• 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 #178 - Federal improvements (UI and more!)

Hello everyone!

Today’s dev diary will show you some of the improvements we’ve made to federations for the upcoming free update!

Federation Voting
Since the release of Federations and the 2.6 update we’ve wanted to make some improvements to how voting in federations is handled. Most of the improvements are related to UI and better feedback, but there’s also been some changes to functionality.

You are now able to use Favors to increase the acceptance chance for your AI-controlled federation members.

1588237130927.png

You are now able to use Favors to increase the acceptance chance for federation law proposals.

We’ve also changed how AI acceptance works for federation laws, so that it is more transparent and more consistent with other features in the game. We look at the AI attitude a lot more now, and it will affect which laws the AI is attracted towards. For example, militaristic empires, or those with either Honorbound Warriors or Federation Builders personalities will be more likely to accept a higher fleet contribution law.

Generally speaking, the best way for you to pass new federation laws is to get the Federation Cohesion to 90 or above, and then suggest a new law change.

When it comes to suggesting changed, the AI will still not attempt to suggest changes very often, unless they are the federation president.

1588237158059.png

The AI will generally not want to increase Centralization unless Cohesion is 90 or higher. Cohesion also directly affects the acceptance chance by a factor of x0.25 (100 cohesion equals +25 acceptance).

1588237186199.png

The UI for voting on war declarations has received a face-lift. It’s now more clear which war goal is used, and you can see a summary of the target of the war, and which their allies are. This should hopefully make it easier for you to decide if you are in favor of the war or not.

1588237297716.png

Whenever a federation law has been voted on, you will now get a pop-up that clearly informs you on what the results of the vote were, and how your federation allies voted.

1588237321844.png

We’ve also improved the feedback you get whenever your federation unlocks a new level.

Joint Operations
Something we wanted to do, but couldn’t do for 2.6 due to lack of time, was to add some more flavor events to federations. We had some cool ideas for things we wanted to try, and we’re very happy that we’ve been able to add some events for the upcoming 2.7 update.

Joint Operations are events to which each member of a federation can contribute, and the types of events will depend on your federation type.

Research Co-operatives have the chance to engage in a joint archaeological dig across their region of federated space. Galactic Unions and Research Co-operatives alike may also find themselves dealing with strange new stellar phenomena at their federation capitals. Hegemonies will have the option of a grand project to celebrate cultural uniformity – and to see who’s still willing to tow the line. Military Alliances can partake in a joint training exercise, while Trade Leagues may seek to improve their collective worth through harmonized logistics.

In all cases, collaboration will bolster cohesion within your federation – however members may sometimes be tempted by individual gains, and further challenges may arise if the federation does not act as one.

1588237346692.png

The beginning of a joint operation for the Research Cooperative!

Origins
A small change we’ve made, albeit probably a welcomed one, is to make it far less likely for the leader of a Common Ground or Hegemony start to be blocked off by their federation members. It’s very likely that they will have at least one open hyperlane to an unexplored star system.

---

That’s it for this week! Next week we’ll be back with some more information regarding the upcoming free update!
 
Last edited:
  • 91Like
  • 38
  • 25
  • 1Love
  • 1Haha
  • 1
Reactions:
oh, just ftr, as one of the ones fussin about federation votes and not giving us enough info:

thank you.

This is exactly what I was looking for tbh.
 
I'm rediscovering EU4, and one of the things I love about it is how good it is at telling you the actual end result of your actions. If you send a ship to protect trade, the game makes sure to tell you whether you'll lose or gain money by doing so. When you send a merchant to steer trade, the game will tell you exactly how many ducats worth of trade he will redirect.

I'm hoping this will make it into to Stellaris, too, because it makes the game so much easier to understand.

EU4 started out really bad on the information front aswell though. I remember there were a bunch of users who were really really obnoxious in regards to the UI (rightfully so) until they slowly improved it.
 
  • 1
Reactions:
If you're letting the AI declare wars while in a Federation you're doing it wrong :3 You should always be war leader.

It seems that AI war declarations no longer consider federation allies ot at least devalue them or overvalue distance. The result is that depending on difficulty you paly as your weakest federation memember might get wars declared on them, for reasons you can't influence. And then you're stuck with the bad AI, deciding to end it.

Federation wars need to be managed on a federation elvel, either communally or by president decision, and it's been annoying since release that they aren't.
 
  • 5
  • 1Like
Reactions:
Nice meme, expect you've made one mistake: it is not Paradoxians presenting me some tokens of love, it is me presenting Paradox my $$ tokens of love

I was not happy w/ performance and have not bought Lithoids until Paradoxians fixed performance in Federations --> I got very happy and purchased Lithoids DLC (along w/ Federations), now I am enjoying playing smoothly past 2400.

However I am not happy w/ poor AI and bugs and I am not going to buy next DLC no matter whatever features Paradox pours in: there are plenty of mods that offer far cooler features, however modders can't fix performance, modders can't fix AI, modders can't fix crisis, modders can't fix fleet manager, etc. <-- that's what I am interested in as a paying customer
And where does it say they aren't working on those? Do you really need them to say in every diary "Oh yeah, we're working on fixing the AI/Bugfixes, because apparently it doesn't happen if we don't talk about it."

Why would you assume they aren't, rather than going with the obvious "Oh yeah, it's not interesting to talk about/not a lot to talk about, so we'll leave it out. I'm sure our players will understand that we're still working on them."
 
  • 5
Reactions:
How significant are the rewards/outcome of those joint ops? Is it a long term buff like the federation perks or just a small one off reward of federation cohesion and/or resource?

It varies, not least depending on how many within the federation help work towards whichever outcome — but the rewards are usually a combination of both. Federations and their constituent empires alike stand to benefit from their collaborative efforts.
 
  • 2Like
  • 1
Reactions:
And where does it say they aren't working on those? Do you really need them to say in every diary "Oh yeah, we're working on fixing the AI/Bugfixes, because apparently it doesn't happen if we don't talk about it."

Why would you assume they aren't, rather than going with the obvious "Oh yeah, it's not interesting to talk about/not a lot to talk about, so we'll leave it out. I'm sure our players will understand that we're still working on them."
They sure didn't work on AI much most of the time, as far as one can tell from how many new features the area compared to how stupid the AI has become. So, if they are willing to talk about it, all the better. The one DD where they talked about AI decision making was very encouraging.
 
  • 2
  • 1Like
Reactions:
A rather slim dd like the last one, but a more appreciated one. UI-improvements are always welcome.

Why would you assume they aren't, rather than going with the obvious "Oh yeah, it's not interesting to talk about/not a lot to talk about, so we'll leave it out. I'm sure our players will understand that we're still working on them."
I'm a player, it interests me and I wish that they would talk about it as often as possible ?

And where does it say they aren't working on those? Do you really need them to say in every diary "Oh yeah, we're working on fixing the AI/Bugfixes, because apparently it doesn't happen if we don't talk about it."
I would question the other way around: When was the last time they've done something without talking about it, including presentations like dev-diaries ? Put the dots together and you will figure out that the less they talk / present about something the less they've most likely done in regards to this.
 
Last edited:
  • 4
  • 2Like
Reactions:
And where does it say they aren't working on those? Do you really need them to say in every diary "Oh yeah, we're working on fixing the AI/Bugfixes, because apparently it doesn't happen if we don't talk about it."

Why would you assume they aren't, rather than going with the obvious "Oh yeah, it's not interesting to talk about/not a lot to talk about, so we'll leave it out. I'm sure our players will understand that we're still working on them."


I dont play Stellaris anymore. I am just reading the devs diary looking for the AI improvements. And If they are working on them, the truth is that the speed or priority that they give to it is signfically low.

Playing Stellaris feels like playing chess against a AI which just moves pawns
 
  • 2
  • 1
Reactions:
Any plans to give Gestalts the option to get additional envoys?

Currently Gestalts, especially machines are unable to properly level their own federation.
 
  • 2Like
Reactions:
They sure didn't work on AI much most of the time, as far as one can tell from how many new features the area compared to how stupid the AI has become. So, if they are willing to talk about it, all the better. The one DD where they talked about AI decision making was very encouraging.
Yes, they had a lot to talk about then. What do you suggest they do now?
A rather slim dd like the last one, but a more appreciated one. UI-improvements are always welcome.


I'm a player, it interests me and I wish that they would talk about it as often as possible ?


I would question the other way around: When was the last time they've done something without talking about it, including presentations like dev-diaries ? Put the dots together and you will figure out that the less they talk / present about something the less they've most likely done in regards to this.
But what do they have to talk about? The last DD they did on it was because they overhauled it. We largely know how it works. What more is there to say?

As for when they did something, literally every patch. They have done innumerable bugfixes and AI improvements, every patch, without mentioning it in a diary. Go look at the patch notes.
I dont play Stellaris anymore. I am just reading the devs diary looking for the AI improvements. And If they are working on them, the truth is that the speed or priority that they give to it is signfically low.

Playing Stellaris feels like playing chess against a AI which just moves pawns
You should look to the patch notes, not the DDs. To most people, the AI is not something they want to hear about at length. Which is what the DDs are for.

It basically boils down to there isn't enough content to cover very many diaries in talking about AI. One per major patch would be far too much.
 
  • 2
Reactions:
As for when they did something, literally every patch. They have done innumerable bugfixes and AI improvements, every patch, without mentioning it in a diary. Go look at the patch notes.
You: "At least 1113 bugs and AI-flaws get fixed, every patch. Go look at the patch notes."
I: "And 8887 bugs and AI-flaws are still in. Furthermore, count at least 3339 new ones on top of said remaining ones if the patch is called an update, especially if accompanied with a DLC."

Trying to make a point that "innummerable" bugs and AI-flaws were fixed ( in absolute numbers ) doesn't mean anything if it's just a tiny fraction ( in relative numbers / in relation ) to the whole mess, especially if it gets worse. And by the way, it wouldn't be the first time that the patch-notes state that something was fixed, but it had turned out to be not true. POPs and your ethics, I'm looking at you.
 
Last edited:
  • 2
  • 2
  • 1Like
Reactions:
Can federation AI at war get a passing look at? It seems to be like 50/50 whether the AI suicidally goes its own way or sits in its homeworld doing nothing, when most of the time the best thing to do would be to follow the federation leader.
 
  • 2
Reactions:
Yes, they had a lot to talk about then. What do you suggest they do now?

But what do they have to talk about? The last DD they did on it was because they overhauled it. We largely know how it works. What more is there to say?

As for when they did something, literally every patch. They have done innumerable bugfixes and AI improvements, every patch, without mentioning it in a diary. Go look at the patch notes.

You should look to the patch notes, not the DDs. To most people, the AI is not something they want to hear about at length. Which is what the DDs are for.

It basically boils down to there isn't enough content to cover very many diaries in talking about AI. One per major patch would be far too much.



And I agree. "most people, the AI is not something they want to hear about at length" I dont want either but... this is because normally the cuantity and importance of the bugs and bad AI are inside an acceptable and a tolerance range. This is not the case and no one of the official communications seems to be worried about it.


After 4 years from the release, the current state of the game is simply not acceptable.
 
Last edited:
Please fix the fleet manager, both in general and also specifically the federation fleet manager: Let the president determine the makeup of the desired fleet so members won't just fill it with corvettes, and fix the problem where it says the fed fleet is taking up fleet cap in the manager window.
 
There is one issue for federations I hoped would be adressed: When a member gains a vassal, it automatically joins the federation. This can destroy cohesion in a blink of an eye. If the federation is on maximum level, it is virtually impossible to maintain the federation level. Worse, on level loss, laws are changed and cannot be changed back for years (a decade, right?). So although the federation itself may be healthy, and quite capable of getting cohesion back up rather quickly, one cannot avoid the level loss and long-lasting consequences from this AI action which the player cannot control.

So to remedy this, I would propose that on maximum federation level, once may still earn federation XP to create a buffer against these events. Maybe enough to maintain the federation level for some years, so that decisive action (envoy spam) has a chance to push cohesion up again. Another way would be to avoid these sudden drops in cohesion at all, but I'm sure you'll find the best way.

edit: forum redesign really gets me so far. except this 'new' habit of pushing the first letter as avatar and that likes are shown on the profile

There is a federation law that bans vassals from joining the federation... I suggest you use that. (While your proposal is a ok idea)
 
  • 1
Reactions: