• 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 #126 - Sectors and Factions in 2.2

Hello everyone and welcome to another Stellaris development diary. Today we're going to continue talking about the 2.2 'Le Guin' update, on the topic of Sectors and Factions. As said before, we're not yet ready to reveal anything about when Le Guin is coming out, only that it's a long time away and we have many more topics to cover before then. Also as said before, screenshots will contain placeholder art and interfaces and non-final numbers.

Sector Rework
Sectors have always been a bit of a controversial feature. Even if you disregard arguments about the general level of competence of the sector AI, the fact that sectors effectively force the player to cede control over all but a few of their planets has never gone down well with certain players. In truth, the decision to force players to give planets to sectors was very much a result of the old tile system - because of the sheer amount of micromanagement that was involved in managing a large number of planets, it was decided that automation was necessary, and also to make that automation mandatory (barring mods) to effectively force players to not make themselves miserable by micromanaging the tiles of a hundred different worlds. With the planetary rework in the Le Guin update, we no longer feel that this mandatory automation is needed any longer, and so we've decided to rework the sector system entirely.

Instead of being autonomous mini-economies, sectors are now administrative units in your empire, with their layout decided by galactic geography, with each sector corresponding to a cluster of stars in the galaxy. Sectors are automatically created when you colonize a planet in a previously uncolonized cluster, and your 'core sector' is simply the cluster in which your capital is located. All interfaces that are relevant to sectors and planets (such as the outliner) are now organized by collapsible sector entries, allowing for better overview and management of a large number of planets. As before, each sector can have a governor assigned to it, but sectors now automatically send all of their production to the empire stockpile instead of having their own fully realized economy. However, since we still want players to be able to offload some of the planetary management when controlling a large number of worlds, it is still possible to allocate resources to a Governor, who will use those resources to develop the planets under their control. This of course means that there is no longer any core sector limit, and anything that previously used to give a bonus to core sector planets has either been changed into a different bonus or removed altogether.

EDIT: Since there's a lot of questions about leader capacity, please read down a bit further in the thread where I address this issue. Thank you!

(Note: Image is highly WIP and has missing elements)
2018_09_20_2.png

Faction Happiness Rework
Factions are also changing in Le Guin, though not to nearly the same degree as sectors. Most of the core mechanics of factions will remain the same, but Faction Happiness is being changed into something we call Faction Approval, measuring how much a Faction approves of your empire's policies. Where previously Factions would only give influence when above a 60% happiness threshold, Factions now always give some influence, with the amount scaling linearly to their Approval, so a 10% Approval faction will give only 1/10th of the influence that a 100% Approval faction gives you (the amount they give also still scales to their share of power in your empire). Faction Approval is also no longer directly applied to Pop Happiness, but rather will affect the happiness of Pops belonging to that faction at different thresholds, with small boosts to happiness at higher levels of approval and increasingly severe penalties to happiness at low levels of approval (effectively swapping the influence threshold for various happiness thresholds).

This should mean that even small boosts to faction approval now directly translates into influence gain, and that factions almost always give *some* benefit, even if that benefit may be outweighed by the unhappiness and unrest they can cause. We're also hoping to have time to review the faction issues, tying them more directly to policies to make them easier to understand. For example, instead of demanding that all species have their rights manually set to Full Citizenship, the Xenophile faction might demand a certain empire-wide policy setting that forces the equal application of species rights across all species.
2018_09_20_1.png


That's all for today! Next week we're continuing to talk about the Le Guin update, on the topic of Trade Value and Trade Routes.
 
Last edited:
You send a lump sum of energy or minerals which is converted into 'sector budget', from which the governor can build, with special scripted costs. We haven't figured out yet how we're going to solve special costs like rare resources. It's also possible that governors might get a small budget each month based on economic strength of sector even if you don't send them resources.

I like the idea that they keep a percentage, or are budgeted some resources, and are able to build from there. I would hate to have to keep track of and build on every planet in every sector of a huge galaxy. That would be a nightmare! I also think sectors should be allowed to build mega structures (habitats/ringworlds/gateways) and defensive platforms if the right box is ticked and they have the resources to build them.
 
You send a lump sum of energy or minerals which is converted into 'sector budget', from which the governor can build, with special scripted costs. We haven't figured out yet how we're going to solve special costs like rare resources. It's also possible that governors might get a small budget each month based on economic strength of sector even if you don't send them resources.
Wouldn't it be simpler to let governors just use the empire's stockpile of resources, and then allow the player to set "Only allow use of THIS resource if we have more than THIS amount in reserve" settings for sectors?

Example:
You set this value for minerals to 500, energy to 900, and alloys to 520.
If your empire has 1500 minerals, 1020 energy and 600 alloys.
That means the sector governor is free to build any structure that costs less than 1000 minerals, 120 energy, and 80 alloys.

I.e. you do not have the complexity of multiple stockpiles, or resource conversion, or special handling of resources. It is all just your one stockpile, and limits that govern when those greedy governors can dip into the glorious empires treasury.
 
Interesting Dev diary.

I am wondering if the Dev team is considering mechanics to make sectors feel somewhat 'distinct' from each other. For instance, each sector may be characterised by an abundance of certain types of deposits/resources, and by a scarcity of other ones (I understand this probably makes no sense from a scientific standpoint, but it may be interesting from a gameplay perspective).

@Wiz, are you considering any such features?
 
The changes (and overall DD size) are a bit... less extensive than I was hoping for. But good changes all the same. I guess im still waiting for that great faction overhaul that actually creates the deep, cut-throat political/ideological landscape that was originally hyped before release.
 
@Wiz can we expect in the future some more binding mechanics between leaders (of faction) and factions? Like for example the low approval from faction can make some additional problems with their leader?
 
Just realised something that would be nice if it would be taken into account, a new sector should only be created if a certain number of systems are in it, you wouldn't want one of your outer colonies be a one system sector just because of its location.
 
Good, logical changes, but sectors still seem to me like a vastly under-used concept. Baby steps, I guess. But sectors being terrain-dependant adds a lot to the feeling of geography, and it opens a lot of possibilities too. For example, giving a sector-wide stability bonus to those sectors who are completely controlled by one single political entity would encourage local quarrels and diplomatic maneouvering, and that's just one random idea.
 
This was a short devdiary. Not as much features highlighted compared to others. Maybe the changes and effects of this devdiary are more subtle.

I think (administrative) sectors and international trade are linked with each other.

Sectors and unrest would be a great link to future (internal) diplomacy rework. Pacify your herectic governors. Exterminatus!

How big is a sector or core sector and when is a sector created, Wiz didnt say. How big is a cluster of stars?
 
This was a short devdiary. Not as much features highlighted compared to others. Maybe the changes and effects of this devdiary are more subtle.

I think (administrative) sectors and international trade are linked with each other.

Sectors and unrest would be a great link to future (internal) diplomacy rework. Pacify your herectic governors. Exterminatus!

How big is a sector or core sector and when is a sector created, Wiz didnt say. How big is a cluster of stars?

My guess is that each sector will have a nice round number of stars in it, like 5, 10, or 20 - though the number of habital planets might vary.
 
Hmmm. Not sure if I like this one. The ability to manually draw sectors has in the past been a rather cool feature that allowed me to tweak my empire's maps to both stellar topography as well as empire relations (e.g. "marches" or military sectors for the purpose of containing potential threats and securing the border).

I do not trust the game to adequately represent my vision for my empire's organization, especially when - as the explanation makes it sound - the sectors are pre-determined based on galaxy map clusters, rather than how much of them you actually control. It makes me think of weird situations like 1-planet-sectors on your border, as it was the only part of the cluster that was left unclaimed.

I'm also surprised at the decision to increase micromanagement by turning sector economy over to the player. Aside from the additional workload (even if it's "voluntary"), it decreases the perceived agency of sectors as political entities.

Of course, these are just initial impressions based on the quick glimpse provided here. Perhaps a stream at some point in the future will alleviate some of my fears.

On another note:
We decided to move away from the monthly cost because players tend to shy away from monthly costs that bring them into a negative balance, even if they are consistantly hitting their stockpile cap, and so ended up using Empire Edicts far less than they could actually afford to.

Whilst I welcome the removal of Leader Cap, does the quoted logic not apply to Leader maintenance as well? Considering that, upon hitting negative balance, Leaders would have to be fired (and are thus permanently lost) rather than just removing a checkbox mark on a Policy, I'd say this is going to be an even more pressing issue here.

Alternatively, if this hints at a developer reassessment of player behavior, can we expect to see Empire Edicts/Campaigns return to a monthly investment again? Personally, I miss the ability to just enable/disable them as my current economy allows or demands, rather than having to stockpile resources for several years before I can use one. I found that I'm using this feature way less now than I did in the past, and as I know Paradox is tracking game statistics, perhaps such metrics have led to this change concerning Leaders?

Or maybe I'm just once again not very representative of the usual Stellaris gamer, I suppose.
 
1. Will the sector AI be improved? So far I rarely bothered with established sector because of how atrocious the AI was in governing my planets.
2. Wil there be a possibility to set more than just one priorities to each sector? For example producing both research and unity?
3. Are the factions going to play more active role in politics?
 
Will leader-cycling still be a thing or will there be a change so you can't hire and dismiss leaders until you get the right one? I coud imagine a system where leader slots are not instantly filled.
 
I did hope that the sectors would be integrated in the Internal Trade mechanics, but there wasn't even a hint in this dev diary. They do keep oneself gussing.