• 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:
There's two elements at play here. The first one is more about what each of us looks for in Sci-Fi. People who enjoy the classic "to boldly go" format of Star Trek usually aren't the same people who enjoy Honor Harrington and Wing Commander, which are definitely analogies for Victorian/Napoleonic warfare and WW2 naval operations, respectively, but with lasers/starships. I prefer the latter, so I naturally prefer hyperspace lanes as well. I don't want space to be too open, because I'm all about the politics and diplomacy and to me, the space setting has the main advantage of giving me a completely new geography every time - no more, no less. The same would probably be achieved with a good random world generator in EU4. This is a matter of preference, though, and that's why I mentioned I'd like to see how large each group is because the choice of FTL seems to corellate with the kind of narrative people want to experience.

Secondly, of course, there is the matter of creeps blocking off systems. I don't think this is an issue of the hyperdrive system, but more of the way battles are handled. They are over way too fast, lean way too heavily on "everything or nothing" outcomes and are entirely numbers-based. That means that a stronger force blocking a system is not just a matter of risk - it's implicitly a HARD block, a wall in space. *That* should not happen and is something that needs to be addressed.

In general I agree with this idea of two general ways of playing Stellaris, and I have to say as someone who was drawn to the exploration qualities of Stellaris that you mentioned it hurts to see that that part of the game is going to be taken away, especially because that is why I bought the game in the first place. It feels like the dev team is actively throwing one set of players under the bus in order to better accommodate and improve the game for a different group of players, primarily because the leads of the dev team are a part of that group and feel that the game should be played that way. I know that it is hard work to try to accommodate multiple play styles in the same game, but I really feel that moving Stellaris toward a combat/warfare oriented direction will really cut large parts of the open exploration that made the game so pleasurable to me.

This is not to say that I don't enjoy a good RTS scrap from time to time, I do, but I have plenty of other options to engage in that in. Options that are more balanced due to preset tech trees and units that allow for more planning and strategic choices, and include more unit abilities allowing for more engaging tactical play. However Stellaris allows that player to engage in a sort of exploration that these other games don't have. In removing warp drive and wormhole travel the devs are constricting that map and enforcing areas of conflict to fight over, which is the least enjoyable part of the the game in its present form. Maybe future dev diaries will detail updates that will make combat and strategic planning more engaging, and I plan to give this new update the benefit of the doubt until I can test it. But I still feel that this is changing the underlying nature of the game and moving it towards a more competitive multiplayer scene and opposed to the open exploration of that I love about Stellaris.

I suppose in the end this is Paradox's game and they have to make the decisions that they feel are best for their company and bottom-line, but as a member of that subset of explorer plays whose experience is no longer supported it really feels like a betrayal, that our experiences and the joy we get from this game is being sacrificed to improve the experiences of other. When you get down to it, it really hurts.
 
Makes sense, a good portion of us tend to only use hyperlanes only (or as I do sometimes preset a bunch of races and make 8/10 use Hyperlanes. Was skeptical of the system changes at first but this update is starting to make me think it all be good. Again though one thing I have to hope for this next update to be great, MAKE SYSTEMS BIGGER, PLEASE. All this new depth will feel sh** if star-systems are still tiny. A solar-system is a big place full of stuff. A whole campaign could feasibly be fought within a system (well a small millitary campaign).

Edit: people saying hyperlane stifles exploration, what are you on about? It facilities it faster, as for being 'blocked in' by space creatures, fly around them in the system. Sure it'll be a little mroe challenging now beacuse of the entry/exit changes to systems but thats how it should be. Was way too easy to navigate the galaxy beforehand.
 
It is not impossible. The devs just want to go the easy way and will sadly enough, probably unintentionally dumb down the game.

Its impossible if you want to avoid massive changes to the game and reducing its quality.

Ever single idea people have proposed to "fix" ftl without restricting it to hyperlane has been abysmal. Every single one.

This option is the simplest and most logical. Not perfect, but beata the alternatives
 
I agree with the many critiques here that this change us a bit extreme. On the other hand, I think this change is necessary 'cuz, as @Wiz correctly asserted, the present system is highly IMBA and it can't be fixed really.
 
If the FTL travel methods are the only thing keeping you playing stellaris, i think this change is the least of your issues.

Despite the effects on war balance, FTL is a tiny part of the game.
Having multiple FTL types and the unique border expansion in Stellaris gave the game uniqueness. Without that, it's just another game similar to SoaSE or something, and those games are better for that style than Stellaris could be, for my previously mentioned reasons like more ships, cooler ships, and titans that have incredible abilities we'll never get for buildable titans in Stellaris (just to name a few). Even the Ether Drake you get is basically just a lance Battleship with stronger than normal weapons/armor/hp, nothing with any actual uniqueness or cool abilities. With this new restriction, Stellaris just becomes a less involved SoaSE, since you can't micro battles and have what are honestly less interesting tech options vs SoaSE (in my opinion, obviously, but there's something to be said for turning a planet into a giant bomb to blow up other planets near it and for EATING ENTIRE WORLDS).

You also have more ways to win in SoaSE such as through a culture war, instead of just outright conquering enemies through planet bombing and taking over their planets (while still having that option and the option of being friends with everyone, or sicking pirates on them and wrecking them that way). Sure, the Leviathins and stuff are cool, but in the grand scheme of things, everything is meh if Stellaris just becomes another 4X of that style, because it can't compete with various ones of that style (SoaSE being my preference, but other folks have theirs).

So, with the border changes and new FTL restrictions, this just turns into a less involved (no combat micro-ability, less options for winning, etc...), yet more involved (planet tile building, ground armies, and science ships being NEEDED to get new places) SoaSE. Luckily I can leave the game as-is by turning auto-update off, but not sure how long a game like this will hold my attention without updates (I mean that for all 4X games, hence why I haven't played SoaSE in a while).
 
Reading this diary I knew that there would be significant pushback to removing warp and Wormhole tech starts. It's understandable, people have been using them for hundreds of hours, and who would want choices removed? But I just wanted to pop in here and say I totally get it and I do think this would be the best for going forward designing the game around.

Issues like "Being blocked in" could be eaised, either by making it easier to pass through friendly systems, or making TONS of hyperlane connections (Which they indicated will be possible with the sliders) to stop from easily being boxed in.

From the first time I played Stellaris I thought the future of the game would be in Hyperlane-only. It's just so much easier to create the kind of "Map geography" when you know exactly what systems are linked to others instead of the "Go anywhere you want" nature of the warp and Wormhole techs. If this is going to help with the problem of no static defences making sense, which in the long term I think it will, I am all on board.
 
@Wiz, thank you for the very comphrensive Dev Diary. It is an understandable and welcome change, which will hopefully created a more strategic and tactical gameplay. With the inclusion of Gateways and Wormholes, it bring the excitement of exploration in the forefront. Interesting times!

For me it would be quite sensible to make the wormhole techs early mid to mid game. In the early game you are focusing on expansion and discovering the surroundings. In the mid game when the most areas are filled up, thanks to such wormholes, it can start an era of discovery; like the discovery of America (new continent). It is quite exciting to discover riches in system, before untouches by others. Of course there are hidden dangers too.

Wiz, I have a question concerning Galactic terrain. I understand there will be system only hazards and maybe larger hazards covering several systems. For the latter how large would such areas be?
For example for sensor blocking nebula;Too small and an enemy will know that a fleet is concentrated there, too large and it is no longer special. There must be a certain balance.

Second question; would such terrain be dynamic; fluctuating, ebb and flow, becoming more and less powerful with time or at certain times? It would be quite interesting that an event rises that make a sun flares solar energy, infuencing FTL, ships getting slower and slower. Maybe to a standstill, thereby stranding ships in certain systems or set of systems.

The plus effect is that such a flare would be beneficial for energy generation.

Or instead of slowing FTL, how about a sensor blackout?

The benefit and disadvantages together.
 
I'm sorry, but I personally feel that removing other FTL types because they "remove the sense of terrain" or for defensive play is tantamount to say, removing Paratroopers from HOI4 because they let you bypass fort lines. The problem with static defenses is they are just that- static. Sure, powerful when they are used, but like the Maginot line, they can and should be bypassable. I also dislike how this forces a homogenity of gameplay for the sake of balance. I've seen that go poorly with games like Planetary Annihilation. Also, like the machine empire update, this is going to mess with the mod community something fierce.
 
So far both of these dev diaries have given me hype boners. I am so exited for this update.

Just the natural wormholes and gateways alone adds so much strategic potential, I love it. What I DO wonder about is with this new ability to hide fleets in certain systems is that indicative of some sort of ability to gather intelligence on enemy fleets, weapons and positions without actually having opened borders and a ship in the area (or sensor data trade deal)? I certainly hope so. I am always so hesitant to get into a war because I never 100% know what an enemy has under the trunk.
 
Because it makes balancing and improving certain aspect of the game impossible.

His ftl intradictor example was a good one. The game experience would definitely degrade if you tried to make a system to appease all ftl types.

It's not impossible, it just requires more time, thought - read: Money.
 
I remember that one DD about how the old AI crisis was called "Spaceport destruction simulator".
So, now we get "chokepoint defence simulator".
Cool. Just one question: What is a guy like me, who usually plays xenophile pacifists warping around, making friends, and uplifting species supposed to do in future? Hoping that not all hyperlanes are blocked by some xenophobe meanie?
I really get the design ideas and what hyperlane-only means for strategy and what not, but... is this all about war? You guys managed it to kill my fun with your "brilliant" idea about how to tag every single trait in game and making modded species classes impossible to play without ingame cheating. And now you are going to take away the exploration part as well. I don't want to play space chess.
 
I'm pretty satisfied with the stated future changes.

Good direction for the game, even though i'll miss the freedom of warp, I'll happily trade it for the better systems to come.
 
Its impossible if you want to avoid massive changes to the game and reducing its quality.

Ever single idea people have proposed to "fix" ftl has been abysmal. Every single one.

This option is the simplest and most logical.
It is the simplest but not the most logical. You are taking away lots of options for other players. How can adding more flavor and adding implementations for that player reduce the quality of the game. It adds playstyles and appeals to a broader public. When I bought the game I was so happy I could go wherever I wanted to go, and not be contrained by some imaginary lane.

And there are some good solutions out there. I think you're just being a bit closed minded here. I'll give the update a shot and make my conclusions out of it.

Also something completely of topic, PLZ increase the spawnrate of Robot Empires. In my game I'm the only one around and it is really killing me. The filthy xeno organics all joined one federation and fight me.
 
Will it be possible to get all the enigmatic techs again in Cherryh? In the current vanilla game, that ship design is impossible due to the Enigmatic Fortress nerfs.

We already have settings that the game absolutely isn't balanced for, like 5x habitable worlds or 5x crisis strength. I think people understand that when choosing to pull a slider up to maximum, they are intentionally sacrificing balance.
Any chance we might be able to get a "reset to default" button for those sliders? I set the number of empires slider to max, and can't recall what it was before.
 
I cannot adequately express how disappointed I am by this news.

Stellaris is removing a feature that made it unique among other 4x games, real time or otherwise, and replacing it with a carbon-copy of what nearly every other 4x game has done since the genre was invented.

A few questions:

Why does space need terrain or borders? Why does it make sense? Why do people feel it's necessary? Why does space need "geography" when there is nothing "geo" about it? Paradox has a plethora of ground-based games where territory, fortifications, borders, and terrain make sense. Why not embrace what makes space... space? Why try to make a space game feel like Crusader Kings or Europa Universalis when we already have those games, and we don't have any games where you do space things in space? At least, we didn't until Stellaris, and now Stellaris is trying to make "Space" into more "Earth" again.

Space is huge. Why on Earth (pun unintended) do we need choke points, which are immersion-breaking and unecessary? Trying to defend borders in space should feel impossible. It absolutely is. Why not, instead of removing a unique feature to Stellaris, we focus on defending the things that actually matter? Allow static defenses to be built on colonies, with the occasional military base in resource-heavy systems that you want to protect which don't have colonies. This allows static defenses to absolutely be useful without removing features from the game.

The design decision for wormholes also makes no sense. They naturally decay, but if you want to see where they lead, you can't ever let them decay anymore? Why would I ever bother with wormholes when they could lead to a swarm of enemies, as the dev diary says, and I can't close it after? Why wouldn't I just wait for gateways?

I absolutely despise hyperlanes. They are immersion-breaking, remove half the point of playing a space game over playing any of the thousands of earth-based war games out there, and frequently necessitate a restart when you spawn next to another empire that blocks all routes out of your little corner of the map. It's tedious, it weakens the atmosphere and feel of the game, and worst of all it isn't fun; it just has a chance of adding the tedium of frequent restarts instead.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.