[Zoston]

Looking at it, what it seems like is indeed that when a POP first pops (hehe, sorry), it is at 0/50 growth, and then grows up till full at which points it stays there. This means that going by the window there is a maximum population (hihi, okay I wasn't really sorry) of 25 POPs at 50/50. By this I would say 1 full POP = 1 billion people. It makes sense for any conversion to be simple, and 25 billion is about right for a maxed out planet. Since I presume that represents only the top 1% of populous (can't stop till it pops) planets out there.

We have no data on how new POPs are created, but my speculation is that it happens sequentially, so you get a new POP whenever the last one is filled up, as long as there is space on the planet. The speed of growth than being based on how much food resource there is on the planet, as per the diary. In other words, the limiter on POPs will be space, which is different from Vicky where there was no space limit on POPs.

That's a simplification, but I don't think it's necessarily a bad one. As I've said before, the Vicky 2 economic simulation really fundamentally doesn't work, because it's just not possible to simulate a supply-and-demand based global economy with that level of detail in a game. A less simulation-based system was necessary, this would be it.

What is a shame though is that this seems to mean that there won't be any 'class division' amongst POPs, and that would mean a much, much simpler level of societal simulation.

We can say that POPs will have the following 'stats' aside from their size which presumably will usually be maxed out: Species, Ethics and Traits, Happiness. But while Ethics and Traits makes for a somewhat complex societal simulation, what the removal of 'class' does is that it removes the economic aspect of societal division. Basically, it seems like there won't be any distinction between poor and rich people in Stellaris. The closest things will be the overall development of the planets people are living on, but that obviously not the same.

Imo, it looks like POPs in Stellaris will be more like a cross between POPs and CK2 style vassals. It'll still be interesting and somewhat complex, but I will miss class divisions. I'd really wish there were a basic division of upper-middle-lower class POPs, with some kind of system feeding into that. Perhaps it could be done with something like the specialist system from Civ 4?

To just brainstorm a bit. You add a lower-middle-upper class division to POPs. At its root, a planet can support one Middle Class POP for each available tile, and Middle Class POPs are always tile-bound. But through policies or other means, you can switch some Middle Class POPs to Lower Class POPs (which are also tile-bound) and in return for every two Lower Class POPs the planet gets one 'specialist' Upper Class POP which is not bound to any tiles. These specialist Upper Class POPs then provide additional benefits like increased research or resources or production. Of course, the downside is that lower class POPs are less happy and more likely to support more egalitarian ethics. In addition, for extra complexity you could expand it beyond just a local planet-based system: you could have certain empire-wide policies which trade extra lower class POPs in distant worlds for extra Upper Class POPs in your core worlds. This would create a source of conflict, but also a great incentive for you to keep unproductive periphery worlds in your empire. Because they'll give you extra Upper Class POPs in your maxed out hyper-productive core worlds.

The more I think about it the more I like it, though I guess Paradox has already chosen otherwise. Though even if it's not in the base game, it might always end up in a DLC

 

[hattorihanzo]

this Stellaris Paradox new 4x space game sound VERY interesting: is a release date been set ?

 

[Meraun]

We can say that POPs will have the following 'stats' aside from their size which presumably will usually be maxed out: Species, Ethics and Traits, Happiness. But while Ethics and Traits makes for a somewhat complex societal simulation, what the removal of 'class' does is that it removes the economic aspect of societal division. Basically, it seems like there won't be any distinction between poor and rich people in Stellaris. The closest things will be the overall development of the planets people are living on, but that obviously not the same.

Waht about theiur Race? If yozu got Humans, Tentacles and Catmen on one planet you will have Problems, depending on each pop's traits.

I think its in Human to go against a different race rahter than a different class of your own kind.

 

[Safehold]

I never played MoO3, but that is the sort of thing that make me love CK2. I want to struggle to keep my empire working and I want the possibility of it breaking away or occasionally helping me in ways I don't expect. As long as I have enough control so to feel my role is no passive and my gameplay matters, I want some independent actions.

