• 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 #120 - New Economy System

Hello and welcome back to the Stellaris dev diaries! Today we're going to start talking about the next major update, which we have dubbed 2.2 'Le Guin' after Ursula K. Le Guin. Right now we're not ready to reveal anything about the precise nature of the update or whether it is accompanied by any DLC, other than to say that the Le Guin will have focus on trade and the economy, and that its release date is far away. Today's dev diary is going to be a bit on the foundational side, going over the new economic back-end we've implemented for 2.2.

New Economy System
The original economy system for Stellaris has always been something of a limitation for us. It's a sort of hybrid system, with resources being both scripted (and thus accessible to modders) and hard-coded (and thus inaccessible) in about equal measures. For example, under the old system ships would always cost minerals, as the code was set up for them to always cost minerals, and the only thing you could change was the amount of minerals they cost. Similarly, most things in the game that had an upkeep were hard-coded to use energy for upkeep, and again, only the amounts were able to be changed. A few things (such as for example Resettlement or the precise resources produced by a building) were more open than this, but generally the system made it quite hard to introduce new resources or change the way a particular empire might use a particular resource. The old system was also quite performance-intensive.

When we decided that we wanted to make the next major update be about the economy, the first thing we knew that we needed to do was to rewrite this system entirely. For the new system, we set out a number of goals:
1: The new system should make it easy to add new resources and swap the way resources are used
2: The new system should be as open to modding as we possibly could make it
3: The new system should improve performance

From this, we've created a new system that we call Economic Templates. Where previously there would be a jumble of different systems for how cost, production and maintenance of the different features in the game would work, there is now one unified system. Any single object in the game that can be owned by an empire and have an impact on the economy is called an Economic Unit. In the database files, an Economic Unit looks like this:

Code:
resources = {
    category = armies
 
    # Normal empires pay for armies with minerals
    cost = {
        trigger = {
            owner = { is_hive_empire = no }
        } 
        minerals = 100
    }
 
    # Hive Minds pay for armies partially with food
    cost = {
        trigger = {
            owner = { is_hive_empire = yes }
        }     
        minerals = 50
        food = 50
    }     

    # If Barbaric Despoilers, produce Energy while on enemy planets
    produces = {
        trigger = {
            owner = { has_valid_civic = civic_barbaric_despoilers }
            planet = { owner = { is_at_war_with = root.owner } }
        }
        energy = 3
    }     
 
    # Normal empires pay army upkeep with energy
    upkeep = {
        trigger = {
            owner = { is_hive_empire = no }
        }     
        energy = 1
    }
 
    # Hive Minds pay army upkeep with food
    upkeep = {
        trigger = {
            owner = { is_hive_empire = yes }
        }     
        food = 1
    }     
}

For those who cannot read our scripting language, this is an example I just created of how the new system can be used. It's for a regular assault army, which normally costs 100 minerals to build and has an upkeep of 1 energy, just as before. However, if your empire is a Hive Mind, the army will instead cost 50 minerals and 50 food, and costs 1 food in upkeep instead of 1 energy. Additionally, if you have the Barbaric Despoilers civic, armies that are located on enemy planets will produce 3 energy/month, paying for themselves and then some through wide-scale looting. This isn't an actual example from the internal build, but something I just created while writing this dev diary to show the possibilities that the new economic system opens up for for both us and modders - we could have fully biological empires that use food instead of minerals to build infrastructure, ships that produce research while in certain systems, leaders that give Unity... the possibilities are endless.
2018_08_09_1.png


Advanced Resources
With this system in place, we've been able to add several new 'advanced' resources to the game. They are as follows: Alloys, Rare Crystals, Volatile Motes and Exotic Gases. These resources are either manufactured from basic resources or found in rare planetary deposits (or both!) and are used to construct more advanced things in the game, such as ship components, megastructures, certain buildings and so on. There is also still a number of strategic resources such as Dark Matter and Living Metal that provide unique benefits, though precisely how many of these we will keep and how they are used is something we're still in the process of figuring out.

As part of these changes we're also in the process of reworking the top bar. Since we will now have rather too many resources to show them all, the top bar will now only show individual entries for resources that are important for your empire to always keep track of, with the rest shown as a consolidated entry that can be tooltiped for greater detail. Science is also consolidated into a total output of all 3 sciences, with tooltip showing the individual production of each. We're going to ensure that only relevant resources are shown individually, so most Machine Empires wouldn't have Food appear as an individual entry in the top bar, for example. We're also considering letting the player manually override this and decide which precise resources they want to keep track of within the available topbar space.

(Please note that the new topbar is nowhere near final and will have some ugly graphical issues. This is not how it will look on release)
2018_08_09_2.png


That's all for today! I know this dev diary was rather technical and perhaps primarily of interest to modders, but I felt it was important to explain the fundamental changes that have taken place in the game's back-end, both in relation to the changes coming in 2.2, and the possibilities that this opens up in the future for having empire types with radically different approaches to resource production and consumption. Next week we're going to finally start talking about the new Planetary Management system. See you then!
 
Also to the fellows discussing win conditions, since the current ones are quite limiting I do tend to sandbox games mostly myself as I usually have little interest in controlling so much of the galaxy, I much prefer it when there are lots of different empires with opposing ethos all squabbling with each other and hope one day some kind of system would be implemented that maintains this variety, maybe an expansion/rework of the faction system so it resembles more of a galactic parliament or royal court (depending on faction ethics and government type) with potential rebel factions that want more autonomy from the home world that will forcefully try to separate from your empire (and ai empires) if they are not placated, or eu4 like pretenders for monarchy based governments, (could potentially use a measurement such as autonomy for democracies / oligarchies and legitimacy for dictatorships / hereditary governments to determine the likeliness of such a faction forming and do it on a planet / sector or a global basis) On top of this slave revolts that get out of hand could create a prescripted democratic crusaders / federation builders empire. This could also build into an espionage system that would give you more options during peacetime with neighbouring empires, whether it's stealing technology and siphoning resources to promoting a detrimental faction in another empire / sowing discourse, this could certainly give the player more options to interact with other empires without going to war and such a system could use influence as its currency assuming it's balanced with the faction system since this is currently the main way to generate more influence. Back to win conditions though, the new market and economy system could give scope to a kind of economic dominance victory condition where you control a certain percentage of the markets production to the point where your empire could (weather actually in game or not) theoretically crash the market based on control alone.
 
Last edited:
That is an excellent idea! Or, perhaps an end/beginning game where another entire galaxy becomes available. Maybe they could be handled like instances in a MMO for performance issues and limit what you can take back and forth. Man, so many ideas!

Oh, my USSR example wasn't a very good one. I apologize if I offended anyone. It was just the first "empire" that jumped in my head the sort of fell but their power never really wained. My bad.

In reality each and every empire fell through outsider influence, or crumbled from within after the one who made it died. The latter is a perfect example of the dangers of my system. If you go too fast, then your empire will crumble from within. If you conquer the whole, and manage to geth through the first unstable phase, then there will be no outsider influence to break the empire. What still can break it is decadence. That can be removed by making everyone equal, and keeping that way.
 
I agree, except that rather than there being little impact, almost each and every impact that you can influence is geared towards warfare and the accumulation of resources (for warfare)

The wise man prepares for war in times of peace. This fact lives even in reality. Every nation has national army, and allies. Even Swiss has an army despite not waging any war over a hundred years. They were prepared to be attacked during both world wars. This game is not, and should not be different on this matter. At first you are alone. You don't know who you gona meet next. Even if you are a federation builder with pacifist+fanatic xenophobe you might end up meeting a genocider first, and then you have only one option. FIGHT. Also even if you got some allies around who knows when you meet a warmonger enemy, and if your allies can beat it. And there are the crisis event to **** you up no matter how you play.
 
Also to the fellows discussing win conditions, since the current ones are quite limiting I do tend to sandbox games mostly myself as I usually have little interest in controlling so much of the galaxy, I much prefer it when there are lots of different empires with opposing ethos all squabbling with each other and hope one day some kind of system would be implemented that maintains this variety, maybe an expansion/rework of the faction system so it resembles more of a galactic parliament or royal court (depending on faction ethics and government type) with potential rebel factions that want more autonomy from the home world that will forcefully try to separate from your empire (and ai empires) if they are not placated, or eu4 like pretenders for monarchy based governments, (could potentially use a measurement such as autonomy for democracies / oligarchies and legitimacy for dictatorships / hereditary governments to determine the likeliness of such a faction forming and do it on a planet / sector or a global basis) On top of this slave revolts that get out of hand could create a prescripted democratic crusaders / federation builders empire. This could also build into an espionage system that would give you more options during peacetime with neighbouring empires, whether it's stealing technology and siphoning resources to promoting a detrimental faction in another empire / sowing discourse, this could certainly give the player more options to interact with other empires without going to war and such a system could use influence as its currency assuming it's balanced with the faction system since this is currently the main way to generate more influence. Back to win conditions though, the new market and economy system could give scope to a kind of economic dominance victory condition where you control a certain percentage of the markets production to the point where your empire could (weather actually in game or not) theoretically crash the market based on control alone.

