• 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 #237 - Reworking Unity, Part One

Доступно на русском в ВК/Read in Russian on VK

Welcome back! We hope you’ve all had a wonderful few weeks.

Today we’ll start with some more information about the goals of the Unity Rework mentioned in Dev Diary 215 (and briefly in 234), some updates on how things have been going so far, and our plans going forward.

Please note: All values and screen captures shown here are still very much in development and subject to change.

Identified Problems and Design Goals

Currently in Stellaris, Unity is an extremely weak resource that can generally be ignored, and due to the current implementation of Admin Capacity, the Empire Sprawl mechanic is largely toothless - leading to wide tech rushing being an oppressively powerful strategy. Since Unity is currently very easily generated through incidental means and provides minimal benefits, Empires have little need to develop a Unity generation base, and Spiritualist ethics are unattractive.

Influence is currently used for many internal and external interactions, making it a valuable resource, but it sometimes feels too limiting.

Our basic design goals for the Unity Rework can be summarized as:
  • Unity should be a meaningful resource that represents the willingness of your empire to band together for the betterment of society and their resilience towards negative change.
    • Unity should be more valuable than it is now, and empires focused on Unity generation should be interesting to play.
      • Spiritualist empires should have a satisfying niche to exploit and be able to feel that they are good at something.
      • The number of sources of incidental Unity from non-dedicated jobs should be reduced.
      • Empires that do not focus on Unity (but do not completely ignore it) should still be able to acquire their Ascension Perks by the late game.
    • Reward immersive decisions with Unity grants whenever possible.
    • Internal empire matters should generally utilize Unity.
      • Provide more ways to spend Unity.
      • Rebalance the way edicts work (again).
  • Reduce the oppressive impact of tech rushing by reintroducing some rubber-banding mechanics.
  • Make tall play more viable, preferring to balance tall vs. wide play in favor of distinctiveness, and emphasizing differences between hives, machines, megacorps, and normal empires. (This does not necessarily mean that tall Unity focused empires will be the equal of wide Research focused ones, but they should have some things that they are good at and be more competitive in general than they are now.)
  • In the late game, Unity focused empires should have a benefit to look forward to similar to the repeatable technologies a Research focused empire would have.
In this iteration we have focused on some of these bullets more than others, but will continue to refine the systems over future Custodian releases.

So What Are We Doing?

All means of increasing Administrative Capacity have been removed. While there are ways to reduce the Empire Sprawl generated by various sources, and this will be used to help differentiate gameplay between different empire types, empires will no longer be able to completely mitigate sprawl penalties. Penalties and sprawl generation values have been significantly modified.
  • The Capital designation, for instance, now also reduces Empire Sprawl generated by Pops on the planet.
1641998332819.png


Bureaucrats, Priests, Managers, Synapse Drones, and Coordinators will be the primary sources of Unity for various empire types. Culture Workers have been removed.

Autochthon Memorials (and similar buildings) now increase planetary Unity production and themselves produce Unity based on the number of Ascension Perks the Empire has taken. Being monuments, they no longer require workers.

1641998343919.png

These monuments are now planet-unique, and can be built by Spiritualist empires.

The Edicts Cap system has been removed. Toggled Edicts will have monthly Unity Upkeep which is modified by Empire Sprawl. Each empire has an Edicts Fund which subsidizes Edict Upkeep, reducing the amount you have to pay each month to maintain them. Things that previously increased Edict Capacity now generally increase the Edicts Fund, but some civics, techs, and ascension perks have received other thematic modifications.

1641998361029.png

As an example, some Bureaucratic technologies now modify the Edicts Fund.

1641998374401.png

The Imperial Cult will squander any excess Edicts Fund on icons of the God Emperor at the end of the month. No refunds!

Several systems that used to cost Influence are now paid in Unity.
  • Planetary Decisions that were formerly paid in Influence. Prices have been adjusted.
  • Resettlement of pops. Abandoning colonies still costs Influence.
  • Manipulation of internal Factions. Factions themselves will now produce Unity instead of Influence.
Since Factions are no longer producing Influence, a small amount of Influence is now generated by your fleet, based on Power Projection - a comparison of your fleet size and Empire Sprawl.

Leaders now cost Unity to hire rather than Energy. They also have a small amount of Unity Upkeep. We understand that this increases the relative costs of choosing to hire several scientists at the start of the game for exploration purposes, or when “cycling” leader traits, as you are now choosing between Traditions and Leaders..

1641998387012.png

And then some empires go and break all the rules.

Most Megastructures now cost Unity rather than Influence, with the exception of any related to travel (such as Gateways) or that provide living space (such as Habitats and Ring Worlds).

Authority bonuses have (unsurprisingly) undergone some changes again, as several of them related to systems that no longer exist or operate differently now.

When Will This Happen?

Since these are pretty big changes that touch many game systems in so many ways, we’ve decided to put these changes up in a limited duration Open Beta on Steam for playtest and feedback. This will give us a chance to adjust values and modify some game interactions before the changes get pushed to live later on in the 3.3.x patch cycle, and we will continue improving on them in future Custodian releases.

We’ll provide more details on the specifics of how the Open Beta will be run in next week's dev diary.

What Else is Planned?

As noted earlier, we’d like Unity to also reflect the resilience of your empire to negative effects. A high Unity empire may be more resistant to negative effects deficits or possibly even have their pops rise up to help repel invaders, but these ideas are still in early development and will not be part of this Open Beta or release. They’ll likely be tied to the evolving Situations that we mentioned in Dev Diary 234 - we’ll talk about those more in the future once their designs are finalized.

Next week I’ll go into details regarding the Open Beta, go over a new system that is meant to provide “tall” and Unity focused empires some significant mid to late game benefits called Planetary Ascension Tiers, and share details on another little something from one of our Content Designers.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
  • 169Like
  • 106Love
  • 21
  • 19
  • 12
  • 2Haha
Reactions:
You realize that is only for feudal society right?
EDIT:
More accurately leaders will cost unity upkeep, but are free when employed for nations with feudal society. Feudal society however makes it so that you can not fire leaders.

I do. I’d actually like to try feudal sometime in Stellaris. It would actually be more interesting if you tried to remove a leader from an assigned role and there was a percent chance they’d say ‘no’ and rebel. Doubt they would implement that yet. But as currently written, I’m conveying what my reaction would be - leave them unemployed, which strikes me as an awkward mechanic, where there might be a way of achieving the design goal in a cleaner fashion.
 
If i am to be honest, don't think some of those changes are good. Influence generating fleets? Tell me i didn't read that straight. Also it kinda changes what those resources are. Unity was a cultural capital. Influence was an executive capital. Ditching Influence and replacing it with Unity to convey a executive, cultural and internal resource could be the best choice. Would need to play this changes, but they kinda feel wrong, don't know if bad, but like wrong. Perhaps better would better to trash can both Unity and Influence, making a new internal resource and giving another name than reworking things yet again. No offense but when things keep changing and changing is that there is something wrong. If a system needs so many reworks perhaps you should think of replacing it instead of reworking it :(

In any case hope this be good for the game in the end :)
 
  • 9
  • 4Like
Reactions:
Custodian team crushing it
 
  • 5Like
Reactions:
1641998374401.png


The Imperial Cult will squander any excess Edicts Fund on icons of the God Emperor at the end of the month. No refunds!



Yeah unity rework is fun and all, but have you cosidered how you may use this dev diary to BETTER SERVE THE GOD-EMPEROR OF MANKIND?
 
  • 4Haha
Reactions:
TBH, I'm not sure I like PDX going all George Lucas on Stellaris' behind for the past six years. Is this game ever going to be in a complete state? Like, no more reworks and endless tweaking?
 
  • 10
  • 5Haha
Reactions:
But Unity only makes sense for Pacificst and Spiritualists empire, doesn't it? WOn't this get in the way of Militarist and expansionists, that enjoys war?
The word unity suggests that it indicates the unity of an empire, not how idealistic or peaceful they are. An aggressive nation of genocidal maniacs still needs to be united under a common leadership and goals..
 
  • 6
  • 1Like
Reactions:
just another rework..
fix ur game!
make subjects/ai working again first
These reworks ARE fixing the game. The custodian team was made specifically to fix the AI and bugs, and polish up the game in general.
 
  • 12Like
  • 5
  • 2
Reactions:
Sounds to me like you just don't want to put in any effort and want to just get tech for free when playing poorly. I've listed many ways to actively catch up on tech when you're behind, and those methods certainly work for me. Either way it does sound like you'll have it easier with the new system one way or another, so enjoy.
"You just want this mechanic cause you're bad" is a terrible argument. Argue against the mechanic, not the person suggesting it.
 
  • 15
Reactions:
I do. I’d actually like to try feudal sometime in Stellaris. It would actually be more interesting if you tried to remove a leader from an assigned role and there was a percent chance they’d say ‘no’ and rebel. Doubt they would implement that yet. But as currently written, I’m conveying what my reaction would be - leave them unemployed, which strikes me as an awkward mechanic, where there might be a way of achieving the design goal in a cleaner fashion.
Okay. You deserve more credit than I initially gave you. Too used to people not fully reading things. My bad.

Sounds to me like you just don't want to put in any effort and want to just get tech for free when playing poorly. I've listed many ways to actively catch up on tech when you're behind, and those methods certainly work for me. Either way it does sound like you'll have it easier with the new system one way or another, so enjoy.
None of those help the AI. While leagues better than it was, the AI still needs some love. That's what James Fire was referring too. Repeatedly. They dont help the AI because it can't long term plan like a human can.
 
  • 1Like
Reactions:
To maximize bonuses from your power projection you'll try to keep your fleet size above your Empire Sprawl.

I actually can see the room for a cool tall play here. You could go for a tiny but hyper militarized nation... You only have a relative handful of star bases and planets, but they're all dedicated to anchorages and soldiers so that your fleet cap is on par with a much larger empire.

Feels tricky to pull off. (Sorta... without inter-empire trade, small empires don't need trade bases. So most of your star bases are anchorages anyway.) But if you could manage it, this could be an interesting play-through.
 
  • 3Like
  • 1
Reactions:
If i am to be honest, don't think some of those changes are good. Influence generating fleets? Tell me i didn't read that straight.

What's tripping you up about this? Do you think that the size and sophistication of a nation's military plays no role in its international influence?

If anything these are exactly the kinds of changes that Paradox should focus more on; resources gained due to decisions made rather than mana.
 
  • 7
  • 3Like
Reactions:
I do. I’d actually like to try feudal sometime in Stellaris. It would actually be more interesting if you tried to remove a leader from an assigned role and there was a percent chance they’d say ‘no’ and rebel. Doubt they would implement that yet. But as currently written, I’m conveying what my reaction would be - leave them unemployed, which strikes me as an awkward mechanic, where there might be a way of achieving the design goal in a cleaner fashion.
Imperator: Rome has a system in which every character (basically their version of a leader) has a “loyalty” value, and if you pull them from their job, they lose loyalty, and if enough loyalty is lost, they stop obeying you, and may even launch a civil war.
 
  • 3Like
  • 2
  • 1
Reactions:
The Imperial Cult will squander any excess Edicts Fund on icons of the God Emperor at the end of the month. No refunds!

""Squander""

Planets full of bureaucrats maintaining the order of the empire are a common sci-fi trope, but admittedly a little dystopian. Maybe there's still a spot for Culture Workers out there.

For certain empires, sure. Byzantine Beurocracy and Efficient Beurocracy exist for a reason. For every empire, though? That.. seems a little off.
 
  • 7
  • 1Like
Reactions:
I really hope we don't see tech costs directly tied to sprawl penalty. There's no economic reason for an empire with more pops, more stability etc to be directly penalized with their ability to research. What I hope we see eventually is that the opportunity cost of research comes from the need to actually manage stability, unrest, happiness etc on worlds such that just building researchers to excess means neglecting governance. In other words, sprawl leading to problems that you need to address with jobs and buildings (implicitly reducing the number of researchers and labs you build) is better design than directly connecting sprawl to tech cost.
 
  • 14
  • 4
  • 1Like
Reactions:
TBH, I don’t like how Feudal Society became a mix of two different concepts: cheaper leaders, and more trusting subjects. I feel that this civic had a lot of potential to empower and expand on vassalization, rather than to provide more meaningful buffs to an entirely unrelated mechanic.
 
  • 6
  • 4Like
  • 1
Reactions:
So, to "diversify" what people play, you want to, nerf early game exploration unless you have a unity build, nerf expansion by removing influence from factions tie the ability to make Megastructrures - you know very Tech orientated - to Unity whose best generation method is Spiritualist (which makes zero sense in the first place) oh and to add to the influence slowing down expansion we also cant increase the admin cap with buildings ... How is this diversifying how people play, it sounds more like everyone will just be shoved in to a Spiritualist tall build rather than the current science heavy meta not to mention solidifying even further the essential nature of the unity ascencion perk, which are hardly diverse in choice right now having mostly 4 cookie cutter builds to use.
 
Last edited:
  • 17
  • 4Like
Reactions: