• 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:
Ah yes, my giant idyllic farm worlds making alloys is such a hellish existance.
Ten gets you twenty the smell of those planets mingles the worst features of a barnyard in summer, and Newark, NJ.
 
  • 1
  • 1Haha
Reactions:
Ah, I see neither of you have ever been to an industrial megafarm.

No I’m just saying nothing in the game requires you to think of it in that way. Depends what your empire is like. One empire’s agriworlds might be hellscapes where slaves march miles every day spraying skin-blistering pesticides on endless, artificially flat plains of monoculture crops. Another’s might be an idyllic rural world where thousands of communal villages live in harmony with nature while the farmers oversee armies of drones.

Point is the flexibility of the RP is pretty core to stellaris and just because a planet is specialised doesn’t mean it’s a hell.
 
Last edited:
  • 6
  • 4Like
Reactions:
Ten gets you twenty the smell of those planets mingles the worst features of a barnyard in summer, and Newark, NJ.
They game literally says they do:
Picturesque pastoral landscapes featuring flourishing crops are effaced only minutely by the ever-present scent of fertilizer.
Despite what many people think pastoral is not a generic term for "countryside". It means pastures. Fields and fields and fields of grass for space cows and moon sheep to eat and nothing else. And don't get me started on the tech descriptions...
No I’m just saying nothing in the game requires you to think of it in that way. Depends what your empire is like. One empire’s agriworlds might be hellscapes where slaves march miles every day spraying skin-blistering pesticides on massive, artificially flat planes of monoculture crops. Another’s might be an idyllic rural world where thousands of communal villages live in harmony with nature while the farmers oversee armies of drones.

Point is the flexibility of the RP is pretty core to stellaris and just because a planet is specialised doesn’t mean it’s a hell.
Tongue in cheek jokes (and the in-game descriptions) aside, even if we assume that your particular agri-worlds are entire planets dedicated to pre-Columbian America style sustainable husbandry it's not a coincidence that both of you chose agri-worlds as your counter-examples. None of the same arguments really apply to forge-worlds, mining worlds, energy worlds, refinery worlds... it's a little harder to argue that converting every possible space on a planet's surface into manufacturing space was done by unobtrusively integrating into the planet's original biosphere. Even if paving over an entire ecosystem is not inherently hellworldish to you, read the descriptions of the single-resource planets sometime (or watch or read literally any sci fi that they take their inspiration from). Rural worlds and tech worlds you'll sometimes see portrayed in a positive light but I doubt you'll find many examples of a planet-wide factory which ends with "and it was good that this happened".

edit: I guess what I'm saying is... sure, you're entitled not to view an entire planet dedicated to generating and exporting as much biomass as possible as inherently nightmarish, and to somehow apply this same reasoning to every other designation. I (and the designers of the existing designation system) am entitled to feel otherwise, and I would prefer a game setup where carpeting an entire planet with a single industry is the exception rather than the mechanics-encouraged norm.
 
Last edited:
  • 3
  • 2Like
  • 1
Reactions:
So one more thing about the Zones, they will shift jobs from the districts rather than add them, right? And there was talk of duplicate Zones, but not much in the way of visual representation, how will that work?
 
Last edited:
  • 1
Reactions:
. None of the same arguments really apply to forge-worlds, mining worlds, energy worlds, refinery worlds...

It’s absolutely possible to imagine positive versions of these. Nothing requires the player to imagine a hellscape rather than something more akin to what you’d find in franchises like Star Trek. Places where the living areas are nice, automation is everywhere, and even places like factories and mines are made as safe as can be.

If you like to imagine hellscapes then good for you but there’s no reason for the game to be made on the assumption that specialised planets are always horrible.
 
  • 3Like
  • 2
  • 1Love
Reactions:
It’s absolutely possible to imagine positive versions of these. Nothing requires the player to imagine a hellscape rather than something more akin to what you’d find in franchises like Star Trek. Places where the living areas are nice, automation is everywhere, and even places like factories and mines are made as safe as can be.

If you like to imagine hellscapes then good for you but there’s no reason for the game to be made on the assumption that specialised planets are always horrible.
We have a fundamental disconnect here that we're not going to get past. A planet maximally optimised for factory space is still a planet maximally optimised for factory space. I find that an inherently hellish concept. They can be the nicest, most pleasant factories you ever imagined filled with happy, productive, perfectly cheerful workers, but it is the entire concept of turning an entire planet into a factory that I find innately hellish, and I do not like the idea of it being galactic standard operating procedure.

So anyway I'm glad I (hopefully) won't have to deal with that any more!

e: Also star trek doesn't really do factory worlds/energy worlds/etc. They have mining colonies or outposts, and they have Risa, and rural worlds, and they probably have a couple of city worlds (not earth, it's explicitly not a city world), but everywhere in the federation tends to be set up as, well, peoples homes, not a hyperspecialised cog in a galaxy sized machine. The people who do that tend to be the bad guys.

e2: Or to put it another way... sure, anything's possible, but I don't think it's really intuitive to picture something called a "refinery world" as full of fluffy bunnies gamboling around delivering crystals to princesses for treats.
 
Last edited:
  • 4
  • 1Like
Reactions:
If there's anything positive about this Economic overhaul is that every Empire in the game, including Gestalts, now have to worry about Trade and consequently Logistics. Empires built on Trade will never have to worry about it but for a typical Empire, they will have to employ Traders to generate some amount of Trade Value in order to satisfy the internal logistics(including for the Military). Citizen strata will generate some TV but I think the most prudent and sure-fire way to prevent a logistics crisis is to devote some districts/building slots to Commercial Zones on rural/worker worlds. They don't consume that many CG's thankfully but it's something that a typical Empire didn't really have to worry about until now since all resources flowed magically from one point to another, even to secluded/remote worlds.

It doesn't mean generating TV means that Ship/Army, Job and Pop upkeep is going away though. It just means that a planet or fleet getting what it needs requires an Empire devote a certain amount towards Trade, which I suppose is a good thing because I often replace the Commercial Zone right at the start of the game. Don't think that's a wise decision now. Spiritualist Empires don't start with a Commercial Zone, hence they may be inclined to get one within the first 5 years or so.
 
  • 1Like
Reactions:
It also has the potential to rein in vassal spam a bit, as those resources will, in coming from worlds you don't own, all require trade to cover the deficit. Actually, making that penalty larger for vassal income could go a long way towards making vassals more appropriately balanced - even with no other changes you'd still be able to drain them dry with insane taxes, but wouldn't actually get those resources entirely for free.
Those resources need to be transported from the vassals somehow. It would only be consistent with colony and market design if there was a logistics "cost" for this. The same also applies to resource trading with other empires.
 
  • 1Like
Reactions:
I'm very disappointed in these miniscule building icons in the current layout.
1740254568972.png

In the game as it stands buildings are some of the most visually interesting things going on with planets. It's really satisfying to unlock new ones and see them sprawl across the world. And there are a huge variety that the artists put a lot of work into. The release game understood this!

Here is an image from the Stellaris' digital artbook (in a section espousing PDX's pride in their icons, no less):
1740254770782.png


These are so awesome! With 2.2 we lost the backgrounds and the studio scaled the buildings down so they aren't displayed at full size. And now we're shrinking them even more?

It's the lack of consideration to this stuff that is causing players to write comments about how the panel is just a "fancy spreadsheet" or confusing/unappetising to parse.

If this layout is non negotiable, I believe at the very least this update should come with a set of new district icons. What's proposed in this dev diary has districts as some of the only large art visible now, and they are going to be the same blurry, repurposed assets every time; regardless of planet climate, empire type or technology level.
1740255072956.png
 
Last edited:
  • 18
  • 4Like
  • 2
Reactions:
Those resources need to be transported from the vassals somehow. It would only be consistent with colony and market design if there was a logistics "cost" for this. The same also applies to resource trading with other empires.
From my understanding, the logistics/trade cost is imposed for any planetary deficit regardless of empire-wide income.

So, without any changes, that SHOULD mean any input resources harvested as taxes from vassals won't count towards planetary income anywhere, and will always impose the trade cost for the deficit.
 
  • 1Like
Reactions:
We have a fundamental disconnect here that we're not going to get past. A planet maximally optimised for factory space is still a planet maximally optimised for factory space. I find that an inherently hellish concept. They can be the nicest, most pleasant factories you ever imagined filled with happy, productive, perfectly cheerful workers, but it is the entire concept of turning an entire planet into a factory that I find innately hellish, and I do not like the idea of it being galactic standard operating procedure.

So anyway I'm glad I (hopefully) won't have to deal with that any more!

e: Also star trek doesn't really do factory worlds/energy worlds/etc. They have mining colonies or outposts, and they have Risa, and rural worlds, and they probably have a couple of city worlds (not earth, it's explicitly not a city world), but everywhere in the federation tends to be set up as, well, peoples homes, not a hyperspecialised cog in a galaxy sized machine. The people who do that tend to be the bad guys.
I agree that it's easier to imagine sci-fi fantasy hellscapes for specialised worlds. But most planets in Stellaris function with no mechanics for longterm damage to the environment. Stellaris industry is eco-friendly using the definition "not harmful to the environment, or trying to help the environment".

You could imagine that a factory world that has universal microchips as the main export of the planet, dominating the shipping volumes with connections to dozens of worlds while only having a small footprint of hyper-advanced factories. Factories maximally developed when they reach some throughput limit (perhaps the use of resources like Volatile motes that are supposed to be rare), with no other export goods on the planet having enough relative advantage vs other worlds to be worth investing in or employing in volumes significant on a galactic scale.

Nice places despite the industry, clean with remediation technologies and pollution treated. Relatively undamaged environments (on the timescale seen in Stellaris).

Stellaris does have a few types of hellscapes mechanically represented:
1. Miserable pops (Slavery, Basic Subsistence, Tracking Implants, Extended Shifts, Enhanced Surveillance),
2. Low habitability (Project Cornucopia, Unpleasant Atmosphere, Strip Mine Network, Tomb worlds),
3. High amenitity use (Tainted Snowcaps, Hyper Lubrication Basins) or merely lacking Doctors and Entertainers,
4. Terraforming from heavy industry with a Coordinated Fulfillment Center into a tomb world

Something like Mustafar from Star Wars I see as represented by Molten Mineral Rivers and a Strip Mine Network. But full mining elsewhere doesn't lower habitability so is probably much less of a hellscape.

e2: Or to put it another way... sure, anything's possible, but I don't think it's really intuitive to picture something called a "refinery world" as full of fluffy bunnies gamboling around delivering crystals to princesses for treats.
One odd thing: No Refineries reduce habitability at the moment. There are no horrible smog-filled refinery worlds, they're all lovely places. You can't tomb-world a planet with refineries. So all refinery worlds are "full of fluffy bunnies gamboling around"... which is lovely, but I agree it's a bit unintuitive. And probably a bit of an oversight.

I'd actually like pollution to be modelled beyond just Relentless Industrialists, with some worlds being clean and unspoiled, some being polluted hellscapes. Perhaps with background situations advancing at a rate dependent on the pollution vs remediation (via techs and buildings), plateauing at lightly or heavily polluted with minor negatives mostly for flavour, unless you really push to turn it into a tomb world with Relentless Industrialists or lack any investment in clean-up efforts.
 
  • 2
  • 1
Reactions:
We have a fundamental disconnect here that we're not going to get past. A planet maximally optimised for factory space is still a planet maximally optimised for factory space. I find that an inherently hellish concept. They can be the nicest, most pleasant factories you ever imagined filled with happy, productive, perfectly cheerful workers, but it is the entire concept of turning an entire planet into a factory that I find innately hellish, and I do not like the idea of it being galactic standard operating procedure.

So anyway I'm glad I (hopefully) won't have to deal with that any more!

e: Also star trek doesn't really do factory worlds/energy worlds/etc. They have mining colonies or outposts, and they have Risa, and rural worlds, and they probably have a couple of city worlds (not earth, it's explicitly not a city world), but everywhere in the federation tends to be set up as, well, peoples homes, not a hyperspecialised cog in a galaxy sized machine. The people who do that tend to be the bad guys.

e2: Or to put it another way... sure, anything's possible, but I don't think it's really intuitive to picture something called a "refinery world" as full of fluffy bunnies gamboling around delivering crystals to princesses for treats.

We certainly do have a disconnect. In the case of egalitarian industrial worlds, especially those with master crafters, I typically envision them as large solar punk communities of craftsmen. With a different empire I might think more of 40k’s admech.

Also I think some of the disconnect comes from how literally we interpret what a district is. Given that all districts produce housing I tend to imagine an industrial district more along the lines of a city that has manufacturing as its primary industry. Not that the whole world is literally one factory. Though like I said above it depends on the empire I’m playing. If it’s authoritarian I might envision the housing as being factory dorms, as opposed to normal and nice neighbourhoods interspaced with factories.

In any case it seems moot since neither of our interpretations will be negatively affected by this update.
 
Last edited:
  • 5Like
  • 1
Reactions:
I'm not against specialization, i'm against massive specialization, or the gameplay we have right now where theres little to no reason to not specialize all your planets.

You pick a planet, if it has more districts of X or a planetary feature improving X you go all X and its over, you can forget the planet exists because you finished your interaction with it until the end of the gameplay.

I'm not against having forge worlds, agro worlds, mining worlds. I'm against having twenty of each because otherwise you're playing the game wrong.
I'm sorry but sci fi is about massive specialization:

All the clark techs are about it as well:

Dyson sphere: Encase a star to collect all it's energy - and deprive it from the solar bodies it has/had - usually by also deconstructing all of it's planets.
Starlifting: extract solar plasma including fused materials for industrial purposes from stars.
RingWorlds: Create large living space for people to live
etc...
Playing the game wrong? You wanna be rewarded for creating ineficiency? Have we been playing the same game for the last 10 years?
 
  • 1
Reactions:
I'm sorry but sci fi is about massive specialization:

All the clark techs are about it as well:

Dyson sphere: Encase a star to collect all it's energy - and deprive it from the solar bodies it has/had - usually by also deconstructing all of it's planets.
Starlifting: extract solar plasma including fused materials for industrial purposes from stars.
RingWorlds: Create large living space for people to live
etc...
Playing the game wrong? You wanna be rewarded for creating ineficiency? Have we been playing the same game for the last 10 years?
Encasing a star to harvest more energy than we could ever generate on a planet? Sure, that's specialization that happens in scifi.

Covering one planet in generators to beam electricity to a farm planet halfway across the galaxy which then ships food over interstellar distances to feed the people on the first planet? In the name of efficiency? That only happens in sci fi parodies.

There's lots of reasons to argue why highly specialised planets should be competitive in a game like Stellaris, but that's not it.
 
  • 4
  • 3Like
  • 2
Reactions:
I'm sorry but sci fi is about massive specialization:

All the clark techs are about it as well:

Dyson sphere: Encase a star to collect all it's energy - and deprive it from the solar bodies it has/had - usually by also deconstructing all of it's planets.
Starlifting: extract solar plasma including fused materials for industrial purposes from stars.
RingWorlds: Create large living space for people to live
etc...
Playing the game wrong? You wanna be rewarded for creating ineficiency? Have we been playing the same game for the last 10 years?

I think the thing is, sci-fi is generally about how dystopian mass specialisation is (mostly in reaction to the consequences of the industrial revolution).

The entire thing is emblematic of the sort of thing prevelant in the political philosophy of 'progress' in the late nineteenth and early twentieth centuries (bearing in mind that the term 'progressive' in modern contexts usually means something which is, in an important sense, extremely different). Essentially this is the thing which gave us the worst parts of Fascism, Communism and Capitalism; the elevating of ideas about 'efficiency' and 'progress' above concerns about people; trying to change people to fit the system rather than building the system to suit people. Or get rid of people who don't fit entirely.

I would like to make sure the system allows me to build less optimal, less efficient but more people-centric planets (in the manner of the 'unspecialized mess' which early space-age planets start with).
 
  • 2
  • 1Like
Reactions:
Encasing a star to harvest more energy than we could ever generate on a planet? Sure, that's specialization that happens in scifi.

Covering one planet in generators to beam electricity to a farm planet halfway across the galaxy which then ships food over interstellar distances to feed the people on the first planet? In the name of efficiency? That only happens in sci fi parodies.

There's lots of reasons to argue why highly specialised planets should be competitive in a game like Stellaris, but that's not it.
Sci-Fi Writers Have No Sense of Scale is, unfortunately a very common trope and much of fantasy breaks down if you refuse to accept the framing conditions, the willing suspension of disbelief and the required secondary powers and tropes like Anti-gravity, Inertial Dampeners and FTL-travel, or in this case all the Planet of Hats related tropes.

A future where empires are struggling to feed people or to pay the electricity bills while building entire ringworlds and dyson spheres is a little like the first Quadrillionaire being malnurished and using a wind-up torch to read at night, obviously the scales are wrong when you look at the math.
But, silly as it may be, there are positives of embracing tropes: smaller, more grounded stories that are simpler to imagine, empathize and immerse yourself in.

If you feel frustrated and want alternative interpretations of mechanics, I enjoy thinking about them:
Agriworlds and Food in the far future:

Materialist empires where a unit of "Food" represents multiple strains of genetically modified, custom-tailored seeds for specific environments and planetary conditions. Acorns for an oak tree that likes being waterlogged in a 8% methane atmosphere and is resistant to volt-beetles, with some kill-switches to avoid it becoming invasive elsewhere and a balanced, nutitionally optimal profile suitable for space beavers. My vision of Farming jobs here involve researchers, regulators, advertising, surveys, computer simulations, realistic stress-testing in giant vivariums and lots of vitally important environmental red-tape that some worlds are really good at handling.

Xenophobic, fragile species where local food production involves unacceptable zoonotic-transfer risks, deadly plagues vs expensive externally produced pre-packaged food necessitates ridiculously expensive logistics.

Spiritualist societies that rejects automation after tractors went murder-hobo (the 40k Iron Men) and made them revert to using scythes and plows (agrarian spiritualists), or each machine now has some biological oversight (servitors and tech-priests).

Xenophile empires where food represents exotic talking pieces and expensive fads like tulip mania (1637-1637) or pineapples (see the Dunmore Pineapple of 1761).

A militarist empire where the cost of reaching orbital velocities are so low compared to military requirements that goods are routinely moved via orbital transfers and it's no great leap to instead dock with the standing fleet of large, hyperdrive-capable craft to move between systems instead.

I like to imagine each unit of food represents entire categories of fantasy things with a mostly biological origin (fruits, woods, oils, plastics, cloths, foods and pets) some of which are highly valued and cannot be mass produced locally (normal wood from Earth in the Expanse, or fantasy wood like the verdani worldtrees in The Saga of Seven Suns).


Energy is also an interstellar networked resource somehow:

Spiritualist may tap into a subspace standing wave (like Tesla wanted for remote power transfer - see Wardenclyffe Tower),

Materialists may stored and ship energy as antimatter pellets held within a protective bubble (think Arcane's Hextech gemstones),

Xenophiles may use some cryptocurrency (literally CaravanCoinz in-game) with keys safely stored in locked shipping containers that the caravaneers and pirates can steal

Xenophobes may use gates between their worlds or amplify power sources with exotic matter (Goa'uld using Stargates and Naquadah, Hivers using gates in sword of the stars, Stellaris with Betharian stone)

The game could try to be different and avoid Planet of Hats related tropes, or be more realistic by removing familiar resources over time as they become plentiful or obsolete (food, planets, weapons) and replacing them with more exotic and esoteric concerns like implant-encryption, cyber-security, biological-warfare protection, class-29 disaster mitigation efforts. But, I think the more would reduce the appeal of the game to a general audience.

If Civ 7's ages are a success perhaps future space games could have energy technology like dyson spheres advance your empire into a new age where energy is now effectively obsolete, no longer a limiting resource to be tracked like food and money in the post-scarcity economy of classic Star Trek. That could work, as long as the next age has fun new resources and new mechanics as older mechanics are phased out and the scope shifts. But more of a suggestion for Stellaris v7.0.

Personally, I like hyper-specialised planets as it gives them a purpose and a weakness (superman and kryptonite). It adds flavour to each world (a single flavour, but memorable) and very distinct planets is better to me than the same ratio of districts repeated over many self-sufficient worlds (with less reasons to interact or trade).

I worry slightly that new trade mechanics and the freedom of zones may result in two builds (given a minimum of 6 buildings choices per zone, each equally valuable):
Specialised zones that have job output, planet modifier, workforce in those slots e.g. +2 minerals per job, +20% minerals and +20% workforce
Generic zones that take any flat output/automation/new resource e.g. +10 Minerals, +100 workforce, +5 Housing/amenities (luxury housing)

Best case:
More varied builds - some special zones and buildings for a utopian abundance empire to make those self-sufficient, people-centric planets vs relentless industrialists with hyper-specialised dystopian, heavily polluted industry.
Worst case: The same set of zone buildings repeated on every world.

But the balance and variety will almost certainly improve with each patch and DLC, so I'm more hopeful than worried about it in the very long term.
 
  • 2
  • 1
Reactions:
A future where empires are struggling to feed people or to pay the electricity bills while building entire ringworlds and dyson spheres is
simply an echo of authoritarian governments down the aeons, diverting resources from the sustenance of the people to the construction of vulgar displays of power.

The government isn't struggling to feed people; the people are struggling to satisfy what the empire demands of them in exchange for being fed.
 
  • 2Like
  • 2
Reactions:
From my understanding, the logistics/trade cost is imposed for any planetary deficit regardless of empire-wide income.

So, without any changes, that SHOULD mean any input resources harvested as taxes from vassals won't count towards planetary income anywhere, and will always impose the trade cost for the deficit.
However:
  • Buying from the galactic market will cost Trade Value and, since Trade Value includes logistics, this implies that logistic capacity is spent on importing resources to the imperial reserves. Then, it would only be consistent if other means of "importing" resources also cost Trade Value (though much less than purchases on the galactic market).
  • Your example concerns the use of imported resources to cover local deficits, but resources can also be spent in many other ways where there is (probably) not any logistics cost. Mostly various construction projects (districts, buildings, space stations, starbases, ships, megastructures), but resources can also be spent via international trading, events, edict/campaign upkeep costs, and so on.
    • Though it should be possible to integrate at least some of these with the economic model in such a way that they also incur logistics costs. For instance, district and building construction could be changed from one-time costs to monthly costs for the duration of the construction project; this would have the implication that worlds under development would get an incentive to have some mining of their own. It would be cheaper to develop worlds as "generalists" until they have matured enough to incrementally specialise more and more in one direction, but this would also delay the potential productivity gains from specialisation.
    • It would also be rather easy to attach a logistics cost to every one-time expenditure of resources.
 
  • 1
Reactions:
The thing with Stellaris is that resources are very abstracted, while this makes sense for the empire level, on a planet level it doesn't make as much sense. I do not think hyper-specialization is necessarily dystopian(I think Star Trek provides a distorted image). Most real life factories do not have industrial revolution level pollution anymore, some don't even have smoke stacks(like car factories). Current and 4.0 up to part 5 do not have districts adapt much to the planet, pollution mechanics have a lot of potential to make planets(not all planets should have the same "resiliency") and empires more unique. Pollution shouldn't be restricted to merely industry, but to all types of districts and zones, and create all sorts of trade offs.

If you want to create dystopias, the game should enable you to create dystopias. If you want to create utopias, the game should enable you to create utopias. I think both can exist at the same time.
 
  • 2Like
Reactions: