• 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 #21 - Administrative Sectors

Hi again folks!

Today I am going to talk about one of the great pitfalls of strategy game design; dull micromanagement. That is, features which require too much player attention. The trick, of course, is determining how much is “too much”, but it’s useful to consider how central the feature is to the core gameplay, how well it scales between small and large states, and how repetitive it gets with time.

In Stellaris, one feature which risked causing bad micromanagement was the planetary tile system; assigning Pops to tiles and deciding which buildings should go where. It is a fairly central feature and it is fun to use… but if you had to worry about 20, 50 or more planets, it would scale poorly. The obvious solution to this type of scaling issue is automation; you can let the AI handle it for you. This is indeed what we did in Stellaris, but not in a “traditional” fashion... Instead, we opted for something a little bit more akin to the vassals in Crusader Kings through something we call Administrative Sectors.

stellaris_dev_diary_21_02_20160215_edit_sectors.jpg


A Sector is an administrative region under the control of a Sector Governor. You can control a few planets directly (your “core worlds”), but once you go past the limit, you will start suffering penalties to your Influence as well as Empire-wide income. The exact limit for how many planets you can control directly depends on various factors, like your government type and technologies, but, as with the “Demesne Limit” in Crusader Kings II, it will never be a huge number. At this point, it is best to start dividing your territory into Sectors. You can decide the Sector capital and which planets should belong to it (but they must all be connected to the capital, i.e. form one cohesive sub-region.) You are also allowed to name your Sectors, for fun.

Unlike proper Vassals, Sectors remain an integrated part of your Empire, but they will handle development of planets and the construction of mining stations within their region for you. You can give them a focus (Industry, Research, etc), an infusion of Minerals or Energy Credits to help them along, and decide if you want to tax them for Minerals and Energy Credits. Sectors do not possess any military fleets of their own, nor do they perform research (they have access to the same technologies you do, and their research output is all given to you.)

stellaris_dev_diary_21_01_20160215_sectors_list.jpg


While Sectors and Sector Governors cannot demand more autonomy, or directly rise up in revolt (things I’d love to explore in an expansion), over time their population tends to diverge ideologically from that of the regime, and create their own identity. Like-minded Pops will tend to migrate there if allowed to. In the same way, aliens of the same species will also tend to coalesce in the same Sectors. Thus, when Factions form, they will often tend to have their main seat of power in a specific Sector. And Factions can demand autonomy and achieve independence. However, this is something that warrants its own dev diary...

That’s all he wrote folks. This time. Next week, I plan to talk about Alliances and Federations!
 
Last edited by a moderator:
  • 241
  • 70
  • 7
Reactions:
It's a system to protect players from themselves.
A lot of 4x games have planet/city governors, but players usually dislike using them because they aren't as good at maximizing production as a human. On the other hand, players also tend to dislike the large amount of tedious work that comes with managing everything themselves.

By using the sector system Stellaris avoids the problem by making the choice for the player in such a way that it is actually integrated with the gameplay, so it becomes something you just do as part of normal play instead of a choice between two negatives.

It's probably mostly a psychology thing, most people would enjoy a game more if they used governors, but they don't because it always feels like a mistake, so by forcing the issue Paradox improves the gaming experience. For the small group that actually enjoys microing everything it's probably only a single value you have to change in the game files to be able to control everything personally.
That's ridiculous. If ai governors are so horrible that its better to manage everything yourself, then why shoot players in the foot by forcing them to use them? And if ai governors are okay, why wouldn't players use them rather that waste time doing something computer is just as good at?
 
  • 20
  • 6
Reactions:
You know, the answer to every disagreement you have with a direction of a particular game is not, in fact, "make it an option". I get so sick of hearing this.

"I don't like aggressive expansion in EU4, I just want to conquer the world, make it an option"
"I don't like having to deal with supply in Hearts of Iron, make it an option"
"I don't like the aliens in Half Life, I just want to fight the government soldiers, make it an option"
"I don't like in Call of Duty how you have to shoot everyone, and can't find a peaceful solution, make it an option"
"I don't like how Civilisation 5 isn't a first person shooter, make it an option"

At some point you've just go to let the developers make the game they want to make and accept that you're not going to be 100% happy about everything in the design. As I said before, they are not making a game just for you.

Now, it might be somewhat relevant if you're talking about graphical or UI decisions or more minor elements of the design but if the game is designed and balanced with the idea that players are going to have most of their planets divided up into sectors and managed by the AI in mind then, no, I'm sorry they are not going to "make it an option" if that's going to completely wreck how the game is supposed to play.
 
  • 26
  • 8
  • 3
Reactions:
The fact that gov type changes the "core planet limit" makes sence. I kinda actually think that indirect democracies should have only 1 core planet without penalties, since that is how indirect democracies works in modern days, they control the major laws, the military, foreing policy and the national capital, while regions in the nation have more autonomy to interviene in their own minor economical matters. I like this Dev Diary, and by each week, I want to play Stellaris even more!
 
  • 2
  • 1
Reactions:
Also I wonder if the number of planets you can control directly scales with map size?
 
  • 1
Reactions:
Did you read my whole post?

If you had read mine, you would have seen where I tried to express that even the option of having mix/maxing for optimal effect would be too tempting. So while I don't like to do it, I would feel like I'm missing out on something if I don't do it. The AI is unlikely to be as effective as a human, and so establishing the disincentive to micromanaging, balances the game for people who don't want to micromanage (as you suggested, the 90%) and gives you confidence that the AI is doing as well as if you were doing it yourself (because of the penalty). Maybe I'm not expressing myself clearly.
 
  • 5
  • 2
Reactions:
Cool, i like the sound of this. Especially how it can influence the pops of the sector, and how like minded pops can immigrate there, thats neat.


Makes it far easier to round up all the xenos and purge them with holy fir- i mean what?
 
  • 1
Reactions:
That's ridiculous. If ai governors are so horrible that its better to manage everything yourself, then why shoot players in the foot by forcing them to use them? And if ai governors are okay, why wouldn't players use them rather that waste time doing something computer is just as good at?

Well with the current system we get the best of both worlds. You're not forced to micro everything and you're not forced to put everything under AI Governors. Instead of inviting you to micro-to-boredom by putting you in the situation where there are no drawbacks you're encouraged to define sectors and use your governors instead. Sectors and governors provide bonuses while extreme microing has diminishing returns through penalties when you go overboard. It's not like you lose control over the sectors or their policies or income, it's just delegated to local divisions of government.

You can still chose to handle a lot (or even everything) yourself but then you face the drawbacks of imperial bureaucracy doing more stuff than is efficient and the heavy foot of government making that type of microing a bad move in most cases by in-game logic rather than arbitrary limitation (as in penalties depending on government type, techs, research etc).
 
Last edited:
  • 8
  • 2
Reactions:
I'm pretty sure the whole idea is that the AI controlled worlds will not be as efficiently managed as the ones you directly manage, so picking which ones remain under your controlled and which get farmed out to the regional governors (who, as I understand it, will now have direct control over their territories) is a decision you'll have to make as a player.

And here, what does "efficiently" managed mean? It means they aren't run with the best interests of the overall empire in mind, which makes a certain amount of sense - worlds remote from the capital aren't necessarily going to be too concerned with maximising production of physics research because the Emperor on the distant capital has a big project on and more interested in the minerals they can mine for their own profit. This system makes a great deal of sense.
 
  • 8
Reactions:
can you 'force' the administrative secotr to do soemthing? i.e. i want planetary defences somewhere yesterday, so i can give them the costs to do it and they'll do it ASAP.
 
  • 1
Reactions:
Are we going to be able to draw them ourselves, Cities Skylines district style?
It says in the devblog that you select which planets/systems belong to which sector. I guess there's no need for drawing per-se then.
 
I have to admit that reducing micromanagement will help with multiplayer sessions.

For single players I´m not so sure about it, but I´ll give it a try (and whine about it later).
 
  • 1
Reactions:
Out of interest, since I haven't seen anyone mention it, what do we think the modules are for the first planet in the second screenshot?

Also I really thought today would be the day I found out that the white bisected square in the top bar is!!!! I don't think I've ever seen it be anything other than 0/0
 
Out of interest, since I haven't seen anyone mention it, what do we think the modules are for the first planet in the second screenshot?

They're for the space port.
 
OK, so I know the game is still in development and nothing is set in stone, but along what lines are different governments able to directly control more/less planets? Is it more of a Military governments exert more direct control that technocratic governments or more of a Democracies can exert more direct control than monarchies?
 
Every DD= Stellaris sounds more awesome :)
 
  • 4
  • 1
Reactions:
This looks like a really great and neat system, and I'm happy that you are already thinking upon how to expand it. That is one of the great things about PDS, the continuous ideas, development, changes for your games!
 
  • 2
Reactions: