• 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 #23 - Multiplayer

Good news everyone!

Today’s Dev Diary will be about Multiplayer and what makes it so great in Stellaris.

Let's start with the basics. Players are able to host games with 32 player designed empires and optionally, several extra randomized AI empires. If you have a new person who would like to join an ongoing campaign they can hotjoin into an already existing empire. This also allows the players to leave or take a break from the ongoing multiplayer campaign and leave their empire in the capable hands of the AI. The host may also choose to host a multiplayer game from a save game allowing players to play grand campaigns lasting several weeks.

stellaris_dev_diary_23_01_20160229_other_player.jpg


One of our longstanding issues with multiplayer is that clients desynchronize, which is usually solved by having the host rehost the game, but this can be quite a menace when playing multiplayer with 20+ people, so we’ve decided that this is an issue we should prioritize higher in Stellaris. Thanks to persistent testing and fixing of out-of-syncs as soon as they happen, we’ve managed to make Stellaris our most stable multiplayer experience yet, allowing us to run stable multiplayer with up to and probably more than 32 players. We test our multiplayer stability weekly by playing multiplayer with our betas and the developers on the project, and it’s loads of fun.

stellaris_dev_diary_23_02_20160229_player_empire.jpg


We’ve designed Stellaris with a couple of things which affects the multiplayer experience which you might want to know.

One of them is that empires have a relationship value of other empires, but the value doesn’t decide the options a player can take against another empire but decides the responses AI controlled countries gives to your requests, demands and offers.

Another thing which Stellaris has that our other grand strategy games don’t is a symmetrical and randomized start, this means that in a multiplayer game everyone starts on more or less equal terms. This makes the game, in our experience, more competitive and a lot of fun. Will you be able to claim ownership of that specifically resource rich system before your neighbor? Or should you enter an alliance to stop a specific neighbor from expanding in your direction?

One more thing which affects the multiplayer experience on an early stage is that players are anonymous until you have established communications with their empires, making you unable to know whether the first aliens you meet will be your greatest allies or your worst enemies.

Next week is all about the AI.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
  • 127
  • 60
  • 3
Reactions:
two quick questions: One, is it always correct?
and two: Does it always determine the winner of a battle or is it just a suggestion?

There is no way for one number to be "correct". Say fleet A is rated 100 and fleet B is rated 80. Perhaps in most cases, fleet A is superior, but you can't rule out that fleet B was designed to take advantage of A's weaknesses. Like A has a lot of small craft with light weapons that have a hard time penetrating B's heavy armor. In Stellaris, every shot is simulated and shown in the graphics. It's not just a meaningless light show.

EntropyAvatar is pretty much spot on. Beyond the strengths/weaknesses between the fleets there's also a fair amount of random-rolls that go on (hits, misses, damage-rolls etc), plenty enough to make sure the "correct" fleet wins most of the time but if a few critical rolls miss the combat can sway to unexpected results.
 
  • 30
  • 2
Reactions:
EntropyAvatar is pretty much spot on. Beyond the strengths/weaknesses between the fleets there's also a fair amount of random-rolls that go on (hits, misses, damage-rolls etc), plenty enough to make sure the "correct" fleet wins most of the time but if a few critical rolls miss the combat can sway to unexpected results.

I hope you avoided situations where a handful of player-designed fleets with large, durable vessels can solo the AI's more numerous, smaller, statistically "better" vessels. This is a frequent problem with space 4X games and leads to the player steamrolling. Happens in Galactic Civilizations, Distant Worlds, Endless Space, Master of Orion and many others, so I hope Stellaris avoids this common stumbling block.

Wars should never be won without significant losses barring a massive disparity in strength.
 
  • 3
Reactions:
The betas we test with are all over the world.

Will Stellaris include a function where a desync occurs, you can stop the game, press a button, where it quickly saves the host's copy, then transfers it to those who are mismatching ?

That would be far simplier solution than having to close the game and restart it, most desyncs in CK2/EU4 are generally event related where it allows the player to buy something which another clients version hasn't registered the money/points to do that.
 
  • 5
Reactions:
Good point, It's currently random, but we might add an option for clustering players together :)

Please do. Me and my friend really want to do a sort of two man allegiance of tyranny for the conquest of the galaxy and we'd like to be close together so we can help each other.

It's going to be Ceazar meets Castro.
 
  • 3
Reactions:
Okay, I want to make 2 suggestions, firstly the big one, instead of showing "unidentified empire" on an undiscovered empire simply don't show them in the list as this adds an element of realism, there's no way for you to know that they exist until you've met them (unless you've heard rumours from elsewhere?).

Additionally, although it may already be in the game, allow an option for a random amount of AI rather than a fixed amount, I like the idea of finding this out in due time.
 
  • 6
  • 3
Reactions:
Not really related to the topic at hand but how about making the colour of your empire on the map fade away as you move inwards from the borders, like in hoi4.
 
  • 3
Reactions:
I hope you avoided situations where a handful of player-designed fleets with large, durable vessels can solo the AI's more numerous, smaller, statistically "better" vessels. This is a frequent problem with space 4X games and leads to the player steamrolling. Happens in Galactic Civilizations, Distant Worlds, Endless Space, Master of Orion and many others, so I hope Stellaris avoids this common stumbling block.

The balance model they are going for is that ships tends to be best against ships that are one size class smaller than them, but have trouble against ships that several size classes smaller. Basically battleships should lack enough small, rapid-recharge weapons to efficiently engage corvettes (though it depends on what sections you pick). Hopefully there are weapons that corvettes can mount that allows them to efficiently damage battleships.

Of course, there is still the problem that larger ships can be so "chunky" that they avoid losses in small battles. This effect is multiplied when repair is cost-free and easy and rechargeable shields make up a large portion of the "hitpoints".
 
  • 4
Reactions:
Does that fleet combat number/value take into effect any admiral leading the fleet/ would an admiral give a combat bonus that would be quantifiable?
 
Last edited:
Good point, It's currently random, but we might add an option for clustering players together :)
Please do. I only play MP with one or two other people and we're (usually) (somewhat) cooperative. I'd really like it if we didn't have to cross half the galaxy to interact with each other. With a small number of players randomly spread it could easily wind up with us basically playing a single player game together.
 
  • 3
Reactions:
Also I'm going to miss asymmetric starts, found they've been handy for introducing less experienced friends to games by advising them of a stronger starting position.

Agreed. It would be nice to at least have the option to do the MOO2 "pre-warp," "average," or "advanced" starts as the creator of the game, giving certain players a few more techs and ships, or perhaps the Distant Worlds options to start with more than one planet. I am planning on playing with a friend who has no PDX experience, and I am worried that I will easily outstrip him without giving him some sort of leg up. The option would be nice for team-style games against AIs as well. I can live without it on release if that means an earlier release, though.
 
  • 3
Reactions:
A stable multiplayer in a Paradox game? What is this, christmas in heaven? I hope it turns out to be true, have a large mp game with my friends planned as soon as the game releases.

When I was playing HOI3 it was stable for the most part from Semper Fi onwards. But again, much depends on the systems of the other players. But I was in a group that we played pretty consistently for a couple of years and we would have maybe one or two drops in about 3 hours play. Since we had players in USA, Western and Eastern Europe, things worked very well.
 
I guess I'm a bit different than some people here but I play strategy games likes this primarily for multiplayer. I like the challenge of facing against another human and trying to outsmart your human opponents.
 
Thank you devs for answering questions on this one.
I can be a Eastern USA connector for multi if you guys need someone else in the beta.
Also, if anyone here would like a co-op partner to play with shortly after release feel free to msg me.