• 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 #72: Crises & The Contingency

Hello everyone and welcome to another Stellaris development diary. We are now officially back from our break in communication and will be resuming weekly dev diaries and streams as usual. Today's dev diary is going to be about crises, and how we're changing them in the future, particularly in regards to the AI crisis. Before I dive into it, I also want to mention that we are still working to address the issues caused by 1.6 and get another bugfixing patch out, the process has just been somewhat complicated by the Bradbury multiplayer beta. See this post for details and discussion of Bradbury/1.6.2 and keep this thread focused on the topic at hand.

Crisis Improvements & AI
Some time back, when I was asked about issues with the crises and the AI crisis in particular, I said that I did not want to put a great deal of resources into improving the end-game when those resources could be put into the mid-game instead, and that these improvements and fixes would come when we felt the mid-game were in a good enough place to justify them. I now feel that we are in that place, and as such we are going to make a major push to improve, balance and rework the endgame crises for future updates.

Probably the most significant change to the non-AI crises is the addition of a Crisis Strength setting in game setup, replacing the old setting to turn endgame crises on or off. It also replaces the scaling to galaxy size and habitable worlds, and has a default setting for each of the galaxy sizes. This setting allows you to control the strength of crises, all the way down from 0.25x of their base power to a massive and likely unstoppable 5x power boost to their fleets. As before, you can also turn off crises entirely.
2017_06_01_2.png


Additionally, we've also spent a considerable amount of time improving the crisis AI, both in terms of how the crises themselves behave and how regular AI empires react to them. Crises should now expand in a more logical fashion and be better at defending and fortifying the space they have taken over. AI empires, in turn, should be far better at understanding when they are under mortal threat and react to a rapidly spreading crisis by banding together against it and coordinating their fleets to fight it.
2017_06_01_3.png


The Contingency
The old AI rebellion crisis suffers from a number of issues, mostly stemming from the fact that it's so different from the other crises. While the Extradimensionals and Scourge are large invasions that have to be fought with fleets, the AI rebellion is supposed to be primarily an internal crisis, with the dangers stemming from infiltration and subversion rather than outright warfare. The problem with this is twofold: The game mechanics do not support it, and it is inherently unsatisfying. Whereas huge fleets roaming around scourging the galaxy of life is an easily understood threat that can be fought by empires coming together and pooling their resources against the invaders, the AI crisis mostly ends up as a series of frustrating events affecting empires in isolation, or 'Spaceport Destruction Simulator' as it's been called.

In addition to the gameplay problems, there is also the narrative problems: Why exactly do rebelling synths pose a galaxy-wide threat? If sapient machines are so powerful, why are ascended synthetic empires not on the power level of an endgame crisis? Even if we were to simply boost the AI crisis by giving it massive fleets, this really doesn't make much sense that a handful of rebelling synths from a handful of regular empires were able to amass such fleet assets in the first place. It's for this reason that we decided to go back to the drawing board and remake the AI crisis in the mold of the other two endgame crises, while retaining as much as possible of the 'synth infiltration' flavor from the old crisis. Enter the Contingency.
2017_06_01_1.png


Without wishing to spoil too much, The Contingency is an ancient AI whose purpose appears to be to sterilize the galaxy of all higher biological life and control or destroy all other Synthetic life forms. At the start of the game, it is dormant, broadcasting a weak signal across the galaxy that affects Synthetics in unpredictable ways. The chance of the Contingency waking up is directly tied to the prevalence of Synthetic life in the galaxy, and should it wake, it will attempt to use its signal to control Synthetics and force them to aid it in its implacable task of galactic sterilization. Unlike the previous AI crisis, the Contingency has formidable fleet assets with which to carry out this task and has to be fought both in space and at home, as it makes use of subversion and infiltration to soften up its targets before the sterilization units arrive.
2017_06_01_4.png


Just as with the Extradimensionals and Scourge, there is additional events and hidden lore to be discovered regarding the Contingency, and synthetic empires will have special interactions and challenges related to it. The Contingency completely replaces the old AI uprising crisis, but we are currently looking at also implementing a new AI uprising, not as a galactic scale crisis but as a midgame event localized to one or a few empires. But more on that later!
 
Interesting, but does this signal only happen in games where that crisis is chosen? Will the player be aware of it early on?

I think I'd prefer an empire's own AI developing into the end game crisis. Or even a materialist player who becomes the end game crisis!
 
Some time back, when I was asked about issues with the crises and the AI crisis in particular, I said that I did not want to put a great deal of resources into improving the end-game when those resources could be put into the mid-game instead, and that these improvements and fixes would come when we felt the mid-game were in a good enough place to justify them. I now feel that we are in that place, and as such we are going to make a major push to improve, balance and rework the endgame crises for future updates.

Very sad that you think the mid game is in a good place. The mid game is still just as boring and uneventful as it was at the start. Utopia did nothing to change that, so please don't think you have finished with the mid game as it looks like you haven't even started. I would really like to know how and why you think the mid game is in a good place, as habitats and factions did nothing to change it.
Hell the whole factions part of the game still does not work or if it does it's very boring and adds absolutely nothing to the game ( this was a feature you made us pay for !! )


I think we are going need more info in the dev diaries going forward. Actual road maps and a list of things you are aware of and working on. We need massive gameplay changes, not reskins of crisis.
This post is nice but its nothing new and just filler, we need actually dev diaries with a bit of substance. Look backing at some of the old dev diares, some of the stuff mentioned in them is still not in the game !

I would think that changes to end game crisis should be alot lower on your list of things to fix.
 
A good improvement bring to the game.
I continue to hope that the next patch corrects a lot of the bugs AND also improves the faulty mechanics like the management of the sectors and its populations.
Point that for me, for the moment is more important than addition of new crises
 
The mid-game is still empty and boring. Defensive pacts & federations cause the galaxy to stagnate. They AI needs to do better, especially at countering snowballing humans.

Honestly, is MP that important that you're willing to disrupt the game being fixed?

Corvette spam (and the fact that higher tech is less efficient than lower tech) needs to be fixed yesterday, and the Sector AI needs to be improved to the point it can be trusted to do literally anything.

That should take priority over pointless MP changes that a small fraction of the userbase cares about.

As stated before, they have a seperate team doing the mp changes. Quit the reactionary bullsh*t please.
 
Hell the whole factions part of the game still does not work or if it does it's very boring and adds absolutely nothing to the game ( this was a feature you made us pay for !! )
Factions were entirely free. You didn't have to pay a cent for them.
 
As stated before, they have a seperate team doing the mp changes. Quit the reactionary bullsh*t please.

You should first carefully read dev posts and only then start your fanboy defensive reaction.
Devs clearly stated that DUE TO MP TESTING they can't quickly code and test 1.6.2 patch, therefore even that MP is being handled by different team their QA department is fully busy with MP patch.
 
Multiple Crisis setting would be interesting, would require a fair bit of work to function well though.

Well I just want to say I too would really enjoy having multiple crisis events be able to fire. I'm hoping at some point down the road our galaxies are in constant peril from ongoing crisis of different scales that fire at different stages of the game.
 
Opps my mistake that just makes Utopia even more overpriced.

Well factions still dont work or add anything to the game.
They do work, and they do add things to the game. The issue is that they're not volatile enough, and they stick around forever when they appear. If they made ethics suppression actually work, and then give unhappy factions a bigger downside, such as revolts and such, then I could see it being really good. for now, it's just "eh" but it's still functional, and better than what was before, as now I actually have to interact with my factions. As for Utopia, it was pretty obvious what you were getting, and it's by no means necessary for the base game. It was clear that all of the additions would be for lategame, so I wouldn't call it overpriced by any means. It delivered on what it promised.
 
They do work, and they do add things to the game. The issue is that they're not volatile enough, and they stick around forever when they appear. If they made ethics suppression actually work, and then give unhappy factions a bigger downside, such as revolts and such, then I could see it being really good. for now, it's just "eh" but it's still functional, and better than what was before, as now I actually have to interact with my factions. As for Utopia, it was pretty obvious what you were getting, and it's by no means necessary for the base game. It was clear that all of the additions would be for lategame, so I wouldn't call it overpriced by any means. It delivered on what it promised.

100% agree with you on factions needing to be more volatike. But in my last two games I choose to ignored them, never looked at the faction tab and nothing happened, it did not effect my game in anyway. So in that sense I dont feel they are working, but yes I agree 100% it was better than what was before.

Looking at content to $ I will always feel Utopia was overpriced and by a lot. I thought a lot more work would go into it, so I was very disappointed, this is first paradox dlc I have brought, so maybe I had too high standards from other games. I have learnt my lesson and wont buy any more DLC for a paradox game.