and all the other bonuses from low empire size aren't enough as a semi wide empire would be. Then again: No pops, no win in Stellaris. Paradox you're doing it all wrong. Go for Bio-Ascension for cloning vats. It does require playing the game a lot differently than previously though. 87 Badges. 2 councillor traits out of 3 is good enough for me. In the current beta branch, I’m running a megacorp. Open menu Open navigation Go to Reddit Home. A small mod that actually re-balances the Tall vs. InflationCold3591. 6. The bad news is that you start with one, and to. The benefits of playing tall are as follows: Smaller empires are easier to manage. ISO system juust flexible enough to accommodate both c. Tall builds are barely viable with DLCs, without them they're basically impossible. Those would be some of the most basic types of non-linear mechanic which could make Tall play start to exist. Remember, planet growth slows when you are expanding, so a constant early game expansion slows your making use of said things. Often multiple playstyles apply and synergize. In a perfect run you would just grow large nough to start the vassalisation chain and then even shrink yourself a bit if over 100. I would say it's not even extra steps anymore, since there's no way you'll get enough leaders to effectively sector an integrated vassal. Go to Stellaris r/Stellaris. Weekly PSA: Habitat spam is the definition of playing wide. After playing a couple variations of necrophage, I started organizing my thoughts to try and learn what worked best for me and why. You will be slightly less ahead, as the AI here is much better at tech, but still a massive lead. 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. Tall isn't viable nothing in the beta makes tall viable. I would however definitely recommend getting Utopia as soon as you can though, the sheer volume of content across all game phases. 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. You can make the argument that 2. The 0,1 penalty is the +10% penalty per system other than the first one. Playing as a corporation is a good way to play tall because 1) the managing is up to the AI so you just upgrade when their population reaches a certain point and 2) it opens you up to the galaxy through business, rather than just through diplomacy. In practice this means you build Habitats, Ring-Worlds, Dyson Sphere and Science Nexus. Wide. Imo the best definition of play wide is a lot of systems. This misconception revolves around playing Tall vs playing Wide. Terraforming to be 100% habitable for your pops. 3. After playing tall it feels really limiting to go back to wide which sucks because I get way more satisfaction from conquering large swathes of space than I do from basically playing as a fallen empire. There hasn't been since like 1. We will use these. Midgame though if you want to play tall, definitely transition into habitats in the systems you wish to develop. This reduces the number of different buildings you expect to build on each planet. Relic world start is pretty good if you can get a few planets to fuel. It is clear, that Stellaris tries it. Been playing stellaris for a little bit now let’s say a couple of months and I was wondering if playing tall is worth it I’ve heard mixed opinions on the topic but if it is worth it could you all give me some tips!Well there is a method of playing 'tall'. Empire size has changed a lot over the years in Stellaris. 1 rules, the best way to play Tall was to reduce the number of systems you controlled. ago. More systems=more stuff. Get a branch office going as early as possible, even if it yeilds +0. This mod makes all the special systems in stellaris have a 100% chance of spawning. Though 25x crises was a serious challenge. It is my philosophy, and thus the mod's, that a 'Tall' empire is one with. You get more yeild from the planet as far as resources plus more space for research labs. What are some key things to do in Stellaris to build tall effectively? I want to play tall because I have been a wide, rapid expansionist in playstyle in basically every 4x/grand strategy game I've played. The biggest reason Wide is better than Tall is growth related. I think my problem is that i am too eager to expend. Think about it like this: A 25k fleet will cost around 15-20k minerals, and a 25k starbase will cost about the same, but a 25k fleet takes roughly 300 minerals per month in upkeep. Cap one or 2 worlds at a time, set food limit to 5k and munch your way to the diabetis throne. It can however be pretty challenging on to get right. All in all though I think this build I'm playing is more static than I like. The current raiding playstyle (whether from civic or ascension perk) is worthless. 2. There is the playing tall strategy. The pop growth bonus in particular is also augmented by the bonuses of xenophobe, for a possible 30% base pop growth. habitats as well as branch offices contribute to empire size. But to really take advantage of that small empire size, you need to focus on research and unity. I would say your focus should instead be on securing defensible chokepoints against your neighbors and grabbing any important resources in your vicinity. With wide you need a ton of governors, and must be replace them constantly. Flag was a pyramid symbol with yellow and black (split down the middle) yellow as the primary I think. Most people talk about Tall vs Wide like this: Wide involves getting a lot of territory, getting a lot of pops, and dominating the galaxy with overwhelming numbers; contrasted with playing Tall, which is about leaving a small galactic footprint but focusing your economy to keep up. Expand at all costs! Wide in general, less-wide if you intend to do an early war of conquest. So you can play builds that are better at tall but your going to lose out late game. Reply. Report. The extremes, right and left, are in the gutters. R5: The Alderson disk origin (added by gigastructual engineering) is a really fun game if you want to play tall. 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. With that just build as much farming and later industry and become. If I'm playing tall, I'm aiming to keep my empire size below 100. It's basically how you use your influence. 