Stellaris Dev Diary #250 - Elevating Civilization

[Alfha Robby]

The three new vassal, hmm its better than i expect since its typical bolster defense, resources and research, though enlighten primitive still didn't get much improvement, also any idea if bioship, hive mind and machine empire get additional civics since these two were treated as forgotten thing.

i'm gonna play subversive cult and build tons of crime at my vassal planet and let me see if they dare to close my branch office this time and become the great hutt this time as the god criminal emperor.

edit: now that i think about it, does the gateway still add border friction opinion?
any idea about how long the cooldown of usage of quantum catapult since i usually build gateway and borrow my subject and ally's gateway to journey across half of the galaxy, especially if the L Gate already being open i don't really have problem with power projection mostly.

 

[kwheeler]

Two notes

• There needs to be a means to destroy star bases, gateways, and megastructures. While a Colossus can destroy a habitat why can't it be used against gateways and megastructures. Let alone why can't we destroy our own?

I'm leery of allowing players to destroy gateways. Some of of the NPC empires are basically sealed away by gateways, with no hyperlanes connecting them. That would make it trivially easy for a player to render an entire civilization trapped by simply destroying a single gate, wouldn't it?

I'd be okay with the ability to destroy one's own gate if you were the empire that built it, though. That shouldn't allow exploits nearly as badly.

 

[Michael Kim]

What if your fleet is catapulted into a system you don't have access for?

 

[Lorenerd11]

I'm leery of allowing players to destroy gateways. Some of the NPC empires are basically sealed away by gateways, with no hyperlanes connecting them.

That's... not a thing, at least not outside of mods. All systems in the game are connected by hyperlanes, with exactly two exceptions, one of which is connected through a wormhole, and the other is connected through L-gates, which wouldn't be destroyable.

And neither of which really includes an NPC empire (aside from that one L-gate outcome, kinda).

 

[BorbiBoy]

Maybe it's bad luck but it's been a very long time since I've seen a war in heaven that actually is a threat. The FEs seem to have been left behind a bit in terms of tech/military power. Titans, jugganauts, even megastructures have all come after the WiH was introduced. The FEs need some buffs.

simple solution ^^ set midgame to 2250 and endgame to 2300. In addition install a shorter senat time mod (so you get somewhere til the endgame) and you are set up for a war in heaven that kicks your butt. At least i have a lot of fun with this setup

But i get you. The power creep is real. It seems getting more and more bonuses stacking higher and higher makes the game easier ^^

 

[Lorenerd11]

In addition install a shorter senat time mod (so you get somewhere til the endgame)

Senate time should be a setting tbh.

 

[Everstill]

Senate time should be a setting tbh.

No need for a setting if it gets a reasonable timer.

Also, the Senate cooldowns must be a function of the Late Game year, so an early late game year become shorter senate cooldown.

 

[zZander56]

No need for a setting if it gets a reasonable timer.

Also, the Senate cooldowns must be a function of the Late Game year, so an early late game year become shorter senate cooldown.

If we're scaling it by late game year, we may as well give it its own slider, one that moves automatically when setting the late game year but could be adjusted.

The Senate timer doesn't feel as bad now that the game doesn't absolutely drag due to performance. But, a static pace for the Senate just doesn't work when different games are set for a different pace from the outset.

 

[DrFranknfurter]

Holdings, Loyalty and Vassal bonuses could interact to produce some rather silly optimal playstyles. Mainly 1-system vassals living on 1-pop habitats being given the maximum subsidies because they will never actually need to be paid much to reach max loyalty. It seems like a fairly logical conclusion based on what we have been shown so far.

With Holding limits of max 4 per Vassal
1. The Optimal solution is lots of weak vassals. e.g. 1 Vassal = 4 holdings, 10 Vassals = 40 holdings. Up to a Maximum of 4 holdings per system in the galaxy.
Results:
1. Feudal Civic/Shared Burdens enabling a Swarm of 1-system Vassals at max loyalty and specialization tier because each has max possible subsidies.
2. Pathetic Vassals that will never grow or be a relevant threat to you, even when fighting together in a joint war.

If Holding limits are instead 1 Holding per x Vassal Empire Size (Size before reduction modifiers like Planetary Ascension)
1. Optimal solution is a small number of large vassals. If you get 1 holding per 100 Vassal Empire size (rounded down) then 1 Size 500 Vassal will give 5 holdings while 10 Size 50 Vassals would give 0 holdings as they're each too small to support the required infrastructure projects.
Results:
1. Feudal Civic/Shared Burdens if you want one of each Vassal type, or if you want more vassals to expand faster out in several directions
2. Overlord encouraged to feed Vassals pops/planets/systems to grow their size and the number of holdings.
3. Large Competent Vassals in the late game that could actually put up a decent fight if they were to turn on you.

I don't think there's anything wrong with the concepts shown. But just like how the game went through several iterations for how to unlock building slots I think the version of unlocking Holdings shown will need some refinement to encourage more fun styles of play and to avoid all the obvious exploits.

 

[Abdulijubjub]

I love having more tools to squeeze more out of each world/pop for empires willing to invest in their worlds. That said:

1. Will gestalt amenities get a bugfix pass when the changes are made for the ring buildings? Basically every gestalt job that gives amenities is broken in some way (like giving the wrong amounts for Charismatic, not giving anything to either Emotion Emulators or Domestic Protocols for machine integrated pops, etc.).

[FIXED] Stellaris - Hive synapse drones don't get amenities bonus from charismatic trait

Description Hive synapse drones don't get amenities bonus from charismatic trait Game Version 3.3.4 (67b9) What version do you use? Steam What expansions do you have installed? Do you have mods enabled? No Please explain your...

forum.paradoxplaza.com

2. Do ring worlds or habitats get a way to benefit from these new buildings? Otherwise, e.g. farming ring worlds become a trap: they're already missing out on potential bonuses like Lush, gaia world, or Tasty Titans, but now a ring world farmer is going to be a full 25% less effective (6 base instead of 8) than a farmer on an actual planet, in a way that's no longer washed out by increasing other modifiers. Missing out on Lush/gaia modifiers would be 1.8 food per farmer, while the missing 2 base is at least 4.6 per farmer, and becomes an even bigger difference as you research more repeatables.

3. Clerks getting a 1 amenity boost is not useful for trade worlds, which will already have more amenities than they need. That, and the 5% trade value, seems incredibly weak compared to the 12.5-33% bonus to base yields that other world types get. So with planetary rings, every pop on the world becomes enormously more effective except for trade pops. I suppose it makes it viable to use clerks for amenities instead of entertainers, but that still pales in comparison to the whopping 20% buff that other economy types get. So this is a big nerf to trade's competitiveness, on top of the merchant upkeep which was added in 3.3. Can trade get some love?

 

[zZander56]

3. Clerks getting a 1 amenity boost is not useful for trade worlds, which will already have more amenities than they need. That, and the 5% trade value, seems incredibly weak compared to the 12.5-33% bonus to base yields that other world types get. So with planetary rings, every pop on the world becomes enormously more effective except for trade pops. I suppose it makes it viable to use clerks for amenities instead of entertainers, but that still pales in comparison to the whopping 20% buff that other economy types get. So this is a big nerf to trade's competitiveness, on top of the merchant upkeep which was added in 3.3. Can trade get some love?

Agreed here. I thought the Giga Mall looked a little out of place.

 

[BrokenSky]

View attachment 828248View attachment 828249

I feel like the orbital filing system wants a buff for death cults (since +1 unity only appears to apply to death priests, not initiates. Maybe more unity or amenities on initiates?)

 

[Lorenerd11]

3. Clerks getting a 1 amenity boost is not useful for trade worlds, which will already have more amenities than they need. That, and the 5% trade value, seems incredibly weak compared to the 12.5-33% bonus to base yields that other world types get. So with planetary rings, every pop on the world becomes enormously more effective except for trade pops. I suppose it makes it viable to use clerks for amenities instead of entertainers, but that still pales in comparison to the whopping 20% buff that other economy types get. So this is a big nerf to trade's competitiveness, on top of the merchant upkeep which was added in 3.3.

Yeah, doesn't a large chunk of trade value come from merchants rather than clerks, with clerks being mostly a background job that's just there to keep pops employed if there's no other jobs available?

 

[Ikael]

The Quantum Catapult sounds super fun, and the Scholarium vassal seems incredibly powerful to have, but damn I am madly in love with orbital rings. As a builder type of player I am salivating with the prospect of not having to wait for the end game in order to make my planets super-productive. There might be something worth spending alloys other than fleet! Will pop quality beat pop quantity? Well, at least we will be closer to that goal. And boy, I want to cluster a system with multiple habitable worlds with ringworlds, so, so badly. Can't wait!

PS: I feel bad for the poor void-dwellers, but habitats were never that good. For habitats to be competitive with ringworlds, you would need to give the habitability / housing system an entire rework.

 

[dgtexan]

How many Quantum Catapults can an empire build?

 

[LizardCommander]

The Cadia system shall never fall.

Move capital to system with a bunch of planets (particularly huge ones), finalize Worm Event, build a couple dozen rings.

Only to watch in horror as a Crisis nukes the star and wipes out the entire system.

 

[goodcigar]

You guys getting any ideas from Apple's Foundation show?

 

[verybad]

also, does the catipolt only work from within it's own system? like, surely, i couendt use it to fire ships around from whereever i want, right?

Says in the Catapult Fleet description "Launch a fleet FROM a system with a Quantum Catapult."

 

[Everstill]

If we're scaling it by late game year, we may as well give it its own slider, one that moves automatically when setting the late game year but could be adjusted.

The Senate timer doesn't feel as bad now that the game doesn't absolutely drag due to performance. But, a static pace for the Senate just doesn't work when different games are set for a different pace from the outset.

They already said they don't want to keep adding slider for everything, specially something as small as this, because soon the Game Creation screen will be dozen of sliders and be very intimidating for new players.

As this is just a balance consideration, it's not hard to create a function for Senate cooldown based on creation settings and preventing a new slider.

 

[DeanTheDull]

2. Do ring worlds or habitats get a way to benefit from these new buildings? Otherwise, e.g. farming ring worlds become a trap: they're already missing out on potential bonuses like Lush, gaia world, or Tasty Titans, but now a ring world farmer is going to be a full 25% less effective (6 base instead of 8) than a farmer on an actual planet, in a way that's no longer washed out by increasing other modifiers. Missing out on Lush/gaia modifiers would be 1.8 food per farmer, while the missing 2 base is at least 4.6 per farmer, and becomes an even bigger difference as you research more repeatables.

The point of mega-world districts like Ringworlds isn't the output, but the sprawl efficiency. By providing 10 jobs a district, you're paying the sprawl costs- in unity and science cost increases- of 5 normal farmworld districts. At the point of the game where Ringworlds are in play, output per pop is worse far less than the science costs for repeatables.

3. Clerks getting a 1 amenity boost is not useful for trade worlds, which will already have more amenities than they need. That, and the 5% trade value, seems incredibly weak compared to the 12.5-33% bonus to base yields that other world types get. So with planetary rings, every pop on the world becomes enormously more effective except for trade pops. I suppose it makes it viable to use clerks for amenities instead of entertainers, but that still pales in comparison to the whopping 20% buff that other economy types get. So this is a big nerf to trade's competitiveness, on top of the merchant upkeep which was added in 3.3. Can trade get some love?

Trade builds are in the same point as Megaworld districts- they are trading output for sprawl efficiency. A fully upgraded trade planet is getting 10 jobs per district- 2 from the urban districts, 8 from the commercial zones. The point is sprawl efficiency, not output, and if you're doing Planetary Rings you're already at the point of spending alloys on internal development rather than conquest.

Where the amenities from clerks comes in for output is how they play with habitability and as an entertainer substitute on dedicated specialist worlds where building slots are more limited than pops.

For trade output itself, one of the main boosters of trade is stability. The maximum stability from amenities comes at exactly twice as many amenities as pops. However, habitability increases pop amenity requirements by 1% for every point below 100. Charismatic as a trait, with a 20% bonus, let you have optimal trade worlds at up to 80 habitability. 3 amenities a clerk makes is 50% habitability. Charismatic-3 amenities will be 20% habitability worlds having optimal trade output. The trade boost from maximum amenities may only be 12%, but this is on planets with as low as 20 habitability and in the context of very high sprawl efficiency in avoiding tech costs.


For the entertainer substitute, on most urbanized high-habitaiblity specialist worlds you'll reliably get 2 clerks per urban district with Prosperity tradition. 20 clerks here will be producing 60 amenities, 72 with Charismatic, or 40-52 pops worth of 100% habitability amenities. That's basically going to be all your Tier 2 upgraded labs, without giving up the building slot for an entertainment complex. (And depending on your planet build, possibly more of the upgraded labs if you have building slots with monuments/a single pop assembly job/lower resource buildings).