• 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.
Hello everyone and welcome to another Stellaris development diary. Today, we're going to start talking about the Planetary Rework coming in the 2.2 'Le Guin' update - the complete redesign of the planetary management system and replacement of planetary tiles. This is going to be a really big topic, so we're spreading it out across four dev diaries, with today's dev diary being about Deposits, Buildings and Districts. Please bear in mind that everything shown is in an early stage of development, and there will be rough-looking interfaces, placeholder art, non final numbers and all those things that people assume are final and complain about anyway no matter how many of these disclaimers I write. :p

Planetary Rework
Before I start going into details on the actual rework, I just wanted to briefly talk about the reasons and goals that are behind this massive rework, and why we're removing tiles and building a new system instead of iterating on the existing systems. For me, getting away from the constraints of tiles has been my single most desired long-term goal for the game. It's not that I think the tile system is inherently a bad system - it works well to visualize your pops and buildings and for the early game it works well enough in giving the player some interesting economic management decisions. However, the tile system is also very constrictive, in a way I feel is detrimental to the very core concepts of Stellaris. The hard limitation of one pop and one building per tile, as well as the hard limitation of 25 tiles/pops/buildings to a planet, it severely limits the kind of societies and planets that we can present in the game.

Do we want to make city-planets, with enormous numbers of pops concentrated onto a single world? Not possible. Do we want to have a fully automated post-scarcity empire where robots do all the actual work? Can't be done without losing out on valuable building space. Sure, we could fundamentally alter the tile system in a such a way to allow these, by for example making it so each tile could support several sub-tiles with additional pops and buildings, but by doing this we will inevitably lose the easy visual presentation that makes the system attractive to begin with, and even then we would continue to be held back by the limit of one pop per building. In other words, we'd end up with something that superficially might resemble the old tile system but offers none of its main advantages and continues to be held back by most of its drawbacks.

When designing the new planetary management system we set out a number of design goals:
- The new system should be able to simulate a wide variety of different societies, to build on the roleplaying and diversity in play-throughs that is such a fundamental part of the Stellaris experience
- The new system needed to offer more interesting choices about how to develop your planets, while simultaneously reducing the amount of uninteresting micromanagement such as mass-upgrading buildings
- The new system should make your planets feel like places where Pops actually live their lives, as opposed to just being resource gathering hubs
- The new system had to be extremely moddable, to make it easier both for us and modders to create new types of empires and playstyles

We believe that this new system that we have created will not only vastly improve many of the features in the game that we couldn't get working properly with the tile system, but together with the resource rework discussed in the last dev diary will also make it possible for us to create truly weird and alien societies that play entirely differently from anything the game currently has to offer, or would ever have to offer if we had remained constrained by the tile system.

Deposits
Under the old tile system, deposits were simply clumps of resources placed on a tile, which would be gathered by a pop and determined what kind of buildings were most efficient to place there. Under the new system, deposits are more akin to planetary terrain and features. Every habitable planet will have a (semi-randomized) number of deposits, with larger planets usually having more deposits. Deposits represent areas on the planet that can be economically exploited, and most commonly increase the number of a particular District (more on this below) that can be build on the planet. For example, a Fertile Lands deposit represents various regions of fertile farmland, and increases the number of Agriculture Districts that can be built on the planet, and thus its potential Food output.
2018_08_16_0.png

(Note: All deposit pictures shown here are placeholders, there will be new art for them that isn't done yet)

Not all Deposits affect Districts however - some (such as Crystalline Caverns or Betharian Fields) are rare deposits that allow for the construction of special Buildings (more on this below) on the planet, while others yet may simply provide a passive benefit to the planet, such as a spectacularly beautiful wilderness area that increases happiness for Pops living on the planet. Deposits can have Deposit Blockers that work in a similar way to the Tile Blockers of old, cancelling out the benefits of the Deposit until the Blocker is removed through the expenditure of time and resources. A planet can have multiples of the same Deposit, and there is no hard limit to the number of Deposits that a planet can hold (though there is a cap to how many will be generated under normal circumstances). The types of Deposits that can show up on a planet is affected by the planet class, so where an Ocean World might get its Agriculture from Kelp Forests, an Arctic World would have Fungal Caverns instead.
2018_08_16_1.png

