• 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.
Hello everyone and welcome to another Stellaris development diary. Now that the 1.7.2 update is out, we can officially start talking about the next update, which has been named 1.8 'Čapek'. This update will include the reworked AI crisis and other changes to crises outlined in Dev Diary #72. More information will be forthcoming in future dev diaries on the exact nature and release date of 1.8, but for today we'll be going over some changes and improvements to Habitability and Terraforming coming in 1.8.

Habitability Changes
Ever since the changes to the habitable planet classes and habitability back in Heinlein we have continued to discuss habitability, and in particular, the frequency of habitable worlds in the galaxy. A general feeling among the designers has been that habitable planets are too common and do not feel special enough, but that reducing the base number of habitable worlds wasn't really feasible while most empires only had access to colonizing a third of them at the start. We also felt that the sheer abundance of habitable worlds that become available to you when you do achieve the ability to colonize/terraform other climate types also meant that there is little pressure to expand your borders - not when you can triple your planet count simply by utilizing the planets already inside your borders.

For this reason we've decided to make a number of fundamental changes to habitability. First of all, the habitability at which Pops can live on a planet was reduced from 40% to 20%, meaning that by default, most species will be able to colonize most habitable worlds in the galaxy from the very start. We have also changed the actual effects of habitability: Rather than acting as a cap on happiness, it now acts as a modifier on it (in addition to affecting growth, as before), with each 10 points of habitability below 100% reducing happiness by 2.5% (so at the base 20% habitability, a Pop would get -20% to their happiness). This means that while low-habitability planets are possible to colonize, it may not be a good idea to do so unless you have ways to compensate for the negative effects of low habitability.
OcmNsiP.png


With these changes, we have cut the base number of habitable worlds in the galaxy in half. For those that prefer to play with more (or even fewer!) habitable worlds, there is of course the habitable worlds slider in galaxy setup as before. Overall, the changes should result in habitable worlds and terraforming candidates feeling like more significant finds in the early game, and contribute to mid and late game friction as empires run out of worlds to colonize inside their borders.


Planetary Deposits
Along with the change to habitability, we have also changed the way resource deposits are generated on habitable worlds. Rather than all habitable worlds having the exact same chance to generate the different kind of resource deposits, we have now broken it up a bit by climate as follows:

Wet Climate planets (Continental, Ocean, Tropical) are more likely to generate food and society research deposits.
Frozen Climate planets (Arctic, Tundra, Alpine) are more likely to generate mineral and engineering research deposits.
Dry Climate planets (Desert, Arid, Savanna) are more likely to generate energy and physics research deposits.
Gaia planets are more likely to generate mixed deposits and strategic resources.

Of course, this does not mean that you will *only* find those types of desposits on such planets - it simply means they are more likely to be found there.
2017_06_15_1.png



Terraforming Interface Improvements
Also coming in 1.8 are a couple changes to improve Terraforming and Terraforming Candidates. First of all, we've introduced a concept called 'significant planetary modifiers'. This is a flag (accessible to modders) that can be set on any planetary modifier, and will result in that planet appearing in the Expansion Planner even if it not of a habitable planet class. For now, the only significant modifier is Terraforming Candidates (such as Mars), so you should no longer find a Terraforming Candidate only to forget which system it is located in, but we expect to make more use of this functionality in the future.
2017_06_15_3.png


We also spent some time cleaning up the Terraforming interface in general, hiding the button for planets where it is never applicable (such as non-Terraforming Candidate barren worlds) and improving the sorting and style of the actual terraforming window.
2017_06_15_4.png


That's all for now! Next week we'll be talking about some significant changes coming in the area of genetic modification.
 
Last edited:
No, it doesn't. It contains a small list of fixes that were tested for a couple of weeks and still leaves a large amount of work to be done. Not to mention you pushed it live before fixing the crash on launch bug, what was the point of the beta if you aren't going to fix these things before releasing it.

If this is what you call being done with 1.6, this is what I call being done with Stellaris and any future DLC.

*shrug*. Don't let the door hit you on the way out.

They even said that they're working on the no-launch bug - now that they've actually been able to get information on what's causing it, since they couldn't replicate it in house. As soon as there's a fix, they've promised it as a patch.
 
*shrug*. Don't let the door hit you on the way out.

They even said that they're working on the no-launch bug - now that they've actually been able to get information on what's causing it, since they couldn't replicate it in house. As soon as there's a fix, they've promised it as a patch.

Where have I heard that one before?
 
In relation to the happiness penalties (again), while I really don't think a higher happiness penalty is a good idea, I'm considering adding in a resource production penalty to represent the difficulties of extracting resources in a hostile environment. Going to see how the balance of that plays out.
Increased consumer goods required would make sense. (More need for temperature control, adverse effects on health etc.)
 
What precise fixes were promised for 1.6 that aren't in 1.7.2?

None. You technically didn't even promise any specific fixes at all. One thing Paradox seems good at generally is not promising specifics. The only thing that was promised was that you aren't done with 1.6, unfortunately that one turned out not to be true. You can say all the fixes that you had intended for 1.6 are now in 1.7.2 but that doesn't really matter. What matters is if the game is in a fun, playable state and it still isn't. In fact, it's worse now as many people can no longer open it.
 
Perhaps I'm overreacting and the additional mineral deposits on Frozen planets could be a nice bonus, but not a significant one, I'd personally always go for a Frozen start. I don't care much about food and energy early on, minerals is what makes me snowball enough for the rest not to matter.
 
significant changes coming in the area of genetic modification

That sounds exiting. I hope the "Robust" trait will cost one point less, so I could uplift and bioengineer a ruler race - the most longlived species in the galaxy. Seven points is just too damn expensive. Sadly right now you can't give irradiated presentients both robust and venerable for a crazy 207 "natural" lifespan.
 
That sounds exiting. I hope the "Robust" trait will cost one point less, so I could uplift and bioengineer a ruler race - the most longlived species in the galaxy. Seven points is just too damn expensive. Sadly right now you can't give irradiated presentients both robust and venerable for a crazy 207 "natural" lifespan.

Couldn't you get both by adding a negative trait?
 
This is a pretty good call. Honestly, this could allow for trading and resource-sharing to become more important since certain empires will have better access to certain resources.
 
Wet Climate planets (Continental, Ocean, Tropical) are more likely to generate food and society research deposits.
Why would I pick a wet climate planet? Food is one the most useless ressource of the three and society research is arguably the worst. Unless food is much rare in 1.8, nobody in multiplayer would pick that choice.

I think making each type of planet more special is a very good thing, but it should be achieved by adding stuff like planet-specific buildings (on a wet planet, you can build energy buildings that also produce research, on dry planets your energy buildings are more efficients etc), not by doing something that seems clearly unbalanced.

Well, one could say that if everyone takes the same planets, there will be a lot of competition for them. But since anyone can now colonize any planets, it just means that I'll prioritize mineral-rich planets even more (even if my pops are unhappy on them, at least my enemies can't get it). I can't see any reason to pick a food-rich planet type since there's nothing to do with that ressource. It's also true for processing alien pops - what's the point of getting +102 food per month? You won't get more pops, and you won't be able to build organic ships or buildings with food.

It's also a completely arbitrary choice, since there's no reason why we wouldn't use wind as a ressource on ocean planets, and dry planets likely have sand storms, which aren't exactly a good thing if we consider that the main energy source in Stellaris is sunlight.

Overall, I'm worried by that addition. I think I would prefer a lot of it was related with planet modifiers (like "exceptional solar potential") etc. That would make each planet feel more unique.
 
None. You technically didn't even promise any specific fixes at all. One thing Paradox seems good at generally is not promising specifics. The only thing that was promised was that you aren't done with 1.6, unfortunately that one turned out not to be true. You can say all the fixes that you had intended for 1.6 are now in 1.7.2 but that doesn't really matter. What matters is if the game is in a fun, playable state and it still isn't. In fact, it's worse now as many people can no longer open it.

...and for those that can't open it, **THEY'VE SETUP THE 1.6.2 BRANCH** until the fix is dealt with.

Is the problem affecting you specifically? If it is, have you sent them any data that your system generates relating to the problem? If you're getting the problem but aren't helping solve it, then stop complaining and wait, meanwhile enjoying the updates and bug fixes. If you're not getting the problem, then you get to enjoy the updates with the MP layer. If you are getting the problem and *have* sent in data, then you've done what you can to fix the problem, and need to let them do what they can.

The game is playable, and works well at the moment.

And again. *At the time* we were told that 1.6 would continue to be worked on. Things move on, and it apparently turned out that the bug fixes that were being worked on could be fitted into both 1.6 and 1.7. This means there isn't really a point to launching 1.6.2 when 1.7.2 contains the bug fixes *and* the change to MP. Or would you rather they launched 1.6.2, and then immediately dropped 1.7.2 on top of it? Or (for some reason) had both out in parallel, confusing the matter even more?
 
Giving the planet classes a bit more texture sounds pretty good. Also giving empires a bit more gameplay differences depending on their starting planet types could add some nice flavour. Though I fear that wet will just tur out as purely worst of the 3.

Oh and maybe rename the modifier flag to something like "expansion relevant modifiers", just in case in the future modifiers will be needed elsewhere to show. An I rally would not call the -25% mineral production modifier not relevant either.
 
Well I guess that's a tolerable way of allowing wider ranging Colonization Efforts.

I mean a better way would be dropping the ridiculous idea that every Planet except Gaia worlds have only a Single Biome type because that is and always will be stupid and it doesn't matter how omnipresent it is in Sci-Fi, it will always be stupid but I'll take what I can get.

Also do you have any intention of ever allowing us to re-order planets in the Outliner? Because at this point I will never ever Colonize Mars because it never appears next to Earth in the Outliner.
 
Like a lot of people, I'm a little worried about Cold > Dry > Wet. I would strongly suggest buffing food somehow in 1.8.

That said, I'm very happy with the habitability changes. Gives more of a reason to terraform, decreases happiness in same-type planets by 5% and same-group planets by 10%, which is approximately what Stellaris needed to balance happiness.
 
On a multiplayer perspective.

RIP hiveminds in this patch, they were bad before, now they are beyond terrible. No private colony ship, no real boni to habitability.

Atleast the habitability changes are an indirect buff to bio ascension and yet again cyborgs. Poor psi players, but they were dead in multiplayer anyway, since for whatever reason they cannot even use BASIC robots, a simple tool.

Planetary Deposits

Wet climate seems worthless. Unless you guys vastly buff the growth bonus for positive food, wet climate is absolutely non competitive. Maybe implement a food cost for colony ships to compensate. Make it like 175 food/minerals, otherwise no one ever is going to pick wet climate. Or make colonies drain food instead of energy. You cannot even trade food in the enclave, these guys know its worthless.

Also don't make a single planet give engineering and mineral production, these two are the overall best combination in multiplayer. Minerals reign supreme and so does engineering tech in the current meta, i suggest to switch it around a little.

Good RP patch i guess. 10/10 for effort.

Also another buff for meta slavers, as they dont care for happiness anyway. Hurrah? x_x.
 
Last edited:
I'm still confused as to why Desert and Arid Worlds exist when they are practically the same thing; and that's ignoring the fact that the classification of a desert includes the polar regions of our own world. Planetary classification in-game requires an overhaul, or at the very least an expansion. It'd be nice to be able to build surface habitats on barren planets, or heck, even molten worlds.

Still waiting on those twin sun systems as well.
 
; and that's ignoring the fact that the classification of a desert includes the polar regions of our own world.
But that's just... what's teh english equivalent again... in Dutch i'd say "Ge zijt een muggenzifter"
If we talk about a dessert we're talking about teh sandy places, if we want to talk about the polar regions we'd use "polar regions" or something.

Eventough you're technicaly correct
 
I know it's a bit off topic, but I would love it if we got a whole selection of uplift traits that gave more specific functionality to a species (like "excellent pilots", +3 evasion for empire while a species of empire) representing specialized biological niches
 
On a multiplayer perspective.

RIP hiveminds in this patch, they were bad before, now they are beyond terrible. No private colony ship, no real boni to habitability.

Atleast the habitability changes are an indirect buff to bio ascension and yet again cyborgs. Poor psi players, but they were dead in multiplayer anyway, since for whatever reason they cannot even use BASIC robots, a simple tool.

Planetary Deposits

Wet climate seems worthless. Unless you guys vastly buff the growth bonus for positive food, wet climate is absolutely non competitive. Maybe implement a food cost for colony ships to compensate. Make it like 175 food/minerals, otherwise no one ever is going to pick wet climate. Or make colonies drain food instead of energy. You cannot even trade food in the enclave, these guys know its worthless.

Also don't make a single planet give engineering and mineral production, these two are the overall best combination in multiplayer. Minerals reign supreme and so does engineering tech in the current meta, i suggest to switch it around a little.

Good RP patch i guess. 10/10 for effort.

Also another buff for meta slavers, as they dont care for happiness anyway. Hurrah? x_x.

Did I miss something about hiveminds losing access to private colony ships?

They're not the *first* priority for me to grab, but they're handy when you get around to them (and have enough of an energy economy to make use of them.