Hello everyone!

We’re back for this week’s installment of the Stellaris Dev Diary. This week we will covering a mix of paid and free features. More exactly, we’ll be talking about the Slave Market, Unity Ambitions and new Mandates. I bet I know which one you’ll want to read about first, so let’s start with that one.

Before we start I need to reiterate that this dev diary contains things that are WIP, with non-final numbers, interfaces or mechanics that might change.

The Slave Market (PAID)
To better facilitate slaver playstyles, we’ve added the Slave Market feature to MegaCorp. This will allow more easy transfer of slaves between empires. In MegaCorp, nothing can stand in the way of the pursuit of profit.

Access to the Slave Market is granted once the Galactic Market is founded. Only empires that also have access to the Galactic Market will be able to use the Slave Market. Only Pops that are currently Slaves are able to be sold on the Slave Market, but anyone can buy them (either to set them free or to put them to work). We're also considering making (non-Gestalt) robots that do not have citizen rights buyable and sellable on the market.

To sell a slave you select one or more Pop(s) on a planet (it must be enslaved). Right now the interface shows planets as the drop-down, but we will be changing it so that you first select a species, and then the list shows the different planets. We’re tweaking the interface right now, so some things might look a bit different as the next couple of weeks pass.

When you have decided which slaves to sell, they will be put on the market. The price of slaves is 500 ± the cost affected by traits. The traits that make them good slaves drives the price up, while things that make them bad slaves drives the price down. Many traits will not affect the cost of a slave.

To buy a slave, you select a destination planet and then simply click the buy button. This will complete the transaction and move the pop to your selected planet.

We are considering adding a simple bidding process as an additional step, but at this time we cannot promise that we will have time to add it before the release of MegaCorp.

Unity Ambitions (FREE)
Because of the changes to the economy system, with Unity coming from multiple sources and being a more integrated resource, we wanted to make sure that Unity is always useful. Previously a paid feature in Apocalypse, Unity Ambitions have now been made a free feature in 2.2 'Le Guin'.

Mandates (FREE)
Since we've added a bunch of new mechanics with 2.2 'Le Guin', we now have a lot more things that we can hook into. As a result of that, we have reworked and added a bunch of new mandates for democratic empires. They usually go along the lines of building more districts, building more stations to gather resource, to increasing monthly income etc.

That is what we have for this week. Next week we’ll return with a Dev Diary about what the community can expect in terms of new Modding capabilities for 2.2 (hint: It's a *lot* of new capabilities).

Don’t forget to tune into Twitch for the Dev Clash at 15:00 CET, so you can see us whack at each other with our new pointy sticks! You can also watch a summarized version on YouTube.

 

[SuiciSpai]

Only after someone buys. Right now there is no way to sell to a specific empire, maybe in the future.

Also an option to forbid some types of empires would be nice. I mean, yes, you are selling slaves, but maybe you don't want to sell them to be consumed by Hive Minds, because is barbaric to do so!!

edit: I meant an option on the galactic market for RP reasons, not an option before starting the game..

 

[anamiac]

The price of slaves is 500 ± the cost affected by traits.

The base price of slaves should not be a fixed value. It should vary according to the principles of supply and demand! If there's a lot of nations currently at war, the price of slaves might go down as nations liquidate their slaves in order to provide more energy for their fleets. At the start of the game, everyone has small resource pools, and maybe 100 energy is a good price for a slave. At the end of the game, everyone has massive resource pools and maybe 2000 energy is a good price for a slave. If you implement it as a fixed 500, you severely limit the market. I would expect slaves to only be bought and sold for a few decades in the middle, as only an idiot would buy a slave for 500 in the early game, and only an idiot would sell a slave that cheaply in the end game.

 

[Verx90]

Suuure... But you are aware of, that this kind of modernizzation is not possible in the current build?
If a leader want to build 4 new mining stations, but I already built all, i could destroy 4 of them, of course. But then I need to build up 8 stations, because the counter is at -4/4
The only way to accomplish this is, to conquer new territory and destroy those stations with your fleets, while in war...

too bad, i didn't know , i rarely play democratic and at some point i ignore it .... as i sad , if you can , but seems it doesn't work . let pirates andle it ?

