• 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 #314 - Pi in the Sky Ideas

Hi everyone!

It’s been exactly 100 dev diaries since we introduced the Custodian initiative alongside the Lem update. With that milestone met, and 314 being funny math number, I thought it would be a good time to review what the Custodians have accomplished, some of the process they use, and where we could go from here.

To review, the original idea behind the Custodians Initiative was to do some of the following:
  • Tweaking game balance
  • Adding new content to old DLC
  • Polishing existing content
  • Bug fixes
  • Performance improvements
  • AI improvements
  • Multiplayer stability
  • UI and quality-of-life improvements

So what have they accomplished so far?​

In my view, the Custodians have been a pretty solid success.

We’ve done a few things:
image9.png

image6.png

image3.png

image2.png

image11.png

image5.png

image1.png

image4.png

image8.png

I promised bad math jokes last week: Why did the Blorg cross the Mobius Strip? To get to the same side.

So how do the Custodians work?​


Ideally, a third of their tasks are dictated by my directives, a third are taken from community requests, and the remaining third are individual developer passion projects. In reality, these segments overlap quite a bit, since we all share many of the same desires.

Before each release, we hold a “Custodian Pitch” meeting, where everybody on the team can write up proposals, give a two minute presentation on what they want to do and why they want to do it, and then a brief but spirited discussion is held debating the merits of the pitch as well as highlighting any concerns or suggestions.

image7.png

Photo from a recent Custodian Pitch Meeting

Accepted pitches go onto a team board, get prioritized, and eventually end up on the schedule. Unlike tasks slated for DLCs, Custodian tasks are intended to be able to slip to a later release if they’re deemed not ready to go live yet, and sometimes accepted pitches wait for a while before getting worked on. Rejected pitches sometimes resurface at a later date, revamped to resolve whatever problems the original pitch had.

image10.png

Part of the Custodian Team Board

As you can see, far more things get pitched and approved than we can actually do, so prioritization is extremely important. More things will move into 3.10 and 3.11 over time.

The Development Oubliette off to the side is for things that we started working on, but had to pause for various reasons.

Following Overlord, we instituted a rule that expansion work cannot absolutely depend on Custodian work, since we intentionally want Custodian work to be able to slip to a different release if necessary - the Situations system came in a little hot and that had negative effects on some of the systems we planned on using them with.

So what are some of those notes?​

From the “In Progress” section under 3.9 Caelum, we have the Diplomacy and Trust changes that we’ve mentioned a few times. We’ll have a dev diary dedicated to this next week, since these have been accelerated to be included in the 3.9.3 release.

Two weeks from now we’ll be providing more details on the Leader Consolidation that we’ve also talked about in the past. Currently these tasks are in the To Do and In Progress sections of 3.10 Pyxis, grouped by dark blue dashed lines that you can barely see in this image.

Other things on the board without planned release dates include a variety of possibilities. Some are larger scope tasks that involve a large number of Custodians, while others might be the type of thing that can be knocked out quickly.

A handful of them include:
  • Espionage enhancements
    • Make Espionage more impactful, but have systems in place to prevent “dog-piling”.
  • Continued work on concepts and nested tooltips
    • Provide information in a clearer way, avoiding walls of text.
  • Improve tutorials
    • They’re really not good at introducing the concepts new players need to learn the game.
  • Improve the outliner
    • Make the Outliner easier to use during different phases of the game.
  • Do somethingwith the Megastructures UI
    • As the number of large space constructions grows, it gets harder to find the ones you want to build.
    • It’s also very confusing to have things that require Mega-Engineering alongside constructions that don’t.
  • Continue after losing
    • Pop up the Select an Empire UI from Multiplayer if you lose a Single Player game, in case you want to continue your galaxy’s story, even if your first empire’s has ended.
  • Improve species modification
    • Address micromanagement and tedium in species modification.
  • Pop performance
    • Pops are one of the greatest sources of late game performance issues. Find ways to reduce their impact.
  • Ship performance
    • Ships (and fleets) are another performance issue to investigate.
  • Investigate number of habitable worlds (and rebalance if necessary)
    • As more scripted systems get added to the game, the habitable worlds slider becomes less accurate.
  • Make AI personalities matter more
    • Review the existing personalities, make them show up in AI weights more often, and differentiate them more.

Next week​

Having come full circle, next week will be about Diplomacy and Trust.

See you then!
 
  • 112Like
  • 40Love
  • 10
  • 1Haha
  • 1
Reactions:
I personally have been loving all the updates that the team has been putting out. It's kept the game alive and active this whole time, which is great!

I have just one question. Achievements with mods, when?
 
  • 2Like
  • 1
Reactions:
I don't really know what's the point of continuing after losing. How do you choose as what empire to continue? Do you see all there are even if you didn't encounter them yet? Seems like a spoiler for your game. Or can you only choose from empires you already encountered? That may come with some nasty suprises when you learn you are neighboring an OP fanatic purifier which is already onto you.
And IF you continue: The AI seldom builds out empires in ways that are functional for players. Most of the time AI playstyle doesn't make any sense in terms of actual player gameplay.

So why even put your (adressing Paradox dev crew here) valuable work time in it? If it's Game Over, it's Game Over. Gamers are used to that since the beginning of gaming. I think there are more urgent matters like the boring late game you could work on instead.
 
Last edited:
  • 1
Reactions:
I would very much appreciate an operation to establish and expand an "Underground Railroad" to help pops escape slavery and purging.
This sounds awesome!

Another one in the same vein: I love the "Overlord Fanatic Ethic Attraction" from Bureaucratic Surveillance, it gives some hope I'll be able to turn that xenophobe/authoritarian empire that comes begging for help to my Worker Cooperative into a xenophile... but I also want to be able to influence, somehow, members of my own federation or any other empire that is not a vassal. "Communal Housing Outreach" and "Temple of Prosperity" exists for Shared Burden/Gospel of the Masses, but we still need to be overlord for that.
 
Performance
Ships (and fleets) are another performance issue that needs to be explored.

The problem with fleet productivity is that the fleet has become much larger.
The reason for this is the strong strengthening of the player’s economy, as well as huge discounts on the construction of fleets and their maintenance.
Thanks to discounts, you can build a fleet almost free of charge.
You can remove these leadership skills that reduce the cost and maintenance of the fleet or cut them five times, including traditions, which also give discounts on the cost and maintenance.
You can also add additional cost when hiring a fleet, where building a fleet will require both alloys and loans.
 
  • Do somethingwith the Megastructures UI
    • As the number of large space constructions grows, it gets harder to find the ones you want to build.
    • It’s also very confusing to have things that require Mega-Engineering alongside constructions that don’t.

If megastructures are getting looked at, I hope some consideration can be given to the Mega-Engineering technology tree. The current requirements heavily reward beelining, which has consequences for gameplay and human/AI game balance. An alternative would be to reduce the requirements for the Mega-Engineering technology but increase the requirements for the subsequent specific megastructure technologies. The requirement of Battleship technology could be removed, and the two remaining technology requirements (Zero Point Power, Citadel) could get alternatives (i.e must have either X, Y or Z from Engineering and A, B or C from Physics):
  • Physics: Zero Point Power, Hyper Shields, Autonomous Ship Intellects / Sapient Combat Simulations, Gateway Activation, Omega Theory + Space-Time Theory?
  • Engineering: Citadel, Titans, Living Metal, Orbital Habitats?
Potential additional specific megastructure prerequisites could include:
  • Sentry array: Tachyon Scanners?
  • Science Nexus: Multi-Dimensional Studies + Interplanetary Research Initiative?
  • Interstellar Assembly: Xeno Relations?
  • Mega Art Installation: Automated Curation Algorithms + Local Hypercommunication OR Consecration Fields?
  • Strategic Coordination Center: Command Matrix + Doctrine: Fleet Liaisons + Doctrine: Armada Battle Formation?
  • Mega Shipyard: Battleship?
  • (GW) Dyson Sphere: Quantum Field Manipulation + Planetary Power Grid?
  • (GW) Ring Worlds: the most advanced Habitat technology?
  • (GW) Matter Decompressor: Subspace Sensors + Anti-Gravity Engineering?
This would mean that beelining 3 technologies would no longer be enough to unlock all megastructure technologies. For "megastructure rushers", after fulfilling the Physics and Engineering requirements, each additional megastructure would require an additional beeline of its own. This would also mean that the availability and appearance of megastructures would depend much more on empires "personality" (research preferences). Cultural empires would tend to get Mega Art Installation earlier, Diplomatic empires would get Interstellar Assembly earlier, shipbuilders would get Mega Shipyard earlier, militant empires would get Strategic Coordination Center earlier, Void Dwellers would get Ring Worlds earlier, and so on. Empire personality would be more visibly impactful on how the game unfolds, and the "random walk" of AI empire research choices would be much less disadvantaged versus human players, thereby improving gameplay in regards to both flavour and AI challenge.

It would also be nice if there was some Megastructural Repair technology that could be researched much earlier than Mega-Engineering (i.e. in tier 3 or 4), similar to how Gateway Activation can be researched and used sooner than Gateway Construction. Repairing a megastructure that is already in place should reasonably be much less challenging than figuring out how to construct a whole new one, since the whole "frame" is already in place (even if there are some potentially planet-sized holes).



A related suggestion concerns ascension perks. It would be nice if their technology requirements did not affect their availability, but rather their effects. Picking an ascension perk that has a technology requirement could also add those technology paths as guaranteed research options (once all their technological prerequisites are fulfilled). There are several compelling reasons for these changes.
  • AI competence:
    Unity-focused empires currently cannot pick technology-gated ascension perks, which means they are much more likely to miss out on some very good stuff. This is compounded, and generalized to non-Unity-focused empires, by the AI also not "knowing" in advance which technologies unlock valuable ascension perks. The suggested change would solve both of these issues and make AI empires stronger.
  • Human gameplay:
    It is not fun to have to leave an ascension perk slot empty while waiting for the right technology to appear, and it is not fun to need "gamey tactics" for roleplaying self-actualization goals. The suggested change would solve these issues.
  • Flavour:
    Ascension perks represent collective aspirations of an empire, and aspirations may come before the means to accomplish them. The United States of America picked the Lunar Program ascension perk before it had developed the necessary technologies, rather than the other way around. The suggested change would allow empires to unite around a direction of development, a great aspiration, and then figure out how to get there. And it is not the easy things that require unity to do, but the hard.
    "We choose to go to the Moon in this decade and do the other things, not because they are easy, but because they are hard; because that goal will serve to organize and measure the best of our energies and skills, because that challenge is one that we are willing to accept, one we are unwilling to postpone, and one we intend to win, and the others, too."
For the scale/importance of the suggested changes, it is worth considering that nearly half of the ascension perks are currently affected by technology requirements.
 
Last edited:
  • 5
  • 2
  • 1Like
  • 1Love
Reactions:
I don't really know what's the point of continuing after losing. How do you choose as what empire to continue? Do you see all there are even if you didn't encounter them yet? Seems like a spoiler for your game. Or can you only choose from empires you already encountered? That may come with some nasty suprises when you learn you are neighboring an OP fanatic purifier which is already onto you.
And IF you continue: The AI seldom builds out empires in ways that are functional for players. Most of the time AI playstyle doesn't make any sense in terms of actual player gameplay.

So why even put your (adressing Paradox dev crew here) valuable work time in it? If it's Game Over, it's Game Over. Gamers are used to that since the beginning of gaming. I think there are more urgent matters like the boring late game you could work on instead.
if you lose to a rebellion or a machine uprising it would be super cool.
 
  • 1
Reactions:
Do somethingwith the Megastructures UI
  • As the number of large space constructions grows, it gets harder to find the ones you want to build.
  • It’s also very confusing to have things that require Mega-Engineering alongside constructions that don’t.
Does this include doing something with the multi-stage megastructures continuation UI and living metals policy? Ever since situations came in I've been desperate to see that whole thing ripped out and replaced with a nice clean progress bar and "use living metals" as a per-structure approach instead of an edict.
Espionage enhancements
  • Make Espionage more impactful, but have systems in place to prevent “dog-piling”.
Again gimme those sweet sweet situations. Oh someone launched an operation and my encryption was high enough to pick up chatter but not enough to shut it down outright? Time to deploy Blorg, James Blorg in a dueling Situation vs the enemy spymaster's nefarious plot.
the Situations system came in a little hot and that had negative effects on some of the systems we planned on using them with.
Systems that included megastructures and espionage right? Right? Don't make me look like the crazy one here!
 
  • 1Like
Reactions:
I don't really know what's the point of continuing after losing. How do you choose as what empire to continue? Do you see all there are even if you didn't encounter them yet? Seems like a spoiler for your game. Or can you only choose from empires you already encountered? That may come with some nasty suprises when you learn you are neighboring an OP fanatic purifier which is already onto you.
And IF you continue: The AI seldom builds out empires in ways that are functional for players. Most of the time AI playstyle doesn't make any sense in terms of actual player gameplay.

So why even put your (adressing Paradox dev crew here) valuable work time in it? If it's Game Over, it's Game Over. Gamers are used to that since the beginning of gaming. I think there are more urgent matters like the boring late game you could work on instead.
My brother in Worm, people have been asking for this feature since launch day. I bought the game about a year after release and "Man I wish I could continue as another empire after I got ate" was already a cliche. It's probably the most exciting and sought after item in the entire list.
 
  • 1Like
Reactions:
Thank you! Thats what i've been waiting for since Nemesis release :)
is release :)
I am in the same boat. I always hoped they would add Espionage operations for Mega Corps especially Crime syndicates. Clicking on a planet and opening up branch offices rn feels so unsatisfactory. When opening branch offices could be an operation/situation then have unique operations (like paying bribes) to help improve trade value or (deals with local crime lords) to keep crime up for Crime syndicates branch offices. Overall the Espionage system feels so underutilized.
 
  • 2
Reactions:
This sounds awesome!

Another one in the same vein: I love the "Overlord Fanatic Ethic Attraction" from Bureaucratic Surveillance, it gives some hope I'll be able to turn that xenophobe/authoritarian empire that comes begging for help to my Worker Cooperative into a xenophile... but I also want to be able to influence, somehow, members of my own federation or any other empire that is not a vassal. "Communal Housing Outreach" and "Temple of Prosperity" exists for Shared Burden/Gospel of the Masses, but we still need to be overlord for that.
Absolutely, yes! Increase xenophilia and egalitarianism through funding protests and lobbyists. Increase xenophobia and authoritarianism through false-flag bombings.

I'd also like for the UNE or CoM to merge if their ethics align, possibly with a name change to reflect humanity reunited.
 
  • 1Like
  • 1Love
Reactions:
My brother in Worm, people have been asking for this feature since launch day. I bought the game about a year after release and "Man I wish I could continue as another empire after I got ate" was already a cliche. It's probably the most exciting and sought after item in the entire list.
For real?! :D I don't get it.
But okay, people have different tastes for their gameplay.
 
Same way you choose an empire when joining a multiplayer game already in progress.
It'd be neat to have some kind of legacy system where you got a few empires to choose from based on how the game went etc. Like preferential weighting to allies or vassals or split off rebellions, an option to only be offered known empires etc. so there was continuity of story. But that's very much a value add, just getting an easy interface to go "welp I'm dead but hey I'll be this guy now" would be huge.
 
Same way you choose an empire when joining a multiplayer game already in progress.

It would be cool to have this regardless of if you've lost. I've never seen a rebellion in a galactic imperium, by the time I've got to that point in the game my empire is typically super dominant. It would be cool to be able to load the game and swap to a smaller empire with the goal of smashing the juggernaut I built up.
 
  • 1
Reactions:
It would also be nice if there was some Megastructural Repair technology that could be researched much earlier than Mega-Engineering (i.e. in tier 3 or 4), similar to how Gateway Activation can be researched and used sooner than Gateway Construction. Repairing a megastructure that is already in place should reasonably be much less challenging than figuring out how to construct a whole new one, since the whole "frame" is already in place (even if there are some potentially planet-sized holes).
I agree, but i think you should not be able to repair it to maximum capacity. There should be a limitation, since you are less refined tech to substitute incredibly advanced tech.
 
  • 2Like
  • 1
Reactions:
I agree, but i think you should not be able to repair it to maximum capacity. There should be a limitation, since you are less refined tech to substitute incredibly advanced tech.
I find the sudden jump to full megastructure a bit too much, ruined megastructures shoud be repaired in stages, at least 2.
The main benefit of ruined megastructures to me is that later on you might manage to build a second one and stack the bonuses, I absolutely don't mind if it takes a little longer to repair the ruined one.
 
I find the sudden jump to full megastructure a bit too much, ruined megastructures shoud be repaired in stages, at least 2.
The main benefit of ruined megastructures to me is that later on you might manage to build a second one and stack the bonuses, I absolutely don't mind if it takes a little longer to repair the ruined one.
I thought about longer reconstruction time, too, but i don't think that it's a good solution, because it will again narrow the gap between the option to repair and the option to fully build one yourself.

I do think going up to stage 1 or 2 is reasonable. It would give a significant boon to your empire, but still be a big investment and you can't fully utilise the bonuses the structure could offer, if you had mega-engineering capabilities.
 
  • 1Like
Reactions: