Speaking from my own limited experience, I have a feeling that EGS is composed of aspects very much varying in their balance. Some aspects are mostly OK. We have more-or-less decent space and planet survival mechanics with very little to actively complain about (like heat actively dissipating in space wtf), a good building mode for all the buildable things, my all-time favorite mass+space management system, and a mostly OK crafting/production system. There are, however, some aspects that I, having played exclusively singleplayer with default settings, have zero understanding of. I do not understand how those aspects of EGS are even meant to be. Trading feels like cheating, especially if trading things that you can craft. Am I supposed to gain this much for a.. deco?? To me, quests feel as a placeholder, which is multiplied by the annoyance of the indestructible blocks and fixed camera cinematics with non-existing animations and zero voiceover (like, I get it, those things are costy. But then why fix the camera? Many games have quest interactions built in speech bubbles). What is the purpose of the quests? Do they give the player something of value on their completion? This is an important consideration for a sandbox game. Combating POI defenses on planet is weird to say the least. I can not fire CV guns in atmosphere, yet they can fire even more powerful guns at me. They have better shield, both more overall HP and HP per block, and a damage output higher than mine by an order of magnitude. The game suggests I build combat-oriented HV, but I fail to design one that is capable of taking more than 3 direct plasma hits. And it already has, like, 10 layers of combat blocks. Am I not supposed to combat POI's defenses at all? Why is spamming rockets from a paper-thin SV while doing the same 2 dodge maneuvers more effective than a fully-armored HV the game is suggesting me to use? Why is shooting my way to a POI's core with 8 gatlings from a dug-up tunnel is a 1000 times more fun than any non-cheesy way? Same thing with CV-CV combat. The damage the weapons do is not obvious to say the least. Not a single in-game clue on how much damage would I deal, as actual damage seems arbitrary and not connected to the 'damage' entry (why have this entry then?). Shields come in two flavors: T2 or no shield. Similarly, armor is either >6 layers of combat/alien blocks or nothing at all, at least, it doesn't matter there. Weapons seem to have no distinct role, I do not understand their individual purpose, and the game does not help me in this. To add insult to injury, there are arbitrary limits on the number of weapons, and those limits seem rather low to me. Why are they present? I don't know. Am I supposed to first avoid any CV-CV combat before I can afford to build a gargantuan hull with 10 layers of combat armor (at least in the front projection) and XXL engines to move this small moon around? I don't know. It seems so. Space POI-CV combat is hot garbage. The POI, composed of the same blocks, is way too overpowered. It is so absurd that I use my same SV to spam rockets and dodge maneuvers more successfully than a CV. Does my CV suck? Am I not supposed to battle POIs yet, or am I not supposed to battle space POI's at all? Then why in seven heavens can I win while piloting a bloody chair duct-taped to an engine and a rocket launcher?? Please note: all these issues are directly related to balance. I am by no extent a pro EGS player. I may not design the best ships, I may not play them too well. But the more I play, the more I get the feeling that the balance is not right. Which balance? You said, that it is impossible to please everybody. I agree wholeheartedly. However, the balance should make some sense. It should take some concrete form. Right now, I don't see some aspects having shape at all (and those are all important parts of the game I must say). To me it seems that the devs, just like me, have no idea about how these aspects should be played. Sorry for the long post, but I'm really frustrated with all these balance issues. tl;dr: I suck at the game and I blame the devs for it.
Your PC specs are important actually. The other games you listed are far less demanding. If you do not meet the minimum specs to play Empyrion then yes, you will lag. There may also be different settings you can turn down such as the water quality. But if you're not going to even list your PC's specs then no one will be able to tell whether or not it really is your PC or the game's optimization.
I know the feeling. That's why we have the config files, and we don't have to mod everything to get a much better/ easier experience. I think players realise the extent of the issue the devs are facing when they open these X thousand lines files for the first time. There was a thread alive some time ago where we could share some easy tricks and tips, but usually when players ask on forums someone answers in the next hours/ days. There is almost no point to discuss balance on forums now, because so many players = so many different views on what it should be. In the end, it will fall on the shoulders of the individual or the server owner. There are always players who will say "but the devs should make some 'neutral' balance" and I can't count the number of times I saw that, and the answer is simply that they can not please everyone. In fact no one can, in any domain. The best the gaming "world" could come up with was "difficulty settings" in a game menu. In Empyrion we have some extra tools and I am quite grateful for that, because Eleon did not have to give us access to modding during development, or even at all.
I wish Empyrion had some method built-in to script the output of LCD displays, something like Astic's EmpyrionScripting mod. A built-in scripting solution might not require multiple LCD displays (1 script LCD + output LCD), the user might be able to just select a toggle whether the LCD's screen input field was for text or scripted code... Then I could also just leave EAC on all the time, whether online or single player.