I played crystal rocks in Moo3, but the things I couldn't control [correction, tac combat I wouldn't control] were mostly immigration and tactical combat. Immigration was simulated using rules and a model, so one planet could have various small percentage minorities of another race that likes the climate. It counted as a kind of population growth boost. Whereas tactical combat used AI scripts for certain ships, so missile loaded ships could be set to fire and run away, then you would see how that would match up as the tactical combat is run. Corrections were made on the macro scale, not the tactical micro scale. Meaning, if you want to counter a specific species' ship warfare, you needed to build new fleets to do so. The pace actually went faster than most 4x because there wasn't turn based combat to slow it down.

Immigration could be turned off or restricted, but it is mostly due to captured populations or remnants, who like the planetary environment. Each species type has a x and y axis on the favored ratio for preferred planetary environments. And thus terraforming it to your type's preference means the other ones start dying off or leaving.

There's a lot of macro scale economic controls in Moo3, and some micro as well. With larger empires, though, I found the macro scale economic simulation and build rates to be reasonable.

I used the UOP strawberry 1.2 patch, since the original game seemed to have so many complex simulated functions that it wasn't straightened out in time. The sheer complexity and back story text, was fun to puzzle out, much like starting as one county in Scandinavia for CK 2.

Unlike Paradox's GSG, Moo3 had a 4x audience that wasn't necessarily looking for grand strategy level macro complexity, and what there was of it, was hard to parse or comprehend for most people. An ambitious goal, but one that needed a rather longer development time. Something like Paradox's dev cycle with Ck1, Ck2, and Eu series.

ADD: I loaded up Moo 3 to fix some things I didn't remember correctly. There's also 3 tax rates, planetary, system, and empire wide. Was 3 tax rates needed to simulate control of micro and macro economies? The micro kept getting "adjusted" by empire wide policies in a not too transparent box, so it was easier to do "top level" management via macro scale, and it cut down on the micro too. When I needed to make stuff for war, empire wide policies and governments changed. The macro scale management felt useful, but the less I did of micro, the less of a micromanagement sink each planet became. There's no need to move fleets around, I just create them out of a pool and I can have as many planets as I wish making war ships, if I disable certain designs. This is particularly useful for large empires since I don't need to micro which planet makes which ships. I just need a ratio of escorts vs long attack missile super dreds.

Endless Space and Endless Legend simplified the UI and mechanics down to a very pure bedrock, with extra frills and features on top.

 

[Ornlu Wolfjarl]

3. Empire-Wide Warehouse. No. This is just plain silly. Abstractions are a necessity, but they have to be abstractions of things that make sense. Where are those resources? Are they in hyperspace?? If the abstraction represents cargo ships transporting resources to where they're needed, why do they get there instantaneously? Might as well ask where that fuse from the intro to Mission Impossible: Ghost Protocol is. Short answer: The Imperial Warehouse is on the other side of the fourth wall. Don't use it. Modern processors are powerful enough to handle many freighters that transport the resources between planets. It would be consistent with the level of detail you're using in the rest of the game.

This. I don't mind so much that there's only 3 resources for your general population to use, although I'd like to see more. I'd like to experience some sort of realistic supply system. We are talking about space travel, covering vast distances of nothing to a destination that likely has a very different environment than the one we started from. Each system should produce their own resources, and then trade for those with other systems in need nearby. This creates small self-sufficient enclaves, possibly with one central trading capital that trades with other enclaves. This creates a sort of natural trade node and political region with all sorts of fun possibilities when multiple civilizations occupy the same region. Importance of regions would also shift as more colonies are established, which would allow for the rise and decline of those trade nodes, creating even more scenarios for fun gameplay as the game progresses (managing space Detroit).

I understand they are trying to streamline the game as a way to reach a wider audience, but I'd urge PDX to not overdo it. Lately, I've come across too many games (Gal Civ 3, Civ Beyond Earth, etc) that tried to streamline what they offered before and failed to deliver to both casual and hardcore players.

 

[PedroVargas]

I understand they are trying to streamline the game as a way to reach a wider audience, but I'd urge PDX to not overdo it. Lately, I've come across too many games (Gal Civ 3, Civ Beyond Earth, etc) that tried to streamline what they offered before and failed to deliver to both casual and hardcore players.

Do you really think Civ BE is streamlined? I rather thought it kept the complexities but feels clunky and artificial. Clunky for example because the tech tree-web-thingy is a mess and hard to grasp and because some mechanics seem badly explained. Artificial because I never felt like I am developing a city/nation but I'm collecting stuff to build stuff and fight stuff, no real attachment to it, no feeling of world building.

The last point would be a potential risk to all space Civs - you're just further removed from things than in a historical game like EU4. History sort of connects you to the world and through that connects you to the game. I hope Stellaris finds a way to make your empire feel more physical and real. From what I've seen up to now they're on a solid path. Not too keen on the abstract tile window but perhaps that's going to be worked on.

As for the supply system: Sounds nice, some realism wouldn't hurt. As long as it doesn't turn the game into a series of waiting for your stuff to arrive.

 

[Meraun]

This. I don't mind so much that there's only 3 resources for your general population to use, although I'd like to see more. I'd like to experience some sort of realistic supply system. We are talking about space travel, covering vast distances of nothing to a destination that likely has a very different environment than the one we started from. Each system should produce their own resources, and then trade for those with other systems in need nearby. This creates small self-sufficient enclaves, possibly with one central trading capital that trades with other enclaves. This creates a sort of natural trade node and political region with all sorts of fun possibilities when multiple civilizations occupy the same region. Importance of regions would also shift as more colonies are established, which would allow for the rise and decline of those trade nodes, creating even more scenarios for fun gameplay as the game progresses (managing space Detroit).

I understand they are trying to streamline the game as a way to reach a wider audience, but I'd urge PDX to not overdo it. Lately, I've come across too many games (Gal Civ 3, Civ Beyond Earth, etc) that tried to streamline what they offered before and failed to deliver to both casual and hardcore players.

I CK II and EuIV Streamlined in our Opinion? Because i doubt they woud go fruther than taht

 

[Heatth]

I played crystal rocks in Moo3, but the things I couldn't control were mostly immigration and tactical combat. Immigration was simulated using rules and a model, so one planet could have various small percentage minorities of another race that likes the climate. It counted as a kind of population growth boost. Whereas tactical combat used AI scripts for certain ships, so missile loaded ships could be set to fire and run away, then you would see how that would match up as the tactical combat is run. Corrections were made on the macro scale, not the tactical micro scale. Meaning, if you want to counter a specific species' ship warfare, you needed to build new fleets to do so. The pace actually went faster than most 4x because there wasn't turn based combat to slow it down.

Sounds like my type of game! Just the lack of tactical combat in a strategy game makes me really happy. And it make sense to not have full control of immigration (and probably more interesting).

Unlike Paradox's GSG, Moo3 had a 4x audience that wasn't necessarily looking for grand strategy level macro complexity, and what there was of it, was hard to parse or comprehend for most people. An ambitious goal, but one that needed a rather longer development time. Something like Paradox's dev cycle with Ck1, Ck2, and Eu series.

Make sense. A pity it wasn't well received. Now you talked about it I kinda want to try out.

 

[Safehold]

Sounds like my type of game! Just the lack of tactical combat in a strategy game makes me really happy. And it make sense to not have full control of immigration (and probably more interesting).



Make sense. A pity it wasn't well received. Now you talked about it I kinda want to try out.

ADD: I loaded up Moo 3 to fix some things I didn't remember correctly. There's also 3 tax rates, planetary, system, and empire wide. Was 3 tax rates needed to simulate control of micro and macro economies? The micro kept getting "adjusted" by empire wide policies in a not too transparent box, so it was easier to do "top level" management via macro scale, and it cut down on the micro too. When I needed to make stuff for war, empire wide policies and governments changed. The macro scale management felt useful, but the less I did of micro, the less of a micromanagement sink each planet became. There's no need to move fleets around, I just create them out of a pool and I can have as many planets as I wish making war ships, if I disable certain designs. This is particularly useful for large empires since I don't need to micro which planet makes which ships. I just need a ratio of escorts vs long attack missile super dreds.

Endless Space and Endless Legend simplified the UI and mechanics down to a very pure bedrock, with extra frills and features on top. Those simplified resource mechanics and other 4x tropes from Moo1 and Master of Magic, felt very very close to the classics. Endless Legend even had the free to roam "settler" which started a city, based on what resource tiles were around it, which was in Mom but not Moo1/2.

In comparison, Moo3 was closer to an economic simulator, that only "looked" like it had 3-4 basic resources. My save game of the cybernetic race Cynoid, turn 475 has me at the top of the galaxy, having wiped out about 4 out of 9 other species. I'm at war with pretty much all of them, and there's 8+ different combat queues going each turn. That's when 4x "bogs" down, but since the combat can be set to AI or using pre set AI scripts I put into the ship design that allows me to watch, I don't normally need to manually control any of the battles. It's more like these little empires surrounding me are tough to wipe out all at once, since it takes time to colonize and invade planets using ground forces, vs just bombing them from orbit. The thing is, when you bomb them from orbit, the planet becomes "available" and then the other AIs colonize it... so they're like cockroaches.

I also have undefended "rears" to my empire that have wormhole connections to the middle of enemy capital construction worlds, so I have to position stationary picket defense fleets there to crunch the enemy apart. Which is okay, since I don't take any casualties due to my massive missile barrage launched from way out of the range of most of these energy beam armed armadas. That's where the macro management of the empire comes in. I have to keep my oppression up to filter out spies every once in awhile, then keep it low to reduce unrest. Raise war allocations for fleet construction when my ships run low. Planetary armies are built automatically, but manually must be organized for offensive invasions.

Looking at the migration patterns, generally if you sterilize a planet and plant down a "pure" colony ship, it'll become 100% of your own race, since you will begin terraforming it to the sweet spot of your genotype. However, there are various 'minor' species and enemy species which you conquered, that may spread around on the planet or to planets it can produce efficiently on. And those different racial types do seem to control how much production each planetary sector produces, but it isn't very transparent and gets very "micro" intensive to find out. Well, it does save on terraforming time and money, if some minor species can work that planet without terraforming tech. I learned not to worry about stuff like that. If I did, it would probably be a crazy meter. The harvester species playable in game, seem to need these 'conquered' races, perhaps as food or something. So for them, the various demographics of a planet would matter a lot more. For people whose player species is "pure" and "efficient", they probably don't want to bother cultivating or adulterating their demographics with foreign species. It does speed up colonization very well though, some of these species have interesting bonuses, like less pollution. Less pollution, more credits for building other stuff. There's also an option to use them as forced gang labor, with another option to set the oppression to high to get good credits but they end up dying. I set it on medium, but it may be possible at the highest settings to "cleanse" a planet or empire of undesirables over an extremely long period of turns (50-100).

The UI for Master of Orion 3 was also rather strange and unique. It had more in common with adventure games and mobile interfaces, where you click and focus on what you want to change, and if you want more options you go deeper into the interface. For people who played games like Eve Online or other "spreadsheet" like functions, it's very easy to use. Once you remember what stuff does, that is. Of course, that's assuming that the "stuff" does what you think it does. Unlike CK 2 and Paradox games, the ruleset for Moo3 is black box. It's not easy to find out what it is doing underneath the hood. People who like designing spaceships, naturally want to find out how the "box works", and if they can't, it gets frustrating. I play the game without even understanding what the rules are, I just know it exists and how to manage it to get what I want. But that's not the direct micro control most people talk about, though, for Moo3.

 

[misterbean]

Sounds like a very fun game to watch.

 

[Safehold]

Judging from Paradox's previous creation, CK 2, the UI and interface gameplay elements seem rather simplistic, but there's a lot going on, which takes play and research to find out.

That seems to be the same philosophy they are applying to the Stellaris vision, with the previous statement about how the early stage of exploration and colonization would feel like a 4x but the later stage would be more like a GSG map. However, the explanation of the vision behind each of these game play features and the level to which they belong in the greater strategy, would help address people's fears and hopes more effectively.

 

[hattorihanzo]

That seems to be the same philosophy they are applying to the Stellaris vision, with the previous statement about how the early stage of exploration and colonization would feel like a 4x but the later stage would be more like a GSG map. However, the explanation of the vision behind each of these game play features and the level to which they belong in the greater strategy, would help address people's fears and hopes more effectively.

what you mean exactly for "GSG map" ?

 

[Teleros]

Planet Tiles
Each habitable planet has a number of tiles on its surface, representing the planet’s size. Some tiles might be blocked by natural barriers, such as mountains, and can be cleared to open up new space. When the galaxy is generated, each tile generates a random number and checks if a deposit will be spawned there. A tile can be worked by having a Pop placed in it.

Buildings can also be constructed in tiles, and they often have adjacency bonuses for the resource they are producing. Therefore it will be advantageous to construct your power plants in proximity to each other, to achieve optimal efficiency.

I'll be honest, this is one mechanism from Galactic Civilisations 2 & 3 I did not like.

Deposits
Resources are generated as deposits and they spawn on planets depending on the type of planet, and which modifiers can be found on the planet. Certain resources are also more likely to be found in systems that lie in specific parts in the galaxy, like inside a nebula. All resources cannot appear on all planets, and some planets have a higher chance of hosting certain resources. Asteroids are very likely to have minerals on them, for example.

I think I'd do something more like MoO2 here, with planets being graded bast on mineral content etc. The idea of a rocky planet forming without at least some metals in it is kind of silly (for reference, Master of Orion 2 went from "Ultra Poor" to "Ultra Rich" worlds for mineral content). Farming without technological assistance like hydroponics or artificial habitats is different of course, in that it's very possible to imagine situations in which you can live on a planet but not farm in the open air (hi Mars).

Orbital Resources
Planets that cannot be colonized do not use surface tiles, but they can still generate deposits. Each planet has an orbital resource slot that can be worked if a Mining Station or Research Station is built in orbit around that planet. Sometimes you encounter planets that you could potentially colonize, but that is not habitable enough for you to want to colonize it. In those cases you may also want to construct an orbital station.

Nice .

Food is a requirement for Pops to grow. If there is plenty of Food, Pops will grow faster. If there is a lack of Food, Pops will be unhappy.

Whilst I understand the desire to keep with the tried & tested formula here, if we're talking about a space-age civilisation then realistically food should never be a problem **IF** there is a decent bit of internal trade and no wars / disasters that might affect the food supply.

Based on what's been said about how pops work tiles, I'm also assuming that you'll need to devote entire pops to food production (although IRL you can produce enough food with under 1% of your population working in food production)... oh well. Like I said, sticking to the tried & tested formula.

Minerals are used to produce most things in the game. If Minerals represent matter, Energy Credits represent work.

Seems fine.

Energy Credits represent all liquid assets and energy produced by our Empire. Actions, such as clearing tiles, cost Energy Credits to perform. This resource is mainly used for upkeep, and although it can be hoarded, that might not be the best way of handling it.

Again, seems fine.

Physics Research, Society Research and Engineering Research are used to advance technologies in different fields of science.

I'm assuming these three are generated by pops sent into science buildings or similar.

Looking at it all so far, I'm not sure what you mean by "all resources cannot appear on all planets", unless it's along the lines of "you cannot farm on the Moon without a hydroponics building" or w/e.

Rare Resources

Urgh.

 

[Hinforta]

One of the screenshots shows a very limited info about the current population of a selected planet. Please tell me there is going to be a possibility to open a fullblown window with lots of details about the planet? Like the exact number of the population, the planet's type, size, status etc?

 

[Abadon777]

Can't wait for the next dev diary this game so far stacks up better than Galactic Civ 3.

 

[Anthedon]

Will the city lights visible from space reflect population location and growth?

 

[Safehold]

what you mean exactly for "GSG map" ?

A Grand strategy game map like when we start CK 2 or EU 4: with gameplay like diplomacy, casus belli only expansion, and so forth. Most of the features they have outlined in the dev diaries seem to be for phase 1 of the game.

Will the city lights visible from space reflect population location and growth?

In previous dev diary one of the devs did say that the planet light would grow to reflect number of sectors occupied by pop or build up. Location wasn't specified though.

 

[drewbc32]

I hope adjacency bonuses are handled well. In Gal Civ you basically only end up wanting to produce one type of resource on each plannet. I kinda like the idea of there being more choices vs always all in.

True. But I think hexes are better for adjacency bonuses than square grids. I hope they keep at it to make that aspect worthwhile.

 

[Evilfisher]

"If there is a lack of Food, Pops will be unhappy."

so colonies cant starve?

 

[Velorian]

"If there is a lack of Food, Pops will be unhappy."

so colonies cant starve?

I guess they get fed recycled waste and algae so no starvation just unhappiness from crappy food. I mean modern tech already means we can make burgers out of waste it just isn't economically worth it. Yet.