400 stars is a good balance between the extreme crowding of tiny where you are guaranteed 100% constant war, and medium where. To me, playing tall means investing resources in things that increase the efficiency of your pops, which allows you to produce roughly the. Early on, the universe is filled. Advice Wanted. Its the eternal question that decides how you’re going to play your game of stellaris and what you early strategy is going to be. Ring world is really really strong for tech rush and tall builds, as well as merchant builds, which is not what DE is meant for. all needs a big overhaul. Either that. Created by Robinicus. 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. Hegemon. The winning strategy was always to expand as widely as possible because doing that. Stellaris Real-time strategy Strategy video game Gaming. There needs to be incentives and/or boni for playing tall, like increased tech speed or unity gain. I usually play "tall" by keeping my empire rather small, and instead subjugating as. If you stick to 10 systems and spam a bunch of habitats you are playing tall. You could try to beat the Fallen. #1. There are others (edict upkeep + tradition cost) but the research penalty seems to be the most meaningful part given how rapidly a high. Weekly PSA: Habitat spam is the definition of playing wide. So going "tall" is just shooting yourself in the foot. Thread starter Tuna Cat;. A tech tree geared to this Play style would be. Because Stellaris is so bad about preventing snowballing, it’s way easier to play wide than tall. Playing tall was heavily nerfed with changes to habitats. but what tall is or isn't is another debate I suppose and I didn't feel confident in getting any points across without using the terminology. 0 has a severe unity bug) - when it comes to both unity and research, more planets is always better. Please read through the new rules for the forum that are an integral part of Paradox Interactive’s User Agreement. I actually don't particularly dislike this change, but this was how I got. 100% habitability is nice for migration treaties with other species that have desirable traits, and increases the chances of refugees in the lategame for more pop growth. Add a Comment. This is going to be my updated take on the basic builds. Playing 'Tall' runs counter to paradox game design in a general way. Now, the Hives that eat people have it easier: Expand like the fckn spanish flu and produce food by eating people. This was: The Network. And Ringworlds would still have that drawback. This may be changing in 3. Not coincidentally, it’s also the biggest driving incentive toward playing wide. A "tall" empire's colonies aren't going to be much stronger or more populated than a wide empire's colonies. Try to expand early if you are playing wide (owning lots of systems) so you don't get cut off by other empires. Tall really does not exist in Stellaris as you can be wide without expanding allot of territory. 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. In just one year, that's 3600 minerals conserved. r/Stellaris. All Discussions Screenshots Artwork Broadcasts Videos Workshop News Guides Reviews. 3. 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. If you're spamming habitats, you aren't playing tall. You want to find all the enclaves asap, kill monsters for more tech, and just generally get that tech up. Tall doesn't mean you can't expand. I would say that spiritualist is a weak choice for tall builds; you're already going to be have really cheap edicts and low unity. For this approach, you'd want origins that can benefit as early as possible from. And yes, having only say, 10-15 systems and using habitats and stuff to build them up is playing tall. This is a synergy-guide, not a min-max guide, for playing Necrophage origin. I always run into economic defects, Overpopulation and being serounded by larger empire's. I'm RPing a Determined Exterminator empire that doesn't want to grow…Honestly, walls like this I can live with, it's when the AI is blatantly pulling things out of it's ass it should have no way of obtaining that I start rage-quitting. I cant play stellaris this weekend to try and min max this build, so monday I can give you a stronger suggestion. We have "wide with many systems" and "wide with few systems, but those systems contain thirty billion habitats". To start, I'll explain my usual play-style as a Determined Exterminator; I like playing tall, and investing heavily into Physics, Society, and Engineering sciences. The rules I'm playing with prevent me from ever having any colonies outside my starting system - this isn't as restrictive as it could be since the disk has 6 size 90 worlds on it. There are many, many ways to play a militarist build. But don't sweat it if you play tall (few systems lots of tech) Don't piss off advanced neighbours. 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). 5K Online. If for Civ 5 difference between small and tall does not matter, it is fine, it is a different game. . 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. Totally viable. -By the proposed time of 2350, you will still be ahead of the AI's. Even a faction with a single city all game. Step 1. I've done a lot of spreadsheeting and playtesting on tech-focus builds, and I'm of the opinion that your ideal mid-game size is 20-30 planets, which no one. There is also the older mechanics such as increased tech cost per planet and ethics divergence by distance which will favour building tall. I'm crushing on tall on hardest on my current game, dominant by the 2300's, overwhelming by 2400. But it doesn't. This is why most people say that wide is better than tall. There's 2 ways to play Stellaris. It is a very rough start. 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. Indentured Servitude is the best kind of slavery, as it has the fewest job restrictions. r/Stellaris • Tall vs Wide is really an issue with a Unity not being competetive with Science. There's also the issue that Stellaris really hasn't had a defined tall playstyle throughout its history. The benefits of playing tall are as follows: Smaller empires are easier to manage. "Tall" no longer exists in versions after that change. A “tall” game usually involves investing in and building up your local empire rather than focusing on expansion. If you get stuck with it, ignore this step. This is the truth. 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). If you play tall right, you can get more than 15000 tech per month mid game. I made a lot of mistakes and read a lot of info on the web and looked at a lot of videos but nowhere do they really teach you how to play.