• 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.
Status
Not open for further replies.

Stellaris Dev Diary #92: FTL Rework and Galactic Terrain

Hello everyone and welcome to another Stellaris development diary. Today's dev diary is about Faster than Light travel in the Cherryh update, and it's likely to be a controversial one. When discussing, please remember to keep things civil, and I would kindly ask that you read the entire dev diary before rushing to post, as it's going to cover some of the questions and concerns we expect to see from the playerbase. Also, as posted last week, all of these changes are currently far away, and we cannot give more details on ETAs or the exact nature of the Cherryh update than we already have. Thank you!

FTL Rework
The single biggest design issue we have had to tackle in the Stellaris team since release is the asymmetrical FTL. While it's a cool and interesting idea on paper, the honest truth is that the feature just does not fit well into the game in practice, and blocks numerous improvements on a myriad of other features such as warfare and exploration, as well as solutions to fundamental design problems like the weakness of static defenses. After a lot of debate among the designers, we finally decided that if we were ever going to be able to tackle these issues and turn Stellaris into a game with truly engrossing and interesting warfare, we would have to bite the bullet and take a controversial decision: Consolidating FTL from the current three types down into a primarily hyperlane-based game, with more advanced forms of FTL unlocked through technology.

However, as I have said on the previous occasions when discussing this issue, one thing we would never consider doing is just slashing FTL types from the game without adding in something else to compensate their loss. That is what most of this dev diary is going to be about. However, before continuing with the details on the additions and changes we're making to FTL, I want to cover a couple of the questions I expect will arise from this:

Why are you removing FTL choices instead of building on them?
A lot of people have asked this question when we have brought up consolidating FTL types before, suggesting that problems such as static defenses can be solved by just adding more mechanics to handle each special case. I think the problem with this is best illustrated with defense stations and FTL inhibitors. One of the aims of the Starbase system is to give empires the ability to 'lock down' their borders, building fortresses that enemy fleets cannot simply skip past to strike at their core worlds, instead of having to create static defenses in every single valuable system.

With hyperlanes, this is a pretty simple affair: As hyperlanes create natural choke points, the only thing a hyperlane-stopping FTL inhibitor needs to do is to prevent enemy fleets from leaving the system once they enter it. The fleet can enter, it can retreat (via emergency FTL) and it can bring down the source of the FTL inhibitor (which might be a Starbase or even a planet) to be able to continue. This is quite easy to understand, both in terms of which system you need to defend to lock down your borders, and how it works when you are on the offensive.

Now let's add Warp to the mix. In this case, the single-system FTL inhibitor is useless because Warp fleets can just go over it, so we'll invent another mechanic: A warp interdiction bubble, stretching a certain distance around the system, that pull in any hostile Warp fleets traveling there to the system containing the FTL inhibitor, and force them to battle it or retreat. This is immediately a lot more messy: First of all, this bubble can't possibly affect Hyperlane fleets, because it could potentially pull them dozens of jumps away from their current location. This means that when fortifying your borders, you now need to not just make sure that every important chokepoint is covered, but also that your entire border is covered in warp interdiction bubbles.

But there's more: Add Wormholes as well, and you now have an FTL type where not only the 'bubble' type interdictor doesn't make intuitive sense (because Wormhole fleets make point-to-point jumps rather than traveling over the map) but if said interdictor works to pull Wormhole fleets out of position regardless of what makes intuitive sense, you end up with the same probem as with hyperlanes, where the fleet can get pulled out of range of its wormhole network and end up stranded even if it brings down the defenses. This means you pretty much have to invent a third type of interdiction type for Wormhole on top of what is already an overengineered and hard to understand system.

Finally, add the problem of displaying all these different types of inhibitors and interdictors on the map, in a way that the player can even remotely start to understand, and you end up with nothing short of a complete mess, where it's far better to just have static defenses protecting single valuable systems... and so we come full circle.

This is the fundamental problem that we have been grappling with when it comes to asymmetrical FTL: What works in a game such as Sword of the Stars, with its turn-based gameplay, small maps of usually no more than 3-6 empires, and 1-on-1 wars breaks down completely in a Stellaris game with real-time gameplay and wars potentially containing a dozen actors, all with their own form of FTL. The complexity collapses into what is for the player just a mess of fleets appearing and disappearing with no discernible logic to them.

Why Hyperlanes?
When discussing this, we essentially boiled down the consolidation into three possibilities: Hyperlanes only, Warp-only, and Warp+Hyperlanes. Wormhole is simply too different a FTL type to ever really work with the others, and not intuitive enough to work as the sole starting FTL for everyone playing the game. Keeping both Warp and Hyperlanes would be an improvement, but would still keep many of the issues we currently have in regards to user experience and fleet coordination. Warp-only was considered as an alternative, but ultimately Hyperlanes won out because of the possibilities it opens up for galactic geography, static defenses and enhancements to exploration.

Here are the some of the possibilities that consolidation of FTL into Hyperlanes creates for Stellaris:
  • Unified distance, sensor and border systems that make sense for everyone (for example, cost of claiming a system not being based on euclidean distance but rather the actual distance for ships to travel there)
  • Galactic 'geography', systems that are strategically and tactically important due to location and 'terrain' (more on this below) rather than just resources
  • More possibilities for galaxy generation and exploration (for example, entire regions of space accessible only through a wormhole or a single guarded hyperlane, containing special locations and events to discover)
  • Better performance through caching and unified code (Wormhole FTL in particular is a massive resource hog in the late game)
  • Warfare with a distinct sense of 'theatres', advancing/retreating fronts and border skirmishes (more on this in future dev diaries)
Are all new forms of FTL free patch content?
Yes. Naturally we're not going to charge for any form of content meant to replace the loss of old FTL types.

Hyperlane and Sublight Travel
As mentioned, in the Cherryh update. all empires will now start the game with Hyperlanes as their only mode of FTL. By default, hyperlane generation is going to be changed to create more 'islands' and 'choke points', to make for more interesting galactic geography. However, as we know some players do not enjoy the idea of constricted space, we are going to add a slider that controls the general frequency and connectivity of hyperlanes. Turning this up will create a more connected galaxy and make it harder to protect all your systems with static defenses, for players who prefer something closer to the current game's Warp-style movement.

Sublight travel is also being changed somewhat, in the sense that you need to actually travel to the entry point to a particular hyperlane (the arrow inside a system) to enter it, rather than being able to enter any hyperlane from any point outside's a system's gravity well. This means that fleets will move in a more predictable fashion, and interdictions will frequently happen inside systems instead of nearly always being at the edge of them, in particular allowing for fleets to 'guard' important hyperlane entry/exit points. To compensate for the need to move across systems, sublight travel has been sped up, especially with more advanced forms of thrusters.
2017_11_02_2.png


FTL Sensors
Along with the change to FTL, we are also changing the way sensors work. Instead of simply being a circle radiating an arbitrary distance from a ship, station or planet, each level of sensors can now see a certain distance in FTL connections. For example, a ship with level 1 sensors (Radar) will only give sensor coverage of the same system that it is currently in, while a ship with level 2 (Gravitic) sensors will give sensor coverage of that system and all systems connected to it through a Hyperlane or explored Wormhole (more on that below), a ship with level 3 sensors will be able to see systems connected to those systems, and so on. Sensor coverage can be 'blocked' by certain galactic features (more on that below), which will also block propagation into further connected systems. We are currently discussing the implementation of sensor blockers as a potential Starbase component.
2017_11_02_1.png


Wormholes
While Wormhole as a full-fledged FTL type is gone, Wormholes are not. Instead they have been changed into a natural formation that can be encountered while exploring the galaxy. Wormholes come in pairs, essentially functioning as very long hyperlanes that can potentially take a ship across the entire galaxy near-instantly. Natural Wormholes are unstable, and when first encountered, you will not be able to explore them. To explore a Wormhole, you need the Wormhole Stabilization technology, after which a science ship can be sent to stabilize and chart the Wormhole to find out what lies on the other side. If you're lucky, this may be unclaimed space full of valuable systems, but it could just as well be a Devouring Swarm eager to come over for dinner. There is a slider on game setup that controls the frequency of wormhole pairs in the galaxy.
2017_11_02_4.png


Gateways
Gateways is an advanced form of FTL most closely resembling the Wormhole FTL in the live version of the game. While exploring the galaxy, you can find abandoned Gateways that were once part of a massive, galaxy-spanning network. These Gateways are disabled and unusable, but with the Gateway Reactivation mid-game technology and a hefty investment of minerals, they can be restored to working order. Like Wormholes, Gateways allow for near-instant travel to other Gateways, but the difference is that any activated Gateway can be used to travel to any other activated Gateway, and late-game technology allows for the construction of more Gateways to expand the network. Also unlike Wormholes, which cannot be 'closed', Gateways also have the advantage of allowing any empire controlling the system they're in to control who goes through said Gateway - hostile empires and empires to whom you have closed your borders will not be able to use 'your' Gateways to just appear inside of your systems.

When the first Gateway is re-activated, another random Gateway will also be re-activated along with it, so that there is never a situation where you just have a single active Gateway going nowhere. There is a slider on game setup that controls the frequency of abandoned gateways in the galaxy.
2017_11_02_8.png


Jump Drives
Jump Drives and Psi Jump Drives have been changed, and is now an advanced form of FTL that mixes Hyperdrive with some functionality from the old Warp FTL. They allow for a ship to travel normally and very quickly along hyperlanes, but also come equipped with a tactical 'jump' functionality that allows a fleet to make a point-to-point jump ignoring the normal hyperlane limitations. This is done with a special fleet order where you select a target system for the jump (within a certain pre-defined range, with Psi Jump Drives having longer range than regular Jump Drives), after which the fleet charges up its jump drive and creates a temporary wormhole leading to the system. After the fleet makes its 'jump', the Jump Drive will need to recharge, with a significant cooldown before it can be used again, and also applies a debuff to the fleet that reduces its combat effectiveness while the cooldown is in effect. This allows for fleets with Jump Drives to ignore the usual FTL restrictions and skip straight past enemy fleets and stations, but at the cost of leaving themselves vulnerable and potentially stranded for a time afterwards. This design is highly experimental, and may change during the development of Cherryh, but we wanted Jump Drives to not just be 'Hyperdrive IV' but rather to unlock new tactical and strategic possibilities for warfare.

Galactic Terrain
With the switch to Hyperlanes and the creation of strategically important systems and chokepoints, we've also decided to implement something we had always thought was a really interesting idea, but which made little sense without such chokepoints: Galactic Terrain. Specifically, systems with environmental effects and hazards that have profound tactical and strategic effects on ships and empires. This is still something we are in the middle of testing and prototyping, but so far we have created the following forms of Galactic Terrain:
Nebulas block all sensor coverage originating from other systems, meaning that it's impossible for an empire to see what ships and stations are inside a system in a nebula without having a ship or station stationed there, allowing empires to hide their fleets and set up ambushes.
Pulsars interfere with deflector technology, nullifying all ship and station shields in a system with a Pulsar.
Neutron Stars interfere with navigation and ship systems, significantly slowing down sublight travel in a system with a Neutron Star.
Black Holes interfere with FTL, increasing the time it takes for a fleet to charge its emergency FTL and making it more difficult to ships to individually disengage from combat (more on this in a later dev diary).

The above is just a first iteration, and it's something we're likely to tweak and build on more for both the Cherryh update and other updates beyond it, so stay tuned for more information on this.
2017_11_02_3.png

2017_11_02_5.png


That's all for today! I will finish this dev diary by saying that we do not expect everyone to be happy with these changes, but we truly believe that they are necessary to give Stellaris truly great warfare, and that we think you will find the game better for it once you get a chance to try them. We will be doing a Design Corner feature on today's Extraterrestial Thursday stream, where me and Game Designer Daniel Moregård (grekulf) will be discussing the changes, fielding questions and showing off some gameplay in the internal development build. If you want a look at some of these changes in a live game environment, be sure to tune to the Paradox Interactive twitch channel at 4pm CET.

Next week, we're going to talk about war and peace, including the complete rework of the current wargoal system that was made possible by the changes to FTL and system control discussed in this and last week's dev diary. See you then!
 
Last edited:
  • 1
  • 1
  • 1Love
Reactions:
these are those "complciated and non-interactive rules" i was talking about.

a nebulae doesn;t do anything to wormholes, etc. it's a mess, it's inelegant, it's messy and potentially can create more issues down the line than it solves.

they had 2 options keep this FTL

or

improve the galaxy generation to allow for more.

I don't think it is, as long as you keep in mind how to give the information to the player efficiently It's doable. Add the FTL type to the fleet icon on the galaxy map and to the icon given in system view, then add a progress and direction line for when a fleet is FTLing. That would sort out the wormhole issue in terms of information.
 
I’ve often thought that stellaris needed some big changes to the core of the game to make it REALLY great, but that the Devs would consider it too risky to make such drastic alterations.

I’m glad they are willing to do so, more interested than ever to see how this game develops :)
 
That wouldn't really do anything though. Am I missing something here? Those stars are very rare, and would not really have any impact on FTL-travel as a whole if they were "impassable terrain".

Create more of them. At least those that are small and would block travel in certain direction. They don't have to be based to blackhole solar system only. It was just something I thought of on a whim.

They could be large area cutted off say an entire arm at least until you setup a gate on the other side via STL or find an alternative route.

Feel free to change to anything else. Don't have to be blackhole.
 
Like we talked about on the Designers' Corner stream, this change opens up so many possibilities for us. In the future we hope to see reap the benefits of this change, especially with a much more interesting galaxy map. As an example, this allows us to do things like "islands" full of interesting star systems, only accessible through a gateway or natural wormhole. An understandable short-term loss (for some players) is something we're willing to risk in order to give you a better experience in the long-term.

If at least it wasn't bloody hyperlanes, I could live with cutting 2 FTLs out of most of the game.
 
As a fellow mod creator, I will probably begin a work on a mod that will add some sort of point-to-point drive using the jump drive mechanic either as a very very early tech or even as a secondary starting FTL option. It will basicaly be like jump drives, except either limited by range or by not being able to use hyperlanes....if it will be possible.

To be honest, the FTL change really threatens to kill the game for game. I hate hyperlanes. They make the game far too much predictable. Like...if I wanted to play a strategic game with terrain, chokes, defensible points I'd go play Civilization.....Space is supposed to be empty, free, unable to be walled of or allow for creation of chokepoints.

Also, leaving hyperlanes only as a starting option basicaly makes you lose the game if there is a more militaristic empire next to you, as now you cannot make any guerilla attacks into their territory. It's just about who has the bigger doomstack with a single deciding battle happening at the nearest chokepoint....everything else will just snowball from that point onwards.
 
Stellaris is considered to be one of the best space 4X games around right now because it does things different to other games in the genre. Why is it now trying to hard to be like those other games?
 
So your answer is that: terrain elements are impossible to design into a space game without star lanes...is that it?

It's impossible to design terrain elements in a system with wormholes, rather. Well, you can, but not when you can build a wormhole generator in any and every system.

You could probably get something resembling a terrain feature with warp, but it would probably be rather silly or have to be nebula based. "Oh look, a naturally occuring ring of pulsars."
 
I will turn the question to you. Imagine you're playing HOI, EU civilization or whatever other earth based game and you had a single map with no oceans but only land mass and some mountains here and there to prevent movements between confining provinces. Would you find it fun?

Yeah, actually, yeah. I *hate* naval warfare in any game for the exact reason of it being too unstructured and micromanagement-heavy.

That's just me of course, maybe not the most qualified testimonial.

Edit: Also, on a less extreme anti-naval angle, Riftwalker makes a much better point than I did :D
 
I will turn the question to you. Imagine you're playing HOI, EU civilization or whatever other earth based game and you had a single map with no oceans but only land mass and some mountains here and there to prevent movements between confining provinces. Would you find it fun?

Because forcing hyperlanes is just about forcing that. They are removing the space from space. Instead of having star systems feeling like little islands in an ocean of space where everything could happen we're getting a huge Pangea with no oceans at all. Only land combat with maybe some instant aerial transport once you have two airports in place (the warp gateways).
It's... boring. It lacks the very feeling of space. It's why I find space strategy games in general more boring than their Earth based counterparts. They always oversimplify and ends up to have even less diversification than their Earth based counterparts.

If anything as a design direction I would have like them to start adding stuff in between stars (where a lot of sci-fi stories happen) instead of cutting it out completely. I understand the mess of the 3 FTL systems and that it had to go away (I never understood why they had to be hard locked at startup actually) but the fact that they choose to force hyperlanes instead of warp as base FTL... I don't know if I can play another space game that feels tight and constricted like a maze.

as a more apt metaphor, HoI is how the proposed system is, making like how stellaris is currently, would be to add the ability to move land units anywhere, even behind enemy lines without needing air transports or anything, it's just a native ability of ground units to move that way. would that be fun?
 
Please, someone clarify to me what exactly is lost, SPECIFICALLY, with the removal of warp. If you give me feels, i'll give you feels back.

Games are all about feels. That's the whole point of them. I play games because they make me feel happy or because they make me feel smart or cool or accomplished or powerful or whatever. No matter how good the mechanics/art/narrative, at the end of the day, if it doesn't make me feel, it's failed. "This feels good/bad" is an entirely legitimate reason to like or dislike a game.
 
Stellaris is considered to be one of the best space 4X games around right now because it does things different to other games in the genre. Why is it now trying to hard to be like those other games?

We are not trying to "be like" anyone else. We're doing radical changes because we see it as the best path moving forwards. We don't need to look at other games to come up with our plans for the future :)
 
We understand that this change is upsetting to some, and we didn't expect anything else. Knowing how big of a change this will be for the game, and for some players, we still decided to go through with it. This was not something done on a whim, but rather after careful consideration and many many months of thinking. We truly believe that in order to make the game better in the terms of warfare and exploration, and more, this was a necessary bullet to bite.

Like we talked about on the Designers' Corner stream, this change opens up so many possibilities for us. In the future we hope to see reap the benefits of this change, especially with a much more interesting galaxy map. As an example, this allows us to do things like "islands" full of interesting star systems, only accessible through a gateway or natural wormhole. An understandable short-term loss (for some players) is something we're willing to risk in order to give you a better experience in the long-term.

To Boldly Go, is the best step forward!

Well, if you're not even willing to reconsider, I'm out. It's a real shame because up until now I was excited. I wanted to give you the benefit of the doubt, but nothing new you could add at this point will compensate for this. Wormholes being locked behind tech I'm fine with. Removal of warp? No. I HATE being forced into playing one specific way when before I had choice. There are better ways to rework/re-balance the current FTL types without gutting our freedom.

I guess this is goodbye.
 
Though I enjoy the Dev Diaries from Paradox I rarely comment in the forum so please forgive the length. This particular diary though has produced a vigorous response from the community which is good in that it reflects the passion people feel for the game. However, it also seems like emotion is clouding people's minds and producing a rush to judgement. Whether the change in FTL will be "good" or "bad" will depend largely on other changes made by the developers. The fact that there largely won’t be either warp or wormholes does not mean that the experience with hyperlanes will be the same as they are in the current version of the game. Note that I have played many hours using each of the three propulsion systems and found things I like and dislike about all of them. After a point I found that the inability to research a different propulsion system via the tech trees made the game very skewed if all three propulsion systems were allowed. I generally only play with a single propulsion system allowed.

Some people are stating their reason for objection have to do with “feeling constrained” or “breaking role-playing” or that hyperlanes aren’t “realistic”. As a trained physicist I can tell you that there are no realistic FTL propulsion systems with our current state of technology. All of the systems in the game are common material in science-fiction and are PURELY speculative. From a role-playing perspective none of them line up exactly with the common TV/movie franchises. For example, could you imagine the warp-drive in Star Trek having such a short range or only being able to start/end at a stellar system or taking decades to travel across the galaxy? As a generic type of game any system of propulsion is going to have elements that don’t match up exactly but that is why we have imagination to help us ignore those parts.

Also the choice of hyperlanes as the one/primary means of propulsion is a logical one because it is the root behind the others. In all three cases (and even Jump/PSI drives for that matter) propulsion consists of starting at star A and ending at star B. For hyperlanes this is a simple straightforward representation. A star may have multiple hyperlanes connecting itself to a number of stars but these are usually immediate neighbors (short range). Warp drive in Stellaris is still going from star A to a star B but the constraint is only on range. As the warp drive advances you can go to stars further away with corresponding side-effects however. The current wormhole system is again going from star A to star B with the only constraint being the range. If you can adjust the number of hyperlanes between stars and the length of those lanes sufficiently then you end up with virtually the same functionality. As a means to introduce geographic constraints into the game this seems like the only practical, long-term solution. A user who wants to go back to warp could just turn up the hyperlane generator to maximum.

As to whether you think geographic constraints in a space-based game are reasonable is a separate argument but seems reasonable at the very least to make game-play better. It is important to remember that Stellaris is not only a 4x game but also is a Grand Strategy Game which makes it distinct. On a personal note I hope the developers in their attempts to introduce constraints make use of the hyperlanes as a constraint themselves. For example:

· Hyperlanes that are “narrow” only allowing smaller ships to pass

· Hyperlanes that are “unstable” only allowing a limited number of ships to pass through in a given time

· Hyperlanes that are “one way” that are only usable in one direction

· The ability to create, destroy, or temporarily block a hyperlane

I definitely feel that the features so far described for the coming update regarding the “claiming” of systems and the “movement” between systems are essential first steps in improving the game.
 
Natural Wormholes and Gateways should provide interesting and cool routes if you happen to encounter them. Systems connected through a wormhole will also count as connected for the purpose of expanding.

My fear is that they will come too late or there would be too many of them for them to be special. There isn't a happy middle ground.

The same can be said of hyperlane although. I don't like how restrictive they feel at the same time I preference the freedom of wormhole travel.

So this change, hyperlane + starbase/outpost, seem like a 1 step forward and 3 step backward to me.
 
I’m sorry, but I’m disappointed.


The removal of different types of movement on the galactic map and the ability to build defense stations anywhere reduced the room for strategies and freedom to play. At least for me. Stellaris is basically rolling back to Pax Imperia. A good and fun game, back in the nineties. Twenty years later, Stellaris is fun and interesting for me, because of the absence of a choke point meta. Counter a doom stack with a meat grinder is no strategy in the deeper meaning of it. See picture below.

I’m a regular reader of the forums and the dev blog and I’m posting very rarely. So the motivation for this post unfortunately is my concern about one of my most liked games.


http://i.imgur.com/WufoaJr.jpg
 
Like we talked about on the Designers' Corner stream, this change opens up so many possibilities for us. In the future we hope to see reap the benefits of this change, especially with a much more interesting galaxy map. As an example, this allows us to do things like "islands" full of interesting star systems, only accessible through a gateway or natural wormhole. An understandable short-term loss (for some players) is something we're willing to risk in order to give you a better experience in the long-term.
I would love to see "islands" like that, sort of how Endless Space starts you out in regions that contain hyperlanes but are only linked to other through the researchable wormhole tech. The game really needs more to distinguish one sector of space from another sector and plain old hyperlane chokepoints only went so far.
 
Natural Wormholes and Gateways should provide interesting and cool routes if you happen to encounter them. Systems connected through a wormhole will also count as connected for the purpose of expanding.

I bet those won't spawn next to your home system, and it will need intensive research to use them. Imagine you spawn next to a xenophobe - or worse: FALLEN - empire, with all your magic star roads going through their lawn. I may be quite a pessimist here, but I see these changes from the way I like to play (like all those "I only play hyperlane so I'm fine!" guys).
This will hinder me. It will rob me of opportunities to see, find, discover and uplift. You may enjoy all that strategy. I am not.
 
I think that the new way of building borders is going to make it feel a lot less restrictive. No more of your borders taking land you can't reach.

Hyperlanes do *worst* with being able to snipe individual systems to be inside your borders. It'll all be about screwing other people out of chokepoints now. If you're quick I bet you can trap the AI inside their starting system!
 
Status
Not open for further replies.