Stellaris Dev Diary #361 - The Vision

[TeutonicPaprus]

• How important to you are the current systems that use individual Pops and Jobs in the planetary simulation?
  Not very. I'd be happy if they were changed, actually, to make it less laggy and such.
• If we made significant changes to fleets, how much could we alter before it no longer felt like the game you love?
  Change literally everything I don't care. BUT, keep the weapon system. If energy weapons start being super good against shields, then it'll start feeling weird.
• What aspects are most important in defining your civilization?
  Civics and origin. Ethics are usually defined based on those, as I imagine how a civilization would evolve given certain conditions.
• How do you set goals for yourself during gameplay? When do you set them, and how often do they change as you play?
  Galactic conquest/general contro, usually. I also set short-term goals of "liberation war these people," "make this ecu," etc.
• How important is the current Trade system, with routes collecting back to your Capital?
  Not at all.
• Is colonization too easy? Should habitability and planet climate matter more?
  Absolutely. Colonization, planet, climate, it should matter a lot. Add 100 planet types if you have to! I just think it should be more involved.
• Are there any Origins that should be Civics, or Civics that should be Origins?
  I heard someone suggest Agrarian Idyll as an Origin, so maybe that. For Civics that are Origins, I think Mechanist should be a Civic. I am aware that it was one of the first Origins, it's ironic, but I think mixing and matching "robot obsession" with other things (Under One Rule, Lost Colony, etc) would be really fun.
• If you could remove one game system, what would it be?
  Sectors. They basically serve no purpose, except for the rare cases where you have a planet without a governor, and even then the sector governor isn't exactly useful since they're specialized for their home planet.
• Which system would you make the central focus of an expansion?
  I WOULD say the end of the game, but that's not a good expansion. So for DLC, I want a dedicated Hive Mind DLC. They're so underwhelming.
• Is there a feature you want to enjoy, but feel the current implementation doesn’t quite work for you?
  Technology. Research labs are satisfying, but the randomized tech tree and 3 research paths feels... limiting? Unrealistic? I don't know the term for it.

 

[Lord_Evan]

How important to you are the current systems that use individual Pops and Jobs in the planetary simulation?

Not very important, I would prefer something that reduces the in game lag and makes the planets and their populations feel "grander". I think the system should actually make you think about who's doing what job, as the traits don't really affect that. Perhaps making it so that certain pops can only do certain jobs and you have to expand the types of pops you have in your empire either by immigration or setting up new species templates and giving them different traits so that they're capable of working the other jobs.​

Or I would remove the pop system all together, and have a better way of seeing the actual population on each planet, making it so percentage of that population works jobs. Having 1 pop to 1 job is too much micromanagement.​

If we made significant changes to fleets, how much could we alter before it no longer felt like the game you love?

I would like significant changes to the fleets. I don't like how it's all about who can build more. If you made it so that you built far, far less ships , and they were harder to build, and you had more control over their look and design I think this would make the strategy of using your fleets much better. It would make it feel like each ship mattered.​

What aspects are most important in defining your civilization?

The narrative of my empire is most important, what is their history and how has their history impacted the way they will shape their future (in fact a system that tracks and shows history would be great).​

How do you set goals for yourself during gameplay? When do you set them, and how often do they change as you play?

I set them at the beginning during creation, I decide what is my empire, how do they behave and what are they to become. If the game isn't going in my favour I will try to adapt them.​

How important is the current Trade system, with routes collecting back to your Capital?

Not important at all, it doesn't do anything for me. I think trades and supply between colonies and other empires should be a big thing,and so this should be reworked to make it actually matter. Such as so you have to control the flow of resources between your planets and empire so that trade or logistics becomes crucial and a target to disrupt during wars.​

Is colonization too easy? Should habitability and planet climate matter more?

Probably, I think unless the species has specific habitability traits then most species should have massive negatives for being on planets they're not adapted to.​

Are there any Origins that should be Civics, or Civics that should be Origins?

I don't know.​

If you could remove one game system, what would it be? Which system would you make the central focus of an expansion? Is there a feature you want to enjoy, but feel the current implementation doesn’t quite work for you?

I would like politics (war, espionage and trade) to be the focus of a serious expansion. I think espionage should be included in that, a real rework of that so you could use it to actually start wars between 2 empires you dislike, or seriously damage other empires, or use it to start rebellions would be great (and have the AI do this to you too). Making alliances matter, and having more political agreements you can have and also a system similar to EU where you can only have so many. Also the war and peace system should allow for individual empires to peace out and also allow you to make peace proposals in a way similar to EU. Basically the war system should be similar to the system in EU4. And as previously mentioned I think trade needs to be reworked so that it's an actual important part of your empire, you should have to think about supplying your populations with food and supplies and how you can impact those supply routes of your enemies during war (and protect your own).​

Politics also expands to the GALCOM, I would like this to be more involved. Perhaps events tied to them, rebellions and resistance when youre galactic emperor, resolutions having bigger policy effects.​

 

[Darlf]

MERCENARIES CHANGES TO REDUCE THEM, ESPECIALLY FOR PEOPLE NOT PLAYING FOR MERCENARIES
WEAKEN THEM OVERALL BUT INCREASE THE DIVERSITY
almost all capacity modifiers should give 1/3 max enclave this will ensure that everyone should have 1 enclave at level 3 of the war rules where enclaves are required for wars. but there won't be a billion of them in the game.

as for the enclave perk, we remove the reduced reward time, too much spam, too strong after what is written below

we give not 2 like today nor 1/3 like the rest of the modifiers after this change only max enclave but 1

additionally all other modifiers from now on give 1/2 max enclave

you can also get a few events giving 1/3, because max resolution about mercenary enclaves has 5 level, so we will get 3/3 and 2/3 max enclave so some event could be cool that sometimes appears or a relic with this.

further enclave specialization:
we spend some alloys - other resources and research and our enclave undergoes specialization in 3 categories

Ship sizes: each mercenary should focus on one of the automatically set fleet templates, like for each cruiser you get 3 corvettes and one destroyer etc etc... you can give it in a menu similar to vassals with simple symbolic markings and some long description of what the proportions of a given fleet are

allow the player to control which types of ships the enclave can build, but there can be no less than 3 types, e.g. corvettes frigates destroyers.

further set the emphasis of armament: focus on weapons - energy, kinetic, missile. although it would be more appropriate to have Balance against armor, against shields - skipping, etc.

Defense emphasis: here it is easier, so Balance, Emphasis on Armor, on Shields, on Hull

each of these 3 columns should have 3-5 options max + as I wrote earlier, the option to uncheck which types of ships cannot be built, but so that the fleet has 3 types of ships available.

maybe this last option should be given to the federation so that bots give the player ships for the federation fleet but do not spam with what is not needed.

and some slight nerf of mercenary enclaves since you can control their composition partially.

so we have fewer enclaves with fewer ships and minimal control over the type of fleets offered by the enclaves... I also think that the enclave could use one interesting modifier of its sovereign... shipyard construction speed but only 50% of the effect... I can already see the enclave spamming you additional ships faster than light .

at the very end each enclave could have its own random perk, something like a personality or empire, from 5-8 of them and they would affect the composition of the ships naturally for a given fleet and minimally on the compositions chosen by the player, e.g. 1 more shields, maybe lasers instead of plasma on some slots? minimal changes to the player's composition.

