Home Trending Latest threads New posts Developer diaries
Jump to latest Follow Reply
  • 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 54227 Bug Reports 37617 Console edition 1312 Suggestions 21772 Tech Support 3217 Multiplayer 392 User Mods 4795 Stellaris AAR (After Action Reports)
Previous dev diary Next dev diary
Show only dev responses

Stellaris Dev Diary #147 - An update on Sectors & Designations

Hello everyone!

First of all I want us to celebrate that today is the 3-year anniversary of Stellaris. Stellaris is such a great game that has changed a lot since its release. Since 1.0 we’ve added Civics, Traditions, Ascension Perks, Fallen Empires, Hive Minds, Machine Empires, planet killers, starbases and much much more.

When we started developing Stellaris, I don’t think we could ever foresee what Stellaris would become this many years later. It’s really become its own thing and it’s really fun to see how many new players – many of who may never have played any of our other games, or any other strategy game for that matter – have found their way to Stellaris. Stellaris is such a great game for telling your own stories and in general just enjoying the awesomeness of space.

A big thanks to our awesome community for making this game even better!

Alright, let’s move on to talking about sectors & designations. This will be a followup to Dev Diary #142 and I will try to outline what we’ve done so far.

Designations
Previously planets would automatically assume a role depending on what was built on it. It’s now possible to set this manually, if you wish to. Having played with this myself, I must say it feels pretty great to be able to make that choice directly yourself.

upload_2019-5-9_14-2-20.png

Automation
A new neat feature is that it’s now possible to decide which planets, regardless if they are in a sector or not, should be automated. Automated planets will build things according to a certain build order, which is set up per designation. For example:
  • Build all district types of its designation
  • Build the buildings following the build order of its designation
  • Remove Blockers
  • Repair Buildings
  • Upgrade all buildings
This will happen every time it has less than 3 open job slots.

If crime is high this will trigger a crisis that will build a Precinct House, ignoring the normal build order.

If a building in the build order can not be build, e.g. because you lack the technology, it will be skipped.

Automation will try to use its own Sector Stockpile if possible, otherwise it will use the Shared Stockpile. You can read more about the sector stockpiles further down in the dev diary.

upload_2019-5-9_14-5-17.png

Because we deemed the risk to be too high right now, AI empires will not manually set designations or use the build orders. Our goal is for that to be improved in later updates, however, and when it’s had more time in the cooker we will be deploying those changes.

Sectors
In the new system, sectors will be created by making a planet a Sector Capital. This will immediately form the sector and include all systems within 4 jumps of the Sector Capital. We originally had thought to make the range 6 jumps, but we feel like 4 jumps feels better.

upload_2019-5-9_14-3-17.png

It becomes very easy to create a new sector. Simply click the flag on the galaxy to open the planet view.

upload_2019-5-9_14-3-49.png

In the planet view we have a create sector button. Once clicked, it will immediately create the sector.

upload_2019-5-9_14-4-15.png

Boom! Sector created. It’s just as easy to delete the sector as it is to create a new one. The sector capital is also visible on the map with its own icon.
​
Sectors now also have a Shared Stockpile, in addition to their Local Stockpiles. It is possible to set monthly subsidies for your Shared Stockpile. This should make it a lot easier to manage larger empires.

upload_2019-5-9_14-4-51.png


What remains to do
We didn’t want to try to do too many things at once, so we will be going with the safer option of deploying these changes in increments. These changes will not be coming in the upcoming update, but rather in the future.

Left to do:
  • Have AI empires set manual designations
  • Have AI empires use build orders for designations
  • Allow players to have control over the build orders for the different designations
  • Add nudging of systems between sectors
  • Allow you to create new sectors from within a sector
  • Display non-sector systems as a “Frontier Space” sector
  • Rework Governor traits to be more widely applicable
  • Look into automation for construction ships
When we’ve looked into more of these things we may want to start exploring ideas like adding more mechanics to “Frontier Space” or if we can tie faction to sectors somehow. Those are only some thoughts we’ve had though, and it's too early to say if that will come to fruition or not.

---

That is all we had to share for this week’s dev diary. I’m really looking forward to next week’s dev diary, when I’ll be sharing something awesome.

Thanks again to all of our community, and let’s look forward to the next 3 years!
 
Last edited:
  • 2Love
  • 1Like
Reactions:
Sort by date Sort by reaction score
What happens when new systems are added within the 4 star system limit of a sector capital? In your example image with sector capital Gossok, what happens when systems Kleeia and Yunak are added to the empire? Are they automatically added to the sector which Gossok is the capital, or do I need to delete the sector and re-create it to add those two new star systems?
 
In the screenshots Yunak and Kleeia would have been included in the new sector if they had been controlled by your empire. If you gain control of them with the sector already in existence will they automatically join the sector or will they remain independent?
 
Good. GOOD. I applaud this dev diary.

At last! a good one!.
It seems you or the dev team, or both for that matter, are getting the hand of this, taking the reins and actually tacking the important issues, and to top it all you also have set far away goals to improve many of the lacking systems. GOOD.
This is what you are supposed to be doing, grabbing what's done and wondering how could it be better, how could you interconect all these systems already in place to make them actually relevant to gameplay.

GOOD. :)

Now, with all the praising done, I'll just mention something.
it's a minor thing but it bugs me because I'm just a grammar naz*. Try spacing "Stellaris" (or repeated words) a little bit more between sentences. Or maybe replacing them with "it" or whatever fits in place. The first part of the motivational speech about Stellaris history almost made me cringe because of this.

Aside from that. Again, good dev diary. Glad to see you guys tackling the real problems of Stellaris instead of adding new fluf.
 
Yes, yes, this is exactly what I want! Customizable build orders means I can control what my planets build without micromanaging each one. And build orders for the AI empires should (theoretically) ensure they always develop in sensible ways and can stand on their own legs. For the future, AI empire build orders and designation selection could also add flavor to different empires based on civics or ethics. Megacorps might focus on build orders centered around city districts and trade value, an empire with the Mining Guilds civic might set up more mining worlds than the norm, fanatic materialist empires might build more research focused worlds, etc.

I think its a very promising feature that could solve a lot of problems and add to the game at the same time.

The one thing I would prefer to be different is to be able to customize sector borders so long as everything is still within X jumps of the capital, instead of everything in that range automatically being added to it. But with the mention of "nudging" systems in and out of the borders it sounds like something close to that might end up being the case?
 
psychotic1 said:
Stellaris needs to have its micro fixed or no one's going to buy the DLC you're working on.
Click to expand...
You must be new to the Paradox forums.

The original argument against sectors was because people wanted MORE micromanagement. People wanted TOTAL control of their empires. People wanted the option to COMPLETELY IGNORE sectors.

Victoria is a game these forums have been howling for YEARS. It is a game that is essentially an excel spreadsheet with graphics. Not even GOOD graphics. PERIOD-APPROPRIATE graphics. With little British-african pith helmets. As a DLC you could buy.

If there was a DLC sold that was "This DLC gives you the ability to manage each individual pop and what they do, how they reproduce, and what job they do, genetically modify them individually, and assign them to specific jobs by hand" that DLC might just be the top selling DLC Stellaris ever had.
 
Duuk said:
The original argument against sectors was because people wanted MORE micromanagement. People wanted TOTAL control of their empires. People wanted the option to COMPLETELY IGNORE sectors.
Click to expand...
Indeed. There's a lesson in here about being careful what you wish for.
 
After 3 years and i still enjoy playing STellaris like it is the first time !!! each game has a fascinating progression, a different outcome and multiple risks and dangers how you cant love such a game , and additional to that eevery bunch of weeks w got updates , improvements and DLCs !!! Stellaris yo ma gayme .
 
Isn't anybody going to ask about the shovels? No, well i will do it. Hey, @grekulf what is that shovel icon in Hantaron, Rovgeddi, Enif and Aphris? They are excavation or system wide blockers? Thanks for the answer :)
 
It looks like the new system is finally getting the required management and QOL changes it deserves. I am hoping you will revisit the "decisions" I talked about in my suggestions thread:
Encourge Growth, Distribute Luxuries, Crime Lord deal AKA free 10 stability for any non-Gestalt. Not only do they require an overhaul, but maybe they could be combined into the sector system or policies.

I'm hoping resettlement will get overhauled aswell. Right now the vast majority of players are using simple mods such as "permanently encourage growth" or "automatic pop migration" .

I'll keep hoping you guys don't forget our favourite Hivemind empires and have something in store for them in the future in terms of new civics + overhaul of outdated ones.
 
grekulf said:
Sectors now also have a Shared Stockpile, in addition to their Local Stockpiles.
Click to expand...
for a moment I almost thought you were saying individual planets were going to have their own stockpiles, which made me think you were expanding how planetary bombardment/blockades were going to work by adding a more siege-like system/option that depended on stored resources(and smuggling if the enemy lacked a sufficient fleet to blockade the planet, maybe using the same stats as the anti-piracy mechanic?).

but sadly that was just a mis-read on my part...
grekulf said:
When we’ve looked into more of these things we may want to start exploring ideas like adding more mechanics to “Frontier Space” or if we can tie faction to sectors somehow.
Click to expand...

giving Sectors their own factions would be a nice way of giving tall vs wide empires a significant difference due to needing to manage them; and if how governors got assigned(as I assume they'd be their sector's faction leader) got different mechanics based on authority type(say sectors in democracies "elect" their governors for free, thus lowering costs but limiting player control, while Imperial/feudal governors can get special traits representing their place in court politics, such as a "Loyalist" who will never betray or asking anything of you, but isn't vary good at governing, giving few bonuses if not outright maluses to their sector in exchange for you not needing to worry about a threat coming from it, or someone "Ambitious" who will turn his sector into the most prosperous in the empire, but will also take the first opportunity you give him to start a civil war so he can take the throne if you make the wrong move and fail to keep his faction happy)
 
Ridixo said:
Isn't anybody going to ask about the shovels? No, well i will do it. Hey, @grekulf what is that shovel icon in Hantaron, Rovgeddi, Enif and Aphris? They are excavation or system wide blockers? Thanks for the answer :)
Click to expand...
Pretty obvious that they're systems which have an Archeology site.

Also, I agree, changing planet designation should cost Influence points. That would encourage you to think about what you want a planet to be for ahead of time and commit to it, instead of micro-managing the swap obsessively for maximum resources.
 
Is it possible to choose to have sectors smaller than 6 jumps? I remember I had a game where a planet could have fallen into a sector (sector A, let's say) but couldn't because it would have been non-contiguous dueto another sector (B). I would happily have dropped the range of B or something to merge them, but...no dice.

Alternatively, can sectors be non-contiguous now?
 
Looks good. Maybe 100 influence cost to create a sector and 25 influence to add systems beyond the four jumps to add permanence and flexibility, with a resource bonus for systems in a sector for incentive.
 
I still don't understand the logic of removing the ability of players customizing which systems are to be in which sectors... Sure, setting a maximum range of 6 jumps that a sector contain is fair game, however, give me back the ability to decide which systems within the confined range can be in that sector.
 
grekulf said:
If crime is high this will trigger a crisis that will build a Precinct House, ignoring the normal build order.
Click to expand...
I hope that it first checks, whether current precincts are actually occupied (and shuffles pops accordingly). Otherwise this could lead to a world full of precincts as we often saw in AI planets. (also, shuffling pops into other security-related jobs first would also help, before constructing the precinct)
 
Bearjuden said:
Is it possible to choose to have sectors smaller than 6 jumps? I remember I had a game where a planet could have fallen into a sector (sector A, let's say) but couldn't because it would have been non-contiguous dueto another sector (B). I would happily have dropped the range of B or something to merge them, but...no dice.

Alternatively, can sectors be non-contiguous now?
Click to expand...

Non-contiguous sector borders should be a feature for empires with "Feudal Society" civic:D
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top Bottom
Back