(Note: All deposit pictures shown here are placeholders, there will be new art for them that isn't done yet)

Districts
Districts are at at the core of how planets are developed in the Le Guin update. Districts represent large areas of development on the planet dedicated towards housing or resource gathering. For most empires, there are four basic types of Districts: City Districts, Mining Districts, Generator Districts and Agriculture Districts. There are exceptions to this (such as Hive Minds having Hive Districts) but more on this in a later DD. The total number of districts you can build on a planet is equal to its size, so a size 16 planet can support 16 districts in any combination of the types available to you. Additionally, the resource-producing districts (Mining, Generator and Agriculture) are further constrained by the Deposits on the planet, so a planet might only be able to support a maximum of 8 Mining Districts due to there simply not being any further opportunities for mining on the planet. City Districts are never limited by the deposits on the planet, so you can choose to forego a planet's natural resources and blanket it entirely in urban development if you so choose.

The effects of each District is as follows:
  • City District: Provides a large amount of Housing for Pops, Infrastructure for Buildings and Clerk Jobs that produce Trade Value and Luxury Goods
  • Mining District: Provides a small amount of Housing/Infrastructure and Mining Jobs that produce Minerals
  • Agriculture District: Provides a small amount of Housing/Infrastructure and Farming Jobs that produce Food
  • Generator District: Provides a small amount of Housing/Infrastructure and Technician Jobs that produce Energy Credits
There will be more details on most of the concepts mentioned above coming in the other dev diaries. For now, suffice to say that the way you develop your planets with Districts will shape that planet's role in your empire - a heavily urbanized planet will be densely populated, supporting numerous Buildings and specialist Pop Jobs such as Researchers and providing Trade Value for your empire's trade routes (more on this in a future DD), but at the expense of not being able to produce much of the raw resources that are needed to fuel your empire's growth and manufacturing capacity.

A planet's Deposits and Planetary Modifiers may influence this decision - a large planet with High Quality Minerals and numerous Mining Deposits will certainly make for a lucrative mining world, but what if it also sits in a perfect spot to make a heavily urbanized trade hub? No longer are choices regarding planets simply limited to 'Where do I place the capital for the best adjacency bonuses?' and 'Should I follow the tile resource or not?' but will be fundamental choices that create diverse and distinct planets that each have their own role to fill in your empire.
2018_08_16_3.png


Buildings
In the Le Guin update, Buildings are specialized Facilities that provide a variety of Jobs and Resources that are not suitable to large-scale resource gathering. For example, instead of having your scientists working in a Physics Lab on a Physics Deposit (whatever that is supposed to be...) you now instead construct a Research Labs building (representing not a single laboratory but rather an allocation of resources towards the sciences across the planet) which provides a number of Pop Researcher Jobs that conduct research for your empire. Buildings are limited by the planet's Infrastructure, with one building 'slot' being unlocked for each 10 Infrastructure on the planet. Some Buildings are also limited in the number you can build on a planet, while others can be built in multiples (for example, a planet can only support a single Autotchton Monument, while you can have as many Alloy Foundries as the slots allow). Buildings can still be upgraded to more advanced versions, but generally there will be far fewer upgrades to do and those upgrades will often require an investment of rare and expensive resources, so it's more of an active choice than something you simply have to click your way through after unlocking a tech.
2018_08_16_5.png


Infrastructure comes primarily from constructing Districts, with City Districts giving much more Infrastructure than resource gathering districts do (6 as opposed to 2 in the current internal build, though non final numbers and all that). In addition to unlocking additional Building slots, a higher Infrastructure level also makes some Buildings more efficient, as the number of jobs they provide is fully or partially determined by the planet's Infrastructure level. For example, in the current internal build, Research Labs and Alloy Foundries both have the number of jobs they provide determined by the infrastructure level, meaning that concentrating your research and manufacturing to your heavily urbanized planets is generally more efficient than trying to turn your agri-worlds into science hubs. In addition to Buildings that provide resource-producing Jobs, there is also a wide variety of buildings that provide for the material and social needs of your Pops, such as Luxury Housing for your upper class Pops, Entertainment Buildings to make your populace happy and Law Enforcement to quell unrest and crime. Densely populated planets tend to require more such buildings, as the need for Housing and Amenities scales upwards with Pops and Infrastructure.
2018_08_16_6.png


Whew, that was a lot of words. Still, we're only just getting started on the Planetary Rework and next week we'll continue talking about it, on the topic of Stratas, Pop Jobs, Housing and Migration.
 
I think words you are looking for are "internal consistency", calling it "realism" kinda mixes the concepts. Internally consistent fantasy (or sci-fi) world might feel alien and unknown, but it will feel immersive and "believable" (for lack of better word) if it sets rules that it then follows instead of asspulling something new every time plot needs resolving.

it's more than just internal consistency, it also needs to be something we recognize, or have relations to real things. a story that involves literally nothing that exists where all nouns are replaced with made up words, even if consistent (you can tell that the story considers blixni very blump, but you have no idea what either of those are, since they have no relation to reality.) isn't very enjoyable.

people want internal consistency, and dislike stuff that is inconsistent with stuff they recognize. if they recognize how gravity should work, they don't want it behaving another way generally, without a decent recognizable explanation, such that a massive object is disturbing the gravity, etc.

this is why a physicist is more likely to be upset by incorrect scifi than a layman, as they recognizer more things and how they're working incorrectly.
 
Re: Trade, a thing that particularly bothers me is the lack of interaction with other empires. Sure, trade is a peaceful mechanic, but if you can't outmaneuver other empires using it is kind of a wasted feature, and then everything comes back to war anyway
This is a pretty minor nitpick but I don't like the idea of any planet class's agri deposits being fungal in nature. Every enviorment, no matter what, needs producers, organism that convert energy from the environment into chemical energy organisms can use. Fungus isn't a producer, it is a consumer, so you need a source of producers for it to feed off of anyway, so it makes more sense to me that all planet types have plant based agri deposits. Maybe Tundra planets could have moss farms or something.
Maybe the fungus is like that bacteria which converts hydrogen sulphide from ocean vents into biomass. I agree that every biome should have a producer.
 
"A huge aspect about building an empire (at least a remotely peaceful one) is building up trade relations with your neighbors."? U wot m8, NO empire-building game had trade route mechanics before Civ V, and we all managed to enjoy them just fine.

Um..
GalCiv 1-3,
Civ 1-4,
SotS,
SoaSE,
Age of Empires 3
All of these games had trade routes well before Civ 5. And depending on what you consider a "trade route" even the grand daddy's Moo 1-2 had trade treaties that essentially do the same thing as most modern trade routes do without an actual route being drawn on the map.

You can be a Grand Strat game without being a Mercantile Camel Train Simulator. I draw your attention particularly to pre-Horse-Lords CK2.

A grand strategy game built around the management of an empire and it's interactions with neighbors both peaceful and hostile just couldn't be called complete without trade mechanics no matter how you look at it. Hense why the lack there-of has been one of the biggest complaints about the game since release.

And I think you're being very unfair by saying that if a game has trade mechanics, in leu of everything else, is automatically turned into a Merchantile Camel Train Simulator. If the game was about nothing BUT managing a Camel Caravan, then that would be what you'd call a Merchantile Camel Train Simulator. But the fact here is that when trade is implemented, regardless of the degree of implementation, it will still be just one part of the richer experience which combined would make up the facets of what managing an empire would entail.

Even if you don't care about trading with other races, an internal trade network would be just as important to building up a strong economy to support your war efforts and likely no more mundane than shuffling tiles around was before, especially now that planet development is a lot more hands off since you need to make slightly fewer decisions than before.
 
Read the Dev Diary again.
Ok, english is not my first language and i was not clear... so, my question was about how technology will change cause a consistent number of techs are now building upgrades. Will building upgrades technologies still exist, naturally changed in some other forms (cause there are no mines/power plants) or are they completely obliterated? In that case the tech "tree" will lose a consistent number of technologies (and i don't thing so)
 
I'm fairly sure that's not what the term means. Planet of the hats tends to refer to culture, not economic specialisation. Besides; if every planet is more or less the same, woudn't that make them less unique? I can't really see how specialisation is meant to make planets feel less unique than having them all do basically everything to an average amount? Or is that not what you're saying?
First off one product planet is explicitly a subtrope of planet of hats.
https://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/OneProductPlanet
Secondly I'm not saying every planet should be the same I am saying every planet should be unique. Unlike the one resource planet where every planet ends up shoved into one of 5 or 6 archetypes.
It makes. No sense.
Actually read David Brin's criticism the hunger games series for why over specializiation is stupid.
Porting over EU4's Infrastructure and Building Locks?

Thanks, I hate it.
Eu4 doesn't have infrastructure it has development which this is different than since we can't build infrastructure directly it depends an natural resources and population. Also were not spending mana to build them.

Well Rouge Servitors still need food.
From the looks of it resource district caps will be high enough to make that not much of an issue. If you want a resource planet there will probably be enough mineral and energy deposits to fill up most of the cap, and from what we have seen so far we can expect the total combined limit of food, mineral, and energy distrct limits to be greater then the total district cap.
I hope all machine empires can build food production so they can trade with it if they want to.

It's bad enough you ridiculously shoe-horned in "choke" points...in a 3-dimensional void, but seriously, do we HAVE to do this with "trade" too?
Well if they put in systems now we can talk about making them more realistic in the future. This isnt like boats in eu4 a mechanic so bad it makes the game worse.

Um..
GalCiv 1-3,
Civ 1-4,
SotS,
SoaSE,
Age of Empires 3
All of these games had trade routes well before Civ 5. And depending on what you consider a "trade route" even the grand daddy's Moo 1-2 had trade treaties that essentially do the same thing as most modern trade routes do without an actual route being drawn on the map.
age of empires 1 and 2 also had them. Pretty sure the TW games has them too.
 
Last edited:
Um..
GalCiv 1-3,
Civ 1-4,
SotS,
SoaSE,
Age of Empires 3
All of these games had trade routes well before Civ 5. And depending on what you consider a "trade route" even the grand daddy's Moo 1-2 had trade treaties that essentially do the same thing as most modern trade routes do without an actual route being drawn on the map.



A grand strategy game built around the management of an empire and it's interactions with neighbors both peaceful and hostile just couldn't be called complete without trade mechanics no matter how you look at it. Hense why the lack there-of has been one of the biggest complaints about the game since release.

And I think you're being very unfair by saying that if a game has trade mechanics, in leu of everything else, is automatically turned into a Merchantile Camel Train Simulator. If the game was about nothing BUT managing a Camel Caravan, then that would be what you'd call a Merchantile Camel Train Simulator. But the fact here is that when trade is implemented, regardless of the degree of implementation, it will still be just one part of the richer experience which combined would make up the facets of what managing an empire would entail.

Even if you don't care about trading with other races, an internal trade network would be just as important to building up a strong economy to support your war efforts and likely no more mundane than shuffling tiles around was before, especially now that planet development is a lot more hands off since you need to make slightly fewer decisions than before.
Civ 4 only had trade routes because there was this little box that said "trade routes". You had absolutely no control over them. Not what I would consider a trade route system.
 
Love how you not just go and explain what exactly you're doing, but as well list precisely why you're doing it.

Not that it will really dent the number of people complaining about 'they be ruining mah tile system, refund plox!', but it's a good show of effort at the very least :3


Looking forward to next Thursday!
 
Main concern is over how the specialisation of planets (which I really like) will make tall empires all the more difficult. 25 planet cap being the primary issue, as well as the buffs a starting planet would need to have in order to go tall. I also have concerns over the AI and empires that may enslave or exterminate. If pops are so important to the growth of a planet now, the AI must be improved significantly. Hiveminds, Radical Exterminators etc. have to remove pops from empires it captures, meaning the planet has to lose all the pops. If the system doesn't allow for a decrease in pops, then it will just result in massive loss in infrastructure and buildings to be destroyed, thus basically nuking the planet as opposed to just its population. On the topic of strata, I hope that migratory species perk finally becomes useful, as it should incentive pops to move away from their home planet to another planet that may in fact better suit them as strata. Speaking of which, how does one create a strata or influence it's creation. Such a thing would require an education system or something akin to Victoria II (directly influencing pops into specific categories). Performance issues are also possible with this, but given that Victoria II runs fine, I should hope this does too. Ultimately though, I do like this new system, and it's possibility for further dynamicism in both the vanilla and modded games.
 
Will we still be able to upgrade buildings?
 
This whole update looks really neat. Seems like a lot of things could be encoded in districts, simply by changing the district types available based on civics, ethics, traditions, planet types etc.

One thing especially that I am wondering, is if this new district system could be used to make to colonization/habitability a lot more detailed. For example, on low habitability planets you might only be able to build "Dome Habitat" districts, and only once you've made the planet more habitable (by changing the planet or the species) can you start using less expensive habitats. That would allow for more classic colonization/terraforming stories, where you start out with limited colonies that work with what the got, and then you develop the planet around them, rather than the current system where you clean up the planet perfectly before moving in.
 
Have you ever considered running for political office? You're the kind of silver tongue that can sell someone dirt, then charge them to take away the dirt they already have in the next sentence lol.
Well, he was known as the master of diplomacy when he played in the EU dev clashes.

If I had to guess, I'd say Chris King is working on vic3 (if it is in development).
Yes that's who I meant I don't get why I keep calling Chris Alex. It's like the third time. Chris is the Scottish guy who did vic2 right?
Yeah, unless/until they tell us he's working on some other game I think that's the safe bet. Probably anyone interested in the Victoria series has been assuming that since he returned to Paradox.
 
Since your adding the ‘jobs’ system I think it would be cool if you could restrict what jobs certain species/subspecies can do (e.g If you had a nerve-stapled species they can only be miners/farmers) and it would also reduce micro-management with having to constantly ‘move’ your pops around.
 
Calls the tile system extremely constrictive, yet every update he has released since he has taken charge of stellaris has removed features, player choice, and dumbed the game down and made the game MORE restrictive and now we have this happening again.

Again people praising the removel of more features when they should be focusing on fixing the broken AI? Or perhaps all the things they broke in the last patch?
 
Yeah, unless/until they tell us he's working on some other game I think that's the safe bet. Probably anyone interested in the Victoria series has been assuming that since he returned to Paradox.
Yeah him or Doomdark seeing how doomdark is one of their best developers and dont seem to be doing something at the moment. Also during the eu4 dev clash they tabbed out by mistake and had something called Doomdarks revenge in the start menu. Now I know that's this really old game but it could also be a nickname for a project hes working on. I wouldtn normally think so but the devs panicked so much when they did it and so they must have been trying to hide something and since that and candy crush saga was all I could find...

Though it's possible Doomdark is already on pre development for ck3.
 
Primitives have their own jobs and such, pre-sapients no longer compete with your colonists for space on the planet.
Hi Wiz, this sounds interesting. Would Stone Age primitives come back? As in the colonies with tribes on them (as a planetary modifier/flag) that are colonizable? particularly liked these events. I was sad to see these go when they were scrapped in favor of regular primitives.
 
Hi Wiz, this sounds interesting. Would Stone Age primitives come back? As in the colonies with tribes on them (as a planetary modifier/flag) that are colonizable? particularly liked these events. I was sad to see these go when they were scrapped in favor of regular primitives.
This is the first time I've seen anyone speak in favour of Stone Age pops being tile blockers!?
Do tell me more about the reasons for your preferences.
[Cranks up orbital observation post to +6 soc in order to closely study this strange behaviour]
Calls the tile system extremely constrictive, yet every update he has released since he has taken charge of stellaris has removed features, player choice, and dumbed the game down and made the game MORE restrictive and now we have this happening again.
What did updates 1.4, 1.5, 1.6, 1.7, 1.8, 1.9, or 2.1 remove?
 
Since your adding the ‘jobs’ system I think it would be cool if you could restrict what jobs certain species/subspecies can do (e.g If you had a nerve-stapled species they can only be miners/farmers) and it would also reduce micro-management with having to constantly ‘move’ your pops around.
Some of the Twitter teasers mention robots and slaves only being able to do certain jobs.