Stellaris Dev Diary #34 - Clarke Patch

[PhoebusRevenio]

Would it be possible to add weapon types that would help larger ships fight against smaller ships in the future?

Such as AoE weapons, cluster bombs, chained lightning, etc...

Also, maybe a feature where the player could choose ship behavior in the ship designer, set up fleet formations, and more or less control the macro side of combat?

One idea would be some sort of a grid layout where custom squads of ships can be given general orders/routing/positioning. This would allow players to position larger ships in the center, shielded ships up front, and maybe have missile ships that move forwards to fire and backwards to reload, weaving in and out of a shield wall. I'm no game designer, and I don't really know anything about where this game is leading to with combat, but that's definitely something that could help make more ship types relevant. Right now I just build hundreds of corvettes and destroyers, with a few battleships, armed with strike craft, for the auras.

The ship designer is really good for a 4x space game, but ship design and combat would feel much more rewarding if we could impact the outcome of a battle more through combat strategy than just having better technology and a stronger economy to build a larger and more efficient fleet.

Thanks for all of the hard work on the bug fixes! This game's depth is incredible,

 

[Lady Lacroix]

I'm now going to stop answering most questions about which particular bugs are fixed, as otherwise I'll be here all week. Patch notes will be available later in the week.

Not really a bug but more a design oversight. Have you come up with a workaround for buildings in sectors that cost influence being unable to be built? Or the upgrading of capital structures for that matter?

 

[ParagonExile]

These are great changes!

Thank you for addressing our concerns, it is much appreciated!

 

[Dark Demise]

Have you guys noticed a bug where your landing armies are lost forever but you still pay maintenance for them? I was landing my armies on a planet when the war suddenly ended, my outliner still says the troops are on the planet and I pay maintenance for them but I can't embark them and can't see them on the planet.

 

[Dalwin]

Moreover , why the first patch is "Clarke" and the second "Asimov" ?

"Asimov" should be the first! Followed by "Bradbury" and then "Clarke" ( and after "Dick" etc etc...!!!! )

No offense meant but I am curious about one thing. When you eat dinner, do you do it in alphabetical order?

I am not saying that Bradbury or Dick are not both Giants with classic works in their own right. The company planned three patches and nicely in theme chose three sci-fi greats for the names. I'd be more curious who was the runner up, the fourth name not chosen or the guy who makes it if the plan gets extended to four parts.

 

[biship]

Evasion nerfed (not fixed? It applys to more than just corvettes)
Accuracy not fixed?
Aggressive combat computers not fixed?
Mod load order not fixed?
Weapon imbalances not fixed?

So they make the game prettier with UI changes, but don't fix all the broken (mostly math) elements . Not impressed.

 

[Aquila SPQR]

Also, could you consider adding a slider to change the research pace? In all 4X games I always prefer playing with marathon-style settings, otherwise by the time the ships reach the front, they risk becoming obsolete.

Yes! This please! I'm currently having trouble tweaking game to have what I like. First of all - I hate the idea of penalty for having higher population. I suppouse it was introduced to slow down research rate of bigger empires so they won't become too powerful, but it's kinda ridiculous - huge empire with dozens of research centers is worse at research than small, few systems ones. I've seen someone claiming he had battleships by 2260 with few planet-wide empire while I have a 50 planet empire and in 2300 I'm still stuck with destroyers, while having about 250 points a month in every field of research.

That's why I reduced population penalty to zero instead of 2% and... now my techs are being researched in two, three months max. Nope, not good. So I decided to add this penalty back but I lowered it, but that's not a good idea either, because it still is punishing the strong while favouring the weak.

So my aim right now is to remove this penalty once and for all and tweak the research times to make them longer to research. I think I'll just multiply them by 5 or something like that.

 

[Warial]

Want to take a bet on if they are in there newb?

Sure thing kid. Apart from mod load order because it's not bugged.

 

[evilcat]

So no longer 1 pop colonies?
You know no shame Paradox!

 

[Coffee Fox]

Thank god people who have tons of planets will be penalized on research costs - Now my race of technologically advanced fox people can be happy.

 

[Dalwin]

Probably means that the threshold for declaring war is raised/lowered based on the slider.

Perhaps this, if declaration is almost automatic once a threshold is reached.

It could just as easily be that there is a percentage chance to declare if a threshold has been reached. This would make the AI's less predictable. Everyone learned before the game was even released that the magic number for a fallen empire was -75. If there is a randomness to declaration, the setting would simply change the likelihood of getting war once the threshold was reached.

 

[Rick Miller]

Hope for a late game optimisation. I wish be able to end my games.

 

[Aquila SPQR]

Thank god people who have tons of planets will be penalized on research costs - Now my race of technologically advanced fox people can be happy.

Nope, they won't. It's called "modding". The idea of pop penalty on research is dumb, that's why it has to be removed from my games.

 

[Beric]

You signed up just to help me understand doubletalk, that's so sweet.

The only reason "free patch" was even used in the first place was because so many people seem to have this misconception that all patches are not already free.

 

[smeznaric]

Will we be able to take control of observation station settings in sectors?

 

[Coffee Fox]

Yes! This please! I'm currently having trouble tweaking game to have what I like. First of all - I hate the idea of penalty for having higher population. I suppouse it was introduced to slow down research rate of bigger empires so they won't become too powerful, but it's kinda ridiculous - huge empire with dozens of research centers is worse at research than small, few systems ones. I've seen someone claiming he had battleships by 2260 with few planet-wide empire while I have a 50 planet empire and in 2300 I'm still stuck with destroyers, while having about 250 points a month in every field of research.

That's why I reduced population penalty to zero instead of 2% and... now my techs are being researched in two, three months max. Nope, not good. So I decided to add this penalty back but I lowered it, but that's not a good idea either, because it still is punishing the strong while favouring the weak.

So my aim right now is to remove this penalty once and for all and tweak the research times to make them longer to research. I think I'll just multiply them by 5 or something like that.

It adds trade offs; If you want to be a mass expansionist who has a hundred worlds, fine, but your research is going to suffer while your industry might be amazing. If you want to be a smaller empire who maybe has... 20(?) worlds, fine, your research will be better, your industry won't be nearly as great, but hey - You'll have better ships than your enemy.

It sounds to me like you just want to buff the expansionist strategy - Basically taking away the pros/cons of going wide, or going tall. The mechanic exists for a reason, it most certainly isn't "dumb". Even with the modifier at 2%, it's still able to be mostly mitigated through most of your worlds being research worlds; you still gain loses in research cost though. Your not supposed to 'Catch up' to the smaller, more advanced nations - It's the price you pay. Sure, my space foxes got battleships early, but their incredibly expensive and taxing on industry - A wider empire can replace their loses in battle, a taller empire has less of a capability to do so.

Nope, they won't. It's called "modding". The idea of pop penalty on research is dumb, that's why it has to be removed from my games.

Yeah, I don't use modding at all - So they'll be fine. I'd prefer to be able to play my games on multiplayer if I wish.

 

[Birdy123]

• Habitability icons/tooltips now show you more detailed information, including which worlds in a system you can currently colonize.

Yes!!! I love this. Thank you!

 

[Cyber-Freak]

UI IMPROVEMENTS
A major target area for Clarke was the UI, particularly in regards to sectors and diplomacy. A few highlights:

• Sectors can now be managed directly from the outliner.

This is great and all, but could you give these guys a suggestion for adding/removing sectors, to either bring forward the priority of the sector selection, or to ignore ship selection while selecting sectors.

That is one of MY biggest pet peves.

I know I learned that I could add sectors by selecting the star system, but before I was using the + which was often covered up by the ship icons. Which meant every time I was adding sectors I was selecting ships instead.

 

[Dalwin]

Technology increases as your population increases? Shouldn't a larger population mean that - everything else being equal - you should finish researching a technology sooner? Is this a balance idea?

It is not only about the lab work in developing a new tech. There is no separate step for integrating that tech into your society. Even a new weapon means that all the manufacturers of weapon components need to retool their factories etc. It would take much more time to disseminate the new tech across a larger empire.

Also, yeah it is a HUGE balance feature. It is about the only thing applying breaks to the urge to spread out and plant colonies as rapidly as possible. The game is more interesting when you need to find a balance between tech advance and empire expansion. Having it so expansion were 100% advantageous would remove a key element of strategy, just as having the game almost force doom stack play removes most of the finesse from war.

 

[Akka le Vil]

It sounds to me like you just want to buff the expansionist strategy - Basically taking away the pros/cons of going wide, or going tall.

The problem being, there is not really anything to do for "going tall" except refrain from "going wide". Internal management is basically nonexistent - what can you do as a non-expansionist that an expansionist can't ?