Stellaris Dev Diary #225 - 3.1.2 "Lem" Patch Update

[Cat_Fuzz]

Have you looked at @pmchem ’s reports on the economic AI?

Link to thread with bug reports

 

[Alfray Stryke]

Have you looked at @pmchem ’s reports on the economic AI?

Yup, been looking at them. Unfortunately I had a mini-vacation this week to play Wrath of the Righteous, so wasn't able to look at everything in as much detail as I would have liked. However, any AI changes that we'd like to make would require more development and testing time than we had for the hotfix.

The feedback is of course massively appreciated and we're having a lot of productive conversations about the direction of the AI, so I will repeat my thanks for the observations and insights folks are sharing.

 

[Tamwin5]

Some basic math regarding Catalytic:

A Catalytic machine empire uses one pop to produce 5 food base. Due to various accumulated bonuses, that will probably end up around 6. A machine Catalytic drone turns 12 food into 4 alloys. So for every drone producing alloys, you need 2 drones generating the upkeep. With -50% production, you'd need 2 drones to maintain "full" output

The exploit still exists. Just now instead of giving +200% effective alloy output, it now only gives +50% effective alloy output. Just make it -75% for now, this fixes the problem (takes 4 drones for no upkeep vs 3 drones when producing food). Even if in 3.2 you plan on completely overhauling how deficits work, please fix this before you move on.

Then there is also the issue that Catalytic is kinda worthless without the exploit. Reducing the food upkeep down to be even to minerals would both make the civic worth using.

 

[drawar]

* Going into a food deficit when using the Catalytic Processing civic will now give a -50% production penalty to alloy production. This penalty is in line with the penalty non-catalytic empires suffer from a mineral deficit

Called it. When other people were calling for a grounds-up redesign of the entire economic system to fix a single exploit that was ruining the game for them (by them using the exploit) I said: why not add an alloy production penalty to empires with Catalytic processing that lack food.

Because the shortage system is just badly done and allows a lot of abuse.
If there is a shortage, just buy/sell a small amount to cancel it for a month.
An insignificant deficit compared to its economy generates maximum instantaneous penalties, which is both annoying and handicapping, more than it should be compared to the size of the deficit.
So that would have been an opportunity to improve the system, which can be very interesting and relatively simple, without really having to reform the economic system, just improve the scarcity system and take advantage of it to enrich the game.

Shortage - Prosperity : progressive

The goal of this idea is to make the penalties for shortages more gradual, but also to give an advantage to empires with significant surplus.

Shortage :
There are 2 types of shortages: general and specific.
Specifics relate to a particular resource.
The generals represent the general consequences of the various shortages on the empire, one on the civilian aspect, the other on the military.

Each specific shortage increases by a certain value depending on the size of the deficit compared to the desired consumption. It increases at least 1 point each month. Maybe for example: Deficit / Desired quantity * 100
Each specific shortage increases the value of the civil and military shortage.

The effects of each shortage will be changed.
Each shortage has a value from 0 to 100. The penalties are gradual. Here are the max effects.

There is also a level system to determine the maximum severity of the specicic shortage, depending on the severity of the shortage.

Level 0:
- Deficit < 25% Desired quantity
- 25 Maximum Shortage

Level 1:
- Deficit > 25% Desired quantity
- 50 Maximum Shortage

Level 2:
- Deficit > 50% Desired quantity
- 75 Maximum Shortage

Level 3:
- Deficit > 75% Desired quantity
- 100 Maximum Shortage

The small deficits under control are not going to create catastrophic shortages in the long run, unless they spiral downward.

Energy :
- -75% Job output
- -75% Research from jobs (machine)
- -75% Unity from jobs (machine)
- +50 Civil shortage (no machine)
- +75 Civil shortage (machine)
- +75 Military shortage

Mineral :
- -75% Alloys from jobs
- -75% Consumer goods from jobs
- -25% Lithoid pop happiness
- -75% Lithoid pop growth
- -75% Research from jobs (hive)
- -75% Unity from jobs (lithoid hive)
- +25 Civil shortage (no lithoids, no machine)
- +50 Civil shortage (machine)
- +75 Civil shortage (lithoids)
- +25 Military shortage

Food :
- -25% Biological pop happiness
- -75% Biological pop growth
- -75% Organic Assembly Speed
- -75% Unity from jobs (organic hive)
- +75 Civil shortage (organic)
- +25 Military shortage (organic)

Alloys :
- +75% Starbase Upkeep cost
- +75% Ship Upkeep cost
- +75% Army Upkeep cost
- -75% Robot build speed
- +25 Civil shortage
- +75 Military shortage

Consumer goods :
- -25% Pop happiness
- -75% Trade value
- -75% Research from jobs (no gestalt)
- -75% Unity from jobs (no gestalt)
- +50 Civil shortage (no gestalt)
- +25 Military shortage (no gestalt)

Influence :
- -75% Governing Ethics Attraction
- +75% spy cost and Upkeep cost
- -75% Diplomatic weight
- +25 Civil shortage
- +25 Military shortage

Exotic gases
- -25% Job output
- +25 Civil shortage
- +25 Military shortage

Rare Crystals
- -25% Job output
- +25 civil shortage
- +25 Military shortage

Volatile Motes :
- -25% Job output
- +25 civil shortage
- +25 Military shortage


Civil :
- -100 Stabilty
- -100% Governing Ethics Attraction
- -100% Pop happiness (no gestal)
- +100 Deviancy (gestalt)
- +100% Empire sprawl
- +100% Edit/Campagne cost
- -75% Planet Build Speed
- -75% Diplomatic Economic weight

Military :
- -50% Naval Capacity
- -50% Starbase Capacity
- -75% Starbase Upgrade speed
- -75% Ship Build Speed
- -75% Army Damage
- -75% Shield hit points
- -75% Ship weapons damage
- -75% Ship armor
- -75% Fire rate
- -75% Diplomatic Fleet power weight

Obviously, the values would have to be adjusted as needed. However, we must not forget that these are the maximum penalties and that the system is progressive.

When a shortage is over, the shortage value decreases from the monthly prosperity value * 2.
To help get out of a major crisis, we can perhaps imagine a mechanism "similar" to EU4 with Bankruptcy.


Prosperity
Prosperity is the opposite effect. It is determined by the amount of resources owned in relation to consumption.

Prosperity works in stages.

Level 0:
- No deficit
- +1 Monthly prosperity
- 25 Maximum Prosperity

Level 1:
- Stock > 3 * Consumption
- +2 Monthly prosperity
- 50 Maximum Prosperity

Level 2:
- Stock > 6 * Consumption
- +3 Monthly prosperity
- 75 Maximum Prosperity

Level 3:
- Stock > 10 * Consumption
- +4 Monthly prosperity
- 100 Maximum Prosperity

If the tier condition is not met, prosperity drops by 1 per month. In the event of a deficit, prosperity decreases by 5 * the value of the deficit. Prosperity protects against the negative effects of short-term deficits.

Prosperity bonuses are also progressive and the opposite of shortage penalties, but less important, maybe a quarter


Market :
Obviously, to give more effect to these mechanisms, it would be necessary to change the functioning of the market a little.
For example : https://forum.paradoxplaza.com/forum/threads/market-rebalance-introducing-market-caps.1464424/

If not at least put a deadline for transactions on the market, maybe at least 6 months. Possibly modified by some factor.

 

[Alfray Stryke]

Some basic math regarding Catalytic:

A Catalytic machine empire uses one pop to produce 5 food base. Due to various accumulated bonuses, that will probably end up around 6. A machine Catalytic drone turns 12 food into 4 alloys. So for every drone producing alloys, you need 2 drones generating the upkeep. With -50% upkeep, you'd need 2 drones to maintain "full" output

The exploit still exists. Just now instead of giving +200% effective alloy output, it now only gives +50% effective alloy output. Just make it -75% for now, this fixes the problem (takes 4 drones for no upkeep vs 3 drones when producing food). Even if in 3.2 you plan on completely overhauling how deficits work, please fix this before you move on.

Then there is also the issue that Catalytic is kinda worthless without the exploit. Reducing the food upkeep down to be even to minerals would both make the civic worth using.

Because the shortage system is just badly done and allows a lot of abuse.
If there is a shortage, just buy/sell a small amount to cancel it for a month.
An insignificant deficit compared to its economy generates maximum instantaneous penalties, which is both annoying and handicapping, more than it should be compared to the size of the deficit.
So that would have been an opportunity to improve the system, which can be very interesting and relatively simple, without really having to reform the economic system, just improve the scarcity system and take advantage of it to enrich the game.

Shortage - Prosperity : progressive

As much as we'd like to redesign how resource deficits work in the game, overhauling the system would be an impossible task for a hotfix given the relatively short time between the release of 3.1.1 and 3.1.2. However the fix for catalytic processing not intended to be a long-term solution and will hopefully be revisited again in the future.

 

[Spaceception]

As much as we'd like to redesign how resource deficits work in the game, overhauling the system would be an impossible task for a hotfix given the relatively short time between the release of 3.1.1 and 3.1.2. However the fix for catalytic processing not intended to be a long-term solution and will hopefully be revisited again in the future.

Would redesigning how deficits/shortages work be the scope for Custodians or the main team?

 

[Lorenerd11]

Have you considered changing Shattered Ring to be a bit more viable? Right now it's basically a handicap.

Maybe make repairing the section require Anti-Gravity Engineering instead of Mega-Engineering, like the requirement to restore a Relic World.

Or maybe you could make the other two sections colonizeable Shattered Ring sections, in place of the Guaranteed Habitable worlds. The number of colonizable sections could even match the number of Guaranteed Habitable Worlds in the settings.

 

[Me_]

Because the shortage system is just badly done and allows a lot of abuse.
If there is a shortage, just buy/sell a small amount to cancel it for a month.
An insignificant deficit compared to its economy generates maximum instantaneous penalties, which is both annoying and handicapping, more than it should be compared to the size of the deficit.
So that would have been an opportunity to improve the system, which can be very interesting and relatively simple, without really having to reform the economic system, just improve the scarcity system and take advantage of it to enrich the game.

Shortage - Prosperity : progressive

It's not a perfect system, but every alternative proposed so far would have been horribly calculation intensive. People throw around the idea of actually consuming goods like it's nothing. It's nothing to make if you are willing to accept each month in-game to take 10 minutes. There's nothing new or innovative about suggesting a true resource consumption system. There's nothing new about suggesting mechanics that work in many other games but on a smaller scale.

Every single "obvious way the catalytic processing should be solved" was an old idea that has been around for years. If it could be done efficiently, it already would have been. Doing it in a way that would not slow down the game is the real challenge.

A progressive shortage system is nothing new either. It's just a little more complicated application of the same solution that keeps getting tied into knots.

The current system works well enough until a better system can be designed, but Stellaris has been overhauled so much already, I'd rather wait for Stellaris 2 to change the core resource management.

As much as we'd like to redesign how resource deficits work in the game, overhauling the system would be an impossible task for a hotfix given the relatively short time between the release of 3.1.1 and 3.1.2. However the fix for catalytic processing not intended to be a long-term solution and will hopefully be revisited again in the future.

Still, it's pretty obvious that -50% isn't enough as it's still more efficient to not make food than to make it (as indicated previously) while -75% should be roughly in the area of "ok for now".

 

[AlphaAsh]

I panicked that there was a typo somewhere in there. Nothing more embarrassing than spelling the name of your game wrong. haha

Oh I dunno....

 

[hart30]

* Shattered Ring World can turn into a planet due to takeover or devastation.

I assume Idyllic Bloom will also do the trick.

* Awakened Empires don't use traditions properly.

Also goes for their internal market. No strategic ressources, but overflowing everything else after some planetary conquest = no ships can be build.

 

[Enfield_PDX]

Would redesigning how deficits/shortages work be the scope for Custodians or the main team?

Not sure yet. But looking over deficits is common discussion.

Have you considered changing Shattered Ring to be a bit more viable? Right now it's basically a handicap.

Maybe make repairing the section require Anti-Gravity Engineering instead of Megaengineering, like the requirement to restore a Relic World.

Or maybe you could make the other two sections colonizeable Shattered Ring sections, in place of the Guaranteed Habitable worlds. The number of colonizeable sections could even match Guaranteed Habitable sections in the settings.

I am open to the idea that Shattered Ring got the nerf bat a bit hard. It's being looked into. Along with necrophage hiveminds

 

[drawar]

It's not a perfect system, but every alternative proposed so far would have been horribly calculation intensive. People throw around the idea of actually consuming goods like it's nothing. It's nothing to make if you are willing to accept each month in-game to take 10 minutes. There's nothing new or innovative about suggesting a true resource consumption system. There's nothing new about suggesting mechanics that work in many other games but on a smaller scale.

I don't think reforming the shortage system, even with a progressive system, will drown the game in calculations.
Calculations, the game is already full, that every time there is a lack of a deficit of 1 a resource, just see all the alerts of unhappy pops that can trigger, because there was a missing one package of strawberries in the supermarket shelf.

 

[LystAP]

Was something supposed to happen with Pleasure Seekers and the Instrument of Desire? I recall it being hinted at, but reports thus far indicates no special events or interactions beyond normal Shroud responses.

 

[Me_]

I don't think reforming the shortage system, even with a progressive system, will drown the game in calculations.
Calculations, the game is already full, that every time there is a lack of a deficit of 1 a resource, just see all the alerts of unhappy pops that can trigger, because there was a missing one package of strawberries in the supermarket shelf.

Let's see the abovementioned idea: 8 triggered modifiers and an extra "dummy" "deficit" resource for every real resource vs. one triggered modifier and no extra resources.

For each of the empires in the game. And let's not get into extra AI work to make it adjust for the new dummy resources and modifiers.

Not sure if it would drown, but it would certainly not help.

 

[grommile]

People throw around the idea of actually consuming goods

like it's something one existing Paradox title does and that title's forthcoming sequel is going to do.

and the existing title even does those consumption calcs daily and a factory that can't get its inputs doesn't produce its full output.

 

[Mythox]

i admit !!! LEM patch is just genius ... it give new ways of gaming for Stellaris and that is AMAZING !!!

 

[Farbros]

I am playing mainly as robots, but Catalyst deserve to produce 0 alloys if there are no food. It's too overpowered otherwise. Do I care if I get 100% or 50% production if in both cases I spend 0 resources as a robot empire? This civic would still be powered in hands of lithoids, machines even with 0% production without food, because as lithoids I have food districts which I never use, because lithoids don't need food, this civic gives a huge bonus at that point, making food districts usability, but not overpowerness.

 

[Daedwartin]

like it's something one existing Paradox title does and that title's forthcoming sequel is going to do.

and the existing title even does those consumption calcs daily and a factory that can't get its inputs doesn't produce its full output.

Victoria 2 economic collapses also tends to make a Stellaris AI's econ collapses look like peanuts. At least its actually possible to fix a Stellaris economic collapse. If theres no iron being produced in Victoria 2, it might never recover regardless of actions taken. Bokoen1 can very much relate to that econ failure.

It also requires ripping out a large portion of the game engine and trying to fit the victoria economy system in if they do things that way...and hoping you dont break anything in the process.

How much you willing to spend to pay for such work to be done and how long you willing to wait for no other content to be made for Stellaris?

 

[tremor3258]

I know putting some sort of relative shortage per the amount of deficit would be more intensive, and go into chain on other things as a further consideration, and I'm glad the hotfix was out fast, but just to check - will alloy production for catalytic be normal if minerals are in deficit now?

 

[wodzu_93]

Changing deficits to be more logical would definetly benefit the game - and it's not even hard to do, nor a performace intensive change.
Deficit modifiers look like this:

energy_deficit = {
    planet_jobs_minerals_produces_mult = -0.5
    ship_weapon_damage = -0.75
    army_damage_mult = -0.75
    ship_shield_mult = -0.75
    spy_network_levels_add = -100
}

All you would have to do, is replace the static values on the right with a deficit ratio.

Let's take advantage of the fact that Stellaris has a registry system for resources, and auto-generates modifiers for all resources, both vanilla and modded.
Append it, so it also auto-generates a hardcoded, country scope scripted variable @x_deficit, where x is a resource name. Let's update our deficit modifier:

energy_deficit = {
    planet_jobs_minerals_produces_mult = @energy_deficit
    ship_weapon_damage = @energy_deficit
    army_damage_mult = @energy_deficit
    ship_shield_mult = @energy_deficit
    spy_network_levels_add = 100 * @energy_deficit
}

All you have to do now, is update that variable monthly when a country has a deficit:
x_deficit = -1 - math.min( 0, math.max( x_produced / x_consumed, -1 ) )

So for situation like this:

You would get -1 - (10/-28) = -1 + 0.3571428573 -> -64.3%

As long as each country has its own set of @x_deficit variables, and deficit modifiers stack multiplicatively (important!), you have a stable system where penalty is directly proportional to the deficit, with hardly any performance overhead compared to current static penalties, and no exploits...

... oh, right, this. Thankfully, dodging penalties by buying resources is also easily fixable. Make resource stockpiles go from this:
Min: 0, Max: country_resource_max_x
to this:
Min: -country_resource_max_x, Max: country_resource_max_x
Now that dept can actually accumulate, no cheesing with market.

Naturally, I am not a Paradox programmer and don't know internals of Clausewitz engine, but considering how little math needs to change to achieve this, it shouldn't be a difficult thing to implement, nor have any noticeable impact on performance. Can we have this in 3.2, pretty please?