 

[Farwanderer]

One of my few claims of gaming pride is that I have all of the achievements for Stellaris. By the end of this month, I will have played by 2000th hour. So I think it's safe to say I love this game. There's not a lot I hold "sacred", I think removing the ability to pause, removing one of the "X"s from 4X, or completely rebooting the lore/aesthetics are about the only things that would make me say it wasn't Stellaris anymore.

I think fleets could change significantly, as long as I don't have to actually control them in a fight I'm pretty open to change. A lot of the dialogue in-game implies significantly smaller fleet sizes and the importance of individual ships, I think it would be nice for the mechanics to reflect that.

The trade route system is fine, but I have significant complaints about the piracy system. The way it works is really hard to pay attention to, and also doesn't have any downsides until all of a sudden there's a hostile fleet in your territory, which seems not very much like how pirates work. Patrolling fleets are awkward to manage and prone to missing spots. I think a much better system would be to have the ability to assign ships directly to the trade route, and if you don't have enough ships assigned you just don't get the extra trade.

I don't have a lot of thoughts on specific origins or civics, but I will say that it would be very nice to have one slot for "this is the unique thing about your starting planet" and a second slot for "this is the unique thing about your civilization".

All of the other example questions kind of flow together for me into the core system that I would rework if I had the chance: planets. And by extension, species and habitability. I would re-imagine something that is on the face of it mostly similar to the way things are now, but happening at the solar system scale instead of the planetary scale. A system would have district slots based on the planets and other phenomena present in it. Each district slot would be suitable for one or more specific types of production, and have its own habitability rating. In order to utilize a district, you would pay a variable amount of resources for development based on what type of location it is, and a variable amount of maintenance based on what species was living there and how different it is from their ideal habitat. This would allow for significantly more variation in habitability types, you could get into things like type of atmosphere, preferred gravity, temperature, etc. Xeno-Compatibility could be significantly simplified to allow you to use the best habitability rating available among species in your empire. This would also allow a greater focus on people who are living off-planet, on things like moon bases and asteroid mining colonies. Every system would have the potential to be a key part of your empire. Habitat technology would simply give you the ability to create new districts with alloys. Ringworlds the same, but with a much higher up-front cost and scale in exchange for much lower maintenance costs.

 

[Cosmic Monolith]

I'm a long time Stellaris player with a few times of burnout, Pretty sure I owned it when Leviathans was not even out yet. Though fair warning English is not my first language alongside not very used to the process of making a reply as I made my account just today.
So here I go with my impossible ideas
For one I love playing Megacorp and Machine empires as they have their own type of weight that feels nice.
So I kinda want to see a pirate authority would be something I guess would be pretty neat?
and prehaps a genocidal civic for megacorps? Well that is enough of civcis and such.

For the second thing I would like to see is prehaps some more astral rift content as its sorta my personal favourite story pack DLC as I love seeing the the weird twisted worlds trapped witin a gateway caused by universal decay.

For my third thing I would love to see is specimens being rewarded for killing guardians like when I killed the Scavanger Bot for the first time ever I would had hoped I could display part of its corpse and get a bit of extra lore about it in my collection but I got the planet modifer.
As for guardians I love them keep them as they make you feel small for the first time seeing them and it feels great killing one. My first guardian I found and killed was the Automated Dreadnaught so I kinda like the more machine based ones cause its my first.
Alongside I think guardians could use some form of protection like what the Tiyanki sometimes get witin galactic community as they are sorta a one of a kind creature.

For my fourth thing I want is to see a bit better threatment towards the great Khan as come on how do they die from old age while stealing so much tech from worlds and other sources and lack morals to keep themselfs a alive a bit longer alongside their anger can be toned down a bit as I would them being a Cetana but for midgame.
Speaking of the great Khan prehaps some more stuff for marauders as the other space born factions akin to it had improvements compared to my Aiiiyaaa yelling marauders friends alongside some more ship types as I would love to see them having a colossus ship in their disposal that would appear later on in the game so they could go back at making demands with the added bonus the "stay on target" achievement slightly more easy prehaps?
Plus marauder spy events prehaps?

The fifth thing I wish to see is a new anniversary pack but for ships alongside cityscape prehaps though I'd still pay 9,99€ for it if it costed something.
For the ship types I want to see are the nice looking non playable empire ships as I think the caravaneers have a nice shipset and I myself find it a bit of a shame I can't use them myself.

for the final thing I want is simply more unique systems as collided planet is super nice to see and left me shocked when I first seen it alongside I want your walls and cityset with your possible ship set certian fungoid space age species hidden behind a anomaly.

For my closing thoughts I'm happy where stellaris is though I do think some older DLCs can be updated and prehaps Ironman mode being a bit less touchy on the mods either way thank you for the great work Stellaris team.

 

[guywithpups]

I'd love to see all has_origin conditional checks to be implemented as scripted triggers, so we can mod origins to civics if we want. There's been a few mods that try this, but the compatibility is a nightmare. If that was just how the base game worked it'd be so much better. Why can't I roleplay a void dweller empire who's also necrophages or a lithoid empire with calamitous birth that also lives under the one rule of a mighty leader? Balance perhaps, but if it's non PvP game for my own fun, let me roleplay any combination that seems enjoyable and I can work out when the balance is off.

 

[PoultryLaser]

As a long-time fan of Stellaris, I’d like to pitch a few ideas. Apologies in advance for the minor Homeric epic’s worth of text.

How important to you are the current systems that use individual Pops and Jobs in the planetary simulation?

While I generally enjoy the current system, it can begin to feel cumbersome when I have a significant number of colonized planets or my planets begin to become overpopulated. I would really enjoy technologies or planetary decisions that allowed me to invest in individual districts, especially if that could be tied into my empire’s ethics. For instance, if I could invest in a housing district enough times, it might eventually become a 4,000-story public housing block, a continent-spanning slum, or galactic cultural center. My heavily expanded mining district could be a robot gulag, a workers’ commune, or the headquarters of my war materials department. Probably each planet could only have one or two investment specializations. I generally play a tall-ish game, but by the late game, my planets can become squished with pops who have nowhere to go. I’d like to have a place to send them that also makes each planet feel more unique.

If we made significant changes to fleets, how much could we alter before it no longer felt like the game you love?

I don’t have any great attachment to the current fleet setup, and I think it could be changed substantially. Weirdly enough, I personally hope that any large changes will draw inspiration from Crusader Kings 3. CK3 obviously has a layered military system with your levies, (consisting of gormless peasants likely to die in service of your greater glory), men at arms (specialized, more professional units which give you particular oomph or counter your opponent’s strengths), and knights (individual characters of particular prowess who can carve a bloody swathe through enemy levies but who also die valiantly and destabilize the kingdom when their ungrateful heirs inherit that duchy). I think this system would actually work well with Stellaris.

Allow me to present the following scenario. Your standard navy is a bit more abstracted. Instead of going to the ship designer and building individual frigates, you have a navy that naturally grows in strength based on your population, technology, star base modules, diplomatic weight, etc. It’s fully capable of swatting down most hostile space fauna or pirate raids, and it will mostly regenerate strength on its own after a scuffle so long as it’s docked in friendly territory. Your cranky, xeno-hating, fungoid neighbors have just declared claims in several of your systems, and their fleet is a bit beefier than yours. Through a bit of espionage, you discover they have several men-at-arms-type additions to their navy: boarding craft, a flotilla of planetary bombardment vessels, and a slave galley (which is available to them because of some of their ethics and/or civics). You consult what specializations you can add to your fleet and see that strike craft would make a lovely counter. Your neighbors invade before your specialized units reach full strength and make some headway, but you intercept them in a system where the ambient space weather already affects their shields and makes the extra vulnerable to your strike craft. Your flag officers (knights) decimate a major portion of their standard navy and kill the opposing flag officer who gave the enemy fleet a bonus to weapons range. After retreating, your opponent begins to swap out their vulnerable boarding craft for something that can counter your own strike craft, so you end the war before they can reach full strength, settling for taking just one of their systems.

Unlocking new ship types, like destroyers and cruisers would boost your standard navy but also give you access to new men-at-arms units and to recruit more stacks of them. Ethics and civics would also grant you new or unique men-at-arms, so your Determined Exterminators could add that Purge-O-Matic 2000 to their fleet when they unlock juggernauts.

Ultimately, I’d like to spend less time in the ship designer fiddling with what I hope is the perfect design for a picket interceptor. Instead, I’d rather spend some resources to tell my main fleet that they should start specializing in picket interceptors. Right now, I spend a fair amount of time simply building my fleets, but I’d rather the emphasis was on activating them and deciding what sort of threats they should counter or present.

Naturally, you would still be able to split and combine fleets as you so choose, with stacks of specialized units and numbers of flag officers being determined at the empire level and not the fleet level.

Is colonization too easy? Should habitability and climate planet matter more?

I’m not sure that colonization is too easy or too hard. If there is a problem, it’s likely that the decision to colonize is too binary. There’s a planet with my habitat preference within my borders? Of course I’m plopping a colony down there. There’s a tomb world with 0% habitability for my species? I’m likely waiting for terraforming technologies to become available before sending in colonists.

There are problems colonizing a deeply inhospitable world, but the only reason you might consider leaving a verdant world uncolonized is the empire sprawl mechanic. There’s no mechanic or civic that rewards players for leaving planets uncolonized.

I’d also like more “weird” planets that have some risk vs reward aspects to colonization. Sure, this world is a Gaia planet, but it’s also a gigantic living creature, and there’s a percentage chance that it eats one of my pops in any given year. Yeah, this is a tomb world, but I need to colonize it in order to open a cool archeological site. This planet is great, but it will explode 100 years after being colonized. This planet is awful for my primary species, but a Fallen Empire will give me a pet leviathan if I can keep 25 pops alive there. This planet is ready to colonize, but I’ll interrupt the lifecycle of the unique biota there if I do, so there’s a scaling science deposit on the planet instead for as long as it’s not colonized. I’d like to feel as though, if I left a planet uncolonized, it was part of a judicious strategy, not because I had too many limits on my technology and habitability preferences.

Which system would you make the central focus of an expansion?

Ground combat simply does not feel satisfying right now, which is a real shame. Alien invasions are one of the key tropes in science fiction, and Stellaris has never really fulfilled that fantasy, unfortunately.

Instead of the current combat system, I would prefer a system composed of three separate elements. The first is the simplest and similar to what we currently have, a fleet would need to bombard a planet and eliminate certain strategic defenses. Defenders have a window of time to scoot their own fleets into the system and stop the bombardment before the invasion and pacification campaign could begin.

Second would require something along the lines of a Hearts of Iron division designer, allowing you to create a few different templates. You can add infantry from different species, training levels based on the rights given to those species, and assign support battalions of armor or alien monstrosities depending on your wishes. This would assign a cost to that unit, in materials and potentially even Pops. Each invaded planet would require a certain number of divisions, varied somewhat based on your template and the size, population, and number of buildings/districts on that planet. For example, invading a primitive planet might require two divisions of slave infantry. Invading a major galactic power’s home world might require twenty elite divisions.

The third phase would function more or less like the archeology system or sieges in EU 4. Based on your army and the skill of your military leader, your army will land and attempt to pacify the planet. Each phase of the campaign expends the resources that army uses. So if that two-division slave army you used to conquer a primitive planet takes three phases to conquer, you would expend 6 slave Pops (and presumably some food and alloys). An elite division likely wouldn’t expend Pops but would instead require substantial inputs of alloys, energy, food, and perhaps even influence or unity. Levelling a planet with widespread bombardment would make phases progress faster whereas selective bombardment makes for slower (but perhaps more successful) phases.

I think the advantage of borrowing from the archeology system is that it also allows you to have a use for your ground forces during times of peace. Hostile non-sapient aliens on a planet you wish to colonize? Send in the Colonial Marines. Your science ship found a super spooky death cult temple on a barren world? Step aside, nerds; the military will investigate this one. Lost contact with a district on your newest colony after they started experimenting with the totally safe zombie space virus they discovered? This better not be another bug hunt, man.

Exploration is one of the great strengths of the game, and a military campaign system that works similar to archeology would allow you to experience new kinds of stories.

 

[Humanesque]

I just tried to play again and ahh... ground up rework for the war system, too, please.

 

[Lenk]

1. How important to you are the current systems that use individual Pops and Jobs in the planetary simulation?
   
   1. I like the system of having a visible representation of a social hierarchy. I like having special pops such as Nobles, Artificers, Ect. To me it helps give a sense of things on a planet scale and by extension gives more immersion to the sense of the larger scales such as sectors and the galaxy at large. I remember the days of when the game function as a tiles and although it ran much smoother it lacked visual clarity, it just seemed like a bunch of random folks bashing rocks together. I am honestly totally fine with going back to the tile system or a different system all together if it improves performance, I just like to keep the little tid bits of flavor intact. If pops are no longer visible then maybe extend the leader's background provide more info or them having fake traits to showcase their background.
      
2. If we made significant changes to fleets, how much could we alter before it no longer felt like the game you love?
   
   1. I like having large fleets being visible but by the end of the game, the game slows to a crawl. For example in the recent campaign I did with bunch of friends, the battle with Cetana slowed the game down significantly. if there was an option to change how things are render so that when certain number of ships are in a fleet, they visually could merge into one ship visibly? Not sure how that will effect performance but it might be better then having to render 3000 ships.
      
3. What aspects are most important in defining your civilization?
   
   1. I like the idea of having institutions being more represented but wish there was more to them then mere edicts. For example, Bureau of Espionage. if it was tied to a building it would add a little bit of flavor, maybe adding fluff events to them every often could be fun to read, like how there is some fluff events between subject and overlord empires.
      1. Could tied a leader to it like as a minor councilor cabinet sorta thing in similar to how there is a spymaster / court in Crusader Kings 3. Wouldn't really care if they give bonuses or not, but having someone as the 'spymaster' would be rather cool and add more flavor even if they technically dont add anything stat wise to the council. Titles in general are fun to play with.
         1. Able to to name institutions would be nice as well.
   2. I like to have more defining civilization material, we have origins and we have governing civics, what about development? We have a little bit of that in the Machine age where we undergo empire wide society level change into an advance government but what about adding something to early game or at menu level? Do colonies develop their own social structures such as creating their own principalities = planet gets a noble job, religions / cults = planet gets a temple regardless of ethics, ect. Could do these with events like how more colony events mod does. Gives the player minor flavor and adds a bit more randomness to spice up the rather dullful colonizing process.
      
      
   3. I like to see more random events with leaders instead of the 3 currently that rarely ever happen. Even if the events dont do anything I like to see more fluff text every so often. Gives the notion that the leaders actually do stuff.
   4. Would be neat to have some minor diplomatic options for rulers of empires to have interactions between each other.
   5. The idea of megasctures building up from kilo / super structures in machine age is very appealing and would like to see more of that going into the future because gives the idea of advancement / societal development.
   6. Ruler Chip Relic needs to be reworked though because by the time you get it your cybernetic pops live upwards to 200 years in a game that only last about 200 years so you dont really get anything out of it.
4. How do you set goals for yourself during gameplay? When do you set them, and how often do they change as you play?
   
   1. Before I start a campaign I would first come up with the kind of scenario I like to play, afterwards I could go about trying to get the best ethics, origins, and so on to get a close as possible to that fantasy. When in game my goals changed depending on what kind of empire I am playing.
      
5. How important is the current Trade system, with routes collecting back to your Capital?
   
   1. I see it at a rather surface level, gives an the idea that the colonies are trading or something at least. though I usually build up all my starbases around my core sector so trader is always secure.
      
6. Is colonization too easy? Should habitability and planet climate matter more?
   
   1. I think its kind of easy as everyone could colonize every planet at the start then just move the pops to better worlds. Doesn't really give the feel of how dangerous a tomb world is or how hazardous is to live any other low hab planet. Pop growth is king of strategy at the moment. if you have more pops, the more you can make, if you can make more then your opponent the more likely you will win.
      
7. Are there any Origins that should be Civics, or Civics that should be Origins?
   
   1. Overall I think the basic limit of civics should be increased or allowed to be increased by some level of social accomplishment. like when you fill up all the traditions, perks, and research the technology, there could be flavor event chain could unlock another civic slot.
      
      
   2. I think this is more of balance thing but there are civics I want to play with and be a feudal space empire with nobles but feel like it is rather lack luster in terms of power when compared to other things.
      
8. If you could remove one game system, what would it be? Which system would you make the central focus of an expansion? Is there a feature you want to enjoy, but feel the current implementation doesn’t quite work for you?
   
   1. No system comes to mind about removal of systems.
      
      
   2. I would like the early game and colonization to get a touch up with events and events that follow up later on as a story pack. For full on expansion I want the other accession paths to get their equivalent of Machine age touch ups with advance governments. Could call it Mind and Matter.
      1. On a side note for flavor, I think the Authority icons for base line governments should get a little touch up where the Government Type (not the authority) could dynamically change the icon. Example: Communal Parity and Representative Democracy dont use the same icon but its still green.
         
   3. I think making planetary sieges have random events and could spawn Generals type commanders if you dont have one assigned (the promoted through ranks sorta event thing like how the normal ship commanders and scientists get)

 

[Darlf]

• How important to you are the current systems that use individual Pops and Jobs in the planetary simulation?fine, be able do a lot of thins to pops is good, but if
• \/
• If evrything jump into more virtual pops ( he he ) and we lose to 40% of actions it still would be fine if that make game go FAST

• If we made significant changes to fleets, how much could we alter before it no longer felt like the game you love?
• \/
• I avoid war due to them, be boring,. 100% fun is from tick stronger ai to do something or trapl players but often it just boring wating player should have option to take control of battel not 100% but say now you do that and fleet will try some moves. not forcing player but allow to have like 15-30% control over battel. Wars should have great consequences when high exhaustion occurs (if it remains in any form) and if you in other side of galaxsy, some gateway or wormhole may cut a litle bit but you never can deleted new a distance modifier that provides certain changes during combat, counted at the same time from the player's closest pre-war colony and from the allied colony (also not counting the new war loot)
  if the colony's distance modifier is worse than the allied modifier, we use an ally, but the ally's modifier should be worse so that only the ally much closer to the target has a more favorable modifier than your version, and the ally modifier could have a limit, e.g. if the modifier was a damage bonus from +20% to the colony and in 40 hyperlines it fades to -30%, the ally modifier should not be above +10%. the numbers and the operation of this variable itself require a lot of arrangements, such as how the gateway should function? should it be a final variable that slightly weakens the negative effects? or should it be counted like hyperlines.

• What aspects are most important in defining your civilization?
• \/
• changes, during 1 match.
  
  RP
  Bending your ideology during roleplay at the beginning because we can't defend ourselves in such a state.
  
  Finding corruption of your original ideology in the middle phase
  
  Stabilizing your original ideology to the ideal without fear of consequences or a huge change
  
  POWER
  Asking or concentrating your power, looking for opportunities without binding yourself, risking.
  
  Using opportunities in the early game phase, refining.
  
  Winning all main and secondary goals by refining your opportunities and defending the stability you have earned.

• How do you set goals for yourself during gameplay? When do you set them, and how often do they change as you play?
• \/
• Making my own perfect empire, often my ideas for gigantic empires turn into medium sized perfect roleplaying pearls of stability, it's not always good but always the situation is stable.. for example stable failure.
  
  Discovering the role doing something strange.
  
  Getting carried away by random rare (should remain rare) totally coincidences...
  Like when as a plantoid from the origin of the fruit, I had 4 murderous neighbors and tiyanki took the fruit to the other end of the galaxy for some reason when I was supposed to leave being attacked from 3 sides, however I started throwing even science ships and building empty corvettes to slow down the enemy, waiting for the formed colony saving 30 out of 50 pop, creating a federation with 5 plantoids next to the new location and creating a peaceful mostly plant galaxy exterminating aggressive empires. and I just wanted to make gaia gardens in the galaxy originally

• How important is the current Trade system, with routes collecting back to your Capital?
• \/
• i use it a lot in past but fact that you cant make off colleting from station X make 0 seans from some trade stations that collect from half of your empire, haveing station around your worlds and a ring it just to good. someone say that if you cout out of your clony it should not give you resorces, but i think it woudl be to hard for stellaris but meyby some -% of how planets that are cut out capitol works, biger crime ect...

• Is colonization too easy? Should habitability and planet climate matter more?
• \/
• yes. we should to back to tech unlocking new plaents and make them pain in as whne you have weak world but not simple - big % if resorces ect. on top of that making colony from evry good world at the same time should not be good for empire as well.. meyby something like how much empire can spread at the same time ? like mix of new and old empre size but working only for more active stuff. you have 100 of it, it give max bonus, you take system or make colony build a lot ? it go down a litle bit for ech, almost non for buulding, but still and you lose more and more below 50 you have some bad stuff for your emprie and bad events biger chances, but ti in tiem go up to 100 again ... How much can we stretch at once?

• Are there any Origins that should be Civics, or Civics that should be Origins?
• \/
• yes but most time ot abaut origin just to nah to be origin and need changes, like furit origin should be buff, not to be strong but to have options or letf as now but make it civics. Natural Perfection Could be origin if all Ascension of the species have it origin. sure there are civics that have similar effect but almost alywas is just origin.. Moze

• If you could remove one game system, what would it be? Which system would you make the central focus of an expansion? Is there a feature you want to enjoy, but feel the current implementation doesn’t quite work for you?
• \/ right now i cant think of sysyem i could deleted they good or can be good if fix or just not importants and not change game so not problem as well.... but no focus no just not, Paradox
• chooses mechanics from a few lines and tweaks them but when a few updates come these mechanics remain in almost unchanged form. simple mechanics are not necessarily bad and stellaris already has enough unique mechanics, now additional already existing content should be created for some time, it is true that some of it is hidden behind dlc X but if there is another archeological dlc why wouldn't it be limited to its archeology pack not unlocking anything that the original has or what the original unlocks in other dlcs.
  
  the game needs to focus on a few smaller dlcs and a huge change to the systems already in place... calculating diplomatic power from the army is ridiculous... what's their strength if I can pump x10 of their fleet out of my shipyards before they break through the first starbase... the fleet strength should be cut to max 20% of what it is and a lot should be added as more stable bonuses modified by the level of economy and military tech, the current trust system is ok but it only delays mass vassalizations and does not eliminate them...
  
  and do something about the fact that AI almost always competes with the first neighbor even if they have similar ethics and are in agreement but have a neutral or open opinion... that's strange, probably in the code bots are supposed to look for rivals for influence first but too often similar bots fight for no reason.

 

[mrt1212]

Honestly, i am so worried about yall messing with civic origin swaps inconsiderately to what is possible at current like 75% of the ideas ive read over time.

Whatever you do, even if its bonkers, if it involves cooldown, dont put it on the modifier screen. It is persistently bonkers how many of these cooldowns are not anywhere near the decision to make them again.

 

[judicator070]

I'd like to thank the Stellaris team for having this discussion with players! Much of my feedback will be about how I would like to see more use cases for situation progress and events. It's a great game mechanic and it should be more widely integrated into the game.

I think that planet colonization is too easy. I believe that situation progress and events should occur during colonization, such that throughout the colonization process you would have to dedicate a continuous flow of resources, and deal with any events that come up, such as dealing with the local wildlife and climate, and the type of events could depend on habitability and planet type.

This also ties into my thoughts about conquering planets. I believe that situation progress and events should occur during conquest. Remove army fleets altogether and replace them with situations and events, such that throughout the conquest process you would have to dedicate a continuous flow of resources, and deal with any events that come up. Essentially, slowing down the conquest and inserting events for aggressive or siege stances, and the same could apply to having events for different defensive stances. The stances could be changed in the situation progress screen. And at each level of situational progression, your choices to events, your stances along with your military power would affect the outcome of planetary conquest until either the situation completes or is abandoned with having either succeeded or failed.

Go ahead with making significant changes to fleets. It would be great if you removed those defenseless army fleets, and instead, fleets would have ship component modules representing which armies they carry, which also contribute to military power. And again, events, stances and military power would be affecting the outcome of the conquest situation. Fleets could intitiate orbital bombardment and/or deploying their pods down to the planet. Oh, and orbital bombardment with situation progress and events too.

If I could remove one game system, it would be the trade route system. I often seem to forget that it even exists. Sure, I'll guard the trade route with a small fleet of corvettes or build other defenses, but again, I believe that events would fit nicely here to deal with pirates and smugglers.

Please have an expansion that expands on politics. Don't remove political factions, just make them more important in influencing members of the council, the agendas, diplomacy, as well as empire and leader modifiers. And create new events that could make political factions a cause for praise or concern depending on which of the factions hold power and what our governing ethics are.

The current systems that use individual pops and jobs are not important to me, so I'm not opposed to this being changed. I recall hearing the game director once say that pop mechanics were better in other games, and so as long as Stellaris has years of continued support, I'm okay with the change.

 

[GCaelann]

Listening to player input for future mechanical changes is a great effort and I hope it changes Stellaris for the better as we continue onward.

Regarding pops and jobs, as much as the individualization of pops can be interesting in many ways, I think it taxes performance too much to be worthwhile. Admittedly it's gotten a lot better these days, but I still think abstraction is the cleaner way. I think the job system is fine, but it would have to be made to work with abstracted pops somehow (regarding traits and weights). Either that, or a decrease in pops with an increase in throughput to compensate. I know this has been suggested before.

Regarding fleets, it appears to be the current biggest performance taxer in the late game, again due to individualization instead of abstraction. Seeing all those little ships is nice but the slowdown isn't worth it. I think a level of abstraction would work without removing the Stellaris identity. Perhaps by having things like squadrons that represent several ships but only render some of them, things like that.

Regarding trade, I find the system a bit cumbersome to work with to be frank, and the fact that people very often will simply wait until they unlock gateways to bypass the entire thing is, to me, evidence that it's simply not fun to most players. I don't think the entire system should be removed and trade simply centralized like other resources (although that's certainly a possibility), but perhaps being able to set certain starbases as trade centers that could receive local trade instead of everything having to go through to the capital would make the system a lot easier to manage and reduce the incentive to want to bypass it.

Regarding colonization, I think it might be fun to take a page out of an old game and implement something like atmospheres and planet types, rather than just climates. Empire founder species would have a native atmosphere and planet type they could colonize and thrive on, and colonizing all others would initially create domed colonies with significantly impacted development and infrastructure. Then, through research, we could develop ways to colonize other atmosphere and planet types, including some of the currently un-colonizable and un-terraformable celestial bodies, and eventually also research climate modification which would be a precursor to a more late-game full terraforming. This would make early game colonization much more difficult without acquiring other species or robots, but give players at the end-game stage "fun tools" to play with the galaxy to their heart's content if they so desire.

I think it would be nice to have an expansion focused on espionage and stealth, and how these mechanics could perhaps be changed. I get that the current system allows for a certain roleplay especially with the events that can popup during espionage missions, and certainly these don't have to go (and could even be expanded into full-blown situations), but I think espionage in Stellaris might benefit from having things like traditional stealth units that can enact operations on site, as well as things like operations that can be developed and "stocked" and then targeted at the galaxy level.

One feature I would like to enjoy but really don't is Xeno-compatibility. I tend to play xenophile empires and tend to accrue several species, but turning the species list into a hot mess and making performance even worse is simply not worth the benefits of XC. So this is definitely one feature that ought to be rethought somehow to make it work without impacting the game negatively too much. Perhaps if pops become abstract and species traits operate in a different way other than in individualized pops then XC would not be as much of an issue.

For the other topics, I don't really have anything to say about them right now.

 

[Samhain08]

Hey there! After 8 years of playing Stellaris, finally signed up on the forum just to give my two cents on that vision!

Here's the main thing I would add : for me, modability is extremely important. I make my own mod for fun. I don't publish it because it's a monolithic, rather messy overhaul that I cannot be bothered to update in a timely manner. I don't really know what vanilla looks like anymore. Stellaris is fantastic for modding, I would not have stuck with the game this long if I hadn't been able to play around in the game files so easily. For me to keep playing Stellaris, it is essential that I'm still able to mod the new stuff that's coming in.

I'd also like to point out a few systems that really need some love :

Trade routes really did not age well. It often clashes with what I'm trying to do in the game. The most egregious example, I think, is with eager explorers. I start a game, I want to try only using warp drives, turn off the hyperlanes on the map. I colonize a world two jumps away. But wait, why do I need to maintain a 12 jump long trade route that uses a FTL technology I haven't even researched??? This is the worst example I can think of, but the system feels clunky in so many other ways. I like the idea of having to care about your logistics, but this isn't it.

The slave market is in a weird place. Buying pops is very powerful, selling them is almost always bad. Not only that, it's unreliable, because you depend on AI empires to fill the market (it's almost always empty for me), or to buy from you at a time you can't predict, so you can't even use this for a quick cash in for an upcoming payment, like from a mercenary enclave. Selling should be immediate, the pop leaves your world, you get energy credits, the folks at the galactic market can take care of them. And to fill the market, maybe smaller factions in the galaxy could be involved. Maybe refugees after a planet has been conquered sometimes get caught by pirates and end up there. Maybe marauder empires abduct a few pops when raiding and send them there. Maybe there is a new slaver enclave, none of the enclaves currently are antagonistic to a non-homicidal player. There's a lot of storytelling potential here. And I'd definitely want a toast notification when pops end up on the market.

Espionage operations are underwhelming. Getting intel on other empires is useful, but the operations themselves aren't worth bothering with. I imagine it would feel bad for players if an operation they didn't see coming was too crippling. But right now the system just isn't really worth engaging with. Operations aren't useful enough to make an espionage focused empire interesting. That's a fantasy I'd like to see better represented in the game.

Haven't tried this in a while, but last I heard, crime syndicates still had to close all branch offices on their enemies' worlds before declaring war. This is silly. I once lost an entire evening unsuccessfully trying to change this one thing.

 

[NotJake0]

If I could, I will use this opportunity to pitch an overhaul for Megacorps

For the most part I really enjoy playing as a corp, in fact people generally make fun of my eco only playstyle (they just don't understand that money is real power), but there are 2 main things that bother me quite a bit with the current implementation.

1. Megacorps should have access to all Authority Types.

Currently corporate is selected in the same way one would select to be democratic, but the current corporate hierarchy is an exact copy of Oligarchic which is fine... only that there very much ought to be options for the others as well. Ideally, I'd like to have the ability to flex a lot more in the space of being a business entity without being constrained within the current definitions associated with the aesthetic.​

​

-Democratic - Co-Op: This one is particularly odd because it actually has a Civic that attempt to fulfil the fantasy, but cannot be used with Fanatic Egalitarian because it conflicts with Megacorp as an Authority​

​

-Oligarchic - Board of Directors: I'm putting a name here only because the current "Megacorp" system as a broad category accounts for all business empires so would need something new for this in particular in the game and this is the most direct way to notate its leadership​

​

-Imperial - Sole Ownership: This one is the most needed at the moment in my opinion, as currently you are able to be a fanatic authoritarian constantly being told that your empire is not authoritarian enough unless you completely change government types. I think also this fulfils a lot of known corporate fantasy, companies with the family name on the building and such (very much especially for the criminal syndicates)​

​

-Dictatorial - Majority Shareholder?: This one I'm not really sure about. Currently the main difference for most Imperial and Dictatorial governments in game is mainly the existence of a dedicated Heir, and I am fine with that being effectively the solution here as well, though not really sure about the name in that instance.​

​

​

2. Retool the existing corporate holdings system into a Market Share system.

This one is likely more complicated to actually implement, but I think potentially even more important for the successful fantasy of taking over the galaxy from the boardroom.​

​

-The current system allows for 1 corporate entity to take up residence on any planet locking out all others, and then allows that singular empire to make buildings in relation to the level of the capital building.​

​

-I would propose any number of entities with a trade agreement (except syndicates) to be able to open shop on a planet. The focus then is on capitalizing the available market share of the population. I think the best implementation of a system like this would probably give a total pool of buildings to be built on a planet by corporations according to its population, to be divvied out proportionately to those entities according to their 'Market Share'.​

​

- I think that currently, there being really nothing to do as a Megacorp to compete against other Megacorps without literally declaring war on them is a big hole in the overall fantasy of the gameplay. Opening up each planet to be forever a battleground means that you can't be locked out by people who got there first if you have a strategy, as well giving new metrics and incentives for what buildings to build or how to interact with an empire. I imagine various systems able to be integrated into this, but most directly Espionage. Corporate Espionage would be great, making plays against each other over stakes in the biggest planets rather than hoping to open up shop on every backwater in existence.​

​

I apologize if that is too long and/or too much, but thank you for reading if you did. I'm happy to answer questions about my pitch if there are any.

 

[Noble Steel]

I enjoy a lot of what people have said so far on this thread, but one aspect that I have always enjoyed in Stellaris was the representation of all the different kinds of cosmological phenomena, different astronomical bodies, and stellar objects that one can encounter in a galaxy full of wonders. While I love me a good megastructure, I suppose Im more interested in the natural wonders of space. I made a rather scathing review of cosmic storms highlighting many of the cool things I thought were missing from a "Space-Weather" DLC. I would love to see an expansion of whats already there. The joy I feel of finding an O-class stellar behemoth should be just one of many many different unique things you can find out there in the galaxy. Since this is a Sci-fi game exploring hypotheticals like FTL travel and the like, I would like to see the Astronomical Taxonomy of the game vastly expanded to include not only more common types of stars, planets, comets, etc, but also to include hypothetical stellar bodies that we haven't been able to observe directly in our universe, Like Quark Stars or White Holes. Listed below is a comprehensive list copied from my steam review with some bonus things I added that I would LOVE to see in Stellaris. Maybe with these additions we could see a dedicated mechanic towards Helioforming (terraforming a sun) stars into different types. Many of these can and should be exceedingly rare--but this makes encountering them help a given playthrough feel extra fresh and rewarding when you do manage to exploit or learn from them!

• Protostars
• Quasi-Stars
• Electroweak Stars
• Preon Stars
• Quark Stars
• Boson Stars
• Planck Stars
• Q-Stars
• Dark Matter Stars
• Antimatter Pulsars
• Blitzars
• Gravastars
• Hawking Radiation Stars
• Thorne–Żytkow Objects
• Supermassive Black Holes
• Primordial Black Holes
• Rogue Black Holes
• Kugelblitz Black Holes
• Micro Black Holes/Quantum Singularities
• Black Hole Tidal Waves
• Quasars
• Hypernovaes
• Kilonovaes
• Supernovaes
• Supernova Remnants
• Nebulae(s) (Emission Nebulae, Reflection Nebulae, Dark Nebulae, Planetary Nebulae, Antimatter Nebulae, Phantom Nebulae, Crystal/Gas Nebulae, etc)
• Planemo Systems (Starless rogue planets)
• Frozen White Dwarfs
• Polar Auroras
• Tidal-Cooling/Heating events on Lunar or larger bodies
• Magnetar-Pulses
• Photon-Winds
• Neutron-Winds
• Solar Flares
• Stellar Megaflares
• Hyperflare Events
• Gamma-Ray-Bursts (GRB)
• Fast Radio Bursts
• Stellar Quakes
• Cosmic Ray Showers
• Asteroid Showers (And no, I don't consider that one asteroid event to be good enough)
• Space Debris/Pollution?
• Graviton Waves
• Gravitational Lens
• Gravity Wells
• Entropic Gravity Fields
• Gas Giant Storms
• Cryovolcanism
• More types of Accretion Discs
• Localized Magnetic Field Anomalies
• Stellar Coronal Mass Ejections (CMEs)
• Rogue Planetary Objects that can enter/leave your systems
• Cosmic String Vibrations
• Exotic Stellar Winds from Hypothetical Stars (e.g., Quark Stars or Strange Stars)
• Axion Clouds
• Dark Matter Storms
• Plasma Storms
• White Holes & Emissions
• Quantum Foam Fluctuations
• Faster-than-Light Neutrinos or Other Particles
• Superluminal Shockwaves
• Primordial Magnetic Fields
• Mirror Matter Objects
• Temporal Vortexes/Distortion Zones
• Plasma Tornadoes
• Wormhole Nexus Points
• Event Horizon Phenomena

 

[papahotties]

I think a colonization/habitability rework could be really fun if paired with a terraforming rework. I feel currently terraforming is sort under utilized and I only use it toward the late midgame/late game to get just that little edge of production because I have nothing else to do with my energy. Maybe making colonizing different planet types come with more penalties, coupled with cheaper and earlier terraforming? Or maybe partial terraforming? Also an origin where you can start with a terraforming candidate guaranteed in your starting system and some early terraforming techs?

 

[JordanEW]

I cannot tell you how excited I am by your willingness listen to the community! I made an account just to post this!

• How important to you are the current systems that use individual Pops and Jobs in the planetary simulation?

Not at all. You could completely change the entire thing. I simply require some kind of 'real' logistics management as a core mechanic is kept involved.

• If we made significant changes to fleets, how much could we alter before it no longer felt like the game you love?

If you took away the ability to manage single ships altogether. However, I do think fleet structure is an important aspect of the game that does not feel very cohesive. When I make a fleet, it does not feel a fleet; it just feels like a bunch of ships I set on certain behaviors that make sense gameplay wise.

• What aspects are most important in defining your civilization?

Traditions, Civics, Origins. In that order. At the top of the list are Traditions for me; they are the breathing life of your empire in real time as they grow. Civics follow as they can influence every aspect of your empire both mechanically and roleplay wise. Last are Origins, there are both too many and not enough, some of them should very much be in other categories, I will address that below.

• How do you set goals for yourself during gameplay? When do you set them, and how often do they change as you play?

My goals are usually intentionally hard (for me anyway). Not because I desire to play a difficult game, but to see what story I can eek out of the game. I will play a diplomacy heavy corporation in a highly aggressive galaxy; to see if I can figure a way to survive and prosper. A Tech rush empire in a galaxy of Marauders and Fallen Empires. That sort of thing. The goals can change frequently depending on the goals of the run. This is usually triggered by random events or discoveries in the game that may be more enticing from either a roleplay or mechanical standpoint.

• How important is the current Trade system, with routes collecting back to your Capital?

I completely ignore it unless I am using a trade focused build. It's boring, it feels too artificial and limited. Maybe make Trade like... trade. You buy 250 metal off the galactic market, then it came from somewhere. It needs to be delivered, and guarded, by real ships over time. Trade agreements need to feel real (and some civilian space traffic would be delightful).

• Is colonization too easy? Should habitability and planet climate matter more?

Yes and No. I would assume most civilizations that have reached the wider galaxy do not really have to worry about things like weather or temperature. Technology is powerful. I would not imagine that a civilization that can create a force field for example, cannot wall off the weather over a city or build underground or in orbit. The actual colonizing is not the problem. Its A) how hard is it to get the resources out in this scenario? B) how many people can you realistically support in a hostile external environment without some sort of civilization-wide focus on it? The first question is somewhat addressed already but I don’t think the latter is.

• Are there any Origins that should be Civics, or Civics that should be Origins?

Absolutely. Overturned should be worked into the civic system somehow, it does not feel like an Origin when I play it. Subterranean should also be a civic, not an Origin. Anyone should be able to decide to build under the ground for heaven’s sake.

• If you could remove one game system, what would it be? Which system would you make the central focus of an expansion? Is there a feature you want to enjoy, but feel the current implementation doesn’t quite work for you?

Hmm, that’s a tough one. 1) I want to say the current 'reasons for going to war' and what you can accomplish, feels so limited, so often. Trash it and rework the whole thing into something else. 2) Deeper diplomacy and spy network usefulness is desperately needed. 3) The fleet scales are a little silly.

 

[Mole204]

-What systems and content are “sacred” to you, which would make Stellaris not Stellaris anymore if we changed them?
-The peace and freedom to mold the galaxy to my will. Stellaris is a wargame simulation, not Care Bears the United Nations. Paradox has been more of a threat than the Crisises.

-If we made significant changes to fleets, how much could we alter before it no longer felt like the game you love?
-Why don't you just leave them alone? "how much could we alter before it no longer felt like the game you love?" is not a challenge. Stop trying to make it a challenge.

-How important to you are the current systems that use individual Pops and Jobs in the planetary simulation?
-Pops and Jobs are the opposite of important. They exist to serve as numbers in the tabletop empire. How they feel is utterly unimportant. Giving them action algorithms has been nothing but trouble, as it is the cause of the lategame slowdown. The Factions are stupid enough. Paradox making the pops and jobs "lively" is an anti-Stellaris add-on.

-What aspects are most important in defining your civilization?
-Keeping the founding main-player species central to the empire, and keeping the aliens on whatever planets I need them to be on. There is no "defining your cultural identity" from the grave.

-How important is the current Trade system, with routes collecting back to your Capital?
-The trade system has come in handy, often being a method to save the empire, if sorted out at the right money-crunch-moment. Please don't screw it up by "improving" it into trash, because your wording makes it sound like you're playing with the light switch for it.

-What aspects are most important in defining your civilization?
-Self defense. Science, science, and a solid treasury. The occasional must-have treasure, like a certain modpack ship, a few artifacts, and some of the megastructures. No, I'm not telling you which, Paradox isn't trustworthy enough to not remove it from the game Just Because.

-Are there any Origins that should be Civics, or Civics that should be Origins?
-Origins and Civics are meaningless fluff. At best it's a ignorable flavour text that gives a stat bonus.

-If you could remove one game system, what would it be? Which system would you make the central focus of an expansion? Is there a feature you want to enjoy, but feel the current implementation doesn’t quite work for you?
-If I could remove something, it would be the lategame slowdown, and the needless pop-decisions that caused it. Then the Galactic Senate, which only has a few bonus decisions in it, then a lot of spam popups- though I like the galactic market. If I could remove something from Stellaris it would be Paradox. They cannot stop themselves from prying open the lid and screwing up the game workings inside. They should have left well enough alone YEARS ago and gone to make Stellaris 2. Just go pour all your player-torture garbage into that and leave Stellaris alone. I'm TRYING to play a game, but Paradox keeps eating the pieces like a retarded Pomeranian.
It's not paranoia if they are out to get you.

-Is there a feature you want to enjoy, but feel the current implementation doesn’t quite work for you?
-Modpacks are very useful in mitigating various errors forced-in by Paradox. Paradox then, goes and tries to knock down as many mods as they can. Sometimes after waiting a period of time to make it look like it's not reactionary, sometimes not.

The most current feature is the launcher being hacked up by Paradox, so that mods aren't running at all. The blame is cast on various operating systems despite Paradox being the ones to try to derail what some mad programmer of theirs has taken a dislike to being upstaged by.

-Is there a feature or direction that Stellaris could do without?
-I forgot there was a music bar for awhile. Don't need that. The graphics are too detailed and Stellaris could run smoother with a little simplification to it. Who cares that every lick of flame on the sun is animated? Or that planets rotate? Just turn it off and ignore the crying of the graphics designer. The same for populations making choices. There's likely newer additions that I haven't noticed since Stellaris has tried to grow out of control.

Try not to burn out your downvote buttons just because I want a enjoyable game. Stellaris HAD one, and has been drifting away from it with every update/ shovelful of sand that has been thrown into the gears.
edit- I see some messages from people who don't like trade and ground combat. I like both those things. They just don't know how to use these features. I do admit it's a bit annoying to have to win the space battle entirely before getting to move troop clouds to a planet. Now, the War Exhaustion bar, THAT needs adjustment. Whatever subprogram is doing to scoring in it is skewed mightily. It always felt like it was doing things in reverse, too.

 

[Armor9D]

What systems and content are “sacred” to you, which would make Stellaris not Stellaris anymore if we changed them?

• None. Twice now, (FTL travel with Apocalypse, the economy with Megacorp) Stellaris has ripped out core gameplay systems and replaced them with something completely different. In both cases it was a vast improvement. I trust Stellaris's developers to make good decisions when it comes to revamping systems and content, while there have been cases where new content was lacking or problematic, there's never been a major rework or overhaul of existing content that hasn't been a significant improvement in my opinion.

How important to you are the current systems that use individual Pops and Jobs in the planetary simulation?

• Not very. There are some nice parts of the current system, such as the ability to add unique jobs as a result of civics, origins, events, planetary features, etc. The encouragement of planetary specialization is nice too. But there's always room for improvement, and if the price of that is changing the current system I don't have any issue with it, though I feel the planetary simulation is good enough that there are other priorities for changes in the short term.

If we made significant changes to fleets, how much could we alter before it no longer felt like the game you love?

• I like that ship design and individual ships are a thing, and that ships are physically present in systems and so are battles, rather than being abstracted. However, as long as these basic principles continue to be observed, I don't mind changes to how they are expressed ingame, e.g. I don't mind if the current ship design system is completely replaced as long as there continues to be a ship design system of some kind.

What aspects are most important in defining your civilization?

• Ethics, Civics, Origin, and Species Traits. I select these to carefully create a specific playstyle that I intend to execute ingame.

How do you set goals for yourself during gameplay? When do you set them, and how often do they change as you play?

• I set an initial long-term roleplay goal when designing my civilization, basically I have an idea of how I want to play it and intend to execute that as faithfully as possible. Short-term and medium-term goals are set according to the actual circumstances of the game itself, reacting to opportunities and threats, but are ultimately in service to, or at least not in contradiction of, my initial roleplay goal, even if that means not playing "optimally". I may change my roleplay goal partway through the game, but I generally only do this if an extremely rare opportunity comes up that I might mot be able to experience again for quite some time, e.g. Horizon Signal.

How important is the current Trade system, with routes collecting back to your Capital?

• Not at all. It's one of the systems that could use a serious expansion and rework, or if it's going to be very simple, it could at least be simple in a way that's not annoying, e.g. trade protection and pirates.

Is colonization too easy? Should habitability and planet climate matter more?

• Colonization does feel a bit too easy, though I feel like part of the problem is less that habitability and planet climate don't matter and more that all habitable planets just feel the same. Most planets don't have too much in the way of unique modifiers or differences, and different climates don't really meaningfully affect how I use planets, that's all determined by planet size and deposits, all climate does is determine how soon I can use a planet. I feel like Endless Space 2 does a good jobs of differentiating planets with regards to colonization and development.

Are there any Origins that should be Civics, or Civics that should be Origins?

• Early Explorers and Natural Design would probably make more sense as Origins.

If you could remove one game system, what would it be?

• Influence and Unity should be consolidated into a single political resource. Having two that sort of do the same thing but in different areas doesn't make too much sense.

Which system would you make the central focus of an expansion?

• Domestic politics, which mostly doesn't exist at the moment. The player doesn't really face any penalties or rewards for playing in a manner contrary to or in accordance with their empire's ideology and government most of the time, and the beliefs and feelings of our empire's pops don't really seem to matter as long as the player exerts a basic degree of competence. Internal politics and rebellions are a central feature of many, many science fiction works and their presence in Stellaris at the moment leaves a lot to be desired.

Is there a feature you want to enjoy, but feel the current implementation doesn’t quite work for you?

• Espionage could be great, but its current version is just very lackluster.