• 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.
Status
Not open for further replies.

Stellaris Dev Diary #152 - Summer Experimentation

Hello everyone!

Summer vacations are reaching their end and most of the team is back as of last week. Work has started again and we're really excited for what we have in store for the rest of the year.

While most of us have been away during most of the summer, we’ve also had some people who worked during July. July is a very good time to try out different designs and concepts that we might not otherwise have time to do, and today we thought it might be fun for you to see some of the experiments we ran during that period of hiatus.

Although we learned some useful insights, these experiments didn’t end up being good enough to make a reality.

Industrial Districts
As I have mentioned earlier, I have wanted to find a better solution for how we handle the production of alloys and consumer goods. I often felt like the experience of developing a planet felt better with an Ecumenopolis rather than with a regular planet. I think a lot of it had to do with their unique districts and that it feels better to get the jobs from constructing districts rather than buildings. Not necessarily as an emotion reaction to the choice, but rather that the choice perhaps feels more “pure” or simple.

An experiment I wanted to run was to see if it was possible to add an industrial district that provided Laborer jobs, instead of having buildings for Metallurgists and Artisans. Laborers would produce both alloys and consumer goods but could be shifted towards producing more of either.

This meant we added a 5th district, the Industrial District. By adding another district we also needed to reduce the number of building slots available. Since there would be no more need for buildings that produced alloys and consumer goods, this should still end up being similar.

upload_2019-8-15_12-14-17.png

A Laborer would consume 8 minerals to produce 2 alloys and 4 consumer goods, and that amount could be modified in either direction by passing a Decision. What I wanted was to have an industry that could have a military and civilian output, and where you could adjust the values between these outputs.

Having a laborer job that generates an “industrial output”, which could be translated into either alloys or consumer goods did feel good, but the specific solution we used didn’t feel quite right.

City Districts & Building slots
Another experiment was to see how it felt if city districts unlock building slots instead of pops. This experiment didn’t have a specific problem or issue it was trying to address but rather it was to investigate how that would feel and work. It was interesting but ultimately it felt less fun than the current implementation. It would have needed more time to see if it could be made to work.
upload_2019-8-15_12-15-12.png

This experiment did include increasing the number of jobs you would get for the building, so a research lab would provide 3 jobs instead of 2.

City District Jobs from Buildings
At the same time, we also tried a version where buildings applied jobs to city districts instead of providing jobs by themselves. One upside would be that you’d need less micromanagement to get the jobs, but the downside is that it would also be quite a large upswing in new jobs whenever you built a city district. In the end, it felt like you had less control and understanding of what a planet was specializing in.

Summary
Although these experiments were interesting, they didn’t end up quite where we wanted to, so they never became more than just experiments. We did learn some interesting things though, which we will keep in mind for the future. The industrial districts are still something I want to keep looking into, but we have to find a better solution.

Dev diaries will now be back on a regular schedule, but we will be looking into changing the format a bit this time around. For now, dev diaries will be coming bi-weekly, which means we will be back again in another 2 weeks with a similar topic.
 
  • 2Like
  • 1Love
Reactions:
On the other hand, with the development of things that already exist like smart metal and 3d printers, it's entirely possible that such a switch could be done literally overnight in the future to a even greater degree.
In the distant future, I suspect, like you, that switching out mass-production will be a matter of literally uploading the new specs into a machine and pushing "Execute" so the automated process can begin production.
 
Just remove buildings, keep only districts and add building qualities to them, like defense, research, alloy industry, consumer goods industry, capital and etc districts. Some of them might be limited in quantity, like mining, capital and farming ones.

Also, provide same district bonus in order to make planet specialization viable, like every same district provides 5% output bonus to dedicated jobs and may be synergy bonus for some jobs.

That will be more simple and less microhell system that will provide the same experience. That also will make possible to have a ring world as one entity.

Best regards :D
 
Last edited:
One of the problems with buildings is that each planet and habitat can support same number of buildings. This makes optimal strategies look very, very awkward.
Someone in the thread had an easy suggestion: Buildings are gated based on number of districts allowed. I really liked that idea. If it's too many (which it would be for 25), maybe PlanetSize 15 allows 10 buildings + 1 building per district above that. (ie 16/11, 17/12... 25/20)
 
If we went that way, then we could easily slide into a situation where small planets become nearly worthless while large planets become even more valuable. Not sure that would do the game any good.
 
If we went that way, then we could easily slide into a situation where small planets become nearly worthless while large planets become even more valuable.
Not sure that would do the game any good.
I know, it's way too logical, that the size of a world may have an impact on the number of its buildings as well as its districts.
 
I think a lot of the issues with performance happen because pop-shuffle checks occur multiple times EVERY SINGLE DAY for some reason.
Exactly, so if we change the job system from individual representation, and made it numerical, without the constant shifts, with still a representation of an economy, it would increase performance and allow MORE to be created, right now the individual populous representation for the economy, simply doesnt work, and it lowers the games performance, and reduces dev. creativity.

Agree. Jobs have made pops a lot more characterful, and added needed complexity to economic management.

I think jobs weight and individual populous representation has not only created a disaster, but has limited the developers. a numerical representation along with getting rid of the weight would not only increase performance, improve the AI, but it would also open up for much more to do with populations. It would make species much better to manage, it would open up for a lot more diplomacy, just imagine, REAL migration pulls, and most importantly it would cut back on tedious unneeded micromanagement.

I'm not saying get rid of district and specialty factories, because you can have the system unlocks stay relatively the same, we just need a better alternative to the individual pop weight system, that is causing the majority of the issues in the game.

Honestly it seems like the devs have coded themselves into a corner with the current job weight system and individual pop representation.
 
If we went that way, then we could easily slide into a situation where small planets become nearly worthless while large planets become even more valuable. Not sure that would do the game any good.
I see no problem with this. Bigger value items = bigger value targets = more counterplay designs in the future.
If we don't introduce new mechanics: bigger planets = bigger stability/crime issues due to an inherently larger population base.

If we do introduce new mechanics, like, say, sabotage: "That's a nice alloy hub you got there. Would be a shame if something happened to it".
 
I see no problem with this. Bigger value items = bigger value targets = more counterplay designs in the future.
If we don't introduce new mechanics: bigger planets = bigger stability/crime issues due to an inherently larger population base.

If we do introduce new mechanics, like, say, sabotage: "That's a nice alloy hub you got there. Would be a shame if something happened to it".
Stability/crime would really be an excellent way to balance it. Unfortunately both things are too easy to deal with in the current version of the game, being almost inconsequential if you play semi-competently.
 
It's wonderful to see an immersive game such as this continue to grow. I feel industrial districts would add yet another layer of detail that would be welcome. So much potential, so many possibilities.
 
I know, it's way too logical, that the size of a world may have an impact on the number of its buildings as well as its districts.

As I understand, a district is a large, expansive netwok of specialized structures. A city district can easily be is about as large as NYC, or London. In contrast, I see a structure like a giant campus, say a research lab is about as big as Apple’s HQ. Large for sure, but not as large as a district. I can see why districts are limited by planet size, but structures are much smaller and would surely fit even on the smallest planet.
 
I think jobs weight and individual populous representation has not only created a disaster, but has limited the developers.... we just need a better alternative to the individual pop weight system, that is causing the majority of the issues in the game.

Honestly it seems like the devs have coded themselves into a corner with the current job weight system and individual pop representation.

Yet myself and other modders have not been limited by it, and have once again made considerable strides in improving the AI's abilities and related performance issues with jobs and number of pops.

This isn't Mission Impossible, and claiming it is is just a sad excuse for ripping out a system that doesn't work because the developers don't have the time/budget to fix something that is, in fact, fixable.
 
Personally, I want the "job priority" nonsense to go away. Allow a policy that allows us to literally move pops between jobs (authoritarians can do it easier than egalitarians, etc) with only some ethics having the ability to lock a pop into a certain job. That will actually make micromanaging our jobs LESS tedious because instead of trying to tweak + and - to get it JUST RIGHT we could just drag and drop them into the appropriate district or building. Maybe have a separate little menu to promote/demote (Well hello there Victoria 2, fancy seeing you here). [Side note: I hate the job ranking system because the interface is not designed well for color blind people and I can't tell what is ranked what anyway. So I have literally no interaction with that entire screen. I am unable to use that entire UI as it stands without squinting and counting clicks anyway. @Jamor ]

Certain "jobs" we obviously can't move (criminals) and certain pop-types can only have certain jobs (slaves, chemical processing). Smaller planets should get modifiers to actually make them have an Empire Sprawl advantage (or something similar) so that having a bunch of small worlds has a viable strategy as opposed to only colonizing large worlds. (Not sure what the balance suggestion would be. I'm winging it a bit here, but there needs to be a mechanic so small works have an advantage and a use. Definitely an efficiency of some kind.)
 
