I would however definitely recommend getting Utopia as soon as you can though, the sheer volume of content across all game phases. 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. 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. also if you're mass vassalizing that's not really tall play, that's just playing wide with extra steps. 20 comments. /rantThe second vassal everyone will want is the Scholarium, who provides a significant bonus to research potential and valuable science tribute. 0. Those people are wrong, as are you. Stellaris has no such restrictions, in fact it’s the opposite; there are almost no consequences for conquering other empires early, you even have choices depending on your situation, and early conquests allow you to conquer even more mid to late game. 4) playing tall was always a losing strategy and only something you do for roleplay or challenge reasons. I'm playing xenophile/pacifist, with the idea of growing tall and defend the galaxy against the endgame crisis. I think the whole tall vs wide dichotomy is dumb. After 2. I felt like I wasn't playing Stellaris, I felt like I was playing high elo StarCraft match. Ascensions are cool. Especially if you've been away for 1-2 years. • 2 yr. Please read through the new rules for the forum that are an integral part of Paradox Interactive’s User Agreement. Also, I'm the Custodian. With the changes made in 3. 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. If you spreadsheeted the numbers for the old sprawl system, the best empire size for optimal tech output was around 20 planets, which is much larger than most people would consider to be tall, and even then such an empire's tech advantage only started to be. 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. You get more and more ways to focus your power inward. the tech tree ends at some point and the. Technology_Training • 3 mo. 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. I personally think thats fine, because I think that playing tall SHOULD be a challenge. Tips on playing wide? So i am trying to play more wide and less tall but i seem to have a problem. ago. 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. Report. So for Tall vs Wide in Stellaris, your start location matters a lot more than your empire build. 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'. . In summary, make tall viable by requiring wide play to require major investment that requires opportunity cost, while giving the player satisfying tall alternatives (infrastructure/tech investment) that simultaneously provide for a more satisfying strategic layer and decision making experience. That also doesn't fix a billion unnecessary pop ups per game, half of the anomalies requiring manual intervention that consisted of "click buttan. Acquire nihilistic acquisition (requires apocalypse dlc) and then try to fight long wars where you capture as many pops as possible. Just don't confuse playing a voidborne in a very small space with playing tall. So does pop assembly, which comes from one-per-colony buildings. 8K 89K views 4 weeks ago Stellaris Tall Build Guide. The only way I can define Tall in Stellaris is when you focus heavily on science from day one to make your POP more efficient. imo, ethics, materialist research speed bonus is great, and robots are an extra source of pops, so it is excellent. 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. But then when I open it I can't close it for hours every time. 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. Megacorp fits very neatly for tall empires, given trade's (somewhat) reduced reliance on planets and pops, and their penalty to empire size. Ryika Jan 29, 2022 @ 11:08pm. 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. "Tall" in Stellaris isn't doing more with less, it's just having less. ago. Either that. Add a Comment. You can still be strong with this build if you manage to survive the early game. If you're going to war, every system claimed is most of a corvette in alloys and a few dozen influence, meaning fewer system claims and fewer corvettes to conquer them. that's the cure. Stellaris players aren't at all happy with the AI habitat spam that plagues their games and have rallied yet again, begging Paradox to address the grand strategy game's long-running issue. Try to expand early if you are playing wide (owning lots of systems) so you don't get cut off by other empires. Here is what I have to report back: -This mod is very impressive and proves a greater challenge than Glavius mod by far. 0 has brought massive changes to how buildings are acquired, how pops grow and how districts work. large number of poorly developed planets. growing pops requires going wide and in stellaris pops are everything. But what exac. Too many planets to manage. If you want to play a game where Tall playstyle is possible, play Endless Legend. Playing tall is using the minimal amount of worlds, rather then the minimal amount of systems. Report. You can no longer colonize large swaths of space with a vassal swarm either. Wide involves expanding as much as possible and colonizing as many planets as possible. While playing tall was pretty much building a lot of frontier outposts and having at most 3-4 planets. Origin varies but Gaia, voidborn and the ever broken ring world start works well. very strong. In Civ 4, which is an actual 4x game unlike Stellaris, playing "tall" is viable. I'm crushing on tall on hardest on my current game, dominant by the 2300's, overwhelming by 2400. 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. 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. 1 rules, the best way to play Tall was to reduce the number of systems you controlled. And yes, having only say, 10-15 systems and using habitats and stuff to build them up is playing tall. 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. 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. 8 that I finally was able to bring into the current patch with the new planet mechanics. The game actually requires a heavy amount of micromanagement, sectors or not. A "tall" empire's colonies aren't going to be much stronger or more populated than a wide empire's colonies. Going into the fir. Best. Any void dwellers build with militarist. But the real mechanic at play with Tall vs. For Stellaris I tend to prefer the term "Dense" as in few systems, but densely populated with habitats. On easy difficulties though, wide is better than tall most of the time. but a bunch of people would scream bloody murder about how they “nerfed” wide play styles so I doubt it will happen. Playing tall finally is viable and I don't feel forced to expand non-stop without trade-offs. I had 2 victories in approximately 360h of playtime. Currently in 2. Tall vs Wide. I believe the large consensus among Stellaris players who pay attention to meta is that, in 2. 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. You can do this by either vassalizing or stacking minus empire size modifiers. Empire sprawl will stay low if you play tall which allows you to tech up and tradition ascend at fast rate. How to win at Stellaris: Play Wormhole only. You can play tall empires by taking tributaries and vassals, its fully possible to only have a few planets while "owning" half the galaxy through your subjects. You can abandon colonies by resettling the last pop to another planet, but it costs 200 influence to do so. While I do know some general aspects of playing tall and I also know that in 2. 7) ASpec 195K subscribers Join Subscribe 6. 400 stars is a good balance between the extreme crowding of tiny where you are guaranteed 100% constant war, and medium where. Over the course of time, that planet will grow and become very valuable and the energy cost to setup a branch office will pay for itself, many times over. ago. This system warps the game and the way we play it in an unhealthy way. You misunderstood what "tall" means in Stellaris. CryptoDeveloping Planets - Play Tall! This mod allows you to develop planets. We have another 2. First time around it'll remove all selected mining/research stations, second time you press it it'll delete the starbase itself, provided there are none of your colonies in the system. 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. I never played a Tall game before and usually rarely peaceful lol But sounds like a lot fun. Playing 'Tall' runs counter to paradox game design in a general way. You could try to beat the Fallen. . Indentured Servitude is the best kind of slavery, as it has the fewest job restrictions. Give me the. Conventional wisdom is that playing wide is easier than playing tall, but my experience has been the opposite. This reduces the number of different buildings you expect to build on each planet. Early on, the universe is filled. Stellaris has an abstraction for Tall vs Wide in-game: the Empire Size mechanic. . A 25k bastion requires 0 minerals per month. A Tall play now isnt about just being small, it is about being efficient. This was: The Network. "Tall" in Stellaris isn't doing more with less, it's just having less. The softcap, even under the initial 3. z0rbakpants • 2 yr. I would say the same happens playing tall. 1. I keep seeing stuff around the internet about 2. So really you will want to find some sort of mod that provides benefits to those with few planets. DIsagree. This mechanic of diminishing returns leads to two distinctly different play styles, wide and tall. 3 base systems + 2 from finishing Expansion traditions + 2 from Efficient Bureaucracy civic + 5 from Imperial Prerogative ascension perk (and maybe another 2/4 if you can stomach playing pacifist plus whatever core sector technologies you can research) is more than enough to get you orbital habitats. Originally posted by twistedmelon: Tall is still a strategy, but it is more grey. If you play habitats you can get more resources from jobs without actually taking up more space. 6 did: it removed the single functionality that provided a mechanical incentive. By building robots and getting % pop growth speed modifiers. Stellaris Real-time strategy Strategy video game Gaming comments sorted by Best Top New Controversial Q&A Hyndis • Additional comment actions. Technocracy is amazing for more research gains. My goal for an empire is to be a Megacorp with a fallen empire overlord, grow tall as I can, and make as much energy/research as possibleTall play in Stellaris is extremely difficult as it requires careful tuning of many parameters. Stellaris "Tall" mainly means getting as much resources as possible out of a small(er) space. Other good tradition trees for Void Dwellers include Domination (more influence and housing), Prosperity (more minerals, more specialist output, another building slot). 8 no DLC. NB: this is system not planet. First things first, let's talk definitions - I describe 'going tall' in Stellaris as simply restricting oneself to never having sectors. r/Stellaris • Tall vs Wide is really an issue with a Unity not being competetive with Science. In just one year, that's 3600 minerals conserved. all needs a big overhaul. 3. Take the ocean paradise origin, for the traits take thrifty, agrarian, repugnant, and nonadaptive. He is punching well above his weight, and would be a strong player in multiplayer. Intro Stellaris Tall Guide Montu Plays 130K subscribers Subscribe Subscribed 3. You use the early bonuses to advantage early-mid game expansion and transitioning into a wide. You can make the argument that 2. It is way to easy to spam Burocrats to avoid any penalties from rapid expansion. 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. I've read on here that playing tall in 2. For how to: watch some of montuplays newest guides regarding playing tall. Having every planet in a system with a habitat or colony. Alternatively, you can use automation, which is actually pretty easy and works well enough for most people. ago. Weekly PSA's PSA- the definition of playing wide is disputed, and many people use systems as opposed to planets as the model in Stellaris. Way, Way, WAAAY Too Many Thoughts on Necrophage (Strategy, Synergy, etc. The meta has shifted a lot throughout Stellaris’s life cycle and will likely shift a lot more in the future. When i play these it often ends. (influence tries to do this, but it doesn't do a good job of it at present) You just do both. It ends up being. Set Galaxy to 4 Spiral Arm. We have "wide with many systems" and "wide with few systems, but those systems contain thirty billion habitats". 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. A place to share content, ask questions and/or talk about the 4X grand strategy game Stellaris by…. walter. Okay, first things first, if you PLAN to play tall go for the pacifist build and just switch out later on. 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. While habitats are good, it’s probably better to be funding colony ships. Preface Hello all! This build I have made is something I'd been using since 1. The Modding Den is a server dedicated to Stellaris Modding invite to our discord server. . By Obsidian Shadow. Toggle signature “The middle of the road is all of the usable surface. As a long time Crusader Kings 2. 3 with the elimination of admin cap. 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. Generally, there are 3 strategies you can mix and match. 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. Spreading all over the map is playing wide. On the plus side, we get more unity faster without explicitly focusing it. Stellaris. The big idea with playing tall will. There is also the older mechanics such as increased tech cost per planet and ethics divergence by distance which will favour building tall. #1. Equilibrius Coastal Raider. It was never viable, and it's not even possible now with the new empire size changes. Add a Comment. Admin cap is super important since you're more sensitive to sprawl penalty. 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. Business, Economics, and Finance. 2; Reactions: Reply. Tall builds are barely viable with DLCs, without them they're basically impossible. self. theBigTurnip385 Major. 8. 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. I like my little bubble of about 20-25 systems, depending on what is in them or what they are. The player "developed" these systems to the heights of their abilities, using Habitats and Ringworlds. Essentially, tall and wide shouldn’t be wildly different as far as pop count goes. 75% boost to the planetary designation on. There's 2 ways to play Stellaris. CK2 took around 8 years until the release of ck3. There are a lot of very easy to make changes that would make the choices a lot more equal if not perfect. Build Starbase at choke points, not on all outposts. 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. . Some used up to 14. Good tall player should get atleast 15 habitats in 2230,Synthetic Evolution before 2260. 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. others will catch up sooner or later. However since few systems with a lot of planets/habitats pretty much are the same mechanically I do not consider it playong tall. The other main reason is that pure machine empires only rely on energy for unity and research production, which makes playing tall weaker than wide since you won’t have as many planets to turn into pure energy worlds, meaning less specialization meaning less production-per-pop. Stellaris. 0. This is really very unplayable for me, i hate playing wide, and playing tall I just. Keeping a small easily defended area is playing tall. Void Dwelling Megacorp is strong but unless you can balance the Influence (Not as bad now but still tight) and alloys early game. The tall playstyle dines like a gourmet only picking the very best and shunning the crud. . 7. 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. In Stellaris, some people play tall by only using a single planet, some go for a small number, like your starting 3, etc. Tall gameplay does not exist in Stellaris. r/Stellaris • How does playing tall work?Stellaris Tall vs Wide is total number of colonies / habitats in general. Since you play pretty much the same if you have 50 habitats rather. 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 o. Stellaris isn't designed for playing tall really. I think my problem is that i am too eager to expend. In 3. With that being said, playing tall in Stellaris is a lot harder than you think! How, then, can you get started playing tall in this game? Keep reading to discover our comprehensive guide! Set Your Limits How to play tall? I thought the changes to unity, particularly the planetary ascension mechanic, would make it ideal for a corporate empire to play tall, so I gave it a shot. Instead it means to have the same amount of planets but concentrated in a smaller patch of space. In Stellaris you can't colonize a planet or build a habitat without claiming a system. If you play at lower difficulties, then the game is designed to be a chill roleplaying experience. Hi, I always play tall, up to 5 colonies, but right now I see it as dumb thing to do due to how easy it is to increase your empire sprawl limit with bureaucrats. Highly stable, unified group thats close proximity keeps together. -By the proposed time of 2350, you will still be ahead of the AI's. I’m just worried how long it’ll hold an attack back later (I’ve already fought a war to a draw by throwing them back 4. It does require playing the game a lot differently than previously though. That being said, if your definition of tall is "just 10 or 20 systems", you could go for a ringworld rush and just fill those 20 systems with them. It is how the terms have worked for the majority of games since I was paying by the minute to access the internet. large empire size) at present. The benefits of playing tall are as follows: Smaller empires are easier to manage. Mind you, even when playing tall, I don't build them, I'd rather. In that case, megacorp is always good, and void dweller will help overcome the main downside of tall: not enough planets. 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 former is obvious as the pops system makes it all but impossible. Jul 10, 2023. ago. 416K subscribers in the Stellaris community. 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. Playing tall may make that a waste of a perk though. The other is increased Trade for Xenophile, the Megacorp's Default Capital ruler job Executive and their unity job Manager make trade on the side of their primary output. 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. 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. The faster you can do it, the less likely other corps can get them from you. Tall doesn't mean you can't expand. 0 making playing tall a viable strategy. Playing tall was heavily nerfed with changes to habitats. The tall vs wide playstyle has devolved from: tall (low systems low planets) vs wide (many systems many planets) to a new style of tall (low systems many planets/Habs) vs wide as it was before. Empire size has changed a lot over the years in Stellaris. The game itself doesn't lend itself to tall play, as the main way the empire can grow is to have as much minerals as possible. Those people are wrong, as are you. Building Tall Pacifist Empire. Bribe them, then submit to vassalisation. ISO system juust flexible enough to accommodate both c. In some updates, it was a very effective strategy to get ahead technologically and get early ascensions - it's much less the case now. This would be opposed to expanding further into space through star bases or. Diplomacy options just feels like a bandaid to try and force a play style that doesn't exist. And orbital habitats rule. Ethics, Civics, Traditions and other choices strongly support or hinder certain Playstyles. If you're playing a standard planetary economy, you are either going to need to expand or get yourself some vassals. Technology_Training • 3 mo. As a result, my mineral and energy credit production is a bit stunted until later in the. Jun 14, 2021 2. Playing tall means not taking very much territory but maximizing what the systems you do take can do. So, there needs to be a growth penalty for Wide or a bonus for Tall. 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. . Then again: No pops, no win in Stellaris. #12. 3. Going wide has been always been better than tall outside of one patch where you could rush science nexus. That typically translates to two or three sectors, max. Tall vs wide isn’t really something that makes sense in context of stellaris or real history. S Tier Origins in Stellaris. GameStop Moderna Pfizer Johnson & Johnson AstraZeneca Walgreens Best Buy Novavax SpaceX Tesla. 1 rules, the best way to play Tall was to reduce the number of systems you controlled. Guaranteed Special System Spawn. Paradox you're doing it all wrong. Less pops equals less resources. HappySack Mar 25 @ 3:07am. This is going to be my updated take on the basic builds. 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. Spoken like someone who isn’t even seven feet tall! Step 1: get boxed in by superior powers. 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. 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. Welcome to the patricians way to play Stellaris. Nothing you do by restricting planets/ habitats offers you anything which you do not get when going wide. If you want you can call this "its dead", but as long some people write a guide, there is a way to play tall. ”. I would say going tall is even more viable now. RodHull (Banned) Apr 22, 2021 @ 2. Tall is not efficient, it only gets you what you need and often pertains slaving. Today I have the first new basic build in a while. I can't give you much perspective specific to your year as I can't be bothered to micromanage like that. Spoken like someone who isn’t even seven feet tall! Step 1: get boxed in by superior powers. Some used one planet. More planets/habitats means more resources means bigger fleets, etc. Weekly PSA: Habitat spam is the definition of playing wide. Branch offices provide you a large income supplement, particularly credits, allowing you to focus your own economy. 0 there is no difference between science going tall or wide. Option A is to build up your internal economy, with any commercial or trade agreements being bonuses to your own production. Despite all the negative feedback from players who got used to 3. 6. Hello, since the Galactic Comunity came out with Federations, I been trying to get towards the frists empires that have the most Diplomatic Weight, however, my playstle are mostly playing tall, with few sectors and planets on it, and with a 1000 Star and 25 empires, it seemed that wide empires tend to have more diplomatic weight because they. I am enjoying playing "Tall" and focusing on tech, planets etc. Open menu Open navigation Go to Reddit Home. Shipsets were reptilian. Stellaris "Tall" mainly means getting as much resources as possible out of a small(er) space. This mechanic takes your Colonies, Systems, Districts, Pops, and any Branch Offices you have and will give you penalties once you reach a certain point. That destroys federations) remove term limit. Then tried a mixed economy run aimed at going tall and setting up strong vassals but was stymied when I realized 3 planets in 28 systems was incredibly unlucky and having anamoly researchers was actually. It gets in my way of actually being able to play. having the biggest, most. It's not strictly bad, but the research speed is better. I would say going tall is even more viable now. 87 Badges. Internal struggles. This is the truth. Stellaris. 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. Pick Aptitude as your first tradition to get +1 trait. 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. 29 comments Best [deleted] • 1 yr. 2. #7. All the changes did was bring them closer together. It’s not a case of habitats being bad for robots, it’s more that their 100% habitability on all planets goes against the tall playstyle. Stellaris. Tall means you really stack all you have onto a few systems. Very high output per system for when your packed in. I finished a rear admiral playthrough as a megacorp recently, no gameplay-changing mods. The truth is there is no “tall” build anymore. It's like having a huge empire to defend, but you don't get the huge economy to go with it. Even “playing tall” can benefit from this pick early since 30 administrative capacity is nothing and the +20 essentially translates into faster research and tradition. Let's get the disclaimer out of the way first: traditional tall tech-focused builds just aren't very strong in the current version of Stellaris, and get easily out-teched by wide builds. Playing tall infers having fewer and more productive planets instead of a ton of mediocre planets. 0 which made it very important as, while minerals are king, science is queen. 3 comments. It’s the ignorant contrarians claiming that only playing tall should be a valid play style who are being told to screw off. 0 ruleset that was revised in 3. This guide is incredible. Your main species is fine for gaia worlds and relic worlds, but anything else will require a different species. All research, economic growth and army production. Often multiple playstyles apply and synergize. It doesn't work in Stellaris (at least in 3. They would be also wrong. Clone army with the Ascendant path since you get 100 pops with +40% ruler output and +20% specialist output. Tall/Wide are CIV terms that the community stole and then tried to apply them to this game and completely screwed everything up. In 5 hours I will play Stellaris with my friends. Best. Empire size has changed a lot over the years in Stellaris. Stellaris Real-time strategy Strategy video game Gaming. Toggle signature. 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. Step 3. 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. Throw Energy. • 2 yr. What i would really like, is to play a geographically small empire but with high population planets and systems (i believe it's possible to have pops on a space platform, but i never seen them). HopeFox • 6 yr. 5K Online. ChronicallyDepressed. you can gain a significant advantage in tech and traditions by focussing on a small number of large, well developed worlds. After playing a couple variations of necrophage, I started organizing my thoughts to try and learn what worked best for me and why. 2 or 1. 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. Playing tall has genuine benefits in terms of potential mid to late game expansion. 3 is a bad idea. Fan demand for equally balanced tall playstyles has hindered game enjoyability. 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. However, nihilistic acquisition allows you to take other peoples pops to absolutely FILL your planets. Overlord has changed a bunch of things when it comes to vassals and such. 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. The challenge can come in the form of story play elements or taking an origin that is plain bad. 1" patch out on the 14th shouldn't really change habitat.