Hello everyone!

Today we aim to shed some light on the upcoming changes for the 1.2 “Asimov” update.

Border Rework
Something we did not like with how Stellaris played out towards the mid-game previous to 1.2, was how that the player tended to get locked in and blocked from exploring or gaining access to the rest of the galaxy.

In the upcoming update we aim to correct that issue by reworking how border access works. By default, everyone will have open border access to other empires’ borders. An empire may close its border through a diplomatic action, and access is denied to your rivals by default.

We hope that this will make the game feel less constrained towards the mid-game.

Another valuable addition is that when you give your ships or fleet a Return order, but they cannot find a valid path home, you may set them as “Missing in Action”. While ships are missing in action, they will be invisible to you and reappear within your borders within a certain amount of time.

Expansion Cost
To reduce exploits of the open borders, we have chosen to introduce an Influence cost to colonizing planets or building Frontier Outposts. This cost will be based on the range to your closest owned system.

Embassies & Trust
A significant change in 1.2 is the removal of embassies and the passive opinion increase they provided. In the “Asimov” update, players will have to gain trust by cooperating with the AI. Trust is gained over time by having some sort of treaty with the AI.

Diplomatic Changes
A number of diplomatic statuses that were previously available through trade have now been changed into being Diplomatic Actions available through the diplomacy screen. We felt that some of these actions did not really feel in place, and that they were too hidden, in the trade interface.

We have changed how cooperating with the AI happens. It is no longer as easy to enter into an Alliance with the AI, and you have to start off by gaining their Trust through research agreements, guarantee independence, non-aggression pacts and defensive pacts.

Defensive Pacts are a new diplomatic action that allows two empires to be called into wars if any of them should get attacked.

Joint War Declarations
Another new diplomatic feature is the possibility to invite other empires to your wars. The AI will not join your wars if their Attitude towards you is not at least neutral and they have something they also want from the target.

All things combined we hope that these changes will make the mid-game feel less static and will open up more possibilities for interesting situations to occur.

Join us again next week for more details about the upcoming 1.2 "Asimov" update!

 

[Sahuagin]

no, you have conflated two separate things. The entire point of sectors is to group micro-level concepts into a macro-level concept. The entire point of *AI*, independent of sectors, is to "offload micro-management". sectors are a fantastic and awesome idea. forced AI control of sectors is a horrifyingly bad idea.

and if you have no interest in controlling the sectors, that's great, you can select "AI Controlled = Yes". Why can't I select "AI Controlled = No"?



Only if I can control where and when they are built (and heck, seeing them would be nice too). Right now we are forced to have our empire peppered with free warscore fruit all over the place that we can't easily see or control. Even if the AI could not build during a war, why should there be dozens of useless spaceports all across my empire? Why do I have forced war vulnerabilities all over the place that I can barely even see?

three disagrees for this, ok, but what's your rebuttal? why should AI control of sectors be forced on us? and/or why should sector AIs stupidly build undefendable warscore all over my empire without my say-so?

 

[Nyrael]

Currently alliances are absolutely pointless in this game. Stop working on diplomacy until you make the AI stop sticking to my fleets during war. As long as they are just extra ships tacked onto my fleet I see no reason to ally with anyone.

The extra ships are more than useful enough, especially if you don't play a Militarist Empire and play leisurely.

 

[Avian Overlord]

They are fixing ally AI. They said it the stream.

 

[OdinTGE]

no, you have conflated two separate things. The entire point of sectors is to group micro-level concepts into a macro-level concept. The entire point of *AI*, independent of sectors, is to "offload micro-management". sectors are a fantastic and awesome idea. forced AI control of sectors is a horrifyingly bad idea.

and if you have no interest in controlling the sectors, that's great, you can select "AI Controlled = Yes". Why can't I select "AI Controlled = No"?

You're missing the other half of Sectors. They are a balance mechanic as well as micro off-load. They exist to represent the difficulty in maintaining unity over a galactic empire. They are meant to be somewhat autonomous. I want them to function and build buildings. You want to completely avoid factions and potential rebellions without putting traits and/or ethos toward controlling divergence etc.

Only if I can control where and when they are built (and heck, seeing them would be nice too). Right now we are forced to have our empire peppered with free warscore fruit all over the place that we can't easily see or control. Even if the AI could not build during a war, why should there be dozens of useless spaceports all across my empire? Why do I have forced war vulnerabilities all over the place that I can barely even see?

Spaceports = Fleet Cap. Therefore you want them, and even if you don't you can't reasonably expect all your sector planets to forgo a basic necessity of a space faring empire. If you want to expand you are expected to defend your territory. If you can't defend it the enemy gets warscore.

They are fixing ally AI. They said it the stream.

Like they "fixed" sector AI? What they meant was "We're making changes to ally AI". Whether that means "fixed" or not is an unknown until patch day.

Any way we can rework out Star Charts and Alliance "vision" works? It's pretty bad to actually trade Star Charts because it "locks" the star systems you haven't explored, meaning you wont find any new anomalies, while if I never share my charts and always clean up all mining bases etc in the systems i'm going to gain before peace, I can survey everything and the game will spawn anomalies without issue.

Once you get past the early game there are no more anomalies to get. The one possible exception being the few stars an empire had from the very start. The issue is that once a planet/asteroid/star has had an anomaly it can never have another. So while the chance to find one on a particular celestial body is random, and therefore you can't say somebody else surveying it could directly "steal" an anomaly, it still means that after three for four empires have come through and surveyed a system you're extremely unlikely to find one yourself.

This is one of my biggest annoyances with the game right now.

 

[Sahuagin]

You want to completely avoid factions and potential rebellions without putting traits and/or ethos toward controlling divergence etc.

I've been playing for ~150 hours, 4 empires, and have not had a single rebellion. So far they might as well not exist. Nevertheless, you're still conflating it. Having sector AI doesn't necessarily have anything to do with factions or rebellion; sector AI or not, you can still have a rebellion. I have no problem with rebellions, in fact I wish they were more significant. That would be one way to have more use for your navy without having to wage war. It also might encourage smaller sectors. Again, sectors are (potentially) awesome; sector *AI* is horrible.

Spaceports = Fleet Cap. Therefore you want them, and even if you don't you can't reasonably expect all your sector planets to forgo a basic necessity of a space faring empire. If you want to expand you are expected to defend your territory. If you can't defend it the enemy gets warscore.

this is not an argument for why sector AI should blindly build spaceports everywhere across my entire empire.

For example, planets. Planets are important, and I want them. but that doesn't mean I want to colonize every single planet everywhere, regardless of how easy or not they are to defend. Rather I need to make decisions about where to spend resources, and whether I feel I can sufficiently defend the land that I'm taking. Every time I colonize a planet, I'm consciously bearing some risk that I will need to defend this colony in the future. The same should be true for starports, except that I have no control over whether they get built, and unlike capturing planets, they are trivial to destroy.

(And this is all ignoring whether or not I actually want to *pay for* them! That was an issue I was somewhat willing to overlook until I realized the implications of them being worth warscore.)

 

[MN121MN]

@grekulf I take it that some of all the planned features for Asimov will not make it in time? e.g.

• Tributaries: New diplomatic status and corresponding war goals.
• More war goals: Humiliate, Open Borders, Make Tributary, etc.
• Emancipation Faction. We had to cut this one at the last minute. Needs redesign.
• Diplomatic Map Mode. Much requested!
• Diplomatic Incidents: This is a whole class of new scripted events that causes more interaction with the other empires.

https://forum.paradoxplaza.com/foru...llaris-dev-diary-33-the-maiden-voyage.932668/

Also, the community manager should update the https://forum.paradoxplaza.com/forum/index.php?threads/stellaris-developer-diary-archive.882950/ with this DD.

Nice DD btw.

 

[the1sean]

Difficulty penalty to alliances is gone, instead it'll be heavily dependant on your war philsophy policy setting (which determines if you're the conquering type or not).

First off, congrats on taking over the creative helm for Stellaris. I am studying Game Design at university in the U.S. and you just snagged my dream job!

Onto business, the current threat mechanic and how it influences diplomatic relations feels wonky to me, so I wanted to share some thoughts:

#1 - One thing that is tough for me is that my threat grows even when I am fighting the same enemy federation as my neighbors, which means that even though we have a common enemy that I declared war on in order to help defend them, our relations are now deeply negative. It would be nice to be able to join existing wars with the only objective of raising relations with erstwhile allies, or barring that some sort of reduction in threat when you have common enemies or rivals. Maybe some wargoal options that don't generate threat or reduce threat. Heck, maybe these are already in the game and just need more transparency to the player.

#2 - In another instance, my threat skyrocketed when an entire Federation declared war on me and then I proceeded to wiped the floor with them. It seems that threat should be mitigated or eliminated for defensive wars.

#3 - In a historical context, gunboat diplomacy is a thing; the bigger your military the more political capital you have, which often leads to trade and more positive relations if the militarily strong powers play their cards right. Currently, I have much weaker opponents sending me insults and refusing to trade research treaties or non-aggression agreements. We aren't rivals, we have very similar/same ethos and govt type, we share enemies, we have never warred, my fleet and military potential dwarf theirs, my tech is much higher, but my threat is too high. It seems like AIs in this sort of predicament should be doing everything that they can to curry my favor and lock down long-term non-agression pacts and the like with me; especially if I am a known warmonger. It would be good to see bonuses to relations if you are militarily much more powerful than an opponent, and penalties if you are much weaker.

I love Stellaris, and haven't enjoyed a 4x game this much since Master of Orion 2, so don't take this the wrong way but you may want to look at some of the diplomatic trading options from the Galactic Civilizations series. In addition to money, minerals, strategic resources, etc, you could trade INFLUENCE, trade embargoes, declarations of war, ships and if i remember correctly votes in upcoming elections (that could be Civilization series). Anyways, this created all kinds of interesting diplomacy options. I actually had a game where a "Lawful Good" alignment empire fought proxy wars without me realizing it by getting small fry nations to declare war on me and then GIFTING them advanced warships. Of course I was baffled as to how these two opponents were able to challenge my military might. How did I figure it out? THE AI LEADER TOLD ME THAT IS WHAT HE HAD DONE as he declared war on me in order to finish me off. I fought the good fight but lost, and I will never forget that experience. The thing is, the Stellaris AI is actually very competent at what it does, and I can't wait to see how the game feels as the wide-ranging economic and political statuses and options expand. Thanks for listening!

 

[Fenian]

Wiz any work on the colony events that are supposed to make the mid game more interesting?

 

[OdinTGE]

I've been playing for ~150 hours, 4 empires, and have not had a single rebellion. So far they might as well not exist. Nevertheless, you're still conflating it. Having sector AI doesn't necessarily have anything to do with factions or rebellion; sector AI or not, you can still have a rebellion. I have no problem with rebellions, in fact I wish they were more significant. That would be one way to have more use for your navy without having to wage war. It also might encourage smaller sectors. Again, sectors are (potentially) awesome; sector *AI* is horrible.

I agree that rebellions are currently not really a thing. I have 380+ hours and a grand total of 2 rebellions, both of which were over so fast they may as well not have existed. On that point, and the sector AI, however you're missing the point. You're arguing against the existence of things because their current iteration is badly done. The fact remains that you want more control over sectors than the game design intends. Currently we are required to take more control via mods etc. because the AI is bad. That is not an argument against the design, it's an argument for fixing the AI.

this is not an argument for why sector AI should blindly build spaceports everywhere across my entire empire.

Yes it is. Spaceports are, in the context of Stellaris, a basic requirement of a space-faring empire. You want to tell people to go colonize the wild west but they can't build any palisades or arm a militia because you don't want to pay for it. If you can't defend the spaceport for a colony then you can't defend the colony. The fact that the AI is abysmal and handling ground assaults does not mean you get to just not build spaceports so you can never lose war score. You're just trying to exploit one unfinished mechanic by removing another unfinished mechanic.

Again, I fully understand that there are currently big problems with when and what the Sectors build but that's an argument for better implementation not a design re-write.

 

[Wrymn]

May I ask which I7 you have?

Yes sorry, dont know why I leaved it blank, its skylake i7 6700k. So for PC gaming where it mostly utilizes one core, this is the best in my opinion.

 

[Sahuagin]

That is not an argument against the design, it's an argument for fixing the AI.

"fixing the AI" may be difficult or impossible and there's a genuine possibility that it will *never* be sufficiently fixed, whereas simply having the option of not using AI for sectors would relatively easily fix most or all of the issues coming from it. My intention is to make the game more playable as quickly as possible.

You're just trying to exploit one unfinished mechanic by removing another unfinished mechanic.

so, you're saying that the forced liability of having free starport warscore meals peppered all over my empire is working as intended? if I were to accept that, it would *severely* diminish my opinion of this game. its difficulty is then completely artificial. it is no longer a strategy game, in fact, because I can no longer make meaningful decisions about how my empire is constructed.

 

[minami26]

@grekulf I take it that some of all the planned features for Asimov will not make it in time?

The other stuff mentioned in DD #33 for Asimov is dd for next week Wiz tweeted it.

 

[OdinTGE]

"fixing the AI" may be difficult or impossible and there's a genuine possibility that it will *never* be sufficiently fixed, whereas simply having the option of not using AI for sectors would relatively easily fix most or all of the issues coming from it. My intention is to make the game more playable as quickly as possible.

Fixing the Sector AI to place correct buildings on correct tiles? Considering there is a mod that already does this using edicts I think they can get it done. We're not asking them to beat a grandmaster Go player here. Just: Is mineral? Build Mine. I'm pretty sad it's been this bad for this long but I'm still certain they'll get it eventually. Your intention to make the game playable as quickly as possible isn't really relevant since you don't work there. Not only that, but there are already mods that give you as many core planets as you want, and the aforementioned auto-build mod that will take much of the micro burden from you. So, if what you really want is to have 50+ core worlds, 5 of which have space ports, you absolutely can do that right now.

so, you're saying that the forced liability of having free starport warscore meals peppered all over my empire is working as intended? if I were to accept that, it would *severely* diminish my opinion of this game. its difficulty is then completely artificial. it is no longer a strategy game, in fact, because I can no longer make meaningful decisions about how my empire is constructed.

#1: The fact that it's "free" indicates you can't properly defend your empire. It sounds like you don't actually want to employ strategy at all. You want the enemy to just go to the one place you want to defend. How convenient that would be if the enemy always just turned up where you wanted them to.

#2: The other empires have the same space ports available for you to destroy.

#3: It is absolutely reasonable that every colony has a spaceport. It's the means by which materials and people are easily moved to and from the planet. The Wild West thing really works. You want your people go settle but you don't want them to build walls, or build a rail station by which they can reach and interact with the rest of your empire. If rebellions actually worked I would say "refusing to allow spaceport construction" would be a great reason for very high unrest and rebellion on your colonies.

 

[Fenian]

Wiz any work on the colony events that are supposed to make the mid game more interesting?

Woops just realized that is intended for 'Heinlen'

 

[Sahuagin]

#1: The fact that it's "free" indicates you can't properly defend your empire. It sounds like you don't actually want to employ strategy at all. You want the enemy to just go to the one place you want to defend. How convenient that would be if the enemy always just turned up where you wanted them to.

what are you talking about, anywhere there could be a starport, there is already a colony to invade first. a colony that takes time and effort to invade, unlike blowing up the starport.

Fixing the Sector AI to place correct buildings on correct tiles?

no, fixing it to not build endless starports for the enemy to destroy, racking up nearly EIGHTY warscore in just a few minutes, and whatever else we might discover the stupid AI is doing later.

#3: It is absolutely reasonable that every colony has a spaceport. It's the means by which materials and people are easily moved to and from the planet. The Wild West thing really works. You want your people go settle but you don't want them to build walls, or build a rail station by which they can reach and interact with the rest of your empire. The way you want your empire constructed is simply nonsensical. If rebellions actually worked I would say "refusing to allow spaceport construction" would be a great reason for very high unrest and rebellion on your colonies.

the heck are you talking about... none of this has anything to do with the game.

starports are a liability (and are expensive), and I am forced to have them everywhere. this is artificial difficulty. it also devolves wars into base-races; as you say: go blow up his starports while he blows up yours. that's "strategy"?

 

[OdinTGE]

what are you talking about, anywhere there could be a starport, there is already a colony to invade first. a colony that takes time and effort to invade, unlike blowing up the starport.

I'm talking about the fact that you obviously can't defend your empire if all these space ports (that the colonies need and rely on, from a "lore" perspective--not to mention fleet cap) are just free for the taking. If you're not defending these spaceports you certainly aren't investing in armies to defend your planets. Space ports being too weak may be an issue. In fact it is, as they don't seem to upgrade their weapons like they're supposed to. Again, though, you're trying to remove a game mechanic rather than fix it.

no, fixing it to not build endless starports for the enemy to destroy, racking up nearly EIGHTY warscore in just a few minutes, and whatever else we might discover the stupid AI is doing later.

Again, you're talking about fixes that are needed. That's not an argument for removing a game mechanic. Even so, as I said there exists plenty of mods to just fix these issues for you. You can have no sectors and have a mod that auto-builds on planets for you. You can have your dream empire of 0 space ports.

the heck are you talking about... none of this has anything to do with the game.

starports are a liability (and are expensive), and I am forced to have them everywhere. this is artificial difficulty. it also devolves wars into base-races; as you say: go blow up his starports while he blows up yours. that's "strategy"?

It has everything to do with the game. I guess you don't grasp analogies? You are indeed forced to have spaceports for your colonies. It's a conceit of the fiction that for a colony to survive and be a part of a wider galactic empire it requires a spaceport. That's just the way the game is made. You can either accept this, or play with mods. Mods the developers specifically made their game to support because they know it is literally impossible to make a game that pleases everyone. As I've said many times you can already play the exact game you want right now. No sector AI, no space ports.

It's not artificial difficulty. It's the requirements of trying to build, maintain, and defend a inter-stellar empire. I don't have this mystical problem you have where my space ports are just free war score candy. I use defensive stations to slow and trap enemies; and position my fleet in peace time to be ready to defend my assets. Of course spaceports are a liability. Colonies are a liability. Ships are a liability. Colonists themselves are a liability. They can all be destroyed and killed. I guess you'd best purge all your pops and commit galactic seppuku so there's nothing left for an enemy to use to get war score.

 

[kazper]

Fixing the Sector AI to place correct buildings on correct tiles? Considering there is a mod that already does this using edicts I think they can get it done. We're not asking them to beat a grandmaster Go player here. Just: Is mineral? Build Mine. I'm pretty sad it's been this bad for this long but I'm still certain they'll get it eventually. Your intention to make the game playable as quickly as possible isn't really relevant since you don't work there. Not only that, but there are already mods that give you as many core planets as you want, and the aforementioned auto-build mod that will take much of the micro burden from you. So, if what you really want is to have 50+ core worlds, 5 of which have space ports, you absolutely can do that right now.



#1: The fact that it's "free" indicates you can't properly defend your empire. It sounds like you don't actually want to employ strategy at all. You want the enemy to just go to the one place you want to defend. How convenient that would be if the enemy always just turned up where you wanted them to.

#2: The other empires have the same space ports available for you to destroy.

#3: It is absolutely reasonable that every colony has a spaceport. It's the means by which materials and people are easily moved to and from the planet. The Wild West thing really works. You want your people go settle but you don't want them to build walls, or build a rail station by which they can reach and interact with the rest of your empire. If rebellions actually worked I would say "refusing to allow spaceport construction" would be a great reason for very high unrest and rebellion on your colonies.

To be fair defending a large empire is currently close to impossible - at least with the basic hyperdrives, so unless you unlock Psi/Jump Drive you're in deep trouble. The main reason for this is the trifecta of weakness of defense stations:
1) You can only have few - spaced far apart
2) They are expensive to maintain - even after the bugfix to costs
3) They are pretty weak and die fast

While defense stations need to be somewhat weak so you don't just build "Fortress Space", this is too much. The limit on how many you can have and how far apart they are spaced is nearly enough - by itself - to ensure you cannot just fortify a system. The rest makes them too weak. If they were a lot cheaper - and perhaps a bit tougher - you could build these to protect said spaceports, at least long enough to perhaps let your fleet get there in time. Right now if you build one fortress per system that's a LOT of energy in maintenance.

Other than that I do agree he is whining and just want to remove features he doesn't like. The solution is to fix the mechanics - not redesign the game in this case.

 

[Sahuagin]

I'm talking about the fact that you obviously can't defend your empire if all these space ports (that the colonies need and rely on, from a "lore" perspective--not to mention fleet cap) are just free for the taking.

I don't get this. You're saying that I can't defend the buildings that I didn't choose to build? Yes. That is exactly the problem. I have not decided that I want to defend these things. They are vulnerabilities that are forced upon me, that I have no ability to think about or decide. My ability to strategically decide where and when to build them is taken from me. I have no say whatsoever. When I build a colony, that is a vulnerability that I accept and choose. Not so with a starport.

Let me describe what actually just happened to me: I had invaded around 8+ planets, and won 5+ major fleet battles. I had made it to around 45 warscore (they had also gotten some as well), and I had a vastly superior fleet. Unfortunately I saw that warscore drop to 0 in a matter of minutes, only to realize that the ONLY thing the enemy did was kill the same 4 or 5 starports 10 times over each. At this point I was declared upon by a second federation. I surrendered to the first, so that I only had one enemy to deal with. Unfortunately I didn't pay attention to the borders, and my entire fleet was stranded behind a border shift on the far edge of my empire. Within only about 5-10 minutes, the enemy had 82 warscore, almost entirely from destroying the same 10 starports 5-10 times each. They did not invade a single planet; they did not engage a single fleet. I've basically abandoned that game in that wretched state.

That's not an argument for removing a game mechanic.

forced starport happy meals spread all over my empire is not a "game mechanic", unless it is a mechanic to make the game feel challenging when it isn't. it does not accomplish anything for the player; it does not allow the player anything. It only allows artificial difficulty. I don't know if that is paradox's intent, but I sure hope it isn't.

You can have no sectors and have a mod that auto-builds on planets for you. You can have your dream empire of 0 space ports.

I will absolutely be modding these things into my own game if they are not officially put in, in fact I don't think I'll ever play the game again with starports worth warscore. you're inability to allow *optional* sector AI is still bewildering and disconcerting, however.

You are indeed forced to have spaceports for your colonies.

only in the game's current state. you do not know that this is actually part of the ultimately intended design.

It's a conceit of the fiction that for a colony to survive and be a part of a wider galactic empire it requires a spaceport. That's just the way the game is made

this is just nonsense... starports in the game have nothing to do with what you are describing.

Of course spaceports are a liability. Colonies are a liability. Ships are a liability. Colonists themselves are a liability.

colonists are not a liability. colonies and ships are, but you *choose* to make them, including *where* and *when* and *how many*.

at this point it's becoming clear that you are not arguing rationally. I don't know what your motivation is for defending these things, but you are not convincing me, only disconcerting me.

 

[kazper]

I don't get this. You're saying that I can't defend the buildings that I didn't choose to build? Yes. That is exactly the problem. I have not decided that I want to defend these things. They are vulnerabilities that are forced upon me, that I have no ability to think about or decide. My ability to strategically decide where and when to build them is taken from me. I have no say whatsoever. When I build a colony, that is a vulnerability that I accept and choose. Not so with a starport.

Let me describe what actually just happened to me: I had invaded around 8+ planets, and won 5+ major fleet battles. I had made it to around 45 warscore (they had also gotten some as well), and I had a vastly superior fleet. Unfortunately I saw that warscore drop to 0 in a matter of minutes, only to realize that the ONLY thing the enemy did was kill the same 4 or 5 starports 10 times over each. At this point I was declared upon by a second federation. I surrendered to the first, so that I only had one enemy to deal with. Unfortunately I didn't pay attention to the borders, and my entire fleet was stranded behind a border shift on the far edge of my empire. Within only about 5-10 minutes, the enemy had 82 warscore, almost entirely from destroying the same 10 starports 5-10 times each. They did not invade a single planet; they did not engage a single fleet. I've basically abandoned that game in that wretched state.

forced starport happy meals spread all over my empire is not a "game mechanic", unless it is a mechanic to make the game feel challenging when it isn't. it does not accomplish anything for the player; it does not allow the player anything. It only allows artificial difficulty. I don't know if that is paradox's intent, but I sure hope it isn't.


I will absolutely be modding these things into my own game if they are not officially put in, in fact I don't think I'll ever play the game again with starports worth warscore. you're inability to allow *optional* sector AI is still bewildering and disconcerting, however.


only in the game's current state. you do not know that this is actually part of the ultimately intended design.


this is just nonsense... starports in the game have nothing to do with what you are describing.


colonists are not a liability. colonies and ships are, but you *choose* to make them, including *where* and *when* and *how many*.

at this point it's becoming clear that you are not arguing rationally. I don't know what your motivation is for defending these things, but you are not convincing me, only disconcerting me.

We quite agree on the problem of defending your starports currently, and particularly the rebuilding of starports that then get immediately destroyed *again* by sector AI, but that is not a reason to throw the baby out with the bathwater. A few tweaks could massively improve this situation:
1) Only fully built starports give warscore
2) Defensive stations become cheaper and/or stronger (and possibly the sector AI start using them more to defend their own starports)

Bam problem solved. Sure there is still a lot of work on making the AI better in general - building ship building modules on their starports seems dumb, but that is peanuts - and can also be fixed.

Removing sectors - which is essentially what your "optional AI" is, is a dumb solution.

 

[OdinTGE]

I'm just going to use the forum's ignore feature. I tried, quite hard, to explain some very simple concepts and you are unwilling or unable to grasp them.