Last edited:
claiming it is is just a sad excuse for ripping out a system that doesn't work because the developers don't have the time/budget to fix something that is, in fact, fixable.

That is the problem though, isn't it? They don't have the time, budget, nor expertise, to fix it, and it will only continue to get worse as they release more expansions.
Meanwhile they have access to other systems, even in their own titles, that can be implemented and adjusted easier, while also improving the overall game performance and AI competence.

I would rather see something happen, than slapping band aids on a gun shot wound and calling it good, like they have been doing.
 
Last edited:
As I understand, a district is a large, expansive netwok of specialized structures. A city district can easily be is about as large as NYC, or London. In contrast, I see a structure like a giant campus, say a research lab is about as big as Apple’s HQ. Large for sure, but not as large as a district. I can see why districts are limited by planet size, but structures are much smaller and would surely fit even on the smallest planet.
Note that you don't always build a single structure when you fill a slot.

You build "Alloy Foundries", not an "Alloy Foundry", for instance. It was something they specifically drew attention to in the Dev Diaries preceding 2.2.
 
I see no problem with this. Bigger value items = bigger value targets = more counterplay designs in the future.
If we don't introduce new mechanics: bigger planets = bigger stability/crime issues due to an inherently larger population base.

If we do introduce new mechanics, like, say, sabotage: "That's a nice alloy hub you got there. Would be a shame if something happened to it".
Mind, a big issue pre-2.2 was people complaining that there was never any point colonizing anything below size 16 planets unless you had ZERO other options.
 
Some extra control over jobs wouldn't go a miss, being able to drag and drop pops around would be a nice little addition there. It would go well with that obnoxious pop eating factory rather than having to just let the game decide who goes in there. I don't mind micromanagment like this, but I hate having to click buttons with encourage planetary growth every so often because no one at Paradox thought to make it a toggle.

I'm pretty sure Paradox aren't a few guys working out of their bedrooms also, so I'm not sure why we're talking about time/budget constraints here. Maybe they'll have to just put off releasing the next shiny to actually fix something.
 
I'm pretty sure Paradox aren't a few guys working out of their bedrooms also, so I'm not sure why we're talking about time/budget constraints here. Maybe they'll have to just put off releasing the next shiny to actually fix something.

They only have around 100 coders/designers ( https://career.paradoxplaza.com/people ) over the 10-15 games they develop, so they are pretty small groups, and corporate gives them a fairly tight time frame for DLC releases since that is their main money maker.
Plus, where they live, they take about 4-5 months out of the year off, so time is even further constrained.
 
Note that you don't always build a single structure when you fill a slot.

You build "Alloy Foundries", not an "Alloy Foundry", for instance. It was something they specifically drew attention to in the Dev Diaries preceding 2.2.

I will agree that Paradox is keeping the scale of many things in the game intentionally vague. This is very obvious with "pops" but applies to buildings and districts as well. In this latter case, however, the artwork provides a clue. The icon for disctricts (and this is especially true for ecumenopolis arcologies) shows a massive network of towering buildings, or rolling green hills as far as the eye can see. Buildings on the other hand are displayed as a single unit. To me it is clear that they are intended to be much more localized, and smaller in scale, although I accept that a "foundry(ies)" can be a connected network of plants roughly in the same region.
 
The icon for disctricts (and this is especially true for ecumenopolis arcologies) shows a massive network of towering buildings, or rolling green hills as far as the eye can see. Buildings on the other hand are displayed as a single unit.
And POPs are represented by a single portrait. But you don't assume they're just a single person, do you?

Buildings are definitely smaller-scale than Districts, but their scale is usually quite clearly explained by their descriptive text. Some are singular structures, others are massive complexes or a broad block of industrial processes.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.