 

[Leinad]

In a real economy the slave trade is dependent on supply and demand, even if the slaves would be sold anyway the addition of more buyers would cause an upward price push incentivizing an increase of slaves to fill market demand and maximize profit. If a fanatic egalitarian society starts mass buying slaves, prices of slaves will go up and slave-driving empires will produce more slaves. Of course as this is a game that will not be fully represented but it does reflect economic reality.

No disagreement there but what does it mean for a fanatic egalitarian society? Is it the moral thing to ignore the suffering despite the fact that you COULD buy those slaves and free them? Is inaction really the "moral" choice or just the pragmatic one?
I'm just saying that you can find arguments for both decisions and that an egalitarian society could easily decide to reduce the suffering through buying slaves even if it does create some bad incentives (just like we do when dealing with terrorist kidnappings).

 

[jPaolo]

I'm very happy that Democracies are getting new mandates.

 

[chapicus]

So as a Rogue Servitor AI, I'll be able to simply purchase bio trophies?! #thenewageofcapitalismishere #veryexcitedrobot

 

[Merrivale]

It really isn't that easy. You might argue that it supports the slavers and gives additional incentives but you could just as easily argue that those slaves would be sold anyways and you might be the only buyer who can free them. The context also matters in this scenario. What if you are actively trying to fight those that sell slaves, you know it's possible to stop them but in the meantime they can still sell slaves. Wouldn't it be better to buy those slaves and free them?
Imagine a scenario in which for example the US could have bought the lives of Jews. Are you really arguing they shouldn't have done it to save them?
So I don't think that it should be a no-go for fanatic egalitarians, the context matters a lot. The only scenario in which it would be absolutely clear cut is you are the only buyer of slaves or offer a disproportional incentive for slavery.

PS: Maybe don't think of them as "slaves", consider them as victims of ransom by terrorists. The official line of many (democratic) countries is that they don't deal with terrorists but the reality is that they will negotiate and thus it creates the same dilemma. For a fanatic egalitarion society every slave would be like one of its own citizens captured by terrorists.

Interestingly enough we have a real live example that buying the slaves would in fact make the market more profitable. It's rescue animals and in fact the commercial puppy operations we commonly call puppy mills are breeding dogs specifically to sell to the rescuers. It's against forum policy to link to the article, but there's a great Washington Post piece on this from April 18, 2018 called Dog Fight: Dog rescuers, flush with donations, buy animals from the breeders they scorn.

Some key quotes:

"Bidders affiliated with 86 rescue and advocacy groups and shelters throughout the United States and Canada have spent $2.68 million buying 5,761 dogs and puppies from breeders since 2009 at the nation’s two government-regulated dog auctions, both in Missouri, according to invoices, checks and other documents The Washington Post obtained from an industry insider."

"“We have breeders that breed for the auction,” says Will Yoder, a commercial breeder of Cavalier King Charles spaniels in Bloomfield, Iowa. “It’s a huge, huge underground market. It’s happening at an alarming rate.”

Many people are unaware of the practice. About 50 of the 86 groups that The Post linked to auction bidders made no mention of auctions on their Web pages, 20 described what they were doing as “puppy mill rescue” or “auction rescue,” and 10 mentioned words such as “bought” or “purchased” at auction but did not say online how much they paid per dog."

"Most breeders used to reserve all of their puppies and younger dogs for pet-store brokers and consumers. Now, at least some are taking them to auctions to sell to rescuers, Grosenbacher and some rescuers say.

“Originally, rescues attended auctions to get the old and the sick dogs, and we paid very little for them,” says Penny Reames, a Kansas rescuer who has attended the auctions for a decade, transferring the dogs to Northern New England Westie Rescue in New Hampshire, which adopts them out for as much as $1,000 apiece. “We don’t see those dogs so much anymore. Now it is primarily puppies who did not get bought by the brokers for one reason or another.”

At Heartland, owner Grosenbacher said, rescuers bid against each other for designer crossbred puppies such as morkies and puggles, and breeders consider the rescuers to be a reliable market for those pups because adopters clamor for them, making them a “cash cow” in the rescue community.

“That’s the one thing that rescues will get in competition over,” he says. “They’ll stand right there and look each other in the eye and outbid each other. By and large, it’s the rescuers knocking each other out.”"

 

[Ex Mudder]

Mixed feeling, I feel like there's a risk of it becoming too micro intensive since once your planet get full you'll always want to sell some slave just to not waste the growth point of the planet. On the other hand, 600 energy is really not that much, I feel like early game it's too little to justify losing a pop and late game it's too little to bother with it. Maybe if you need energy ASAP, but selling isn't instantaneous anyway. The only reason I'd see myself using this feature would be to tweak the exact planet makeup, in effect a way to reduce population on a planet to make room for a better pop (ie all my farming job are being done by my farming pop so I want to get rid of any additional farming pop, with the money just being a nice side bonus), but I think this should be possible without having to sell them by just killing the pop.

Also this might end up making it too easy to colonize planet that you don't have access to, right now you need to either invade or uprise a pop of a different planet preference, but with this you can just buy it as soon as the market open up, in effect opening every planet for colonization much earlier.

Remember that you use energy to buy things from the market. 500 energy per pop translates into a certain average amount of consumer goods, minerals, food, and alloys. So you can use the energy credits you get from selling slaves to raise money to finance a fleet build up or offset a consumer good shortage, or even build a colony ship.

 

[Mauer]

Will we be able to use pre-sapients and/or primitives as a source of slaves? It would give additional roleplaying and functional uses for them than just invade or vassalize (and something for Pacifist slavers to do with them).

 

[Verx90]

Remember that you use energy to buy things from the market. 500 energy per pop translates into a certain average amount of consumer goods, minerals, food, and alloys. So you can use the energy credits you get from selling slaves to raise money to finance a fleet build up or offset a consumer good shortage, or even build a colony ship.

yea , but remember that energy credit value may variate during the game . you may end up with having anything worth 2-3 times energy credits , reducing the worth of it and so collapsing slave price worth.

 

[Pointyearedgit]

The base price of slaves should not be a fixed value. It should vary according to the principles of supply and demand! If there's a lot of nations currently at war, the price of slaves might go down as nations liquidate their slaves in order to provide more energy for their fleets. At the start of the game, everyone has small resource pools, and maybe 100 energy is a good price for a slave. At the end of the game, everyone has massive resource pools and maybe 2000 energy is a good price for a slave. If you implement it as a fixed 500, you severely limit the market. I would expect slaves to only be bought and sold for a few decades in the middle, as only an idiot would buy a slave for 500 in the early game, and only an idiot would sell a slave that cheaply in the end game.

We are considering adding a simple bidding process as an additional step, but at this time we cannot promise that we will have time to add it before the release of MegaCorp.

So supply and demand might come into it. Plus, you need to remember that:

• Resource numbers are different
• Pops are quite powerful.
• The slave market isn't available in the very early game, the galactic market must be founded
• In the end game, you would need them en masse or you are buying very powerful pops, which have a higher base cost

yea , but remember that energy credit value may variate during the game . you may end up with having anything worth 2-3 times energy credits , reducing the worth of it and so collapsing slave price worth.

You trade on the market for energy credits, energy credits are money. You can just buy resources off the market, that vary as the game progresses. When you are swimming in energy credits in the late game, you probably need more pops to do w/e (or as a conqueror or despoiler, you are picking up more pops in larger wars). So the slavers sell in bulk at that point, and the buyers will want the same.

I think people are too hung up on what a pop is, remember that we start with a factor of 3 more starting pops, and ecumenopoli hold hundreds of them. One pop in 2.2 < one pop in 2.1.

 

[hewhoispale]

The base price of slaves should not be a fixed value. It should vary according to the principles of supply and demand! If there's a lot of nations currently at war, the price of slaves might go down as nations liquidate their slaves in order to provide more energy for their fleets. At the start of the game, everyone has small resource pools, and maybe 100 energy is a good price for a slave. At the end of the game, everyone has massive resource pools and maybe 2000 energy is a good price for a slave. If you implement it as a fixed 500, you severely limit the market. I would expect slaves to only be bought and sold for a few decades in the middle, as only an idiot would buy a slave for 500 in the early game, and only an idiot would sell a slave that cheaply in the end game.

Trying to simulate that is *way* beyond a reasonable initial scope for this feature.

 

[vonriel]

I'm a bit concerned about the state of Barbaric Despoilers with the advent of the slave market. While I get that they can function as slave takers and peddlers, beyond that, it doesn't seem like there's a niche for them any more. Even in the live version, it's hard to find a use for them outside a Life-Seeded build where you abduct pops to forcibly resettle them. Of course, now that a slave market exists, that seems like a much better way to get your settling pops if you were otherwise dedicated to a Barbaric Despoilers build.

So are there any real changes to Barbaric Despoilers that we know of coming down the line? It already feels like a muddled civic, and now the only real benefit for it that I could find is being rendered moot.

 

[Sheriff Godwin Law]

Looks like a fun way for a rapidly expanding xenophile empire to homestead new planets.

 

[Verx90]

You trade on the market for energy credits, energy credits are money. You can just buy resources off the market, that vary as the game progresses. When you are swimming in energy credits in the late game, you probably need more pops to do w/e (or as a conqueror or despoiler, you are picking up more pops in larger wars). So the slavers sell in bulk at that point, and the buyers will want the same.

I think people are too hung up on what a pop is, remember that we start with a factor of 3 more starting pops, and ecumenopoli hold hundreds of them. One pop in 2.2 < one pop in 2.1.

that you sell them 1 pops at time or 100 , if you need 10 energy credits minimum to buy ANY other resources on the market , the worth of the slave will be reduced by 10 . you know how markets work right? not being able to put your price on slave , make this risky.

if 450 energy can buy 300 minerals, or 30 minerals it change things up . since by selling 30 minerals, you can buy a slave, and by spending 3000 minerals you can buy 100 .

edit, ofc this is a exageration to show worst possible case.

 

[mindlace]

I would love to hear more about the new mandates, that was one of the most meh aspects of being a democracy after a few playthroughs...

 

[Lasagna Star Empire]

What about selling ships?

 

[meiam89.]

Remember that you use energy to buy things from the market. 500 energy per pop translates into a certain average amount of consumer goods, minerals, food, and alloys. So you can use the energy credits you get from selling slaves to raise money to finance a fleet build up or offset a consumer good shortage, or even build a colony ship.

What really matters is how much it is compared to how much you're making at the moment. Mid game on you usually make 100+ energy every months (assuming energy credits income is similar post patch), will I really want to even bother selling pop (which will negatively effect me in the long run and takes a few clicks) for just a few months worth of energy that might take quite awhile to even be sold (I feel like from mid game on the supply of slave will far outpace demand)? I think there's going to be a very short window in late early game where it'll be interesting to do (when it's equivalent to a year or two of income) and that there will be some potential buyer (I'm not sure how the AI will behave when purchasing slave), but outside of that maybe 10 year window, I don't see this feature being worth much.

I think a potential solution to this would be to have some sort of slave drain, maybe you could rush building things (ships, facility, maybe even bio tech) by sacrificing slave (ie working them to the bone), then renewing your supply of slave trough trade would be actually useful since you'd be constantly burning them. Or maybe have different slave work regiment option, with some reducing slave growth and some flat out decreasing slave number over time, such that buying new slave would be necessary.

Otherwise it seems like the only use of it is to adjust the population of your world by off loading excess slave or buying slave specializing in certain function (one miner, one farmer and so on), but once your planet make up is good the feature would be left alone.

 

[anamiac]

After this change, will optimal play strategy for a slaver require me to sell a population from every max population planet every three or four years? Seems like it could become micro intensive.

 

[CmdrPanorpa]

Selling machine pops on a market would make sense. If an empire had an excess of energy but lacked the minerals to build machine pops or needed them immediately instead of waiting for construction, they could simply buy them. The ones on the market may have a range different traits also, I don't see how much different it would be from selling slave pops.