Stellaris Dev Diary #141 - Exploring the Future

[Rip Off Productions]

I think we actually don't need ethos for Gestalts. I mean, for sure the extra Living Standards and Xenophiles' +Trade Value are garbage for a Gestalt.

well of course hive Gestalt Empires have to be given different buffs/options/features by each ethos, along with maybe different localization names for them(for example: the "Authoritarian/Egalitarian" axis is changed to "Centralized(+admin cap?)/Autonomous(lower leader costs?)" and enables or disables Civics appropriately)

 

[Methone]

well of course hive Gestalt Empires have to be given different buffs/options/features by each ethos, along with maybe different localization names for them(for example: the "Authoritarian/Egalitarian" axis is changed to "Centralized(+admin cap?)/Autonomous(lower leader costs?)" and enables or disables Civics appropriately)

That's a solution, sure. But I really do think the way around 'All hives are the same unless you're literally the Zerg' is more personality-giving Civics like what machines have; I just don't think the solution to this is to have Gestalt Consciousness unlock another half of the game's ethics.

 

[Neceros]

Great update!

The biggest problem with population that I can find is this:

As we all know, as a planet gets more populated it's able to support more specialized buildings. The specialized buildings themselves each add more jobs for the planet to fill up.

The issue is even if you have a race that is spec'ed in pop growth you simply won't reach that pop max. This leads to a case where each planet has possible buildings which can be made, but without a population able to utilize those buildings. Building slots sit open for years because of this even if I'm maxed out in all my resources. And I just sit there... staring at those building icons in my outliner glaring at me.

I don't know a good fix for this. Is there some way the specialist jobs don't influence the job cap for planet pop?

 

[Neceros]

I completely agree. I actually like many of the new changes post 2.0, and think they add a great deal of strategy to the game at the beginning. Nonetheless, at present, once your empire gets on a roll, blobs and gets past a certain size the external threats diminish, the interest goes as you wait for a crisis that I'll probably crush, an awakened empire to actually do something or a repeatable tech to, er, repeat. And of course there's the micromangement of planets, but I think that will be fixed. Also, I only go to war for something to do rather than for any real strategic reason. Knowing I have won the game usually with 100 years to run, is probably why I have never ever finished a run through despite clocking up 1000+ hours. It is still my favourite game to play but while loving the early and mid game, I think the end game could be made really much more engaging.

...

That would definitely get me completing a game.

Very much this.

My favorite time in Stellaris is the beginning when I am expanding and taking stars, and then the middle, where all the countries are outlined and the stars are taken, but nobody is really in the lead yet. There's so much potential at that point. I envision those country lines slowly changing, but really it shouldn't change all too much too quickly.

I want more diplomacy moments and espionage. I don't want my enemies to automatically know the strength of my empire, and vice versa. I want to have intelligence officers that report to me when things go badly and have me make permanent decisions that affect my empire and my relations.

I want more strange things to happen later in the game, after I'm established. Not to take away my stuff, but to make me think and decide what is most important at any one time and to be able to reflect on t hose decisions meaningfully.

I don't want to know the outcome of the game 100 years before it actually ends.

It'd be nice if the galaxy map only let you zoom out far enough to see known territory. Maybe an indicator telling you upon which side of the galaxy you lie, but the aim is to stop information overload.

Mind you, I come from Aurora 4X, but it would be really amazing if there were a short pre-hyperlane time where you focused solely on your own system before you can even jump out to other systems.

Often I feel the scope of the game is just too big. I would be far happier controlling a handful of systems then 500. Just adds more meaning for me when things really matter and you don't have 500 options. What's another sector when you already have half of an entire galaxy? It's just numbers at that point.

I want more meaning in the things I do. I try to inscribe story into everything that happens, but sometimes my brain is tired and I just want to experience what my citizens are experiencing. Sometimes I feel like I'm so far away and just playing a game. I want that immersion and life.

 

[SPECTREtm]

I would like to see more performance optimisation and eventually larger galaxy maps. I´d also want to see more Megastructures such as a Mega-shipyard and an overhaul/buff of ringworlds, dyson spheres and science nexuses.

 

[Beagá]

Extra tiers for mega-structures would be nice.

 

[Longprao]

I would like to see more performance optimisation and eventually larger galaxy maps.

Yeah 15,000 stars map with 1,400 building slots, native support would be nice, so we could play until the end of the universe!

 

[methegrate]

Four ideas. All based around keeping a sense of discovery through the whole game by preventing border gore and pulling back on the unlimited snowball effect. Tl;dr: players can only restrict access to inhabited systems so the map stays open. Don't just give out communications, let players send out the Enterprise to seek out new life and new civilizations. And restrict the snowball effect of empires and fleets with fuel ranges and per-system sprawl modifiers.


First an idea from another thread. Get rid of borders. Instead, you can only restrict access to inhabited systems.

When you build an outpost in a system it falls into one of two categories:

• Inhabited Systems - If you build an outpost and then a colony/habitat the system becomes yours. You can control access by opening and closing your borders.
• Uninhabited Systems - You can build outposts and mining stations here, and only one empire can have an outpost per system, but doing so doesn't claim them. They don't become part of painting the map and you can't control access to them. These systems are deep space.

This would make the map feel orders of magnitude more open. Players could move around the galaxy for the whole game because each empire would only control access to a handful of star systems. It would dramatically increase interaction, as your ships move through and around systems inhabited by other races (even unfriendly ones). At the same time, though, you can still stake out an area of space that's "yours" in the sense that other empires don't have installations and outposts there.


Second, roll back the way communication works. Communication should happen when you meet another empire directly or when something causes another empire to share their contacts with you.

This would keep the sense of exploration past the first few years. Right now the map fills up completely by mid-game. This system would keep the discovery alive, transitioning from finding what is out there to finding who is out there. As empires (hopefully) continue to get more distinct and exciting, this will in turn become even more interesting. We want to recreate the terror of discovering there's such a thing as the Borg, or going through a wormhole only to find a race of shapeshifting conquerers on the other side.

It didn't work before because of borders. If we use the per-system method above, players will be able to keep exploring for the whole game. Moreover, since only science ships can enter unexplored systems, they would stay relevant. As the only vessels capable of deep space exploration it would be vital that they continue their mission of exploration to seek out new worlds, open up new trade routes and identify new threats.


Third, add fuel range to military ships.

This would help slow down Risk-style rollups. Right now the only thing that slows down a war is attrition. That isn't an effective mechanism because, once one side starts to lose, attrition quickly becomes a lopsided mechanic in favor of the winner. A basic fuel range would add a layer, requiring that players take and hold supply bases in order to advance. It would give losing players a little more time to rebuild and would push back on unlimited doomstack marches.

It would also incentivize diplomacy, as players who want to project force galaxy-wide would need a network of treaties and alliances to do so (preferably by expanding border control to Closed/Civilian Access/Military Access).



Fourth, add "distance from capital" modifiers.

This would affect ethics drift, stability and production. It would be based on sectors (finally giving us a reason to have them). A sector would have a sector-wide distance modifier based on how far the sector capital is from the empire capital. It would apply to every system in the sector. In turn, each system in the sector would adjust this distance modifier based on how far it is from the sector capital.

This would help give us a "pull" mechanic for large empires, basically a reason to stop snowballing. Right now we do have empire sprawl, but the challenge is that it applies empire-wide. This means that Earth has every bit as much sprawl problem as End does, which isn't necessarily a bad thing, but it often means that a player simply chooses between Tall or Wide. You either suck up the empire-wide penalty or stay tiny. What we want is a reason for wide empires to say "this is probably about as far as I should go right now." A per-system modifier might do that.

 

[TempusxX]

what I'd like to see is this the ability to travel to another galaxy and conquer it. Then when you conquer the new galaxy you move on to another galaxy. Though that's probably too much and take too much work. I would like to see what they did to the war and economy by overhauling it to overhaul the diplomacy/federation. I would also like to see a Galactic Council or a Space Nato, and I hope the Galactic Council/Space Nato with overhaul of Federations and Diplomacy is next

 

[Zarpaulus]

Four ideas. All based around keeping a sense of discovery through the whole game by preventing border gore and pulling back on the unlimited snowball effect. Tl;dr: players can only restrict access to inhabited systems so the map stays open. Don't just give out communications, let players send out the Enterprise to seek out new life and new civilizations. And restrict the snowball effect of empires and fleets with fuel ranges and per-system sprawl modifiers.


First an idea from another thread. Get rid of borders. Instead, you can only restrict access to inhabited systems.

When you build an outpost in a system it falls into one of two categories:

• Inhabited Systems - If you build an outpost and then a colony/habitat the system becomes yours. You can control access by opening and closing your borders.
• Uninhabited Systems - You can build outposts and mining stations here, and only one empire can have an outpost per system, but doing so doesn't claim them. They don't become part of painting the map and you can't control access to them. These systems are deep space.

This would make the map feel orders of magnitude more open. Players could move around the galaxy for the whole game because each empire would only control access to a handful of star systems. It would dramatically increase interaction, as your ships move through and around systems inhabited by other races (even unfriendly ones). At the same time, though, you can still stake out an area of space that's "yours" in the sense that other empires don't have installations and outposts there.


Second, roll back the way communication works. Communication should happen when you meet another empire directly or when something causes another empire to share their contacts with you.

This would keep the sense of exploration past the first few years. Right now the map fills up completely by mid-game. This system would keep the discovery alive, transitioning from finding what is out there to finding who is out there. As empires (hopefully) continue to get more distinct and exciting, this will in turn become even more interesting. We want to recreate the terror of discovering there's such a thing as the Borg, or going through a wormhole only to find a race of shapeshifting conquerers on the other side.

It didn't work before because of borders. If we use the per-system method above, players will be able to keep exploring for the whole game. Moreover, since only science ships can enter unexplored systems, they would stay relevant. As the only vessels capable of deep space exploration it would be vital that they continue their mission of exploration to seek out new worlds, open up new trade routes and identify new threats.


Third, add fuel range to military ships.

This would help slow down Risk-style rollups. Right now the only thing that slows down a war is attrition. That isn't an effective mechanism because, once one side starts to lose, attrition quickly becomes a lopsided mechanic in favor of the winner. A basic fuel range would add a layer, requiring that players take and hold supply bases in order to advance. It would give losing players a little more time to rebuild and would push back on unlimited doomstack marches.

It would also incentivize diplomacy, as players who want to project force galaxy-wide would need a network of treaties and alliances to do so (preferably by expanding border control to Closed/Civilian Access/Military Access).



Fourth, add "distance from capital" modifiers.

This would affect ethics drift, stability and production. It would be based on sectors (finally giving us a reason to have them). A sector would have a sector-wide distance modifier based on how far the sector capital is from the empire capital. It would apply to every system in the sector. In turn, each system in the sector would adjust this distance modifier based on how far it is from the sector capital.

This would help give us a "pull" mechanic for large empires, basically a reason to stop snowballing. Right now we do have empire sprawl, but the challenge is that it applies empire-wide. This means that Earth has every bit as much sprawl problem as End does, which isn't necessarily a bad thing, but it often means that a player simply chooses between Tall or Wide. You either suck up the empire-wide penalty or stay tiny. What we want is a reason for wide empires to say "this is probably about as far as I should go right now." A per-system modifier might do that.

Yeah, no. That inhabited/uninhabited dichotomy would allow empires to cut off their rivals' systems by building a habitat.

 

[Neceros]

I dislike how quickly planets fill up. It's a brand new colonizable planet, and can be fully at capacity in under 100 years somehow. It just seems like a really short amount of time to fill a whole planet from scratch.

 

[methegrate]

Yeah, no. That inhabited/uninhabited dichotomy would allow empires to cut off their rivals' systems by building a habitat.

Except you wouldn't be able to build the required outpost if someone already had one there.

Each system could only have one outpost, but you wouldn't be able to prevent someone from moving through an uninhabited one.

 

[DreadLindwyrm]

Except you wouldn't be able to build the required outpost if someone already had one there.

Each system could only have one outpost, but you wouldn't be able to prevent someone from moving through an uninhabited one.

Because building a military outpost on an otherwise uninhabitable rock and just supplying it has *never* been a thing?
Or in this case building a fully souped up starbase with all the guns and platforms.

 

[Badesumofu]

Great update!

The biggest problem with population that I can find is this:

As we all know, as a planet gets more populated it's able to support more specialized buildings. The specialized buildings themselves each add more jobs for the planet to fill up.

The issue is even if you have a race that is spec'ed in pop growth you simply won't reach that pop max. This leads to a case where each planet has possible buildings which can be made, but without a population able to utilize those buildings. Building slots sit open for years because of this even if I'm maxed out in all my resources. And I just sit there... staring at those building icons in my outliner glaring at me.

I don't know a good fix for this. Is there some way the specialist jobs don't influence the job cap for planet pop?

I dislike how quickly planets fill up. It's a brand new colonizable planet, and can be fully at capacity in under 100 years somehow. It just seems like a really short amount of time to fill a whole planet from scratch.

Um, k? Your first complaint I read and thought this is not remotely close to my experience. I'm always short of building slots. Then I read your second complaint and now I'm totally bemused. You simultaneously are concerned that you can't ever fill up planets with enough pops to use all the building slots but also dislike that planets fill up too quickly.

 

[methegrate]

Because building a military outpost on an otherwise uninhabitable rock and just supplying it has *never* been a thing?
Or in this case building a fully souped up starbase with all the guns and platforms.

If your talking realism I guess? But that wasn't my suggestion. I suggested keeping the one-system/one-outpost rule and other construction only allowed in systems with an outpost, all just like we have it now. The difference would be that access restrictions (like closed borders) apply only to inhabited systems.

This would free up the map enormously, allowing players to move around the board throughout the entire game. Right now, once borders fill in, gameplay pretty much is restricted to your space and its borders. I think it would make the game far more exciting to change that.

 

[Calonderiel]

Another option to keep borders open could be making closed borders a military effort.

I think a realistic system could be in three tiers:

1. Completely open borders gives a small opinion boost. All ships can pass freely, including military ships
2. Open borders is opinion neutral. Civilian ships (science, construction, colony, trade) can pass. Military fleets can't.
3. Closed borders gives a small opinion malus. No ships are allowed to pass, but enforcing it takes effort. Military fleets and trade routes are obvious and always blocked. Science, construction and colony ships can slip through if the system isn't blocked by military effort (military fleets, FTL inhibitor or inhabited system).

Maybe you could allow a crime syndicate to run trade routes through closed borders. Lore wise it would fit in as smuggling routes.

 

[Neceros]

Um, k? Your first complaint I read and thought this is not remotely close to my experience. I'm always short of building slots. Then I read your second complaint and now I'm totally bemused. You simultaneously are concerned that you can't ever fill up planets with enough pops to use all the building slots but also dislike that planets fill up too quickly.

So, one is referring to game balance, and the other refers to the thematics of it.

Thematically it doesn't make sense to me for a planet to become full in 100-200 years, not including migration.

The first comment was worded weirdly. My issue is the building slots and specialized pops, not really the population growth speed. I'll explain better.

What happens to me is this: my planets get bigger and unlock more building slots. Adding buildings adds even more jobs to the planet. You get a new building slot every 5 pops. Essentially I always have the building available icon on my outliner constantly. I'm never able to fully fill in my buildings until much later because there's just so many jobs on each planet. If I try to actually fill in all the building slots I get 145/200 jobs taken issues.

It's a cycle that doesn't end for a long time simply because adding buildings adds pops, but you get buildings from having pops. Just keeps going.

 

[Neceros]

If your talking realism I guess? But that wasn't my suggestion. I suggested keeping the one-system/one-outpost rule and other construction only allowed in systems with an outpost, all just like we have it now. The difference would be that access restrictions (like closed borders) apply only to inhabited systems.

I like this idea. So, Closing your borders doesn't actually keep them out unless you have a space station or something protecting that area.

But then it begs the question: If you're found out in a closed out border area, do you automatically go to war? Perhaps it opens up dialogue options and consequences of being found breaking the closed borders policy?

 

[Badesumofu]

What happens to me is this: my planets get bigger and unlock more building slots. Adding buildings adds even more jobs to the planet. You get a new building slot every 5 pops. Essentially I always have the building available icon on my outliner constantly. I'm never able to fully fill in my buildings until much later because there's just so many jobs on each planet. If I try to actually fill in all the building slots I get 145/200 jobs taken issues.

So if I understand correctly, you are upgrading existing buildings before building new ones? I think that is your problem then. I find building slots are almost always scarce. There are a lot of good buildings. It would be a rarity to fill every slot on a given planet with fully upgraded buildings though, and you wouldn’t for instance upgrade a basic lab to a level 2 lab if you had a free slot to build another level 1 lab.

 

[pieman]

I completely agree. I actually like many of the new changes post 2.0, and think they add a great deal of strategy to the game at the beginning. Nonetheless, at present, once your empire gets on a roll, blobs and gets past a certain size the external threats diminish, the interest goes as you wait for a crisis that I'll probably crush, an awakened empire to actually do something or a repeatable tech to, er, repeat. And of course there's the micromangement of planets, but I think that will be fixed. Also, I only go to war for something to do rather than for any real strategic reason. Knowing I have won the game usually with 100 years to run, is probably why I have never ever finished a run through despite clocking up 1000+ hours. It is still my favourite game to play but while loving the early and mid game, I think the end game could be made really much more engaging.

Apart from the issues of performance and stuttering, I think sectors is the key to creating a good end game.

Firstly, getting sectors working properly will solve the issue of micromanaging 200 planets completely. But what I'd love to see it the sectors to be part of an internal politics / diplomacy update, to create more challenges from within an empire, particularly ones which are huge. An couple of unhappy sectors (with differing predominant ideologies from the central government) of 20+ planets could create loads of issues that could really mess with you in the end game and possibly lead to you losing huge swathes of territory - which would be awesome. Think a pacifist empire that you took over in the early mid-game getting rebellious.

After all, I don't think many of us play Stellaris to "win" except in multiplayer - it's the adventure and the story that matters most. I could not care less if my game ends in ruinous defeat if I've had a great journey. Maybe there could be something like how CK2 works with its factions. Huge empires at the moment are internally very peaceful and stable. But really they should be massively unstable with high unhappiness, with the threat of violent and bloody break-up around every corner (much like many of my relationships!!).

An end game I'd like to see would possible be like this. Due to being really good at Stellaris, I am in the year 2300 ruling a huge empire with very powerful and influential sectors, who are threatening to breakaway, become independent, attempt to overthrow the central power, or join another empire, or whatever. The sectors gang up - massive civil war - a few small empires on my fringes take advantage of the mayhem and pinch some territory. I am reduced to a small rump state and have to rebuild - which I will as I am way smarter than AI. The Crisis comes and the galaxy buddies up to defend itself. The Crisis beaten off (hopefully) and the galaxy can go back to tearing itself to pieces while I and all the other empires attempt to re-establish supremacy. Until the psionics unleash the galaxy ending event - that I have never seen as I have never made it that far!!

Personally, I think that would really spice the game up. Perhaps an option pre-game for real empire destroying events in the end game, so those that just want to blob to their hearts content, can continue to do so.

That would definitely get me completing a game.

Back when they'd just introduced forced status quo, it felt really good as a small empire, to go in and nab some border systems off of a huge neigbour while they were preoccupies, and then war exhaust them and force status quo them.

Right now, war exhaustion ticks a liiiiittle too slowly, and i think having another whole 2 years grace period after 100% is a bit much. we loast a lot of those sniping small skirmish wars of opportunism that we barely had.