Stellaris Dev Diary #70: The Adams Update (part 1)

[Peter Ebbesen]

@Wiz There will always be bugs, but as part of the bug-fixing part of Adams is the team just addressing the most urgent bugs or is this a sweep to catch up on the huge debt of bugs accumulated since release? Bugs that have been logged for ages but (for obvious reasons) prioritized lower in the past since there's always been something higher priority to deal with, whether that be showstopper or major bugs or the development of new DLC? If part 2 of the Adams update deals with bug fixing, would you care to comment on this issue?

That I bring it up is because as a player it is immensely frustrating to report bugs in the bug forum that PDS recognizes as internally logged, and then never see any action taken on them unless they are showstopper bugs, major bugs, or seem to deal with an issue du jour. As a developer I have full sympathy for the harsh necessities of prioritization, but as a player it is damned frustrating when reported bugs are not either a) fixed, b) marked won't fix, or c) given some sort of schedule for fixing, but instead d) end up in limbo.

Having one's reported bugs end in limbo is never fun.

It is enough to discourage people like me from filing detailed bug reports on anything but major bugs, when bugs that, while minor, are 100% reproducible, affects a lot of players (or in some cases all players using a game mechanic), and which would appear to any coder to be easy or even trivial to fix (granting that it is always easier to say that about stuff other people have to code ) - nevertheless remain unaddressed for months on end. (In some cases rapidly approaching their first anniversary.)

 

[pieman]

Possibly a bit contentious but I'd like to see sectors only being able to have the same number of planetary systems as your core worlds. Makes researching core world tech more valuable and prevents exploitation of having one massive sector that otherwise comprises your empire.

I'd also be interested to see how sector politics eventually develops. At some point down the line in a future version of Stellaris, lumping all your worlds into one sector may simply result in the sector governor immediately declaring independence from the empire that was dumb enough to give a single person control of 80% of their planets.

 

[Rubidium]

That's fine, but materials cost is usually pretty cheap anyway. It's labor and overhead that eats project budgets alive. Nothing leads me to believe that stellaris empires have ascended beyond our basic understanding of project management

Most of the "labor" would be transforming the planetary material into ringworlds and moving it more or less into place, though. It's not like you can just move Jupiter into the right spot and it becomes a ringworld; you have to modify it quite a bit, and do weird physics stuff to it. That's the part that's been done for you.

To go back to the autorepair example, your time and expenses budget would be much bigger if you had to manufacture all the parts yourself, rather than buying them from a supplier. It's the cost difference between building a car from scratch or repairing a used car to be good enough to run.

Yes, unfamiliar technology would be a problem, but the basics of ringworld construction have to be determined by the laws of physics and thus relatively similar. The remainder you can juryrig as you need (since you have the technology to do so).

 

[perost]

Possibly a bit contentious but I'd like to see sectors only being able to have the same number of planetary systems as your core worlds. Makes researching core world tech more valuable and prevents exploitation of having one massive sector that otherwise comprises your empire.

It could also make the repeatable "+1 Sector Limit" tech not completely useless. The sector limit currently increases by 1 for every 4 planets you own, so the sector limit is just never an issue. Limiting the size of sectors and nerfing the limit scaling (maybe with bonuses to expansion-focused empires) could make that tech useful, otherwise it might as well be removed from the game. But I can see a lot of players disliking such a change, even though I think it would make sector management more interesting.

 

[Metztli]

Any even vague indications when the patch will be released ?

 

[Cat_Fuzz]

It could also make the repeatable "+1 Sector Limit" tech not completely useless. The sector limit currently increases by 1 for every 4 planets you own, so the sector limit is just never an issue. Limiting the size of sectors and nerfing the limit scaling (maybe with bonuses to expansion-focused empires) could make that tech useful, otherwise it might as well be removed from the game. But I can see a lot of players disliking such a change, even though I think it would make sector management more interesting.

I like this also as you get more choice, do you slowly take full control of your empire, or allow your sectors to take more planets increasing the total number of planets owned but not having full agency over what they do.

I'd also be interested to see how sector politics eventually develops. At some point down the line in a future version of Stellaris, lumping all your worlds into one sector may simply result in the sector governor immediately declaring independence from the empire that was dumb enough to give a single person control of 80% of their planets.

I would love to see more internal politics like this.

 

[Elimdur]

@Wiz There will always be bugs, but as part of the bug-fixing part of Adams is the team just addressing the most urgent bugs or is this a sweep to catch up on the huge debt of bugs accumulated since release? Bugs that have been logged for ages but (for obvious reasons) prioritized lower in the past since there's always been something higher priority to deal with, whether that be showstopper or major bugs or the development of new DLC? If part 2 of the Adams update deals with bug fixing, would you care to comment on this issue?

That I bring it up is because as a player it is immensely frustrating to report bugs in the bug forum that PDS recognizes as internally logged, and then never see any action taken on them unless they are showstopper bugs, major bugs, or seem to deal with an issue du jour. As a developer I have full sympathy for the harsh necessities of prioritization, but as a player it is damned frustrating when reported bugs are not either a) fixed, b) marked won't fix, or c) given some sort of schedule for fixing, but instead d) end up in limbo.

Having one's reported bugs end in limbo is never fun.

It is enough to discourage people like me from filing detailed bug reports on anything but major bugs, when bugs that, while minor, are 100% reproducible, affects a lot of players (or in some cases all players using a game mechanic), and which would appear to any coder to be easy or even trivial to fix (granting that it is always easier to say that about stuff other people have to code ) - nevertheless remain unaddressed for months on end. (In some cases rapidly approaching their first anniversary.)

I totally share your feelings. I hope this time the precursor events get finally fixed. All the problems have been reported multiple times not only stating that "something" does not work but instead showing the code that is wrong as well as the solution for it.

 

[lilsaihah]

Like this sector discussion. Would like to throw my chips in.

Yes, having a sector that fills up deeply and often is a big advantage to just having one supersector, that's true. You will be able to make consistent gains out of simply draining this sector regularly. As it's been covered, though, there's very literal difference between one supersector which you drain every 10 years, and two sectors which you drain alternatively every 20 years.

Where this discussion breaks down is that each sector has its own cap.

If you were to have 1 sector, you'd have your baseline mineral storage, the sector's single efficient drain, and that's the depth of your resources.

If you have multiple sectors, then you have your baseline mineral storage and each sector will have its own independent cap. If you have the Influence to support it, you will be able to drain them in sequence to greatly exceed your Mineral and EC caps.

 

[TheDungen]

Claiming these systems will allow you to repair these ruined megastructures and restore them to full functionality. Repairing a megastructure is cheaper and faster than building a brand new one, and also doesn't require any Ascension Perks, only the Mega-Enineering technology.

That's nice but I still think you ought t break the mega engineering up into several techs, mega engineering which should be available much earlier and then separate techs for unlocking every individual mega structure.

Ruined ringworlds that existed previously (such as the Cybrex homeworld and the ones owned by the Keepers of Knowledge)

I assume this includes the sanctuary too?

 

[Teutonizer]

Can't wait for the patch
Oh, Great PDX, for how long you'll be tormenting us with waiting?

 

[enpi]

Can we have new rooms with NO blue sky background?

 

[TheChaosShow]

Yes, unfamiliar technology would be a problem, but the basics of ringworld construction have to be determined by the laws of physics and thus relatively similar. The remainder you can juryrig as you need (since you have the technology to do so).

Unfamiliar tecnhology IS A BIG PROBLEM. If you don't have the tech you can't repair it.

You need the technology to build one to repair one.
You just don't have to have te Ascension Perk to repair the ringworld. Not having the ascension perk does not mean you don't have the know-how. You can see is as your Empire knows as to built a ringworld but does not want to, maybe because does not want to consume an entire system, or I don't know, some other ethical reason. But repair a broken ringworld? Yeah totally fine with that, we know a ring world works!

 

[Malistair]

I for one would like to see the build times for megastructures reduced. Given the benefit these structures give the cost in resources and time is exorbitant. Also, as mentioned in another post I would love to see a "Kuat" style super shipyard megastructure that greatly increases ship build time or allows for the construction of multiple hulls simultaneously.

 

[Mummolus]

Does Adams fix the bugs with Horizon Signal, or the Enigmatic Fortress?

New QoL stuff is great but we seriously need the content we already paid for to be working.

 

[IacobusBoemicus]

The screenshot hints at Fanatical Purifiers receiving some sort of ethics requirements change, very nice!

 

[Wizzington]

@Wiz There will always be bugs, but as part of the bug-fixing part of Adams is the team just addressing the most urgent bugs or is this a sweep to catch up on the huge debt of bugs accumulated since release? Bugs that have been logged for ages but (for obvious reasons) prioritized lower in the past since there's always been something higher priority to deal with, whether that be showstopper or major bugs or the development of new DLC? If part 2 of the Adams update deals with bug fixing, would you care to comment on this issue?

That I bring it up is because as a player it is immensely frustrating to report bugs in the bug forum that PDS recognizes as internally logged, and then never see any action taken on them unless they are showstopper bugs, major bugs, or seem to deal with an issue du jour. As a developer I have full sympathy for the harsh necessities of prioritization, but as a player it is damned frustrating when reported bugs are not either a) fixed, b) marked won't fix, or c) given some sort of schedule for fixing, but instead d) end up in limbo.

Having one's reported bugs end in limbo is never fun.

It is enough to discourage people like me from filing detailed bug reports on anything but major bugs, when bugs that, while minor, are 100% reproducible, affects a lot of players (or in some cases all players using a game mechanic), and which would appear to any coder to be easy or even trivial to fix (granting that it is always easier to say that about stuff other people have to code ) - nevertheless remain unaddressed for months on end. (In some cases rapidly approaching their first anniversary.)

We've spent a whole bunch of time on old bugs with Adams, we skipped doing any major features precisely so we'd have time to chew into the backlog.

 

[Wizzington]

That's nice but I still think you ought t break the mega engineering up into several techs, mega engineering which should be available much earlier and then separate techs for unlocking every individual mega structure.

I assume this includes the sanctuary too?

Sanctuary has no need to be repaired.

 

[Mathrafalovich]

Will Awakened empires rebuild megastructures? So, if a materialist FE woke up, might they repair their damaged rings?

 

[permanently_afk]

We've spent a whole bunch of time on old bugs with Adams, we skipped doing any major features precisely so we'd have time to chew into the backlog.

But he's right, it is motivating to see progress on the bugs. Can we have some sort of marker for the bugforum with the possibilities: "Added to internals" and "Need more data!" ?

 

[TheDungen]

Sanctuary has no need to be repaired.

Actually about half the segments are broken. And the only time I've seen it the rest of them were inhabited which means that technically it's never in your space.