Hello everyone and welcome to another Stellaris development diary. Today's dev diary will be focusing on the road ahead after Cherryh and Apocalypse, and our long-term priorities going forward.

Cherryh Post-Release Support
As mention in last week's dev diary, the immediate priority for the team is post-release support for Cherryh and Apocalypse, fixing bugs, addressing balance/feature feedback, and working on quality of life and performance improvements. We are maintaining a running 2.0.2 beta patch which we will continue to update every few days or so until we are happy with the state of the game.

The Post-Apocalypse
Apocalypse and Cherryh were an expansion/patch focused almost exclusively on war, and with it out, we are now going to be moving on to other, non-war related priorities for future updates, expansions and story packs. To give you an idea of what's coming, we're going to revisit the list of long-term goals for Stellaris I made and updated for Dev Diary #50 and Dev Diary #69. This time, we're going to organize the goals into the ones we feel have been delivered on, old goals that were added to the list before 2.0, and new goals that we have set for ourselves after 2.0 (there is no prioritization difference between goals based on when they were added or whether they are considered old or new for this particular list).

As before, the list is NOT in order of priority, and something being considered completed NOT mean we aren't going to continue to improve on it in future updates, just that we consider it to be at a satisfactory level.

As before, THIS IS NOT AN EXHAUSTIVE OR FINAL LIST, NOTHING NOT ALREADY COMPLETED IS CERTAIN TO HAPPEN AND THERE ARE NO ETAS

Completed Goals

• Ship appearance that differs for each empire, so no two empires' ships look exactly the same.
• More potential for empire customization, ability to build competitive 'tall' empires.
• Global food that can be shared between planets.
• Ability to construct space habitats and ringworlds.
• Factions that are proper interest groups with specific likes and dislikes and the potential to be a benefit to an empire instead of just being rebels.
• Ability to set rights and obligations for particular species in your empire.
• Buildable Dreadnoughts and Titans.
• Deeper mechanics and unique portraits for synthetics.
• Reworking the endgame crises to be more balanced against each other and the size/state of the galaxy.
• Reworks to war to address the 'doomstacks' issue and make the strategic and tactical layers of warfare more interesting and less micro-intensive.
• Superweapons and planet killers.

Old Goals

• A 'galactic community' with interstellar politics and a 'space UN'.
• Deeper Federations that start out as loose alliances and can eventually be turned into single states through diplomatic manuevering.
• More story events and reactive narratives that give a sense of an unfolding story as you play.
• More interesting mechanics for pre-FTL civilizations.
• 'Living systems', making empire systems feel more alive and lived in

New Goals

• Less micromanagement and more focus on interesting choices in regards to planets, the ability to grow planets beyond current fixed size.
• Empire trade mechanics and trade agreements.
• A galactic market where resources and strategic resources can be imported and exported.
• Espionage and sabotage mechanics.
• Improved galaxy/hyperlane generation with better placed systems and dangers.
• More anomalies and unique systems to explore.

That's all for today! Over the next few weeks, dev diaries will continue to focus on post-release support. Feature dev diaries will resume when we have new features to talk about. Finishing off this dev diary is a screenshot of how we're reworking difficulty modes in the next update to the rolling 2.0.2 beta:

 

[Sapa Inca]

Deeper Federations that start out as loose alliances and can eventually be turned into single states through diplomatic manuevering.

I have certain that the diplomacy update will be great, because Cherryh update was amazing.
My only concern is about integrating gestalts consciousness in federation single states, because currently, gestalt pops cant survive inside a empire with normal government.
Maybe add a special citizenship for hive minds and machine pops that empires in federation with gestalts can use.

• More anomalies and unique systems to explore.

A system with a matrioska brain, home of a civilization of virtual aliens and a system with a living planet and boths can be contacted in diplomacy tab would be great. : )
Expanded interactions with gas beings in diplomacy tab would be interesting too.

 

[Cat_Fuzz]

Looks great.

Would only quibble the naming convention of difficulties - it's kind of vague and could do with better explanation though I do like the sound of scaling AI. Would this be matched to when crisis times appear (so by the end game crisis you're looking at hard mode - post end game crisis your looking at insane difficulty)?

 

[LoneSpirit]

You have access to Jump Drive and can create Gateways

And they are not what warp and wormholes have been. Sure, Gateways awesome, but it's not warp/wormholes substitude at all.

 

[Argen Tum]

I would really like to see a trading system like in EU4. Trying to steer trade in the right direction is in my opinion really fun and I think it would fit in nice i Stellaris, with some minor tweaking. The trade system can't be there from the start of course, but either you could build trade centers, or maybe find old abandoned trade hubs. Then the hyperlanes would decide which trade hub/center a system belongs to. Could be really, really fun in my opinion, and something to do when at peace. And would add another way for a small, tall empire to compete with the larger, like if you build/find a trading hub at a chokepoint.

 

[grandad1982]

Thanks for the final and exhaustive list!

I look forward to seeing what you will do with planets. I personally really dislike te tile system and while I don't think it will go away, I would still appreciate any mitigation of its worst parts.

I also look forward to more inter empire politics and trade. For me that is what will keep the game interesting past the end part of the early game.

 

[LtAlguien]

• A 'galactic community' with interstellar politics and a 'space UN'.
• Deeper Federations that start out as loose alliances and can eventually be turned into single states through diplomatic manuevering.

I feel this two should one and the same, the 'Space UN' being part of a Federation where member states vote for Federation rules.
Or at least the 'Space UN' can be ignored instead but suffering some sort of backlash (what are they gonna do? invoke 'sanctions' ha ha ha!) plus it won't make sense for Swarms, Fanatical P. and Defense Matrix to care about it

 

[Everstill]

What about victory conditions? I'm pretty sure they've not changed since launch and I think for players who are more interested in internal development than war they could use some love.

How you declare you "won" in a galaxy? Like, you get a lot of Book Mana and declare you won and everyone concedes?

It's even more silly in a galaxy where we have Hordes, Purifiers, Exterminators and Galactic Crises.

There is really only 2 ways to say you have "won the game": You conquered everyone or you are in a Federation with everyone that is left.

What we can do is making that empires that focus on internal development can make superweapons like colossus faster so they can Enforce their win faster in a different way.

 

[Coconut_Cookie]

Can the new and old goals be tied in with the existing mechanics? Because things like unity, especially just after utopia felt a bit tagged on. I'm referring mostly to leaders, I think the game would have a lot more narrative if they had a bit personality and agency. For example sector leaders having aspirations of independence (or lower taxes) or the leader of the militarist faction insisting on fleet maneuvers during his current term rather then that one event.

I would also like to see deeper federation mechanics concerning the end game threats. For example the scourge being detected a few years beforehand and the members squabbling on how to deal with it with some members even denying the very existence of the threat.

I want some of the game mechanics and the new mechanics to come to be a bit more intertwined than the are right now.

 

[Cat_Fuzz]

I feel this two should one and the same, the 'Space UN' being part of a Federation where member states vote for Federation rules.
Or at least the 'Space UN' can be ignored instead but suffering some sort of backlash (what are they gonna do? invoke 'sanctions' ha ha ha!) plus it won't make sense for Swarms, Fanatical P. and Defense Matrix to care about it

Would personally prefer a federation to be like its own UN, where each state within votes on issues, however you could be associated with other federations at the same time. This may or may not lead you to have to potential switch allegiances if the two Feds begin to rub up against each other, or you could play member states off of each other for personal gain.

 

[Nyrael]

What about victory conditions? I'm pretty sure they've not changed since launch and I think for players who are more interested in internal development than war they could use some love.

I guess it's not on the list because it's not such a high priority, but Wiz said he intends to replace that system with something else (as I understand, more akin to you declaring what you want to achieve and then having some sort of mission system).

But generally, the Victory Conditions are a pointless gimmick. The game is not built to care about them, they were never given any attention and only included because players like seeing such things, and is possibly on the list of features that PDS Developers regret having ever added. It's better that you just set your own goals, and work towards them.

 

[Sapa Inca]

Would it be possible to turn Awakened Empires into the catalysts for something like that? Basically after a phase of intense warfare (be it alone, in a WiH or as GotG), they start to calm down a bit and turn their carved-out spheres into various types of "mega-federations".

Benevolent Interventionists could be your most standard "UN", with motions and interventions against members that break the galactic treaty framework. Watchful Regulators are similar but more concerned with technology instead of civil rights.

Jingoistic Reclaimers become the "Galactic Hegemon", a feudal suzerain ruling over ambitious vassals that in secret plot their downfall. By gaining favors with the Hegemon, its vassals can make it look the other way while they expand their own sphere on influence. But offending the Hegemon could have terrible repercussions. Basically a much more involved version of CK2 China. Doctrinal Enforcers are similar, but more "space Pope".

This is the best idea that I read about space UN, make AEs the catalysts of a UN formation.

 

[Cat_Fuzz]

Can the new and old goals be tied in with the existing mechanics? Because things like unity, especially just after utopia felt a bit tagged on. I'm referring mostly to leaders, I think the game would have a lot more narrative if they had a bit personality and agency. For example sector leaders having aspirations of independence (or lower taxes) or the leader of the militarist faction insisting on fleet maneuvers during his current term rather then that one event. I want some of the game mechanics and the new mechanics to come to be a bit more intertwined than the are right now.

This could be fun - a scientist with maniac trait may wish to build a Ringworld during their tenure as leader, or a warlike general might attempt to conquer a nearby system.

Tie these events into a political system and it would be incredible. You would need to apologise to the other nation, tell them the system is yours now, or reprimand the general but otherwise keep a status quo?

 

[Knight of Orthus]

How you declare you "won" in a galaxy? Like, you get a lot of Book Mana and declare you won and everyone concedes?

It's even more silly in a galaxy where we have Hordes, Purifiers, Exterminators and Galactic Crises.

"Sir, the Prethoryn have devoured the last independent nation. All their fleets are heading directly for us."

"Fear not, young Admiral. We have now attained more than 1000% production efficiency compared to all other nations in the galaxy."

"But that is because there are no other nations!"

"We are also lightyears ahead in terms of societal advancement and technology. Our victory is at hand."

*Victory screen flashes*

*Empire gets destroyed because player accidently touched space.*

 

[Nyrael]

Would personally prefer a federation to be like its own UN, where each state within votes on issues, however you could be associated with other federations at the same time. This may or may not lead you to have to potential switch allegiances if the two Feds begin to rub up against each other, or you could play member states off of each other for personal gain.

As I understand, they want to have Federations evolve into larger unions (or be replaced by more differing Unions, not sure). Space UN and Space HRE are examples that Wiz had given on Twitter.

This is the best idea that I read about space UN, make AEs the catalysts of a UN formation.

Xenophile FE could cause the formation of a Space UN if it doesn't already exist (or take it over if it does), Great Hordes, Spiritualist AE and Militarist AE (as it is more Militarist than Xenophobe) could create a union where vassals compete around who can win more systems for their master, while Materialist and Robotic AE would be all about creating some grand projects, which subject states would want to either support or abuse for their own needs.

 

[Cymsdale]

Which difficulty is "normal"?

 

[Pete0714]

One thing I guess I would like to see, call me a nerd, is systems with red giant or supergiant stars. I know their is a mod for this but I would like to see it in game. Maybe with storylines that involve the chance of the star going nova: do you take the chance at developing that system, even if the system has superior resources and planets? Just a thought, not a huge deal if they don't do it.

 

[Asiak]

and working on quality of life

Is it intended that citadels, starholds and starbases downgrade straight to outpost as opposed to incrementally down one to their lower level?

I really fail to see how that is logical either in terms of gameplay or realistic in terms of what a space faring empire would do?

I understand that it's give and take that you must decide which systems to invest in, and in what way. But when we've been piecemeal building up these stations outward, when we've been specializing them by module as we can or as we need.

But when we realize we don't need a citadel in that system or perhaps a starhold, we don't just downgrade it to a smaller starbase no no we just scrap the whole thing back to outpost????? Only to have to build back up to the level we wanted.

 

[Pharos_1323]

I like the idea of the Scaling difficulty. But it might be nice to have it (or a version of it) that, rather than just get harder over time, actually reacts to the relative strength of the player in comparison it their contemporaries. Giving boosts to the AI if the player pulls ahead of non-advanced start races (more so if they pull ahead of even them) and winding them back if they fall behind.

 

[Snoipah]

I like the idea of the Scaling difficulty. But it might be nice to have it (or a version of it) that, rather than just get harder over time, actually reacts to the relative strength of the player in comparison it their contemporaries. Giving boosts to the AI if the player pulls ahead of non-advanced start races (more so if they pull ahead of even them) and winding them back if they fall behind.

Nobody likes rubberbanding mechanics.

 

[MacGillivray]

I guess it's not on the list because it's not such a high priority, but Wiz said he intends to replace that system with something else (as I understand, more akin to you declaring what you want to achieve and then having some sort of mission system).

But generally, the Victory Conditions are a pointless gimmick. The game is not built to care about them, they were never given any attention and only included because players like seeing such things, and is possibly on the list of features that PDS Developers regret having ever added. It's better that you just set your own goals, and work towards them.

Yeah I'm sure I've heard wiz speak about this before, I just wondered whether that had been shelved seeing as it's not on the list today.

And I agree, the victory conditions are pointless, which is why I set my own goals like I think most people do. That's why I wish they were either overhauled or they might as well just be cut like the devs have done to other mechanics that weren't working as intended.