• 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 #278 / Stellaris Dog Diary #1 - Release the Hounds

Hi everyone!

Short dev diary today - the team is hard at work putting together a patch for a selection of what we deemed the more critical issues that have come up in 3.6.0, tentatively scheduled for next week.

Among a few other things we're looking at, we're currently investigating the launcher issue that falsely flags all DLC as corrupted, have a few crash fixes ready, and several ship sizes that lacked role definitions (such as Menacing ships) will now have them. As a little quality of life balance change, I also snuck in a speed increase to Juggernauts, making them move at the same max speed as Battleships and Titans.

Overall, I'm quite happy with the stability and quality of the release, which is a positive argument for future open betas in the same style. Thanks for all of your help making this a solid release.

Wondering what is in 3.6 "Orion"? Here's a summary of what's in the 3.6 Update on the Stellaris YouTube channel:

Since I'm not quite ready to talk about what's in Canis Minor yet, here are some puppy pictures to act as a clever distraction.

Dog!


Sleepy dog.

See you next week!

EDIT:
We have become aware of a crash on startup, that we're currently looking at fixing in 3.6.1. If some of you are experiencing crashing on-startup, and have an empire with a field (empire name, adjective, leader name, etc) that contains special characters (eg. <>$[]), this will cause a crash on-loading the game. We have prepared a list of workarounds to fix this issue, organized by level of difficulty, with 1 being the easiest and 4 being the most involved:

1. Rename or remove the user directory. The user directory is typically located at "C:/username/Documents/Paradox Interactive/Stellaris/" on Windows, "~/.local/share/Paradox Interactive/Stellaris/" on GNU/Linux and "/Users/username/Documents/Paradox Interactive/Stellaris/" on Mac OS X. WARNING: This will clear any settings, saves and user empires you may have changed/created.
2. Rename or remove the user_empire_designs_v3.4.txt in the user directory. WARNING: This will clear any user empires you may have created.
3. Edit the user_empire_designs_v3.4.txt file in the user directory to have no fields like names, adjectives etc. that includes <>$[].
4. Edit any field containing any of <>$[] characters from name="We love blorg <3" or
Code:
name={
    key="We love blorg <3"
}
to
Code:
name={
    key="We love blorg <3"
    literal=yes
}
 

Attachments

  • tofu_01.png
    tofu_01.png
    2 MB · Views: 0
Last edited by a moderator:
  • 54Love
  • 51Like
  • 7
  • 4Haha
  • 4
Reactions:
If said mods were intended to be used by a significant portion of the players then they'd have made it a free dlc.

They are advertising a mod in the launcher right now.

If it's not intended to be used by players, they'd have to be insane to do that.

I think the devs are sane, and they intend the mod they are advertising to be used, and that mods are part of intended play.

But also playing without mods is intended, of course. It's not either-or. You can have more than one modset (one empty for example), and you can have more than one playthrough. I'd even suggest you are intended to have more than one playthrough.
 
  • 1
Reactions:
I personally have 2 mod playsets; Ironman and Modded. The Ironman playset only changes graphical stuff and QoL, like my custom galaxy texture and Tiny Outliner.
 
  • 1Like
Reactions:
We changed the Juggernaut's base max speed to match the Battleship and Titan, not the theoretical maximum (outfitted with Afterburners and the like). They're significantly faster than they were, but they're still not speed demons.

We didn't make any changes to Afterburners at this time. After observing the effects of this change, we'll see if more are necessary.
Well, that's... better than nothing. Might even be good in the late game, when you start really wanting hardening. Back in the old days when computers didn't maintain range, I usually didn't put afterburners on battleships, but these days it's extremely good, especially if you have enough of a tech advantage that you can actually outrun pursuers outright. The ability to ensure your fleets can quickly get where they need to be is a big plus, of course. So it's a shame Juggernauts still can't, in fact, match the max speed of battleships.
 
But also playing without mods is intended, of course. It's not either-or. You can have more than one modset (one empty for example), and you can have more than one playthrough. I'd even suggest you are intended to have more than one playthrough.
Here’s the problem, you say that both are intended yet also say that playing without mods is missing out on the intended way to play.
 
  • 3
Reactions:
Here’s the problem, you say that both are intended yet also say that playing without mods is missing out on the intended way to play.

If you never play with mods, you are missing out on intended play.

If you never play without mods, you are missing out on intended play.

Both are intended play. If you only do one, you are missing out on the other.
 
  • 4Like
  • 1
Reactions:
If you never play with mods, you are missing out on intended play.

If you never play without mods, you are missing out on intended play.

Both are intended play. If you only do one, you are missing out on the other.
This is self contradictory, because the word ‘intended‘ means that it‘s the primary way of playing the game, and essentially it would be impossible to play the game ‘as intended’ by your definition, since you can’t simultaneously have mods and no mods.

its intentional that mods are supported, but mods are not the intended way to play, since ‘intended’ means It’s How the devs expect you to play. I don’t think they were thinking about stuff like gigastructures when they created Stellaris
 
  • 4
  • 2
Reactions:
This is self contradictory, because the word ‘intended‘ means that it‘s the primary way of playing the game

Incorrect, you're assuming there can be only one true way but that's not how this game works.

This is not the Highlander. There can be more than one.

You're intended to play games with mods (including dev-released mods which are advertised in the launcher), and also intended to play games with no mods. There is no contradiction there.

You are intended to play this game multiple times, and you're not intended to play it the same way every time.

but mods are not the intended way to play, since ‘intended’ means It’s How the devs expect you to play.

When devs release a mod and devs advertise that mod in the game's launcher, I think it's pretty clear they intend people to play some games with that mod.

You honestly think they advertise mods they don't intend anyone to play? That sounds insane.

I think the devs are smart and not insane.
 
  • 2
  • 2
Reactions:
You honestly think they advertise mods they don't intend anyone to play? That sounds insane.
Wow, you really don't get it. It's not all or nothing, obviously some people play with mods and the devs release mods for those people. Nothing about that says that it is the intended way to play the game or not.
This is not the Highlander. There can be more than one.

You're intended to play games with mods (including dev-released mods which are advertised in the launcher), and also intended to play games with no mods. There is no contradiction there.

You are intended to play this game multiple times, and you're not intended to play it the same way every time.
Now your problem is assuming that people are 'supposed' to play a game in a certain way, where the reality is that you can play it however you want. Some people don't toggle mods on and off and have a preferred game setup, and insinuating that that is the 'unintended' way of playing is disingenuous.

How do you know that you're not intended to play the game the same way every time? It seems more reasonable than claiming that you're supposed to toggle mods on and off all the time, and that is the proper way to play.

If you don't want people to interpret your statements as being all or nothing, maybe the word 'not intentional' and 'missing out on half the game features the devs intended' to describe people with playstyles different to yours aren't the smartest word choices.
 
  • 4
  • 1Like
  • 1
Reactions:
Wow, you really don't get it. It's not all or nothing, obviously some people play with mods and the devs release mods for those people. Nothing about that says that it is the intended way to play the game or not.

The same person can play both with mods and without mods. In fact, that's the expected way to play. It's not one or the other. They expect some people who have never used a mod to try their mods -- that's why the launcher advertises those mods.

The whole point of advertising is to get people to try a thing.

Now your problem is assuming that people are 'supposed' to play a game in a certain way

We're both using the same language -- "expected" and "intended" -- so it's weird that you're unable to understand the same words which you've been typing.

The problem is that you have a strange mental block about only playing the game one way, when the expectation seems to be that you play the game multiple times, and some of those times -- not all of them -- you are expected to use mods. Other times you are expected to not use mods. That's why the launcher supports multiple playsets, and that's why devs release mods.

You are expected to try them. Using mods is part of intended play (but not all of it because you are also expected to play without mods).

How do you know that you're not intended to play the game the same way every time?

1 - Launcher playsets lists support distinct, separate mod lists for different play-throughs, and make it easier than previously to have both a with-mods playset and a no-mods playset. Adding explicitly new functionality like this makes it clear the functionality is intended.

2 - Achievements which require multiple different games (with different empires) to achieve.

3 - Multiple mutually exclusive decisions like Ascension Path (now 4) and civics where you're intended to try all of them, but you can't do that all at once. Requires multiple playthroughs with different empires.

4 - They've added new origins and mechanics like Become the Crisis which impose distinct play style on you.

Those are four examples. The devs keep adding new things, and you are expected to try these new things. If you never try new things, that's unusual and seems unexpected.
 
  • 2Like
  • 2
Reactions:
No, I'm playing their game exactly as they intended.

They intend the game they release to be enjoyable as-is, in exactly the same way that a chef intends the meal they prepare to be enjoyable without me adding extra salt and pepper to it.
Without getting into the larger debate, I had to address this, since I am, in fact, a professional Chef; this is completely untrue, except for a few egomaniac chefs who wish to tell people exactly how to eat their food. The rest of us (the vast majority in my personal experience) prepare a tasty meal with the expectation that each customer will add salt and pepper or other condiments to suit their individual taste as desired. There is no "right way" to eat a dish except the way that gives you, the individual consuming it, the most enjoyment.

So I guess, in a roundabout way, I also addressed the larger debate. :)
 
  • 3
  • 2Like
Reactions:
who wish to tell people exactly how to eat their food. The rest of us (the vast majority in my personal experience) prepare a tasty meal with the expectation that each customer will add salt and pepper or other condiments to suit their individual taste as desired.
I sincerely hope you intend it to be nice when the customer chooses "zero" as their condiment level, though :)
 
  • 2
  • 1Like
Reactions:
The problem is that you have a strange mental block about only playing the game one way, when the expectation seems to be that you play the game multiple times, and some of those times -- not all of them -- you are expected to use mods. Other times you are expected to not use mods. That's why the launcher supports multiple playsets, and that's why devs release mods.
You’re the one with the mental block in that there must be an intended way to play the game…

mods or no mods, the devs expect you to play the game however you’d like, and there’s no insistence on playing with mods or not.

not playing with mods is not ‘missing game features’ lol and neither is it not expected. Because you seem to have this mental block that you’re supposed to play the game in a specific way, with randomly switching mods on and off. Whereas there are many other equally valid ways of playing the game, and the devs don’t ‘expect’ or ‘intend’ any of them
 
  • 2
  • 1
Reactions:
Intended =/= Supported. The intended way of playing the game is to play the game that the devs released
You’re the one with the mental block in that there must be an intended way to play the game…

That was actually you.

Anyway, you've been asking for evidence, and then not engaging when I give you a lot of evidence, so I'm starting to doubt that you're here to argue in good faith.

What evidence would you accept that mods are intended to be part of some (but not all) games?
 
  • 2
  • 1
Reactions:
That was actually you.

Anyway, you've been asking for evidence, and then not engaging when I give you a lot of evidence, so I'm starting to doubt that you're here to argue in good faith.

What evidence would you accept that mods are intended to be part of some (but not all) games?
The intended way is closer to what the devs actually released, tbh my problem is that you are specifically saying that someone is missing content rather than the word intended specifically. Which makes me think you’re here to just attack others.

There's nothing morally wrong with the fact that you're playing only half the ways the devs intended. It's your game, you should enjoy it. But mods are an intended part of enjoying it.
essentially, this comes off as somewhat condescending towards other peoples play styles because you’re saying their way of playing is ‘not the true way’. There is no true way, but I find ‘not playing with mods’ is at the very least intentional, given that the game would exist with or without mods.

The evidence I’d accept that mods are THE intended way to play some games would be that the Ironman enables you to earn achievements. Since that’s the ‘official’ mode.

however, im not the one making assertions whether someone is missing ’the intended way’ because there’s no real intended way, except for the game in isolation. You’re not ‘missing’ anything if you’re enjoying the game, after all.
 
  • 1
  • 1
Reactions:
You’re the one with the mental block in that there must be an intended way to play the game…
The intended way is closer to what the devs actually released

You kinda said the the opposite in your previous personal attack.


tbh my problem is that you are specifically saying that someone is missing content rather than the word intended specifically. Which makes me think you’re here to just attack others.

I'm attacking the idea that mods are un-intended for real games.

I'm attacking the idea that the "one true way" to play the game is without mods.

Devs release mods. The launcher advertises mods. What devs actually release includes mods.

The evidence I’d accept that mods are THE intended way to play some games would be that the Ironman enables you to earn achievements. Since that’s the ‘official’ mode.

There is no such thing as "THE intended way to play" and that's the mental block your argument keeps stumbling over.

There is no "official" mode (but if there were it would probably be MP since that's allegedly the majority of in-house test games) -- and anyway Ironman continues to work even if you have achievement-disabling mods installed. Some mods do not disable achievements, so I guess in your mind they'd be "official mode" mods, but I don't think even those mods are "THE intended way to play" because there is no such thing.

The intended way is closer to what the devs actually released
however, im not the one making assertions whether someone is missing ’the intended way’ because there’s no real intended way

Dude, c'mon. You're contradicting yourself inside the same post.

Your first sentence was making an assertion about "the intended way", using those exact words.


EDIT:

As of 7 minutes ago there's an official PDX contest sponsoring mods:


I think it's intended that players use some of these mods which PDX is sponsoring.
 
  • 2
  • 1
Reactions:
You kinda said the the opposite in your previous personal attack.




I'm attacking the idea that mods are un-intended for real games.

I'm attacking the idea that the "one true way" to play the game is without mods.

Devs release mods. The launcher advertises mods. What devs actually release includes mods.



There is no such thing as "THE intended way to play" and that's the mental block your argument keeps stumbling over.

There is no "official" mode (but if there were it would probably be MP since that's allegedly the majority of in-house test games) -- and anyway Ironman continues to work even if you have achievement-disabling mods installed. Some mods do not disable achievements, so I guess in your mind they'd be "official mode" mods, but I don't think even those mods are "THE intended way to play" because there is no such thing.




Dude, c'mon. You're contradicting yourself inside the same post.

Your first sentence was making an assertion about "the intended way", using those exact words.
I’m done. Your whole shtick seems to be About nitpicking and making blanket statements, and i will just drop it here. There’s no point in arguing with you because you seem to purposefully ignore what other people say, instead hyper-fixating on specific words.
let’s just agree to disagree. This will never go anywhere
 
  • 1
  • 1Like
  • 1
Reactions:
I’m done. Your whole shtick seems to be About nitpicking and making blanket statements, and i will just drop it here. There’s no point in arguing with you because you seem to purposefully ignore what other people say, instead hyper-fixating on specific words.
let’s just agree to disagree. This will never go anywhere

Your character attacks will never be able to sway my opinion.

I've provided a bunch of evidence, including the current sponsored mod contest, that mods are intended to be used for some (not all) games.

Not sure what words you think are being unfairly hyper-fixated, but you were making personal attacks against me for using literally the same words you did in the same post. Is it supposed to be "unfair" of me to notice that?

=====

Anyway, my argument wasn't with you in the first place. You just jumped in and tried to get personal.

My argument is against an idea, specifically against the idea that there is one true way to play which does not include mods.

I think there's strong evidence that part-time mod use is included in intended play.
 
  • 2
  • 1
Reactions: