Recently I've been playing a game that I've been meaning to finish forever, MOO3, and something about it hit me that reminded of this episode. It is scaled complexity run amok. The worst part about the complexity is it forces you to go back and deal with things all the time.
Take espionage, it isn't like you move a slider like in the first game or hire a group of spies and send them all out to do a mission. You first have to pick the type of spy you want (only good for one mission), train him for several turns, hope he has good stats when he's done training, and then use him from time to time. Then you have to go back every so often and hire more because they retire after a time even if they aren't doing anything.
The thing about MOO3 is that you were never meant to micro-manage all the things you can micro-manage. The intention was for you to give guidelines to the AI on what to do, and then only go in and micro when there was some specific important thing you had to do. It was supposed to be mainly macro, but with the option to micro.
Yeah, save for FF12's gambits, AI tends to be troublesome. I tell a planet to build ships and then it puts all its money into research. Still, it's the responsibility of the developers to make sure a feature like that is working before unleashing it on the general public.
TBH, I really love the PTO series method of ship building.
You know, depth is one of those words that get thrown around a lot in story-telling, but I'm not entirely sure what that entails... I think a lot of people would think of Depth and Complexity as the same thing, but I THINK I know there's a difference; like it's possible for a story to be "deep" but easily understandable... Though I have a feeling, most people won't think it's deep BECAUSE people can understand it better. Like they're some sort of hipster or something.