Partly the espionage system which is missing entirely, and partly my faction rework idea. In my idea faction attraction is more dependent on what exist around a pop., and what your empire does. Also if chance given, then faction tries to take over peacefuly by the ruler's etho always plays system.

As democracy where everyone is full citizen your factions would never cause big problems, but your policies could get **** up, if they elect a ruler who does not sharing it.

As oligarchy you have more control by influence during elections, and elections are not often, but it still can mess you up, if you ignore it entirely.

Dictatorical case would include the rebelling factions try to kill your leader, and elect their own, if they are majority, but if not.

Then they do the same as with Imperial one. Cause unrest, strikes, or even revolt if living standards are bad, or slaver.

Part of the espionage would be manipulating the factions. Both inside, and outside borders. You could try to turn the authoritarian state into an egalitarian, by helping the slaves in their revolt.

The economy victory still makes no sense. You think, that a determined exterminator gives a **** about the organics economy?

I see potential in possible new economic system. But no matter how much option you give the end is same. You make federations, or/and wage wars to control the galaxy. Technological victory is something i could agreed with for tall empires. Some sort of global mind control for example.
 
The core trouble I have is that, while this is the vision, it's not the reality.

I don't have any objection to open world games. Indeed, in other threads I've suggested that the right direction for Stellaris might be more like Dungeons & Dragons, a game system which players can populate with stories, lore and characters through the mod community. Or perhaps a strategy Elder Scrolls, a huge open world in which you can get around to the victory conditions whenever you feel like it.

However even in that context, for me the missing piece is how few of Stellaris' many components actually impact the state of play.

In an open world game your decisions still have consequences. In D&D I can write any stories I want, play any adventure, but my choices still matter because the game responds to what I do. Choose to develop a rogue vs. a fighter and you have a very different game. In Stellaris most of my choices don't matter because the game responds to very little of what I do. If I choose a democracy or an oligarchy I still have the exact same game. There are a ton of buttons to push, just almost none of them actually affect the state of play.

For me, mechanics like factions, policies, species rights, politics and government, all of those innumerable incremental technologies, etc., they don't make the game more versatile and interesting because they don't have any consequences. These mechanics don't create new challenges or solve existing ones. They don't give me new options. They sometimes nudge numbers, but never enough to notice.

To borrow your painting a picture analogy, it's as if half the paints in my box didn't leave any mark on the canvas. Imagining a splash of blue doesn't work, nor does just engaging in elaborate head canon and calling it role play. I don't need a computational box to daydream. It's why warfare is the most developed and satisfying system in the game, because this is one of the few things you can do that actually has a tangible, noticeable impact on the game board.

This is the problem I was referring to earlier. Stellaris is packed with options and choices that you can completely ignore, and every single play through is exactly the same. That has to be fixed. Each mechanic should have meaning, and I'm not entirely certain it's possible without changing something about the game's current half-grand strategy/half-4X/half-role playing philosophy.

The end is the same in any case. What Stellaris missing is the different abilities to reach that end. Espionage to alter, or harm other empires. Diplomatic options for better cooperation such as buying yourself into a federation, that isn't exactly hostile, or make others accept invitation to a federation. Sure pure opposites will never work together on that level, but at least make it wider. Tech victory could be acceptable for tall players, but making the right economy, diplomacy, and espionage stuff might also let tall players win through federation.
 
The wise man prepares for war in times of peace. This fact lives even in reality. Every nation has national army, and allies. Even Swiss has an army despite not waging any war over a hundred years. They were prepared to be attacked during both world wars. This game is not, and should not be different on this matter. At first you are alone. You don't know who you gona meet next. Even if you are a federation builder with pacifist+fanatic xenophobe you might end up meeting a genocider first, and then you have only one option. FIGHT. Also even if you got some allies around who knows when you meet a warmonger enemy, and if your allies can beat it. And there are the crisis event to **** you up no matter how you play.

I wasn't arguing that though. Sure every nation has the means to defend itself, but most nations aren't entirely geared towards creating a war chest niether. The new update is a step in the right direction for sure, hoping a diplomacy update can come later (such as negotiated claims and the like)

EDIT: Example - right now if I want to expand and I'm boxed in, I have one option - DoW and have a bigger/better fleet. This means I piss off this empire and potentially piss off its allies and or my neighbours.

What I hope will come in the future will be that I can DoW, buy the system through a superior economy, use subterfuge to stage a coup within the system or negotiate the system to be under my control. Each of these has different connotations for relations eg.

Economy is seen as fair play - if you can afford it, it's yours. No loss of sovereignty so no neighbours will be particularly threatened, however the pops on the planet may not like being bought into another empire and egalitarian / xenophiles may dislike the pops being treated as mere production numbers.

Subterfuge means you may get away with it, but you might not - if you do, most turn a blind eye except the targeted empire, but if you get found out, you're in DoW territory with the targets allies and none of its nieghbours will trust you for a time.

Diplomatic response could be long and cost influence, but avoids war. Perfect for pacifists, or those seeking to expand only when necessary and keeping the status quo with relations.
 
Last edited:
I wasn't arguing that though. Sure every nation has the means to defend itself, but most nations aren't entirely geared towards creating a war chest niether. The new update is a step in the right direction for sure, hoping a diplomacy update can come later (such as negotiated claims and the like)

EDIT: Example - right now if I want to expand and I'm boxed in, I have one option - DoW and have a bigger/better fleet. This means I piss off this empire and potentially piss off its allies and or my neighbours.

What I hope will come in the future will be that I can DoW, buy the system through a superior economy, use subterfuge to stage a coup within the system or negotiate the system to be under my control. Each of these has different connotations for relations eg.

Economy is seen as fair play - if you can afford it, it's yours. No loss of sovereignty so no neighbours will be particularly threatened, however the pops on the planet may not like being bought into another empire and egalitarian / xenophiles may dislike the pops being treated as mere production numbers.

Subterfuge means you may get away with it, but you might not - if you do, most turn a blind eye except the targeted empire, but if you get found out, you're in DoW territory with the targets allies and none of its nieghbours will trust you for a time.

Diplomatic response could be long and cost influence, but avoids war. Perfect for pacifists, or those seeking to expand only when necessary and keeping the status quo with relations.

You can buy planets. AI just smart enough not to sell it. If you are boxed, then you can try to form federation, or wage war.

What is not full retard, and would implement is espionage to cause trouble, or even alter other empires (not without limitations, or possible counter movement though). For example you are egalitarian pacifist, and you got an authoritarian spiritualist neighboor. Your espionage cause slave revolts all over, and to save the nation's economy it turns into an egalitarian state, and there you go. From neutral enemy into an ally for federation.

I would also implement more trade options which i explained in several posts. The main point is better cooperation between tall, and wide by allowing tech, and fleet trade in different ways. Also the ability to trade with diplomatic deals so if your economy is that great then you can buy yourself guarantee independence, or buy yourself into a federation.

Of course, if target empire despises you, then trading, and diplomacy are no go. You could still use espionage.
 
I wasn't arguing that though. Sure every nation has the means to defend itself, but most nations aren't entirely geared towards creating a war chest niether. The new update is a step in the right direction for sure, hoping a diplomacy update can come later (such as negotiated claims and the like)

EDIT: Example - right now if I want to expand and I'm boxed in, I have one option - DoW and have a bigger/better fleet. This means I piss off this empire and potentially piss off its allies and or my neighbours.

What I hope will come in the future will be that I can DoW, buy the system through a superior economy, use subterfuge to stage a coup within the system or negotiate the system to be under my control. Each of these has different connotations for relations eg.

Economy is seen as fair play - if you can afford it, it's yours. No loss of sovereignty so no neighbours will be particularly threatened, however the pops on the planet may not like being bought into another empire and egalitarian / xenophiles may dislike the pops being treated as mere production numbers.

Subterfuge means you may get away with it, but you might not - if you do, most turn a blind eye except the targeted empire, but if you get found out, you're in DoW territory with the targets allies and none of its nieghbours will trust you for a time.

Diplomatic response could be long and cost influence, but avoids war. Perfect for pacifists, or those seeking to expand only when necessary and keeping the status quo with relations.

To clarify, are you actually suggesting for the game to allow systems buyout?
This seems to be immenselly unwise for the gameplay. If anything money should be the facilitating element here, but only in the sense of being a resource drain needed to finance the way, the takeover might happen.

Espionage and trading and and cultural ties with the neighbouring systems to start that peaceful flip or military invasion for the stereotypical way.
 
Cherryh more or less killed Stellaris for me, but this "Space Victoria Lite" approach might bring me back.
 
You can buy planets. AI just smart enough not to sell it. If you are boxed, then you can try to form federation, or wage war.

That's exactly what I was saying though - these are the two options available, I'd like more...

The fact that systems are almost never traded for makes it kind of pointless being there, save to gift vassals. I would like to be able to say 'okay, we'll swap this system, for these two' or 'okay, here's 20000 minerals and a research treaty, but we're keeping Plutarch IV'.

Of course the AI would need to weigh up value and not be easily gimped by the player (eg would be incredibly unlikely to sell a system with a strat resource or galactic wonder, would otherwise be determined by how new and how much output is produced)

To clarify, are you actually suggesting for the game to allow systems buyout?
This seems to be immenselly unwise for the gameplay. If anything money should be the facilitating element here, but only in the sense of being a resource drain needed to finance the way, the takeover might happen.

Espionage and trading and and cultural ties with the neighbouring systems to start that peaceful flip or military invasion for the stereotypical way.

I'm not against the idea of it being a gradual thing, but I'd say that's more like one way to take a diplomatic approach. Sort of like saying 'hey, so trade is mostly for our benefit in this system. Most of the population is us and most of the systems administrators are run by members of our empire so, this systems basically ours, right?

However, why not have a system in which planets/systems can be traded? Why would it be unwise for gameplay, given my earlier quote and you build the AI with enough sense not to trade for peanuts? If they decide it's not for sale, then you can weigh up other options (diplomacy, war, espionage)
 
Last edited:
That's exactly what I was saying though - these are the two options available, I'd like more...

The fact that systems are almost never traded for makes it kind of pointless being there, save to gift vassals. I would like to be able to say 'okay, we'll swap this system, for these two' or 'okay, here's 20000 minerals and a research treaty, but we're keeping Plutarch IV'.

Of course the AI would need to weigh up value and not be easily gimped by the player (eg would be incredibly unlikely to sell a system with a strat resource or galactic wonder, would otherwise be determined by how new and how much output is produced)



I'm not against the idea of it being a gradual thing, but I'd say that's more of one way to take a diplomatic approach. Sort of like saying 'hey, so trade is mostly for our benefit in this system. most of the population is us and most of the systems administrators are run by members of our empire so, this systems basically ours, right?

However, why not have a system in which planets/systems can be traded? Why would it be unwise for gameplay, given my earlier quote and you build the AI with enough sense not to trade for peanuts?
The main problem of a good system based around the idea of buy and sell systems is build a good AI that known how use adequately this system.
 
The fact that systems are almost never traded for makes it kind of pointless being there, save to gift vassals. I would like to be able to say 'okay, we'll swap this system, for these two' or 'okay, here's 20000 minerals and a research treaty, but we're keeping Plutarch IV'.

THIS! I completely agree. I have been in situations where a suffering ally would be helped tremendously by allowing me to purchase a system that did them no good at all and they would get resources that could save them from being destroyed. In fact, it was practically charity. But no, the AI seems to only let systems be traded when settling a war. We even had a migration treaty at the time.
Trading systems is seems to be an automatic -1000.
 
The main problem of a good system based around the idea of buy and sell systems is build a good AI that known how use adequately this system.

For sure, doesn't mean it's not impossible though. First it would check if the system contains empire capital, strategic resource, or a completed galactic wonder. These systems have the same effect as trading systems is now (ie impossible)

It would then need some checks and parameters, eg anything less than the equivalent of 20/30k minimum minerals energy before it considers it. This is then factored based on total output of systems, no of pops on the planet (so more = a higher price), no of tiles (though soon to be irrelevant)

It could also value your systems this way, so a small backwater planet with some room for growth may fetch a small discount if you're looking to pick up another system cheaper.

EDIT: Could also get a discount for Federations with this also as empires co-mingle and share territory. Provides some internal competition over who is the top dog within the alliance.
 
Last edited:
Just what I was thinking! Great! But could keep in mind, maybe bringing back the idea of renewable energy. I really missed the solar panels in the space station, thought I was thinking that now that we have power plants you could play with it. Like making different kinds of power plants, i.e Tidal power plants for Continental or Oceanic worlds, but when you build them in Oceanic worlds they give a bigger source of energy. This could also be the case with wind power and Arid or Dry worlds. Additionally, you could play with oil, i.e you get a polluted world in exchange for a ton of energy or upkeep of somekind, or buffing the productivity of minerals. This polluted world will start crumble tile by tile with debuffs or decreasing its population and maybe this could be use with radioactive energy too. Just a draft of ideas.
 
renewable energy. I really missed the solar panels
An energy source based on the entropic decay of stars and the universe isn't renewable. Renewable energy is summoning hell beasts from subspace and cooking them for fuel. Since they can never be truly killed and simply get banished back to the void you can draw on them over and over again as a source of unlimited, renewable fuel.

Haunted ghosts are also a cheap, renewable source of refrigerant if you don't mind getting the chills.
 
An energy source based on the entropic decay of stars and the universe isn't renewable. Renewable energy is summoning hell beasts from subspace and cooking them for fuel. Since they can never be truly killed and simply get banished back to the void you can draw on them over and over again as a source of unlimited, renewable fuel.

Yes, but every time someone tries that they eventually lose to the infinite and respawning legions of hell.
Also whoever ordered it gets punched in the face, a lot, by some crazy man in power armor.
 
That's exactly what I was saying though - these are the two options available, I'd like more...

The fact that systems are almost never traded for makes it kind of pointless being there, save to gift vassals. I would like to be able to say 'okay, we'll swap this system, for these two' or 'okay, here's 20000 minerals and a research treaty, but we're keeping Plutarch IV'.

Of course the AI would need to weigh up value and not be easily gimped by the player (eg would be incredibly unlikely to sell a system with a strat resource or galactic wonder, would otherwise be determined by how new and how much output is produced)



I'm not against the idea of it being a gradual thing, but I'd say that's more like one way to take a diplomatic approach. Sort of like saying 'hey, so trade is mostly for our benefit in this system. Most of the population is us and most of the systems administrators are run by members of our empire so, this systems basically ours, right?

However, why not have a system in which planets/systems can be traded? Why would it be unwise for gameplay, given my earlier quote and you build the AI with enough sense not to trade for peanuts? If they decide it's not forтш sale, then you can weigh up other options (diplomacy, war, espionage)

Mostly because it cheapens the systems. I think, there are conditions when a system will never be traded - a system with a settled planet, a system with a strategic resource, systems with developed star bases and important features, like enclaves or black holes.
I can't really imagine the conditions when an empire would decide to sell off a system and how one (AI) would evaluate the value of selling and buying a system.
I am not saying this can't be developed though. A large empire with 100+ stars in control might possibly agree to sell off a few stars , including the 10th copy of Yurantic crystals they have (in the current version of the game, Le Guin will change a lot of things about that, i hope), but i can't see an empire selling off a developed planet. For that to happen, the value of a planet for the owner compared to the deal conditions (military and resource help? A large number of new techs?) needs to be very small, which begs the question what is the value for the empire, proposing the deal?

That's a not small thing as well. When would an AI empire consider it prudent to buy off a few star systems (and planets) compared to trying to get them in a different way.
Also, what effects that should create in the empires themselves? I mean, half the expected fun of Stellaris is managing your empire.
Let's imagine the results for the empire which sold the planet and other star systems:
Aggressively Militarist pops would be pissed unless the deal gives them new toys or allows bigger fleets and better armies.
Xenophobes will be up in uproar - the heck are our glorious empire is even dealing with those alien bastards!!!!!... maybe reduced by the immense positive value of the deal
Xenophiles will be mostly considering the trade value and would be happier if the deal will include migration and long-term export trade clauses
Materialists will be meh, unless new techs and maybe research cooperation is included.
Pacifists will be heavily weighing how positive the deal was based on contents - trade union, industrial stuff, loss of incomes compared to the deal and i guess,also how many pops were lost.
Technically that last part is the most important. Factions that lose the most pops from the sale will be the most unhappy. Imagine selling off half pf the spiritualist faction's supporters?

Same set of reactions need to be imagined for the buying empire, and then you need to consider how this can be developed for Robot and Swarm empires and the authoritarians.

P.S. Admittedly, i do believe factions should be redone as dynamic parties and form their political desires based on ethical beliefs of their members. I.e an egalitarian-materiliast part and so on. Respectively, parties should be forming their political aspirations (what they promise to do) and react to what is happening in the empire.
 
Last edited:
I've been waiting for over a year for something like this. Never imagined they'd actually redo the entire system.
Hopefully, we'll get a private sector of economy, with non-controllable civilian ships etc... That would be awesome.
Even if that doesn't get added, the new system can be used to mod it in anyway. It would even allow creating something that's remarkably close to Distant Worlds private industry: Private wealth could be handled separately from the rest of the economy, and event spawned non-default empires could be used to manage private sector ships.

My only wish now is that they re-add "local" resources, similar to how food worked pre-1.5. That way it would be possible to add localized industry and go full Vic II.