• We have updated our Community Code of Conduct. Please read through the new rules for the forum that are an integral part of Paradox Interactive’s User Agreement.

Stellaris Dev Diary #111 - Anomaly Rework & Expanded Exploration

Hello everyone and welcome to another Stellaris development diary. Today, we're going to start talking about the 2.1 'Niven' update, which will be the next major update after 2.0. At this point I cannot give you any details on the exact nature of the update or when it's arriving, but I *can* talk about some changes we're making and new features we're introducing in regards to exploration, galaxy generation and anomalies.

Anomaly Changes
In 2.1, we're changing the way anomalies work in a few ways. First and foremost, we are removing the concept of failure risk - we found that the possibility to fail on anomalies added little to the game in terms of interesting choices, and mostly frustrated players or made them wait with researching said anomalies until their chance of success was maximized. As such, instead of making it so that anomalies have a failure risk based on scientist skill level, we've instead made it so that the time it takes to research an anomaly is heavily dependent on the scientist skill versus the level of the anomaly - researching a level 2 anomaly with a level 2 scientist will be a comparatively quick affair, while attempting a level 10 anomaly with the same scientist can take a very, very long time, and might mean that it is better to return to it later with a more skilled scientist, so not to hold up your early exploration.
2018_04_19_2.png

(Note: Not final numbers, etc)

As part of this we've also added an anomaly tracker tab to the situation log. The anomaly tracker will keep track of anomalies that you have discovered but not yet researched and easily let find and you return to them.
2018_04_19_1.png


Hyperlane Generation
Another thing that is changing in 2.1 is the way the Hyperlane network is generated. Rather than simply attempting to connect stars to nearby stars, we've created a new generation algorithm that builds up 'clusters' of stars with a high degree of internal connectivity, that are connected to each other by thinner 'highways' which form natural chokepoints. These chokepoints are also registered as such by the game, allowing us to find actual chokepoint systems and avoid placing Leviathans and other powerful space monsters there, as well as improving the AI's ability to detect suitable spots for defensive starbses. The hyperlane connectivity setting will determine the level of connectivity between clusters, and thus how frequent and easily circumvented chokepoints are.
2018_04_19_3.png

(Note: Image is not final. We're still working on the algorithm)

As part of this it will now also be possible for modders to easily generate systems and clusters of systems that are not connected to the main hyperlane network.

New Stars & Systems
Lastly for today, we've added a bunch of new system and star types to the game. First out are binary and trinary star systems - systems containing more than a single star. These systems come in a variety of configurations, and will often contain more planets and resources than conventional, single-star systems. We've also added some new star types to the game in the form of Brown Dwarves (not technically stars, I know) and Class M red super-giants. We've also made it possible to generate more than a single asteroid belt in a system, and created some new mineral-rich asteroid-heavy systems. Finally, there are some new unique systems to find with large amounts of resources in them, guarded by powerful space creatures.
2018_04_19_5.png

2018_04_19_6.png

2018_04_19_4.png


That's all for today! Next week we're going to be talking about something just a little bit mysterious called the L-Cluster... see you then!
 
All current tool-using sapient life in the Stellaris galaxy consists of oxygen-breathing liquid water users, or highly advanced robots built by oxygen-breathing liquid water users to function well in oxygenated atmospheres at temperatures where water is liquid.

I don't see why them all reaching a similar conclusion about fleet logistics is such a terrible shock.

WRONG!
There's the baldarak too.
Also maybe some guardians and spaceborne aliens are sapient.
And who knows what sorts of things made the thing in Gargantua!

#uselessfacts :p
Edit: bah, you said tool-using! Leaving my mistake for posterity.

Anyway, the discussion in this thread made me come around to removal of anomaly fail chance.

The chance should just be hidden and immutable, like special projects :p

Chances of bad outcomes from special projects needs to remain though.
 
I see the logic behind the new anomaly system. After all Stellaris has a lot of "resource management/priorization" elements in the early/mid game, so making scientist more efficient/fast working instead of more likely to get better results seems logical IMO. Im not sure if Wiz actually stated that now all anomalies will we a 100% win. Maybe there is still a "fail chance", but now its unaffected by skill level. (Just speculating, tho)
In any case, making easier to add new anomalies looks good in my book, Id like to get into modding Stellaris some day.

Im not sure if the cluster thing is going to be iterated more by PDX as a concept or its just a galaxy design/placement concept, but IMO it would be great if it were to become an important game mechanic, similar to how de Iure Duchys/kingdoms work in CK2, so you could have these two empires always at war for their claims of the "Omega Cluster" because of its unique orillium reserves.
 
Another thing that is changing in 2.1 is the way the Hyperlane network is generated. Rather than simply attempting to connect stars to nearby stars, we've created a new generation algorithm that builds up 'clusters' of stars with a high degree of internal connectivity, that are connected to each other by thinner 'highways' which form natural chokepoints.
Will average size of such clusters be part of options on galaxy generation? Because with shown size it's more or less "everything is better-painted 0.75 now" and as much as I dislike "chokepoints, what chokepoints?" of 1.0, I dislike endless strings of 0.75 even more... even if they are fat strings now.
 
Randomization has no inherent value. It only has value if it creates interesting gameplay outcomes or choices. Anomaly fail risk did not.

I honestly think that the change your suggesting has the opposite effect..

I used to play Stellaris a lot because unlike most strategy games it didn't feel like a standard spreadsheet management game, there was always a level of uncertainty, and randomness, that made each new play through different. Anomalies are, by design, random events that give the game flavor. If one player gets 10 exceptionally good anomalies/events in a row and another gets 10 bad anomalies/events in a row that's no better or worse than having one guy succeed and another fail.

The vast majority of Anomalies don't present you with a choice, and they don't have different successful outcomes, so the choice is whether you risk a scientist early or wait until they're almost guaranteed to succeed. There's always a small chance of failure, and it's that little bit of uncertainty that makes the game-play interesting. If anomalies have a 100% chance of success, and the rate is based entirely upon your scientists skill, I feel like anomalies will feel less like special events and more like another build queue players will have to manage.

This change seems to follow the theme from 2.0, more management less decisions. If you think that a chance of failing an anomaly is not an interesting choice, or outcome that's fine, but let me tell you I personally find the idea of trying to organize which anomalies my scientists research 100x less interesting. It's no longer about the choices, or possible outcomes, it's entirely about how fast you achieve a specific outcome, and that's not why I play this game.
 
Any chance we might be able to get a system editor tool so that we can easily create new starter systems, &/or perhaps template systems that can be generated into the galaxy?

My ideal would be for us to be able to treat systems much like species: setting this one to force-generate into a galaxy, this one to optionally generate, this one to definitely not generate into this new game...
Additional Species/System/Anomaly tools would be nice. Make it easier to build a campaign in game.
 
I sense wiggly hyperlanes that require researching applied casimir effect to unlock in the future.
Uh, they're already in the game :)

They just don't get a line on the map (because they go a very long way and would have to cut across other hyperlanes, which tends to look bad).
 
So... just to summarize: from 2.1 there will be no risk of losing scientists investigating anomalies?..
No risk of anything bad happening during the investigation of anomalies at all?..
Hope I am misunderstanding something here. Because if I'm correct, it's just horrible news
I get that the whole "wait until your scientist is lvl 5" thing was kinda frustrating - but this changes basically kill all the sense of adventure. Couse, what is an adventure without risk?
And without it, science ship exploration will be no more exciting then tile management...
 
@Wiz

I am kind of disappointed that it took too long to realize that the flat 5% risk wasn't a great idea.

Any change to how survey mechanic works which mess up automatic exploration in late-game? Especially if those system used to have hostiles or become "unconnected" from where your homeworld is. But the explorer itself is still free to move toward a new "unexplored" system and automatic exploration will just failing and say can't reach a new system despite being inside of one.
 
We are going to need a lot of new anomalies. Exploration phase is already too short, it feels like you get maybe a decade or two before your borders start to hit your neighbors, and most definitely before your science ships start running into systems already surveyed. Now with no dupe anomalies exploration is going to be really fast and... sadly boring.

I really think we should be able to get anomalies even after other empires have surveyed those systems or gotten them. It makes sense even lore wise. Think how often in say Star Trek they come across strange things... I would say the vast majority of times it happens in systems/planets already owned and "known" to others. In many cases in well traveled regions of space.

I get that there could be some issues with anomalies that add resources to planets... but I'm sure there are workarounds that can be programmed. I want to be exploring... seeking out strange new worlds and events for most of the game. Of course now that communications automatically give survey data that makes it even harder. Perhaps a complete rework of how anomalies work needs to be in the cards, because as it stands now they are getting squeezed more and more into irrelevance, which is unfortunate. And if 2.1 appears to be the "exploration" update it seems like if not now, when?

It would be interesting if getting better sensor tech allowed a science ship to unearth previously unknown higher level anomalies in already surveyed systems. Making players resurvey systems with higher level tech is bound to be too annoying though, so limiting the extent of this discovery to systems in range of a listening post and systems where science ships are orbiting a planet to help with science would make more sense.
 
Last edited:
That's all for today! Next week we're going to be talking about something just a little bit mysterious called the L-Cluster... see you then!
The cosmologist in my tells me that this is probably an abbreviation for the local cluster (more commonly known as the local group) of galaxies (Milky Way, Andromeda, Magelanic clouds etc.). That could mean we get maps with several galaxies that are only connected by wormholes / gateways (and in some cases via jumpdrive).
 
@Wiz Does this mean that anomalies will never fail again and all my scientists are safe? ;-)

I actually like the off chance that an event can go wrong or that there is some kind of unforseen danger to exploration.
I mean, if there are more event-chain-like results from anomalies now, where there might be a chance to loose a scientist+ship for some high risk high reward kind of thing, I'm all for it, but without that exploration might feel like just a nother todo list that you sort by "fastest to scan"...?
 
Also worth noting that I didn't put in the DD is that it is no longer possible to get the same anomaly twice for the same empire in 2.1, and that we have reworked the anomaly back-end to be easier to work with, so modders will have an easier time adding anomalies to the game.
Wait, wait, wait. Are we talking anomalies or anomaly categories here?
 
So... just to summarize: from 2.1 there will be no risk of losing scientists investigating anomalies?..
No risk of anything bad happening during the investigation of anomalies at all?..
Hope I am misunderstanding something here. Because if I'm correct, it's just horrible news
I get that the whole "wait until your scientist is lvl 5" thing was kinda frustrating - but this changes basically kill all the sense of adventure. Couse, what is an adventure without risk?
And without it, science ship exploration will be no more exciting then tile management...
All that has been said is that the chance to fail is no longer tied to scientist level. Instead scientist level now only affects anomaly research time. Presumably fail chance will be handled some other way, likely via events (similar to the colony event where you find terraforming equipment)