Stellaris Dev Diary #364 - Sights Unseen

[Dayknight]

Oh one more thing: what about adding more win condition?
Yes, we can declare game won and close the game anytime. But it create natural tension and give player some proper goal for play.
E.g. Pax Galatica with certain amount of years can be win condition for galactic emperor. When it become wincon, rebel against emperor make more sense and galactic community become more important content to delve into.

 

[Skeletr0nKing]

I want a game mode where your pre ftl is contacted telepathically by the Unbidden, offered technological abd psionic gifts and tasked with building a little portal for reasons. That'd be fun.

 

[Foxosaur]

I want a game mode where your pre ftl is contacted telepathically by the Unbidden, offered technological abd psionic gifts and tasked with building a little portal for reasons. That'd be fun.

That actually sounds fun. Like a Pre-FTL gets random messages, illusions, signs from fallen empires and crisis to do their bidding which can ultimately destroy everything else if too succesful

 

[Colin2002]

What do you think I missed? Are any of these especially attractive or repellent? Where do you want us to go?

I think all of the above mentioned ideas are really cool except the scenarios. I don't dislike the idea but i would rather just have more option at game/empire creation like more control over what is going to spawn/ what events are going to take place in the galaxy instead of these scenarios. Secondly while I like the BIO ships I worry about them being locked behind an ascension path but if its integrated well then it should work fine.
I like the reworks that are planned and i think all of above mentioned ones should be implemented as I think these are systems that need the most attention in particular politics and espionage
Also any updates on the fleet changes you mentioned last week?

Where do you want us to go?

One thing that was missing although was already mentioned as feedback in the vision dev diary is fleets. There are currently too many fleets in the game especially in the endgame and this causes significant lag and reduced the strategy behind ship building and attacking as it mostly just boils down to a numbers game. So if were gonna add bio ships we should revisit ships and fleets as a whole. This could also be combined with a buff to space stations as currently even if you specialize heavily in them with both leaders, the tradition and ascension perk they still are not a valid defense option in the late game. Another one was both colonization/habitability and trade. I wont discuss them as they have already been covered in detail previously but i hope these get improved upon as well in the future as both systems feel very basic atm.

Secondly, there are also some minors things you could sprinkle in updates that don't need a whole DLC/update. Firstly is more fallen empires or at least have one for each ethic including a hive mind and a Megacorp one so at least we are not playing with the same few every game. And although i know fallen empires are dormant it would be nice if they interacted a bit more with the galaxy prior to potentially waking up in the end game and declaring war on a the galaxy or a crisis. Secondly some civics/origins/ascension perks need to be touched up as either they are not very useful or powerful and/or they were added a long time ago and haven't changed or adapted as they game as evolved and grown bigger with more content and DLC. Cosmic storms also needs to be improved and not just abandoned as I feel there is a lot of potential but the current implementation is quite bad. Another thing is the galactic community. Small things like additional options other than just galactic custodian/emperor and making resolutions and being in breach of galactic law feel more impactful. Finally it would nice if more existing content and DLC worked better with the other existing content/DLC. Cosmic storms is good example but there other things like maybe using war and espionage to influence foreign politics, to brake up federations or to cause an internal revolt/civil war.

Lastly regarding this point while doing all this improve and strengthen the AI as while it has gotten better in some area overall a lot of AI decision feel weird, counterintuitive or just plain bad. For example in my recent playthrough were Cetana spawned the other AI empires seemed not concerned at all by her presence and her goal to destroy the galaxy and therefor did nothing to stop her. I was the only one that sent fleets at Cetana. Also other decisions like what building they put on their planets and how peace settlements during are just more example where AI makes poor decisions and in the case of war goals makes it almost impossible for you to achieve victory against them.

While I doubt this is going to happen it would be nice if really old DLC like Utopia was just added to the base game as most of those features feel like core gameplay elements at this point and it would streamline future updates and changes involving core gameplay aspects

Finally i would just like to add my overall thoughts on the future of the game and how new content and DLC moving forwarding should focus more on improving and expanding existing systems in the game rather then adding new ones that end up feeling half baked and that requires us to learn a whole new mechanic.

 

[Bellera]

Trade!

I think it is a system that could add so much to the game if done properly. The current system was a very big letdown. Link it to strategic resources, or create entirely new trade comodities. Add proper trade routes to foreign nations, make a more interactive system that you dont interact with only when piracy is a problem. I think the trader empire or megacorp fantasy simply doesnt work with the current system.

 

[:DNA Pyro]

I currently don't have the funds to get a pc capable to play stellaris pc but my idea could be for both pc and console albeit a bit of an undertaking I'd imagine.. official mod support with an official mods browser available for pc and console. I know that games like bg3, skyrim etc have had great success Implementing such a thing and I for one would love to be able to add ship types, megastructures etc to the game. I feel like this can only be good for stellaris because everyone had their own ideas on what they love from the game and with official mods support across all platforms everyone can tailor their experience <3

 

[BLM-93]

Guys, with the Nomads, Pirates, Bounty Hunters, Smugglers playability and the "Internal Politics" overhaul (long overdue!), you've just found your Major Expansion for Season 9! Do it!

 

[Sian]

Please don't pair biological ships with biological ascension. I fully agree that the fantasy of true bioships isn't fully realized. But as a person who actually plays biological still, you have to ask what has biological been to us thus far? For me it's about enhancing my population through genetics to be on par (even though they aren't) with Synthetic, and Psionically ascended species. And if I can still do that, and you also wanna add some biological ship stuff great I just.

In and so far that I'm reading it, it's not as much as Biological ship being depending on having done biological ascension, but rather that they could be easily be stuffed into the same DLC with only minimal faff.

That said, I really would love to see an expansion on hive minds specific stuff, so they're less of 'simply' being fleshy machines that can't do half the cool things machines can do. Honestly Hive Mind really seem like the least developed empire choice

a DLC filled with Biological ascension rework, 'proper' bioships, and Hive mind stuff sounds like a great jumping off point in my book

 

[Calvax]

This was a bit of a stream of consciousness dev diary, so I’m sure I’ve only scratched the surface of possibilities.

What do you think I missed? Are any of these especially attractive or repellent? Where do you want us to go?

These all look really good, especially dynamic factions. There's a lot of potential there to make the galaxy feel more alive while offering different challenges (particularly for map painters if pops don't just roll over anymore). I also like that you're thinking of how gestalts could work with these in their own way. Science fiction has plenty of examples of hive minds that have to deal with schisms, fragmentation, and the general issues that would come from a mind so parallelised and spread out. I'm glad any rework wouldn't just have them as factionless.

In terms of what's missing I'd say there are a few themes that are related to what you've said but could do with a section of their own:

1) Soft power. There's no real soft power mechanics in stellaris. You can't become a trading hub that exerts power through economic domination, and the favor system is completely bare bones and gamified (get diplo tradition, stick envoy in foreign empire, wait for random favours). Compare this to something like Vicky 3 with its markets or the hook system in CK and it's a stark difference. I'd like there to be more ways to influence the galaxy in stellaris beyond war, or war with friends (which is what diplomacy often boils down to).

2) The rise and fall of empires. Empires do fall in stellaris, when they're conquered by other empires or crises. Otherwise the galaxy is very static and ossifies the longer the game goes on. Virtually every game ends in 2-4 power blocks that sit there, unmoving, until the occasional massive war that will shift borders a bit. There should be more internal factors that lead to significant changes in the map. Just look at vassals, right now they're a "win more" mechanic. Loyalty does nothing since a disloyal vassal can still be taxed to the point they fall further and further behind their overlord in economy, tech, and military making it increasingly less likely they will rebel (IMO we really need a penalty to collected tax scaling with disloyalty). There should be mechanics beyond war that represent the rise, change, and fall of empires.

3) Notification spam. This isn't a theme but it's something I definitely think needs to be considered. With every new DLC there are more and more events, decisions, and therefore pop ups in a common game. I play on slow speed but it's gotten to the point that by the midgame I fell I'm being forced to close or otherwise address a pop up window every 10 seconds. I'm not even exaggerating, while it might not average that when you've got science ships surveying, storms popping, rifts, specimens, wars, a billion and one treaty requests from the AI etc it gets overwhelming. And I'm a player with well over a thousand hours in the game. At least I can just reflexively close everything that doesn't matter. For a new player with a subscription it must feel like playing an unprotected browser game at times. Please consider the mechanics of how information about our empires is presented to us. Paradoxically while we have a lot of information thrown at us the vast majority of time it lacks key information that makes it useful. E.g. when leaders retire/die we're not told where they were working, or when empires do anything we're not given any context for who that empire is (a close ally and friend gets the same level of information in a popup when they go to war as a random one system empire on the far side of the galaxy).

 

[Falling5tar]

I honestly just want some form of ground combat rework. It does not have to take up an update, just something small.

 

[RhysTheT00n]

If they add loads of stuff for playable Nomads, you don't understand how quickly I'm turning them into the Quarians. In terms of revamping the war system so empires can betray you and change sides, I absolutely *dream* of a scenario where I'm manipulating the Geth to fight the Quarians while I play as the Reapers and then having the Geth suddenly switch sides and join the galaxy's war against me. The only trick is that if I turn the Quarians from a well-established (voidborne) empire into a single fleet of Nomads, what's stopping me from just sending a fleet in their direction and wiping them from existence myself?

 

[CassCD]

What do you think I missed?

Nothing. You guys can't miss with ideas as great as these. 2025 really sounds like it's going to be an amazing year for Stellaris.

 

[Nobunaji]

Like all others have said, this DD contain many angle of explorations that are great.

Here are a few pointers I'd like to see :

- War :

Armies and ground invasion are extremely boring in their current state. My ideas, to make it a more interesting system, are the following :
- Defensive armies should be reworked to have multiple types of units. They would be spawned by Buildings that could be built akin to Megacorps building and holdings.
- Offensive Armies should be tied to normal ships. With each tier of ships being able to transport a bigger amount of units (E.g. : 1 for corvette, 2 for destroyers, ..., 8 for battleships. Different units could take more space (A giant death robot would surely take more space than a regular soldier)

- Espionage :

Right now it is really hard to keep track of spies network and in most of my playthroughs I end up forgetting I even started one. This is why I think we should have a new tab in the outliner for anything Espionage/Diplomacy related.
I also think Espionage, Diplomacy, Federations and maybe even the Galactic Community could use the situation system to make progress on operations / diplomatic negotiations.

- Species Pack :

Hear me out : Space Dinosaurs
I'd also like to see more Dimorphisms and Psychic version of portraits akin to what the Machine Age did
As well as to see all existing portraits receive Cybernetics and Synthetics version. (This should be done over time and slowly but I really think this is a necessity).
Finally, I still don't understand why the Humanoid portrait category has 3 different version of the Human race.

- Faiths :

I think a new angle of exploration that hasn't been mentioned in this DD would be religion. Because even the most fanatically materialistic world could revere science like Spiritualist revere a god.
I think such a system could be a mix of Civilization's system and Crusader Kings' system.
It's a pretty vague idea but I like to think it could allow things that are currently not allowed.

With that said. I'm very excited for the future of Stellaris.
Cheers to another year of Stellaris.

 

[mirco297]

I’m very glad with the discussion point of “Faction and Politics” in particular, because that sits very close to the feedback you asked to prepare in the previous dev diary.
One thing I feel like Stellaris is currently missing can be best described as:
Species centred political intrigue and decision making.

Every species in our empire currently receives their citizenship status, rights, restrictions and living standards directly from the player, and they just accept this in every way.
The only way alien pops can express their species interests (or dissatisfaction with their current species rights) is the -10% happiness penalty from Population Control and Residence Citizenship and possibly by joining the Xenophobic Isolationist. And the latter of these expressions actively runs counter to their species interest because adopting this faction still means that empire will favour the founding species.
They don’t apply any form of pressure or push for decisions which favour their species in particular.

What I think is missing:
Currently pops from all species push for the exact same policies based on their ethics.
There is no inter-species conflict of interest or competition for favourable positions with a given society.

When the United Nations of Earth gains a large populations of extreme xenophobic Prikkiki-Ti pops through conquest, they don’t get factions specifically dedicated to favourable policies, reforms or ethic shifts in favour for the Prikkiki-Ti species. Instead they get a Xenophobic Isolationist faction which favours Humans if it were ever to be embraced, because the Humans are the founder species.
The Prikkiki-Ti can never politically push for things that might be desirable for a fiercely xenophobic species that was forcefully conquered. They can never apply political pressure on the United Nations of Earth government to sequester the Prikkiki-Ti populace from all other alien species, they can never push for reforms that give their species in particular more political power in the United Nations of Earth or even (if they are powerful enough) push for some kind of autonomous territory/released sector where they can create their Prikkiki-Ti-favoured/only state.
And I don’t mean that this would be reserved exclusively for xenophobic ambitions or pops, this is just an extreme example for illustrative purposes.

Though I also want mention on this point that Stellaris already has a pretty way in which pops from different species are inclined towards different ethics based on their traits, living standard and jobs. In that regard Stellaris isn’t lacking.

In the hopes of further elaborating upon my point, I want to give an example of the kind of game-play I mean:
Quite a while back I played as a Pacifist-Authoritarian-Materialist (not xenophobic at all).
Early on I managed to get two species with the artic habitability preference and a large quantity of artic planets (My founder species was Continental). One artic species came from migrations treaties with a valued ally, was very well suited to use as leaders and that the Conformists trait. Meanwhile the other artic species had traits ideally suited for a slav… Voluntold Community Service and hailed from a rival nation that had attacked me unprovoked.
Across all artic worlds, I made the ally species full citizens and the rival species *Voluntold Community Workers. And overtime this arrangement became a staple of my empire, as I had many artic worlds. It was to the point where the artic ally species were more numerous that my founder species.
But while the game allows for such a structure with the current citizenship systems, there was no faction or political pressure to keep or change this arrangement in anyway.
The rival species never pushed for a better citizenship status, which is fair enough. They are *Voluntold Community Workers and have no political power after all.
But the ally species also never incentivised me to keep this arrangement or prioritise their species even more. They are effectively competing for preferred habitability planets with a species that has no political power, yet they never push for policies or species rights changes that make sure their species becomes the majority on this planet. Or even to become the dominant species of by civilisation, since they vastly outnumber the founder species already.
This arrangement was purely based and maintained on my vision for this empire, and I’d like to see some kind of species interest to be present in the game.

What I hope to see:
In the previous dev diary you mentioned that the developers were considering “a system more similar to the pop groups in Victoria 3.
I didn’t know what this would imply, but I looked into Victoria 3.
And I’m quite glad I did, because I think I found an excellent example of what I hope to see in Stellaris in terms of Species centred political intrigue and decision making.
In the update 1.8 video they show their National Movements, and I think they are a great way of expressions species interest in Stellaris.

Species centred politics is a fantasy you see in quite a lot of Sci-Fi.
But one example I’d like to mention in particular for this comment is the Mon Calamari and Quarren from the Star Wars: the Clone Wars animated tv show.
They are both species native to the planet Mon Cala, in the Mon Calamari system, positioned in the Calamari sector (take a guess which species was more politically dominant).
They were both alien species fully recognised by the Republic and enjoyed full citizenship.
Yet they also deeply hated and were in fierce competition with each other for millennia.
They didn’t fight each other most of the time, but they sought any society or political advantage for their species. Image trying to manage species two ocean world species that had movement which sought disadvantage their rival species in particular and reserve ocean worlds/pop growth for their own species.

And to be clear:
I don’t hope for some species interest group that is just small time xenophobia, nor do I want all oppressed alien species to be lumped into a “pleaze be Xenophile/non-Xenophobic :3” faction that stands in opposition to the Xenophobic faction favouring the founder species.
I mean movements for individual species with a noteworthy political presence (be it population size or political power) that advocate for their own interest in particular. Something that might inform differential treatment for various species in non-xenophobic empires.

The mechanics of species citizenship, rights and restrictions haven’t really changed much since launch. And while I like the options we currently have, I’d also seeing this aspect of the game to be more fleshed out. To give the player at least a narrative reason to give full citizenship to one species, while only giving residence status to another beyond “I have xenophobic ethics, I can’t give them full citizenship”.

Thank you for reading this. ^^

 

[DeanTheDull]

Next week we’ll be reacting to your responses to this one.

The days are getting shorter and the snows are starting here in Stockholm, so I expect I’ll keep this one pinned for the next two weeks.

See you next week!

Hi Eladrin, team. Formerly more common poster here who's dipped away over the last year or so. Thanks for inviting opinions, as I'd probably not raise this otherwise.

This is one of those things where 'it's not you, it's me,' where a game's design focus and I part ways and that's fine. This isn't a critique, or a criticism, and mad respect for the Stellaris team as a whole. This is just a sharing of why I drifted away, and what might interest me in returning.

I've dipped away from Stellaris over the last two years, not really playing since the Machine expansion but really starting with the Leader expansion, because I found the early game too decisive, and mid/late-game content too time-intensive to reach. With how decisive things like Leaders could be, but certain design limitations (ever expanding ascension perks or civics for the same number of available choices), Stellaris felt increasingly like a 'solved or suboptimal' game- either you chased a meta, and could be so powerful that only higher difficulties or such would compete, or you embraced non-optimization and could not compete at those same difficulties.

But if you did lower difficulty but then optimized out of habit, then you could crush the setting by the mid-game, which made mid-game and end-game content something that you could be over-prepared for by the time it came from, and with the 'winner' of the game decided well before it came. I can't remember which year it was the last time I actually did an end-game crisis, because it became an issue of just waiting out the clock till they spawned. Yeah, auto-build systems were supposed to improve that, but... yeah. The difficulty curve wasn't great, with too wide a fluctuation, since by the time you reach year 100 for that natural mid-game content your deviation of power could be so massive. That's just how decisive that tech or tradition rushing could be given time.

That is why your final thought on scenarios raised my interest enough to comment. Specifically, an advanced start option.

I think a lot of my feelings of the mid-game capability gap would be mitigated if the late-early/mid-game was already in play from the start. Have a small cluster of initial colonies somewhat developed, some basic space lanes between powers pathed, but also have the galactic community already started, the Khan right around the corner, and so on. Give players tools to compete with, but deny the decades of disparity of optimized vs unoptimized early-game growth. There can still be substantial exploration to be had- entirely unexplored systems, unscanned systems, even hidden empires not connected- but provide for a feel of the 'old galaxy' discovering the 'new one' akin to the established powers of Europe reaching ocean travel and 'discovering' unknown lands, as opposed to every encounter being the first.

I feel this would be beneficial because many of the dynamics that can make the mid-game distinct from earlier games (galactic politics, federation advancement, storms, Khan as a disruptor, etc.) depend on end-game timing rather than tech, and can be most interesting when done from a position of relative equality. Galactic politics mattering because you can't already conquer your rivals. Trade pacts being beneficial because the other side has an economy worth the name. An influence cost for galactic actions as an alternative to expansion, as opposed to a replacement when there is no exploration left to do. E

This would, in my mind, put the premise back on strategy- and even roleplaying- rather than 4X growth escalation. Exploration still has a point, new colonization still has a role, but the map RNG of the first 20 years of gameplay wouldn't be as decisive- or repetitive- as if your first 20 years are about maneuvering for power block competition.

As for how this can be justified? Space storms, the fallen empires, a 'scenario' mode, there are lots of ways. A pseudo-random scenario mode might be 'best' from a planning perspective, as you could control for variation by having a core number of constants (a galactic cluster of established powers, a smattering of hidden powers, the neighborhood total war threats) while allowing variation in other spaces.

Whether the initial galactic setup is for a cold war, a race for colonization, a hidden driven assimilator / necrophage devouring swarm in the unexplored (and primitive-heavy) uncharted spaces, tons of options. That doesn't mean 'easy' options, but...

But really, just bypassing the early game would be a 'win' that would go a long ways to rekindle my interest.


And if it doesn't / it's unfeasible / you prioritize other things... best of luck with it!

 

[Helicopter200]

I wish all species to be dynamic like what we have in machine age

 

[herculeanus]

The revision of the battles/ships.
Montu Plays made a video about it:

And it really does need to be revised urgently.

 

[somerandofromreddit]

I’d also want to add some variant of factions to Gestalt empires - maybe Instincts for Hives that grow more dominant based on your behavior or Directives that compete for priority in Machine Intelligences. They’d have to feel different from individualistic factions, however.

