• We have updated our Community Code of Conduct. Please read through the new rules for the forum that are an integral part of Paradox Interactive’s User Agreement.

Stellaris Dev Diary #368 - 4.0 Changes: Part 2

Hello everyone!

Today we’re going to take a deeper look at some of the ways we’re adjusting game pacing through changes to Galaxy Generation, Message Settings, Events and Anomalies. Then we’ll take a peek at the Focus system, the Empire Timeline, and a few other changes.

Some of this has already been covered in the announcement diary, but I’ll be providing more up-to-date screenshots and more details. As this is from a build that is still in active development, there will be placeholder icons or temporary text in some of these screenshots, and all of these are still subject to change.

Pacing Adjustments​

Stellaris is a game with many moving parts, each of which interact with other elements to produce a complex whole. Small adjustments in one spot can have significant effects in another, and in the end there can be unexpected impact to the general pacing of the game and overall economy.

Galaxy Generation​

As mentioned in Dev Diary #366, we’ve gone through all of the scripted systems and done a normalization pass on the frequency of these systems appearing, as well as preventing many of them from appearing in empire starting clusters. Some other adjustments have been made to generation as a whole, which should distribute non-guaranteed habitable worlds a bit better and reduce the likelihood of massive clusters of them right around your homeworld.

There were comments in the thread asking for the ability to easily change these weights. Since most of them now use scripted variables, they’ll be very easy to change with mods.
# SYSTEM INITIALIZERS
@spawn_system_rare = 0.1
@spawn_system_uncommon = 0.5
@spawn_system_base = 1
@spawn_system_slightlycommon = 2
@spawn_system_common = 4
@spawn_system_verycommon = 8
@spawn_system_extreme = 16
@spawn_system_max = 99999

@spawn_system_enclave = 100 # first enclave uses this, rest use extreme

As the pool of anomalies and prescripted systems with guaranteed anomalies have also grown over the years, we’ve adjusted the anomaly spawn chance increment a bit to compensate.

Leader Traits​

A minor change from the original announcement is that we’ve implemented a suggestion from the forum thread to have the trait selection levels on even levels - it’s much cleaner overall. Leaders still begin with a starting trait at level 1.

If you have trait selections to make, the leader level up Notifications will show the green “call to action”. If you don’t, they’ll have a more subdued monochrome icon.

Leader positions will also have a significantly greater effect on which traits will be selected for players without Galactic Paragons or those that prefer automatic trait selection. For those that prefer picking leader traits themselves, this bias is instead reflected in which traits are selected for the pool of possible traits whenever a new trait is available.

In Settings, we’re also letting you choose what you would like your default automatic trait selection to be. Any time you take over an empire as the primary human player (a distinction that is primarily relevant for co-op gameplay), it will make sure that the Auto Select Leader Traits box is set to your preference.

image10.png

Events, Messages, and Notifications​

We’re going through many events, messages, and notifications to reduce the number of popups that disrupt your general gameplay. While major events still appear as popups, those that don’t require an immediate response or are purely informational have been converted into notifications or toasts.

image3.png
image6.png
image14.png
image2.png
image4.png

The Artisans and Mirror Dimension can wait until I’ve finished what I’m currently doing.

As we’ve been doing this pass, we’ve updated some of the messages that have been converted into toasts, to make them more informative at a glance.

image13.png

Empire Focuses and the Timeline​

While designing the Empire Focuses we had several thoughts.
  • Stellaris is a dynamic game full of wonder and possibilities. Our sandbox nature means predefined and structured trees cannot work for us.
  • Tasks provided by Focuses should help guide newer players through the game, providing suggestions for short and medium term goals.
  • Behaving in a manner consistent with your Empire Focus should naturally complete the Tasks from that category.
    • Empire Focus categories are Conquest, Exploration, and Development. (Names subject to change.)
  • Rewards for progress within a Focus category should be intangible.
    • Any rewards you get should feel narratively consistent with your empire’s behavior. For instance, acting as an aggressive militarist should naturally guide your researchers to theorizing applicable technologies.
    • These rewards should reduce the need to rely on lucky draws from the tech pool if you want to pursue your Focus.

The Empire Timeline and Focus share a tab in the Situation Log.
image9.png

The current mockup of the Timeline tab. Some differences will exist between this and the final version.

Tasks come in four different categories - Conquest, Exploration, or Development correspond to the three different Focuses, and there are some very basic Tasks at the beginning that are considered “Core”. Completing a Task grants progress within its associated category; Core tasks grant progress in all three.

image11.png

Many of the early game tasks are generally straightforward. The tooltips try to give some advice about how to complete them.

At any time your empire will have five tasks offered, weighted toward your selected Focus. Tasks complete automatically and retroactively, so if you’ve already completed an Archaeology Site, it will complete immediately if you draw it. If you have a Task that either feels impossible or isn’t something you want to do, you can discard it for a small Unity cost.

Many of the rewards for progression along a Focus are (currently) research options thematically associated with the Focus. For example, the first Conquest milestone grants Doctrine: Fleet Support as a guaranteed research option, while others in the line include Specialized Combat Computers and Destroyers. You’ll still have to research them, but we’re happy with how your actual actions in game have an impact on the ideas your researchers are coming up with.

The Empire Timeline shows many of the key events of your empire. Beginning with your Origin as the starting point, important milestones will be logged as they happen. Empire firsts feature prominently on the timeline, such as your first colony or the first time you’ve been humiliated by a Fallen Empire, but some other crucial moments are listed as well, such as war declarations, megastructures, when a crisis appeared, or when an accursed rival stole your Galatron.

The timeline has several zoom levels to let you see a general overview of what happened at a glance, or a detailed list of interesting moments.

image1.png

Hard Reset​

In the 4.0 ‘Phoenix’ update, we’re adding a new Origin to the Synthetic Dawn story pack called Hard Reset.

As a warning, this Origin gets pretty dark (even for Stellaris), very quickly.

image7.png

In this Origin, you begin as the cybernetic battle thralls of an advanced Driven Assimilator that have suddenly lost connection to the gestalt intelligence. Naturally, you were outfitted with some of the finest combat cybernetics available.

image8.png

Your civilization begins in an immediate fight for your lives.

Thankfully, as the elite battle thralls of your former masters, you excel at violence. This is good, because you’ll need to fight through rogue barrier fleets that still infest nearby systems.

image12.png

I’m sure everything on Dream Loop is fine. No need to investigate further, right?

As with Broken Shackles, the exploration of yourselves as a people is a core part of this Origin, with factions forming a little while after you gain your independence.

image5.png

Your sudden independence has also left your populace with some traits that represent your nature as Assimilator battle thralls. As you discover more about your past, you’ll have opportunities to either mitigate or enhance these traits, either by pursuing de-cyberization or by embracing the power of the machine. An alternate path exists where you can instead accept your conflicted nature and… Well, I won’t spoil what happens on that path.

Achievements​

As part of the development process, we decided to take this opportunity to review some of the rules around gaining achievements. As I think that many of the simpler ones are a great tool for letting you know that you’re playing the game “correctly”, so we’ve made a change.

Ironman mode is no longer required to earn most Stellaris achievements. An unmodified game checksum and being in single-player remain as requirements.
  • The "Victorious" achievement has been updated to "Win the game through any victory condition in Ironman mode."

Next Week​

We’re still working on getting things like the pop and planet changes presentable, so next week we’ll likely be talking about Trade and Logistics.

See you then!
 
  • 114Like
  • 62Love
  • 9
  • 7
Reactions:
What is Paradox's obsession with removing Ironman as a requirement for achievements? It's an unnecessary and unwarranted change every time that just depresses those who care about achievements.
 
  • 10
Reactions:
What is Paradox's obsession with removing Ironman as a requirement for achievements?
Achievements are supposed to cater to a game's entire player base, with options ranging from the easy ones for everyone to the insanely hard ones for people like you, and they don't.

"Energetic" (have 1000 EC) and "Brave New World" (colonize a planet) – trivial tasks that any player capable of playing the game at all can accomplish – have a completion rate of less than thirty percent on Steam.

Most people don't play "unmodded Stellaris on Ironman". They play with mods, or with Ironman disabled, or both.

And if you look at other strategy games where "no mods, Ironman" is not a requirement for achievements, you will see that the completion rate for extremely challenging achievements is very low there, too.

Most people either don't care enough about achievements to bother cheating to get them, or care too much about achievements (and about their internal self-image as an honest person) to be willing to cheat to get them.
 
  • 17
  • 1Like
Reactions:
Can we have a checkable option for the answer that we want to be always defaulted with repetitive messages, especially with multiple answers?
 
  • 1Like
Reactions:
Yes, as I do not know how the details and the balancing will look, I can only assume. But the system reads like an avenue for frustrating feedback, where players complain that the task system makes the game too rigid if it provides deterministic rewards, thus making it the most optimal way to get ahead in the game.

The node you showed with "Build 20 Destroyers" implies this unlocks the guaranteed research option for getting Cruisers. I guess we could have the same task for Destroyers? So, assuming we start with 5 military tasks and not much is going on, there might be a task like "Build 20 Corvettes" that leads to a guaranteed Destroyer. If my assumption is correct, you could beeline to Cruisers—hell, even Battleships—if you focus on that.
I think you might be misunderstanding the tasks a little; by themselves, these only give progress for the respective focus. You can even see it on the screenshot - building 20 Destroyers provides 25 points towards the Conquest Focus, and you need a 100 to complete the shown milestone.

Thus it is up to the player which tasks they want to accomplish the milestone, and the ones that don't appeal to them can be ignored (though I am in agreement with one comment I saw that there should be a way to refresh some tasks for free every so often).
 
Last edited:
  • 3
  • 1
Reactions:
What is Paradox's obsession with removing Ironman as a requirement for achievements? It's an unnecessary and unwarranted change every time that just depresses those who care about achievements.

I’ve never particularly cared for achievements ever since they became a thing in gaming. So I might not be the most typical person there but even if you do love them I don’t see why it matters that anyone else can get them easier. It’s not like you lose anything from it, you still did the challenge the way you liked.
 
  • 5
Reactions:
What is Paradox's obsession with removing Ironman as a requirement for achievements? It's an unnecessary and unwarranted change every time that just depresses those who care about achievements.
I'll see your question and raise you another one. What is with random people deciding what is and is not right when it comes to how others play their games? Does the person playing a non-ironman game and earning achievements lesson the impact of your earning it? What about someone playing with mods? Does the person using a United Federation of Planets shipset or species mod to add Klingons or Romulans into the game, or even just having a wider name list diminish the impact of your achievements? And also, you should only speak for yourself. I am someone that cares about achievements. I love achievement hunting in game. But guess what? I also loving being able to make a ton of saves, when I want to make them. I enjoy having a United Federation shipset and large namelist while fighting against Klingons and Romulans. So, please, do not speak for me, as I do not have a problem with people playing non-iron man games and earning acheivements. I do not have a problem with people using mods and earning achievements. These are video games, played by a wide range of people for a wide range of reasons. I do not care if people want to install a mod that will unlock every single achievment in the game as soon as they launch it. What other people do, it doesn't effect me one bit.
 
  • 5
Reactions:
Depends on the implementation. When you build a lot of destroyers, it makes sense that you gain knowledge about how to build them faster, cheaper, and stronger. This should really increase the likelihood of such technologies dropout. However, it doesn't make sense that now you know how to build a cruiser.
You don't "learn how to make cruisers".
You get a option to tell your scientists "figure out how to make cruisers". At 100% the normal cost.

I have 830 hours in Stellaris and I have 3/191 Achievements. One of those three achievements being 'Colonize a Planet' which only 27% of players have... If achievements are meant to represent what a player has achieved in their time playing then it has absolutely and totally failed in it's current form. Players who only play multiplayer or with mods are completely left out of the system, and judging by the numbers there are far more people out of the system then in.

I would recommend making achievements possible with mods and in multiplayer games.
Relaxing Iron Man is okay, but allowing Checksum Changing Mods would remove all value from the Achievements.

Also I am not aware that there is a rule against getting Achievements in MP?
 
  • 4
Reactions:
Relaxing Iron Man is okay, but allowing Checksum Changing Mods would remove all value from the Achievements.

Also I am not aware that there is a rule against getting Achievements in MP?
In your opinion. And in mine and many others, allowing checksum changing mods would have no bearing on the value of achievements. Again, I ask, how does letting me have different models of ships, or new models for species, or new namelists detract from the value of your achievements?
 
  • 6
  • 1
Reactions:
I will never get tired of Paradox releasing a dev diary about apples, including a description of apples and a few examples of varieties and uses, followed by a whole bunch of posts of people giving out about apples for reasons like "I hate the colour orange" and "You said it has an "edible skin" why did you put a skin on it I hate having to peel the skin off things" and "I don't see the point of apples when we already have oranges" and "I don't want to eat seeds, why did you put seeds all over the insides, I'm so angry about these seeds, you should have put all the seeds into some kind of central "core" instead".
 
  • 6Like
  • 6Haha
  • 1
Reactions:
In your opinion. And in mine and many others, allowing checksum changing mods would have no bearing on the value of achievements. Again, I ask, how does letting me have different models of ships, or new models for species, or new namelists detract from the value of your achievements?
Apparently there is nothing preventing the text half of those mods from containing code.
 
Apparently there is nothing preventing the text half of those mods from containing code.
In the case of shipsets, perhaps you could designate in the mod that ships would have access to more or better weapon mounts or armour/shield/utility slots, or better base stats (at least judging by some of the ones that introduce new classes of ship)?

New portraits appear to be fine (and don't change checksum) *if* they simply replace an existing one - it's adding entirely new portraits and how that's defined that seems to be the issue - perhaps because you could code a portrait to have more than one of the gameplay affecting tags (like lithoid and machine traits).

Not sure about namelists, but I've not looked at them. I would *deeply* love to have namelists be accessible and non-checksum affecting, because I'm getting tired of the existing ones, especially the functionally unpronounceable ones.
 
Apparently there is nothing preventing the text half of those mods from containing code.
So, because there is the chance they can contain game altering code, too bad for you and the mod you want to use? Great argument. Again, I ask, how does how someone else acquires an achievement affect you? Does it lessen the accomplishment you had to achieve? Does it make your achievement invalid? Have you never heard of the method of altering the .exe to remove the checksum requirement thus makes playing with achievements possible? Or the Steam Achievement Manager (SAM) that lets you unlock achievements with the click of a button. Since those both exist, does that now mean that every achievement you've acquired over the years is now worthless and meaningless?
 
Last edited by a moderator:
  • 5
  • 1
Reactions:
If my assumption is correct, you could beeline to Cruisers—hell, even Battleships—if you focus on that.
You have made far more than one assumption and most of them are incorrect and directly contradicted by the text in this and the last dev diary.

edit: You're not wrong about a lot of the stuff you're posting about how the game works and what it rewards and why that is not ideal and so on, but you're using that to argue against a non-existent mechanic that is completely different from the focus trees described in the OP.
 
Last edited:
  • 5Like
  • 1
  • 1
Reactions:
You don't "learn how to make cruisers".
You get a option to tell your scientists "figure out how to make cruisers". At 100% the normal cost.


Relaxing Iron Man is okay, but allowing Checksum Changing Mods would remove all value from the Achievements.

Also I am not aware that there is a rule against getting Achievements in MP?

Why care? I’ve never cared about achievements since they were introduced as a concept in gaming and don’t get why anyone would. Surely no one is seriously valuing their gamerscore (if that’s even a term still used, I have no idea). If you’ve done something the hard way you can take pride in that regardless of how many people cheat to it. It’s not like there’s any real value to having a tickbox on your steam account saying you did something.
 
  • 6
  • 1
Reactions:
Relaxing Iron Man is okay, but allowing Checksum Changing Mods would remove all value from the Achievements.
Looking specifically at Paradox grand strategy titles:

Paradox's 2022 grand strategy game Victoria 3, which allows achievements without ironman and with checksum-changing mods (in part because the more powerful UI modding capability of Jomini-based games requires even "pure UI" mods, that in pre-CK3 titles could be checksum-free, to be checksum-protected), has an achievement called "Azadi".

To get this achievement, you have to start the game as the tiny rump fragment of the Mughal Empire, complete "Prisoner of the Red Fort", expel the British, and unify India under your rule.

On Steam, this achievement has a reported completion rate of 0.1%. For comparison, EU4 – which requires Ironman, Normal or higher difficulty, Historical Lucky Nations, and no gameplay mods – has a completion rate of 0.9% for "The Three Mountains", which requires you to not merely unify India as a one-province minor, but conquer the entire world as the Animist island nation of Ryukyu.

I think it's safe to say that the value of achievements has not actually been diluted in Victoria 3, despite the collapsing-sky protestations of those who oppose relaxing the constraints on achievements.
 
  • 5
  • 5
  • 2Like
Reactions:
You're assuming that getting the guaranteed research options through the focus system is going to get it to you faster than your normal gameplay.

They're intended to be failsafes to ensure that you get what you need to support the playstyle that you are actively engaging in, rather than rewards.

Edit: I'm sure that the most competitive players will find ways to take advantage of it, but since you'll still have to research the technologies, it's similar to getting a luck tech draw.
Suggestion: if you reach the "fleet doctrine" level after having already researched fleet doctrine (or are >50% through currently researching it or have it as a garaunteed option through other means) you instead gain a pittance of unity approximately equal to one free reroll.
 
  • 2Like
Reactions:
In the case of shipsets, perhaps you could designate in the mod that ships would have access to more or better weapon mounts or armour/shield/utility slots, or better base stats (at least judging by some of the ones that introduce new classes of ship)?

New portraits appear to be fine (and don't change checksum) *if* they simply replace an existing one - it's adding entirely new portraits and how that's defined that seems to be the issue - perhaps because you could code a portrait to have more than one of the gameplay affecting tags (like lithoid and machine traits).

Not sure about namelists, but I've not looked at them. I would *deeply* love to have namelists be accessible and non-checksum affecting, because I'm getting tired of the existing ones, especially the functionally unpronounceable ones.
Those mods all need a text file. To put each Image/Texture to the proper spot.
Those files can contain mod code.

I hope they can modify the prasing of those files to filter all code, but that is probably a bigger rework.

So, because there is the chance they can contain game altering code, too bad for you and the mod you want to use?
Yes, that is how reality works.

If it makes getting the achievements trivial, it devalues all the achievements everyone else got the hard way.

Why care? I’ve never cared about achievements since they were introduced as a concept in gaming and don’t get why anyone would.
Then you should not care about them requiring Ironman and a unmodded game.
Yet here you are, caring about it?
 
Last edited by a moderator:
  • 8
Reactions:
If it makes getting the achievements trivial, it devalues all the achievements everyone else got the hard way.
All achievements for games without Valve Anti-Cheat are trivial. All someone has to do is download Steam Achievement Manager and award themselves the achievement.

(If you do this on a game with VAC, you are liable to end up with a VAC ban.)
 
  • 2Like
  • 2
Reactions:
This is an utterly insane position.
That's what people here said when I, as one of very few people, 100% correctly predicted the disaster that was the 2.2 rework of Stellaris and protested loudly against it while it was in development. Then it released, and it was interesting to see everyone here who had been cheering for it realize that the game had just been turned into a broken, tedious, laggy mess that the AI was even unable to play - a state in which the game remained for YEARS.

I've never been wrong about which new features or reworks in Stellaris are bad ideas. This is one of them.
 
  • 7
  • 4Haha
Reactions: