• 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 #371 - 4.0 Changes: Part 5

Hi everyone!

This week we’re looking more at the economic changes of the Stellaris 4.0 ‘Phoenix’ update, and how we’re going to update the Planet UI to work with them.

As this is all still in development, things are still subject to change, and I’m going to be using a lot of the UX Design Mockups in this dev diary. The final versions will not match these work-in-progress designs precisely. The Open Beta will definitely not be at these polish levels. Also be aware that numbers on these mockups are all placeholders meant to help the rest of the team get the layout right, so things like the Pop Counts or Production numbers aren’t accurate.

Planets - Districts - Zones - Buildings - Jobs​

As mentioned last week, one of the fundamental changes we’re making to the economy behind the scenes is that planets are now the source of production rather than the pops themselves. This is a generally subtle change from your perspective as a player, but this opened up an opportunity to revamp exactly how planets are structured, and to formalize some of the job hierarchy. A few of you have already guessed some of the things I’m going to share with you.

We’re introducing a new planetary feature: Zones. By specializing Districts, Zones function similarly to how the Forge World, Factory World, and Industrial World designations previously modified the jobs provided by Industrial Districts – only now as a more structured, intuitive, and flexible mechanic.

The 4.0 Planet Hierarchy is:
  • Planets produce and consume resources.
  • Districts provide a base number of Jobs for each level of development.
  • Zones manipulate what Jobs are provided by their District.
  • Buildings typically modify the production of Jobs themselves, though may also provide static numbers of Jobs.
  • Jobs are filled by Workforce, and make the planet produce a single resource by default (unless they have been modified).

Standard planets have a City District that contains your urban development, and remains capped by planet size as it is in 3.14. The City District has four Zones - one will always be locked to a Governmental Zone and contains your Capital Building, while the other three will be selectable. Normal planets also have Mining, Agricultural, and Energy Districts which each have one Zone, and - like 3.14 - are gated by planetary features. Industrial Districts have been removed, as their function has been replaced by Zones.

image3.png

Upgrading Districts is now clearly shown as a button on the Planet UI - this should reduce the number of “it took me X months to realize you can build districts” posts. As part of the increase in differentiation between Districts and Buildings, we’ve changed some of the terminology slightly - instead of building a dozen Districts across a planet, you will upgrade their development level. Functionally this remains the same.

image11.png


Zones are our new addition to the Planet Hierarchy. Zones let you change the nature of their District. By default, the City District will provide Housing and increase the maximum number of Civilians that your planet can support. (Based on design discussions over the past week, we’re leaning towards your Empire Capital having a bonus increasing this number significantly, which has the nice secondary effect of making the conquest of Homeworlds in the early game carry the societal challenge of suddenly creating many angry Dissidents that will be unable to promote back to Civilians as this bonus is lost.) If you build a Foundry Zone, the City District will replace some of their Civilian capacity and housing with Metallurgist jobs for each level of development. If you then build a Factory Zone, the City District will provide both Metallurgist and Artisan jobs, but with further reductions to their Citizen capacity.

image12.png

While you can build multiple Zones of the same type (in your City District, for example), the first Zone of each type built on a planet gains three slots for Buildings. (Duplicate Zones do not grant additional Building slots.) Buildings typically modify the production of their associated Job, and most are now Planet Unique. The majority of Buildings are restricted to the specific relevant Zones that they can be built in, but some can still be built anywhere. The Government Zone and Urban Zone can, however, accept most Urban buildings. The build list will be filtered appropriately.

The majority of Jobs will now have a single output by default, so Researchers are being broken apart into Physicists, Biologists, and Engineers.

Origins and Civics that previously replaced Jobs will now typically instead have a Building that modifies the associated Job. A benefit of this is that it should now be able to stack better with other similar Civics - we hope to be able to reduce restrictions so perhaps you’ll be able to sacrifice willing Pops by flinging them into a black hole for money.

The Planetary Surface​

Your homeworld is a bit of a special case in Stellaris - it’s not a brand new colony, but it’s also not very specialized. It needs to provide a little bit of everything, but could really use some cleanup after all those years of development (becoming an Early Space Age civilization is a dirty job.)

Here’s the work-in-progress UX mockup of what Earth may look like at the start of the game:

image8.png

The unspecialized mess of being an Early Space Age civilization gives us a relatively unspecialized zone that provides us with the basic resources necessary at the start of the game. We’ll eventually want to replace that Zone with a more specialized one.

As we head to the stars, we’ll naturally want to colonize our Guaranteed Habitable Worlds. The new Colonization UI will let us immediately set the desired planetary designation for our brand new colony.

image2.png

Don’t worry, you’ll be able to select something other than Factory World...

Here’s what our new colony could look like once the colonization process finishes:

image7.png

...But why did you choose Mining World for a planet with Poor Quality Minerals?

The Reassembled Ship Shelter provides Colonist jobs that will provide the Amenities and Stability previously granted by the Colony designation. As shown, the technologies required to expand on an alien world are not necessarily the same as those you need back on your home planet.

Our UX designer has created these explanations of the new UI:

image6.png


image1.png

And here’s what our two planets might look like after some time has passed.

image9.png


image10.png

Special Cases​

Ever since MegaCorp, paving the entire world has always been a grand ambition of Empires.

We’re currently thinking that an Ecumenopolis should act like the megacity it is. The Ecumenopolis will have multiple Urban Districts - one large main one and three more smaller Arcologies.

image4.png

Wait, this means you can make a Fortress Ecumenopolis…

Although the gameplay of upgrading a Habitat Complex by building orbitals throughout a system made Habitats more interesting, having to hunt down that last moon to place the orbital proved incredibly annoying.

For 4.0, we’re removing this pain point. Upgrading Districts on a Habitat will spawn Orbitals throughout the system as their Development Level increases. Some of the district capacity will be available immediately upon colonizing the Habitat Central Complex, with the remainder gated by upgrading the Capital Building. We’re also considering having the district capacity for Habitats more closely linked to the deposits available in the system instead of the current behavior where each mineral deposit grants a static amount of capacity.

We expect to see some unique or former districts for habitats be reimagined or return as Zones, such as the Order’s Demesne for KotTG or Sanctuary Districts for Rogue Servitors.

image5.png

Goodbye, hunting for where that last minor orbital is hiding!

Next Week​

Next week, @Gruntsatwork will go into some of the scripting details of Jobs and Pop Groups. We should also have some more information about the upcoming 4.0 livestream.

See you then!
 
  • 121Like
  • 109Love
  • 11
  • 4
  • 4
Reactions:
Reading the DD again and some of comments, I have to agree that there is a disconnect between the flavor implied by the new naming conventions and the flavor implied by how it actually works mechanical and existing naming conventions.
The name zone and using singular district implies that everything within them are physically located together, but that clearly can't be the case. We are building up entire planets. The various features of a planet aren't gonna be all be clumped together by what resource they provide. And zones clearly can't be distinct geographical areas, or we would be able to build buildings in duplicate zones. The mechanics suggests that what they actually are, are investments made to a type of industry/infrastructure/business on a planet, with buildings representing further investments to make specific technologies available within said industry/infrastructure/business on the planet.
Not sure what the name should be, but zone definitely doesn't feel right for it.
 
  • 6
  • 1Like
Reactions:
I was paraphrasing but that’s the impression I got. I don’t really understand the reasoning. This was the reply to a request to retain plural districts in order to not make planets feel like they have one city, farm, mine etc



I strongly disagree that these are equivalent dissonances. I have 10 city districts on a planet, and I make the decision that I want cities on this planet have a portion zoned to science. So I set a zone UI element to science and pay the associated development cost, if any. I now have 10 cities with sections zoned to science, or maybe 3 pure science cities while the rest do other things, whichever is my preferred headcanon for this planet, empire, or species.

I then decide I want to invest in getting my guys some supercomputers, so I pay to add a supercomputer building to my cities' science zoning UI element. All my science zones (or science cities) get supercomputers built in them, or maybe I just build one big planetary supercomputer that they all connect to via the Internet. Whichever seems more appropriate.

That I interact with all these options through a single UI segment is a good thing! It's a grand strategy game, making multi-city decisions with a single button click is the minimum scale I expect to be working on.

E: edited to be a bit less manic. I don't want to be responsible for turning this into Civilian Chat 2.0.
 
Last edited:
  • 6
  • 1Like
Reactions:
I was paraphrasing but that’s the impression I got. I don’t really understand the reasoning. This was the reply to a request to retain plural districts in order to not make planets feel like they have one city, farm, mine etc



That's funny. After reading your comment on the forum here it didn't make sense to me at all, so I went to the reddit thread to find the full context. Only to discover... you've given me the full context! Hah. Even the guy on reddit is still confused!
1740156779663.png


My understanding was that a lot of this was hot code and subject to change. People are giving feedback on a small iteration with tangible benefits and suddenly they don't want to budge? That can't be right.
 
Last edited:
  • 3
  • 1
Reactions:
As usual, anything dealing with the state of habitats gives me mixed feelings.
I haven't played Void Dwellers since the change.

Just, what am I doing with them? I'm not using them to build up in a small area because you get so much less per system. I'm not using them for a per-pop advantage because they can't even specialize to the degree normal planets do and have no orbital rings, whereas originally they specialized harder with all-in on one district type but had pretty high sprawl implications. I'm not doing it for a growth advantage because, on top of no longer having a bazillion of them to grow on, now that wouldn't work anyway...

Just, what is the reason to specialize in habitats now? The only major area I see an advantage is refineries, but that's not enough to use Void Dwellers.
 
  • 1
  • 1
Reactions:
My understanding was that a lot of this was hot code and subject to change. People are giving feedback on a small iteration with tangible benefits and suddenly they don't want to budge? That can't be right

I don’t think they don’t want to budge and I’d be surprised if this change was set in stone. My sense is that they’ve spent a lot of time talking about what might be confusing (for example having one prominent tile acting as a plural) and want us to try it out. Doesn’t seem unreasonable for us to give feedback on what we see now but at the same time I expect the devs will wait for the beta to change anything.

I’m still not entirely sure what the problem is in this case. Only thing I can imagine if they’ve spent time going through every building/zone description to have them refer to how they affect the jobs of a singular district.
 
  • 1Like
Reactions:
I just wanted to address all these comments. Here is what I think would work really well:

View attachment 1257135

This would just be some localisation/naming tweaks.
1. "Zone" goes away and is named "District" (thus we avoid having two generic bucket terms of indistinct heirarchy)(we also retain the sci-fi "district" linguistic staple).
2. "Upgrade" becomes "Build" (could also have been "construct" or "build new" or "establish new")
3. "District" becomes "Settlement" for rural locales or "City/Cities" for urban ones.

That's it. You'll notice that the mock-up text "Development 2/5" element is still totally workable in this scenario, I like it a lot. (Lastly it occurs to me scripted loc could be used to retheme these for hives and machines, which probably deserve it. Zones is great for machines! (And habitats)

Edit: Woops I notice I forgot to replace one of the instances of "Zone" with "District" in the "Click to Add new Zone" text in green, but you get the picture.

Instead of district, districts or settlements, I'd like to also suggests sector/sectors instead. Might be confusing with galactic sectors maybe, much it gives me more of that future society vibe then the other options suggested.
 
  • 5
Reactions:
It does seem odd to me that every planet now only has one city district, one mining district, one food district that is "upgraded" or "developed". I hope it's just a wip localization because otherwise that seems to needlessly cut down on the fantasy of planet scale/scope.
 
  • 2Like
  • 1
  • 1
Reactions:
It does seem odd to me that every planet now only has one city district, one mining district, one food district that is "upgraded" or "developed". I hope it's just a wip localization because otherwise that seems to needlessly cut down on the fantasy of planet scale/scope.
I am pretty sure all of this is UI mock ups, and all they have to do is add a S. It is not like any space faring civ would have only one city lol.
 
1740165087963.png

I very much dislike this new planet portrait crop. It has considerably reduced visibility of the suface art: We've lost lots of terrain visuals to the bottom and perhaps more importantly nearly all of the sky. Currently the sky has all kinds of cool elements that can appear such as a local gas giant (if the planet is a moon in orbit of one), ring worlds and more. All that is gone now to conform to the new aspect ratio. Do we need to cut this cool stuff?

Example of a gas giant in the clouds in the current game:
1740165391625.png
 

Attachments

  • 1740165336893.png
    1740165336893.png
    408,8 KB · Views: 0
  • 7
  • 4Like
  • 1
Reactions:
View attachment 1257213
I very much dislike this new planet portrait crop. It has considerably reduced visibility of the suface art: We've lost lots of terrain visuals to the bottom and perhaps more importantly nearly all of the sky. Currently the sky has all kinds of cool elements that can appear such as a local gas giant (if the planet is a moon in orbit of one), ring worlds and more. All that is gone now to conform to the new aspect ratio. Do we need to cut this cool stuff?

Example of a gas giant in the clouds in the current game:
View attachment 1257220
In all fairness, they didn't only change the angle. On the new one I can perceive depth, and on the old one it's very 2D. Obviously theyre both actually 2D, but I don't really perceive depth in the old one personally.
 
  • 1Like
Reactions:
In all fairness, they didn't only change the angle. On the new one I can perceive depth, and on the old one it's very 2D. Obviously theyre both actually 2D, but I don't really perceive depth in the old one personally.
They didn't change any angles or how the layers are arranged as far as I can see. They just cut a bunch of information at the top and bottom, then scaled it to cover the width of the panel. (Without using higher resolution assets, which is why it looks blurry. But with regard to that last bit, it's just a mock-up after all so fair enough for a dev diary).
 
  • 1Like
Reactions:
It does seem odd to me that every planet now only has one city district, one mining district, one food district that is "upgraded" or "developed". I hope it's just a wip localization because otherwise that seems to needlessly cut down on the fantasy of planet scale/scope.
Energy districts aren't gone either. I do partially miss industrial districts but, doesn't each city district getting 1-4 "zones" that add specialization not also simulate planet scale/scope? Like; one planet could have forge, industrial, and military zones while another has research, trade, and government zones which seems to me like it would provide just as many planet customizing options as the old system if not even more.
 
I am a little worried about civic/origin/ascension building slot requirements.

Right now there's already ~5 to 7 must include buildings per planet you developed depending on build (culture works, ascension planets, civic stuff, etc). If I'm say, forced to use urban zones to house those, won't that make planet specialization far harder? If I need culture workers, psi corps, etc on my planet, there's hardly any room left for actual workforce (especially for Alloy/CG/research worlds)

Overall I think these changes are healthy but I do think we lose out on stuff (particularly for tall empires who need to stack powerful buildings in their few colonies) by doing so.
 
View attachment 1257213
I very much dislike this new planet portrait crop. It has considerably reduced visibility of the suface art: We've lost lots of terrain visuals to the bottom and perhaps more importantly nearly all of the sky. Currently the sky has all kinds of cool elements that can appear such as a local gas giant (if the planet is a moon in orbit of one), ring worlds and more. All that is gone now to conform to the new aspect ratio. Do we need to cut this cool stuff?

Example of a gas giant in the clouds in the current game:
View attachment 1257220
I like the new planet UI but yes, I fully agree with you, the portrait area needs to be larger. I suspect that UI Overhaul Dynamic will provide a wonderful alternative and not just that one but other larger view mods will become available soon after release.
 
  • 2
Reactions:
  • 10Haha
Reactions:
Ooh, these are really really nice changes. The planet system always felt a little underbaked so I'm happy it's getting a full overhaul.
 
Palpatine: "Not from a xenophile..." :p
Not to worry, I have taken a more complete and wider perspective and knowledge of this, not just the dogmatic view of the xenophiles..
I have to say I'm not a fan of the way this looks like it's really trying to force planetary specialisation even more than what's in the game at the moment.
It really feels bad when a planet only outputs like.. 1 or 2 resources. Dystopian, you know? Not every empire should be the Imperium of Man.

I feel like Specialisation should be a strategic choice which trades efficiency for brittleness, rather than a standard.
The problem is that the game abstacts logistics. You wouldn't be having this issue in factorio for instance. But the way the game is presented to you, you imagine monoculture planets with no penalty of covering all the mines with cities or logistic cost. That is why I mentioned above about the dissonance of the way the game portrays planets, their organization and the production report.
 
  • 1Like
Reactions: