• 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:
It's right next to a star. It would naturally be hot.

And what do you mean "doesn't have to be on the inside"? If you mean on the outer side of the frame, that would still be close enough to be extremely hot.
Here:
Dyson sphere habitats around a white dwarf in an actual science paper. That's without Stellaris levels of anti-gravity tech and shielding that can stop X-slot beam weapon to the face.
 
  • 1
Reactions:
I'm not entirely sure how I feel about all this. It seems to be more restricting but could also result in less annoying micro management.

For me it will be important if the new mechanism succeeds in making it more transparent how things interact and work - like why are production, criminality, stability stats how they are and how can I manipulate them?

Now that I think about it: I hope that living in habitats will be reworked to become more tolerable for pops in the first place. Better yet: scrap the "Habitat preference" system all together and establish "climate zones" for habitat districts, maybe as a bonus feat. If I would build a habitat for Earthlings I would make sure that the climate fits the needs of inhabitants - so I would make it "Wet moderate" there and not "Habitat".
(Do I make myself understandable? English is not my native language)
Habitat as a preference category makes no sense. This could be reworked by the new zones system altogether. Make different climate zones on the same habitat a possibility for mixed species with different preferences - so there is no need to genetically modify them to live all in the same habitat. This would be a lot less trouble and more fun. Generally I never build habitats because it's more headache than anything else.
 
Last edited:
  • 1
Reactions:
In the early 2200s we're still using fossil fuels, it's certainly very human of us.
I can imagine gasoline being used as a cheap and portable fuel source to provide energy on a newly colonized planet before the infrastructure necessary to support a nuclear reactor or geothermal well is built.
 
  • 4
Reactions:
A Dyson Sphere is a structure dedicated entirely to solar power collection and is definitely not designed to be habitable, or inhabited by anyone other than whatever crew is assigned to maintain it.

Even if you want to imagine it as your seat of power, it could never support a significant amount of civilians, which is what habitable worlds represent.

And mechanically, one of the main benefits of megastructures is significant bonuses without the need for pops, and thus without the drawbacks from empire size, increased by colonies, districts, and pops.

So as cool as it would be to have pops working on a Research Zone at a Science Nexus, or a Military Zone at a Strategic Coordination Center, I'm not so sure whether it would actually be good mechanically.
I don't want to take the thread off topic, but this has beed discussed a lot here, so I'll provide just a short comment and recap:

You can make the outside of the shell habitable like habitats, and use the energy from the collectors to keep it habitable. A civilization that has mastered gravity, antimatter, exotic materials and other clark Tech can easily do that. If not just for the energy collection, but for the real estate.

With the levels of pop habitability on Stellaris 3.X, you could put an extra large(game setting) galaxy worth of pops into a sigle one, just for game balance. If you work it out with square kilometers, even at a distance of 1 AU, such a construct could house millions if not billions of class 30 stellaris planets. Some people around here did the calculations years ago.
 
  • 1
Reactions:
I think it would be neat the game kept track of system deficits and mainly used those for logistics cost calculations.
While it would be convenient, I do think that bringing resources out of the gravity well of a planet is the biggest cost. Once those resources are in space, then I can see an argument on how it's not that much more work to have them travel to the nearby moon versus the planet that's sixteen star systems away. It will take more time, yes, but perhaps not much more energy. I can believe a system that tracks resource deficits on a planetary level for that reason.

This might also tie in well to what we've just seen with the different districts. If there is enough of an incentive to produce some of your food, energy, and minerals (for consumer goods production) locally, then that might see planets that have one each of those districts developed. That would also increase the number of buildings that could be built on a planet, although whether that ends up being a significant benefit is still undetermined.
 
  • 2
  • 2
Reactions:
While it would be convenient, I do think that bringing resources out of the gravity well of a planet is the biggest cost. Once those resources are in space, then I can see an argument on how it's not that much more work to have them travel to the nearby moon versus the planet that's sixteen star systems away. It will take more time, yes, but perhaps not much more energy. I can believe a system that tracks resource deficits on a planetary level for that reason.

This might also tie in well to what we've just seen with the different districts. If there is enough of an incentive to produce some of your food, energy, and minerals (for consumer goods production) locally, then that might see planets that have one each of those districts developed. That would also increase the number of buildings that could be built on a planet, although whether that ends up being a significant benefit is still undetermined.
As is said in Kerbal Space Program, "Once you reach orbit, you're halfway to anywhere."
 
  • 3Haha
  • 1
Reactions:
Actually, Ranger Lodge as a building really doesn't feel like it has much sense as a building, since its whole thing is about keeping the environment untouched.

Maybe it would be better if Ranger jobs were added directly by the blockers instead.
I always thought of the Ranger Lodge as being the welcome center at a national park.
 
  • 1
  • 1Like
Reactions:
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.

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!
Very interesting stuff indeed!

Questions:
It looks like there will now be a hard cap on even the theoretical amount of building slots available on a planet. The current (soon previous) Planet UI supports building mods that increase the number of available buildings beyond 12, to 16, 20, 24 or even higher. I still like to use these. Will it no longer be possible to increase building slots via mods in the new system?

Is the number of zone slots modable?

Requests:
PLEASE take this opportunity to add a new Designation or Planet Type (short of a full Ecumenopolis) for 'Major Worlds' or 'Core Worlds' or something like that. Basically non-specialised planets or enhancing Sector Capitals - which in the case of 4.0, would be great to use as other Civilian-holding worlds. Now seems like a great opportunity.
Possibly a type of planet besides the Capital which can support four City Zones, for a reasonable trade-off.

Please make a naturally occurring / base game 'dark' user interface.

Please hire Orrie or at the very least, give him something for the trouble of having maintained the best and most essential mod on the workshop for the last 6 years!

Lamentations:
Goodbye, Industrial Districts. I loved you and your unique orangey-brown colour. You were taken from us too soon and my gaming life will never be the same without you. Forever in my <3.
 
Last edited:
  • 3Like
Reactions:
@Eladrin I believe that Industrial districts are still needed on planets in order for Foundry and Factory zones to not compete against Government, Housing, Commercial and Civic zones. A separate Industrial district will also allow the new UI to be flexible in regards to both future DLC and mods. I also think that rural districts (Agriculture, Generator and Mining) need to have multiple zones (again for the sake of mods and future DLC).
 
  • 4
  • 2
  • 2
Reactions:
The majority of Jobs will now have a single output by default, so Researchers are being broken apart into Physicists, Biologists, and Engineers.
Will the science output in the top bar be split into three as a QoL change, so we don't have to keep clicking to see our balance of each type?

Also, I know these are mockups, but the green text on the semi-opaque green horizontal status bar (e.g. Housing) is a little hard to read. The yellow and red numbers are better (albeit probably not for colorblind people), but the background of that status bar is lighter and closer to the text color than I think it is on the live version. I hope the actual UI picks up on that and makes them easier to spot, since having them as a line of numbers in the middle of the window is already visually burying them compared to the grand district and planet banner pictures.
 
  • 4
  • 1Like
Reactions:
“The majority of Jobs will now have a single output by default, so Researchers are being broken apart into Physicists, Biologists, and Engineers.”

Does this mean the “Natural Physicists/Sociologists/Engineers” traits can get their own auto-modding trait?
 
  • 5Like
Reactions:
I wonder how this will effect special designations, like resort, prison, and thrall worlds. Maybe get a holy world revamp, while we are at it. Though I do hope we can make prison worlds work with arcologies please, and more adv. resource worker jobs for prisons. So I can do my authoritarian worker focused builds.
 
  • 3
  • 1Like
Reactions:
They are purely flavor, and are thus lower priority than implementing the rest of this, will probably start less robust than I'd like it to be in the long term. There's a lot of flavor benefit we can harness there though, which is why we wanted it added there.
Love the idea but in 2200 fossil fuels should be replaced by a mix of renewables and fission power, and only used for cases like vehicles where power density is a serious concern. Heck I’m pretty sure UNE lore has Perhaps fission power should be the starting label? With the exception of antimatter reactors (antimatter has to be manufactured so it’s not a primary energy source, but a battery) it makes sense that planetary power generation and spaceship reactors should evolve in parallel.
 
  • 1
  • 1Like
  • 1
Reactions:
Eh it's the risk of a champagne bottle spontaneously exploding. Now granted, airlines pay huge amounts to guard against extreme low probability, extreme high impact risks, but in this case we can look at Tinto Talks: they're not getting stormed.

Getting community feedback so early they have to rely on UI mockups is good. All the psychic damage the players take from a very long hype train is a worthwhile downside for actionable intelligence with plenty time to manoeuvre.

It's the 0.0001 percentile that always does the most horrible stuff around.

In fact, an inhabited Dyson Sphere would be a ring world with energy districts...
I always had this question in my mind: why does a Dyson sphere doesn't require workforce to produce energy, while the ringworld does?

If we have the technology for a stellaris dyson sphere ingame, then why do we not have ringworlds, planets and habitats auto generating energy as well?

Somewhere somehow, the game implies full automation without the requirement for workforce on some places but not on others. Is it possible to learn this power??? :)
 
Somewhere somehow, the game implies full automation without the requirement for workforce on some places but not on others. Is it possible to learn this power??? :)

Palpatine: "Not from a xenophile..." :p
 
  • 4Haha
Reactions:
A lot of change, I don't know how I feel about it all. I just hope its no worse intuitive than than current. I'm sure that side of it has been considered though.

On a related note, purely from my casual-eye perspective. I use to read posts that the default "New Colony" designation was the best until it was no longer choosable(e.g. the colony had grown). I had a habit of "setting and forgetting" my designations for the most part, so just didnt live by that rule whatsoever. The game demands enough from me.

So my plea to you is... don't make that designation better on its own again without making it obvious or a non-choice. E.g. You can't choose a designation until its grown a reasonable amount.

Anyway, good work as usual.
 
  • 2
Reactions:
So my plea to you is... don't make that designation better on its own again without making it obvious or a non-choice. E.g. You can't choose a designation until its grown a reasonable amount.
I disagree with this, I think playing optimally should require good micro but the difference should not be so big that it'll tank you.

Like I think just taking the one you want initially and then ignoring it should be strictly less optimal than using the initial one until a certain point, because it causes you to make decisions "Do I accept this small suboptimal play and don't need to think about it, or will I remember and update the designation later".