Stellaris Dev Diary #373 - 4.0 Development Progress Update

[MarkDey]

Sure, but remember that even if it's part of a pseudo-tutorial, there are still tangible rewards associated with fulfilling these tasks, so tasks like that one can very quickly turn into having to do unnecessary and interesting extra clicks. Tasks that require you to do things just for the sake of doing them will become annoying really quickly.

It was said earlier that any rewards will be intangible, like a guaranteed technology option instead of 1000 energy.

 

[Metallichydra]

Notice how it says "First Precursor"

 

[Ajacoba]

Notice how it says "First Precursor"

Yes, first precursor OPTION
technically all precursors are in every game right now, but finding one locks away all others

 

[Critical Ethics]

It was said earlier that any rewards will be intangible, like a guaranteed technology option instead of 1000 energy.

Progressing further down the focus while also clearing a slot for a new task is sufficiently tangible, and "assign and unassign a scientist" sufficiently trivial, that yeah it's a makework task that will mildly distract and annoy a certain category of experienced player (e.g. me) every time it pops up.

There's an idea - certain very basic, "this is what a button does" tasks that only show up if you have the tutorial bot enabled. I'd have no problem with that scientist task popping up for a new player, and I'd never* have to see it because I don't have the tutorial on.

*cough cough

 

[Ajacoba]

Progressing further down the focus while also clearing a slot for a new task is sufficiently tangible, and "assign and unassign a scientist" sufficiently trivial, that yeah it's a makework task that will mildly distract and annoy a certain category of experienced player (e.g. me) every time it pops up.

Wouldn't you automatically clear it anyways the moment you start your first research world?

 

[Archael90]

We wanted to keep the Market generally the same and continue to allow the existing trade based builds to function mostly how they do now. While we're not afraid to drastically change things in Stellaris, and were I starting from scratch I might have made it more strongly a logistics capacity (possibly even replacing Naval Capacity!), we do want to support most existing playstyles and keep things somewhat familiar in 4.0.

I hear You. but dont You think that making a TV income being a ponthly/yearly potential to do stuff, would be actually more tactical, deep and decision making? One would need if they want to buy new stuff from market, others would like to invest into bigger fleet. keeping it as a standard resource would make war oriented playstyle be always better than trade focused one. Warmongers can store TV and send their huuge fleet to deliver swift fatal blow, while trade empire have lot of money they can'tuse for things. TV being potential means that war empires could not afford bigger fleets and have to keep it smaller but stronger.

 

[fourteenfour]

Will Mac users be able to participate in the open beta?

 

[Ryika]

It was said earlier that any rewards will be intangible, like a guaranteed technology option instead of 1000 energy.

Perhaps "tangible" was the wrong word, but that is a reward that will influence the game. Having a guaranteed tech option not only guarantees access to it if you want it, it also removes it from the tech pool if you do not want it "now", and it gives you another fallback option if you roll three techs that you don't need.

It's possible that this is too minor of a bonus that people would care about it, but it still seems like a bad idea to encourage what is essentially empty micromanagement.

This particular example also sends a potentially bad signal to new players, because most empires probably want their scientists in science ships early on.

 

[Mech_infect]

1. These are all very interesting dev diaries, thank you.

2. Should players, in connection with the previous hints about the DLC about internal politics, force ideas and simply try to find a way to dialogue about ideas and suggestions regarding politics as such? Is now the time? There are many smart and inventive players on the forum who deserve to be heard at least partially

 

[Critical Ethics]

Wouldn't you automatically clear it anyways the moment you start your first research world?

If it pops up before I'm planning to make a research world then it will be taking up a slot, so it's mechanically efficient but gameplay irritating to quickly clear it for "free". If it pops up after I've made a research world then I'll never even see it.

I'm hype for focuses as a core concept but they'll live and die on the specific tasks, and this kind of task is not the good kind. Which is why it's good to give feedback and IMO that was a good spot by @Ryika

e: and as @Ryika said, if it pops too early then you're actively teaching players bad habits. Making it contingent on having a sufficiently sciencey science world would be another solution, since as you said the player will either have already assigned one and be rewarded with free science focus progression and a cleared slot, or else could probably do with being told or reminded that it's an option.

 

[Anonim97]

You know, I absolutely love the fact that You folks give us informations about the progress of the stuff that you have been working on.

It's a much better than the "we won't say anything but we are working, believe us" stance others have.

 

[Anonim97]

Back in Dev Diary #366 when we first announced 4.0, we mentioned that "The Q2 Stellaris release, currently expected sometime around our Anniversary in May, will be the Stellaris 4.0 ‘Phoenix’ update."



We wanted to keep the Market generally the same and continue to allow the existing trade based builds to function mostly how they do now. While we're not afraid to drastically change things in Stellaris, and were I starting from scratch I might have made it more strongly a logistics capacity (possibly even replacing Naval Capacity!), we do want to support most existing playstyles and keep things somewhat familiar in 4.0.

So you're saying there is still a chance for changing Trade/Logistics for the 4.X version? ;P

 

[JuliuszKL]

is it possible to have logistics costs on system and sector deficit aswell so you can interact with this system on many levels?

 

[acki02]

I hear You. but dont You think that making a TV income being a ponthly/yearly potential to do stuff, would be actually more tactical, deep and decision making? One would need if they want to buy new stuff from market, others would like to invest into bigger fleet. keeping it as a standard resource would make war oriented playstyle be always better than trade focused one. Warmongers can store TV and send their huuge fleet to deliver swift fatal blow, while trade empire have lot of money they can'tuse for things. TV being potential means that war empires could not afford bigger fleets and have to keep it smaller but stronger.

I think I'd like a middle ground approach the most: let it stock up as currency, but the deficit should occur when the income of TV is negative.

And gestalts should have it not be stockpile-able in that scenario imo

 

[NilsFabian]

Back in Dev Diary #366 when we first announced 4.0, we mentioned that "The Q2 Stellaris release, currently expected sometime around our Anniversary in May, will be the Stellaris 4.0 ‘Phoenix’ update."

A very happy birthday to me.
Thanks. But don't rush yourself. I'm rather having a belated birthday present than a Civ 7 release of Stellaris 4.0. Good things are worth the wait and Stellaris is the best

 

[Knightshade]

Is there any plans on making ground invasions more dynamic and decision focused rather than smashing bigger numbers into smaller ones. I for one would like to see ground battles and conquests treated more like how excavations are handled with some decisions and event trees. It would also help to promote players to use generals if a ground invasion simply won't progress without one.
From a perspective of narrative players it might be awesome for them see actually see their armies taking over a planet bit by bit, memorialising the smaller battles for key planetary locations.

 

[Mister X-X]

Wow So when is the obt? next week ?

 

[Miesha]

What I wanna see is TV bottlenecks, that increase TV upkeep when more things that have TV upkeep exist in the same system. So, have one planet that's not self-sufficient? Ok, thats fair, normal trade value deficiency. Have three planets that are all pumping out alloys and not a single food district in sight? Well, now you're in trouble, each planet would increase the TV upkeep of other planets in the same system if they all have TV defiencies.

Then you park your shipyard in orbit and have 6-8 fleets there and now you're just hemorrhaging, bleeding trade value profusely. Having multiple fleets in the same system should increase TV upkeep of each fleet, and add that on top of planet deficiency? Oh now you've done it.

And to somewhat balance it out, fleets outside of friendly borders should have a higher TV upkeep baseline to prevent a doomstack from the enemy from screwing you over if economies are relatively equivalent, they should be bleeding just as much as you have to in order to fight them. Occupation of planets should also have a TV cost for the occupier to encourage faster, smaller wars and status quos being settled more often because the economy just cant handle more fighting and planetary occupation.

 

[Ajacoba]

I hear You. but dont You think that making a TV income being a ponthly/yearly potential to do stuff, would be actually more tactical, deep and decision making? One would need if they want to buy new stuff from market, others would like to invest into bigger fleet. keeping it as a standard resource would make war oriented playstyle be always better than trade focused one. Warmongers can store TV and send their huuge fleet to deliver swift fatal blow, while trade empire have lot of money they can'tuse for things. TV being potential means that war empires could not afford bigger fleets and have to keep it smaller but stronger.

A trade empire can use their trade to boost the economy and buy a bigger fleet than the uneconomic warmongerers

 

[Ozonosfera]

I am once again asking to allow achievements with mods. Stellaris has some great mods that can't be enjoyed if one wants achievements.