I am not sure that this is a good Idea, even if it's different, it still means all Empire have the same kind of System. Let the Hive Mind just be a unified mind, so that Hive and Individualist Empires really play and feel different. Maybe Individualist => Full Factions, BioHive => Some Instinicts, Machine => Full Unity would work.

What do you think I missed? Are any of these especially attractive or repellent? Where do you want us to go?

One of the good things about Stellaris are the roughly equally powerful but very different Empires. So we can mostly mix and match out of:

• Planet vs Habitat Empires, and in the Future maybe Nomad Empires
• "Normal" Resource Gathering and Production Economies (with and without the Catalytic Processing Flavour) vs Trade Economies with Merchants and Traders (needs a Buff in the new System after you killed nearly all our Merchants) vs Megacorp
• 4 Ascension Paths (Yes, Bio and Psyonic need some Love),
• Individualist vs Hiveminds
• Single Unified Empire vs Vasalswarm vs Federation of 'Equals'

I think it is important that you keep all those different styles of Empires in Mind and make sure that all possibilities stay competitive with and distinct to each other.

What do you think I missed? Are any of these especially attractive or repellent? Where do you want us to go?

Also, Please for the Love of God, as a bridge until the new Pop System is done, turn Xenpocompatibility from:
You get 10^69 new Hybrid Xenosubspiecies,
into:
All those different Xenos are now all one Species (or maybe max 4: Cold, Dry, Wet, Space [combines Habitat, Ring, Tomb and Gaia]) with a big "Xenocompatible-Bonus" and changing (or combined) Portraits representing all original Species. All those Species that all look different now are actually one with like all their bonis combined. Thematically, it's actually the same as the current System (all those Xenos can now interbreed, aka ARE NOW BIOLOGICALLY ONE SINGLE SPECIES!), but it would make it actually playable.

 

[windsong]

I believe the use of Biological, Psionic, and Cybernetic Ascensions can be made selectable as an option, allowing players to decide whether they can be used simultaneously. If there are concerns about balance or playability, additional restrictions could be introduced. For example, a second Ascension could occupy two Ascension slots, while a third might take up three slots. The concept of a non-Gestalt mechanical species that wields psionics or a super-civilization mastering both genetic modifications and cybernetics sounds incredibly interesting to me.

I also think that declaring war without notice or breaking a ten-year peace treaty should be allowed. Of course, the consequences for doing so should be severe, such as incurring widespread hatred from the galaxy's normal empires. Additionally, penalties like significant losses of Influence, Unity, and a national-level debuff could be introduced. However, the idea of forcing a Gestalt Consciousness intent on eradicating all life in the universe to obediently adhere to a ten-year truce feels quite strange, even though I understand this is for game balance.

The faction doctrines and objectives sound intriguing, but I would also like to see a DLC that strengthens Imperial or Oligarchic governments. For the former, there could be a simplified family tree and family system similar to Imperator: Rome, allowing players to cultivate heirs early on. For the latter, it could function like the family system of Republics in Crusader Kings 2, letting players groom successors from among a few oligarchic families. Additionally, instead of political ideologies, there should be more factions within Imperial and Oligarchic governments that, despite sharing the same ideology, oppose each other due to conflicting interests. Perhaps each faction could even have ties to one or more oligarchic families, with vested interests behind them.

I feel the espionage system is still a bit underwhelming at the moment. Its main function seems to be adding immersion and making it harder for us to know the status of AI empires. If the espionage system is to be deepened, I think the directives should have more tangible effects. For instance, causing the breakdown of AI alliances, inciting unnecessary wars between AIs, and so on, rather than just sabotaging a single starbase.

If playable space pirates are introduced in the future, I think it would be necessary to make trade routes visible, similar to the Cathay and Human Empire factions in Total War: Warhammer 3, where periodic, uncontrollable caravans are sent across the map. Additionally, for a DLC introducing playable space nomads, I hope it would be possible to launch boarding battles against enemy fleets. This would allow us to emulate scenarios like those in the Halo series, where even with technological and space combat disadvantages, we could resist invasions through elite gene warriors engaging in boarding actions and ground warfare.

 

[Dmitry02]

Factions and internal politics must be a priority, in my opinion