• We have updated our Community Code of Conduct. Please read through the new rules for the forum that are an integral part of Paradox Interactive’s User Agreement.
Hello everyone!

Today we aim to shed some light on the upcoming changes for the 1.2 “Asimov” update.

Border Rework
Something we did not like with how Stellaris played out towards the mid-game previous to 1.2, was how that the player tended to get locked in and blocked from exploring or gaining access to the rest of the galaxy.

In the upcoming update we aim to correct that issue by reworking how border access works. By default, everyone will have open border access to other empires’ borders. An empire may close its border through a diplomatic action, and access is denied to your rivals by default.

closed border.jpg


We hope that this will make the game feel less constrained towards the mid-game.

Another valuable addition is that when you give your ships or fleet a Return order, but they cannot find a valid path home, you may set them as “Missing in Action”. While ships are missing in action, they will be invisible to you and reappear within your borders within a certain amount of time.

Expansion Cost
To reduce exploits of the open borders, we have chosen to introduce an Influence cost to colonizing planets or building Frontier Outposts. This cost will be based on the range to your closest owned system.

expansion cost.jpg


Embassies & Trust
A significant change in 1.2 is the removal of embassies and the passive opinion increase they provided. In the “Asimov” update, players will have to gain trust by cooperating with the AI. Trust is gained over time by having some sort of treaty with the AI.

Diplomatic Changes
A number of diplomatic statuses that were previously available through trade have now been changed into being Diplomatic Actions available through the diplomacy screen. We felt that some of these actions did not really feel in place, and that they were too hidden, in the trade interface.

diplomacy screen.jpg


We have changed how cooperating with the AI happens. It is no longer as easy to enter into an Alliance with the AI, and you have to start off by gaining their Trust through research agreements, guarantee independence, non-aggression pacts and defensive pacts.

Defensive Pacts are a new diplomatic action that allows two empires to be called into wars if any of them should get attacked.

Joint War Declarations
Another new diplomatic feature is the possibility to invite other empires to your wars. The AI will not join your wars if their Attitude towards you is not at least neutral and they have something they also want from the target.

invite attackers.jpg


All things combined we hope that these changes will make the mid-game feel less static and will open up more possibilities for interesting situations to occur.

Join us again next week for more details about the upcoming 1.2 "Asimov" update!
 
Wiz said in the stream that xenophobes will no longer hate themselves for getting gene mods.
So will there be a subspecies mechanic or are all modded pops of the prime species still considered members of the prime species?
 
  • 1
Reactions:
As far as opened borders go I'm all for it, they would add more depth and complexity to the game, but I would like this to be a three tier system:

  • First tier would allow all types of ships to cross borders (the default setting),
  • the second one would allow me the option of closing the borders for military fleets so that other empires would still need to ask me for permission,
  • third closed for all types of ships.
The second tier, just like the closed borders for all types of ships would come at a cost (worst relations with other empires). The second tier would add more complexity, because if it is allowed that other empires have their fleets in your systems then they could declare war and achieve war goals much more easily. This would be very infuriating in MP where a declaration of war can happen easily.
 
  • 6
Reactions:
Excellent, these changes are definately heading in the right direction. With a bit more polish in diplomacy, the AI might finally start to stand out from one another. I hope the AI have to build relations just the same as the players do and that the Federation spam will be a thing of the past as well.
 
  • 1
Reactions:
Just two words - Influence Game.
Who needs minerals, or credits? All we need is influence! Devs, seriously, what are you doing? Just look, how many people in steam play with no outpost maintenance mod!
Also, i has many situations, while the planet i can colonize is far away. Now I must wait 30 years to get enough influence for it?

If you colonize 20 planets along the path to the target system, it will cost less influence than saving up for that one far distant system alone. This is actually a good thing and creates a game out of colonization. There will also be more interaction with how influence is used, for instance an Individualist empire will gain access to private colony ships that cost no influence at all but give you a much more difficult issue with divergent ethos. Personally I think private colony ships should create vassals not just unruly colony's.
 
Echoing an above post - what exactly IS War Philosophy? I've not heard any concrete, certain info on what it actually means. I can't seem to effect it no matter the variations of policies I try with war economy and bombardment and the like. I do vaguely remember it changing in my second ever game, but I might be misremembering. So what is it, what effects it? If we're having stuff tie into it more weshould at least know what War Philosphy represents

So, I admit, this DOES worry me a bit. It sounds in theory like a great idea, but...

Finally, will we be getting ANY increased clarity on the "differing war philosophy" modifier? It's a real obstacle, and it's currently extremely difficult to find what the negotiating partner objects to! Embassies are currently one of the main ways to work around this - but if we could, say, just ASK (or get details on) what the problem actually is, it would be a much better solution.

In the Stream, Wiz showcased that there is a NEW policy called "War philosophy". It'll have three positions:

a) Unrestricted warfare
Same as usual. No restrictions apply.

b) Liberation warfare
You may never declare wars to cede planets. You can declare wars to liberate planets as usual

c) Outlawed warfare
You may never declare wars. For ANY reason.

This policy, however, does not affect defensive wars. Even if your War philosophy is not "unrestricted", you can set "cede planet" wargoals if you're being attacked. Also, you can always declare wars and choose "cede planet" if the target planet was yours in the past. All ethics can choose any philosophies, save for Fanatic Pacifists being locked at "Outlawed warfare" and maybe Militarists being locked at "Unrestricted warfare" (I say maybe because Wiz haven't said that, but it makes sense.).
 
  • 8
Reactions:
While fleets stranded after a war between borders was certainly an issue, which is effectively removed, i'm still rather disappointed by this update. It does not adress major issues such as:

- Combat (Corvettes still the most powerful unit, evasion and fleet triangle attack mode not adressed)
- Xenophobe weakness (lots of maluses, no significant bonus or sense in playstyle), overall the ethoses are not balanced
- Sector AI management weakness (tendencie to have planets pop stuck at 0 or -1 food production - or the same for power production and consumption)
- ...

All in all the game still feels and certainly will feel unbalanced and simply not thought through on many levels. I am very disappointed by Paradox, i certainly will not buy Hearts of Iron (or any other Paradox game). I have played quite about all 4x games since 1995 (Ascendancy), but this one is really disappointing. It feels like a bad copy of another notable 4x game which i will not name here. The game was/is unfit for release by my standards.
 
  • 5
  • 3
Reactions:
I'm a little bit worried about expasion costs before I know more details of it. Is it possible thet we can get more detailed information?
 
  • 3
  • 1
Reactions:
One problem that I have noted in other 4x games with default open borders is that the AI tends to flood your territory with ships that just hang around/do nothing.

Hopefully AI in stellaris will keep ships out of your territory unless they are transiting through (this should probably be the same for humans, you can travel through but not stop). Open borders is one thing, but parking a doomstack over another player's home world should not be allowed.
 
  • 9
Reactions:
All ethics can choose any philosophies, save for Fanatic Pacifists being locked at "Outlawed warfare" and maybe Militarists being locked at "Unrestricted warfare" (I say maybe because Wiz haven't said that, but it makes sense.).

as far as i remember, fanatic pacifists are locked out of the unrestricted warfare. so they could declare war, but only to liberate planets, not for conquering them
 
  • 2
Reactions:
One problem that I have noted in other 4x games with default open borders is that the AI tends to flood your territory with ships that just hang around/do nothing.

Hopefully AI in stellaris will keep ships out of your territory unless they are transiting through (this should probably be the same for humans, you can travel through but not stop). Open borders is one thing, but parking a doomstack over another player's home world should not be allowed.

i would like an energy fee when you drive trough colonized aereas (aereas where they have scanrange of)
 
  • 1
Reactions:
In the Stream, Wiz showcased that there is a NEW policy called "War philosophy". It'll have three positions:

a) Unrestricted warfare
Same as usual. No restrictions apply.

b) Liberation warfare
You may never declare wars to cede planets. You can declare wars to liberate planets as usual

c) Outlawed warfare
You may never declare wars. For ANY reason.

This policy, however, does not affect defensive wars. Even if your War philosophy is not "unrestricted", you can set "cede planet" wargoals if you're being attacked. Also, you can always declare wars and choose "cede planet" if the target planet was yours in the past. All ethics can choose any philosophies, save for Fanatic Pacifists being locked at "Outlawed warfare" and maybe Militarists being locked at "Unrestricted warfare" (I say maybe because Wiz haven't said that, but it makes sense.).

So, why would you choose anything other than unrestricted, apart from ethos limitations? What advantage do you get from choosing liberation or outlawed?
 
  • 2
  • 1
Reactions:
To the UI designer:

1. Please sort the Diplomacy screen by 'opinion', e.g., and I don't care which end is top:
Declare War - Declare Rivalry - Close Borders - Insult - Make Trade Deal - Form Non-Agression Pact - Guarantee Independence - Form Defensive Pact - Form Alliance

2. Please make the Diplomacy screen tall enough that it doesn't need a scrollbar.
 
  • 3
Reactions:
Most of these changes seem like good ones, we'll have to see how they work in game of course, but overall I like this. I was expecting to see some clarification in this DD about any upcoming ethos and government changes and I'm wondering if it wasn't included because the rumored changes are not set in stone yet. I'm hoping that's the case because some of those rumored changes really concern me, especially the nerfs to some ethos, while making other ethos basically "the best" choice. However, what was covered here is pretty much all positive stuff I think.
 
Yeah, that has really been breaking my immersion every time I think about it. It should be a soft closure, with warnings and relation costs, not a magic wall...

Well, there is no "magic wall". If I tell you "I see any of your ships in my space, and it is war", actual war is what you need to enter my space (and you can always declare war, unless truce is in effect).
 
  • 4
Reactions:
This seems kinda pointless given all the other major problems with Stellaris. How about fixing the severe lack of content and play first and then worry about fine tuning and redoing elements later? Right now Stellaris is one of the most boring games I own and with these changes I have even less reason not to play like a genocidal warmonger.
 
  • 25
  • 5
Reactions: