Stellaris Dev Diary #211: 3.0.3 Beta Updates

[mial42]

You do need the strategics for upkeep.

That's true. But the strategic requirements are small enough to meet with natural finds supplemented by a couple of refineries here and there. It's not like 2.8 where you needed entire planets worth of refineries.

Also if 33% is too powerful, how can we have any significant techs in this game?

33% per level is too powerful because it's multiplicative throughput. If it were just an additive modifier... it would still be stronger than three capital techs put together. But it's multiplicative, making it much more powerful. The two techs together are stronger then the three capital techs (+30% additive production/upkeep) AND both +10% techs AND the ministry of production put together (66% vs 65%, but more importantly these are multiplicative), and the techs come earlier and are cheaper then those.

Making it 16% per level would still be extremely strong, but bring it in line with the base resource ones (which are 16% per level for farming/generating).

It already has too many piddling, tiny modifiers that don't matter unless you aggressively minmax them.

The difference between these techs and the others is that these are (a) huge and (b) multiplicative.

 

[Anonim97]

I hope this is the thread to post suggestions/feedback to the Beta Patch:

Anyway while the capital building got rebalanced when it comes to pops number (10/25/40 as opposed to 20/50/100 or whatever used to be), the Finisher Effect of Prosperity Tradition still uses the old number of pops - 1 Merchant Job per 50 pops.

 

[adil3tr]

I question the wisdom of buffing resource production per job yet more while further buffing wide empires over tall ones (small colonies get more out of these changes).

Isn't dealing with problems like pop abduction, the relative value of conquest and genocidal civics more pressing?

Tall empires should have more pops on fewer planets, planet-cities, and habitats. All these nerfs were a bad idea, they should have boosted tall ones rather than held back wide.

 

[DC E1G]

I disagrre on this point. I think it would be better to increase the output at least of the colonizable megastructures (Ringworlds, Ecumenopoli and maybe also Habitats) so if the Pop growth will decline you can still keep growing your Empire without conquest (this would also make tall builds more viable).

I think this could be also made as a slide/ adjustable so every player could just adjust the megastructure pop output according to his needs from maybe 0.1 to 10 or 0.1 to 15 with a standard setting of 1.

IMO Stellaris already borders on having too many sliders as is. I strongly disagree with adding more just to paper over balance/design issues.

If pop growth makes late game megastructures worthless, then pop growth needs to be changed. Thankfully it seems they're working on this.

 

[Platoondas]

I've been playing the 3.0.3 beta. This has been the most interesting and fun game of Stellaris I can recall. Some issues, but genuinely a much better play experience. Great job!
Settings: ironman (only ui mods), grand admiral, x5 crisis, rogue servitor, ring world start. Started before the beta-update continued past it.

Devouring swarm AI took about half the galaxy I had been propping up two buffer states against them while focusing on my economy and research. Unbidden spawned on top of my Fen Habbanis and expanded aggressively. They've gone after other AI more than I. I've been forced to fall back to some core worlds to continue building up it takes my entire fleet to stop the attempts into my core and most of my alloys to rebuild it before the next wave.

The good:
- Less end game micro, remaining decisions are more strategically interesting.
- Less pressure to spam habitats
- AI, especially the crisis plays better than before

Issues:
- Growth of Bio-trophies feels extremely slow now. I wonder if the 50% growth penalty for RS is still necessary?
- The "unexplored" status of systems long held by other empires even allies feels strange. Cant even explore there.
- Even with a complete sentry array don't have full intel of "ship details" of foreign powers.
- Massive mineral surplus, every empire seem to have a massive surplus of minerals. Typically I go through a shortage phase before a matter decompressors become available.

 

[Nebbie Zebbie]

I've been playing the 3.0.3 beta. This has been the most interesting and fun game of Stellaris I can recall. Some issues, but genuinely a much better play experience. Great job!
Settings: ironman (only ui mods), grand admiral, x5 crisis, rogue servitor, ring world start. Started before the beta-update continued past it.

Devouring swarm AI took about half the galaxy I had been propping up two buffer states against them while focusing on my economy and research. Unbidden spawned on top of my Fen Habbanis and expanded aggressively. They've gone after other AI more than I. I've been forced to fall back to some core worlds to continue building up it takes my entire fleet to stop the attempts into my core and most of my alloys to rebuild it before the next wave.

The good:
- Less end game micro, remaining decisions are more strategically interesting.
- Less pressure to spam habitats
- AI, especially the crisis plays better than before

Issues:
- Growth of Bio-trophies feels extremely slow now. I wonder if the 50% growth penalty for RS is still necessary?
- The "unexplored" status of systems long held by other empires even allies feels strange. Cant even explore there.
- Even with a complete sentry array don't have full intel of "ship details" of foreign powers.
- Massive mineral surplus, every empire seem to have a massive surplus of minerals. Typically I go through a shortage phase before a matter decompressors become available.

Habitat spam is still amazing, you just need to realize they cap out around 25-27 pops.
The 50% growth penalty is also for Driven Assimilators, which are often OP (and to my understanding are more OP than ever this patch). That said, I think it's not a very good way to balance them, and should be reexamined.

 

[der.mo]

IMO Stellaris already borders on having too many sliders as is. I strongly disagree with adding more just to paper over balance/design issues.

If pop growth makes late game megastructures worthless, then pop growth needs to be changed. Thankfully it seems they're working on this.

I don't think that there can be too many soliders. They make the game customizable which is always a good thing.

I just think it feels unnatural for advanced Megastructures to require a lot of pops to work. I mean in an real world Ecumenopolis/ Ringworld/ mining habitat, ect. there would be 3 guys pushing buttons to create resources for entire star-systems...

Also this would decrease the endgame lag on weaker computers and still encurage tall playstyles...

Also the build limit in non-colonizable-megastructures could be lifted (and maybe one for Alloys could be added)... this would make my dozens over dozens of mining and fortess habitats in the late game obsolete...

I mean i usualy play with Gigastructural Engineering anyway but it would be nice to have some of that in the vanilla of the game...

 

[Moonspring]

Is it intentional that Ringworlds get the same productivity upgrades via forges and fabricators as other planets?

Because in 3.0.2 those buildings give +5 jobs instead of +1, making industrial ringworlds quite productive. Whereas in the bea it's just the normal +33%/+16% increase insteaf of +100%.

(colors match the same thing. sorry if my format or color choice sucks, work to improve it it but this is the best I can do right now)

+33% base production is more then the +0% it gives in 3.0.2
+5 jobs per segment gives 0 more Alloys without the Pops to work those jobs.
In 2.8 it was harder to get specialist jobs, as we were initially limited to 2 Specialists per 5 Pops so ring worlds were more valuable.
In 3.0.x its very easy to get a lot of specialist jobs but its much harder to get Pops.

The +33% is also a multiplier so its much stronger then a +33% bonus to resource from jobs would be.

Example with energy: around start of the midgame you can produce around 18 energy per job. ('round' number for easier math)
50% from edict. 25% from Generator colony. 25% from advanced resource building.
60% from tech. 10% from 1 Capital building bonus Tech. 15% from 75 stability, 15% from Ingenuity (or robo trait) so we get a nice flat +200%.
This is a bonus of +200% for [300% total]. Adding the +33% to it will increase the total to 24 energy per job, or [400% total].

As you can see its the same as a +100% energy from jobs. If you are already at 24 energy per job or 400% (late mid game/ start of endgame) then it will become"
32 energy per job or [533% total energy per job]. Now its the same as +133% energy from jobs. Or about 26x Energy repeatable Tech. (rounded down)

+33% base production = +133% energy from jobs.


As you can see, it becomes a very large bonus to production as it scales with other bonusses.
With Alloy or Consumer Goods it wont scale as hard (there are fewer sources of bonus for them) but it will still increase the more you already have.

~


I agree that moving towards more productive jobs and less total Pops would help the game. Without additional balancing it remains to be seen if something like this is a good change or a bad one. Jobs do need that higher output if we are going to move to fewer Pops in the galaxy. But I believe it would be more interesting if it wasnt a huge buff across the board but rather specific buffs for different planets.

As others have suggested as well, I think it would be a better idea to move changes like that to Ringworlds or Gaia planets as well as maybe change the type of bonus. Gaia planets could for example increase the base value of Society Research on that planet, Ringworlds a Pop growth bonus, Ecumenopolis an empire-wide bonus reduction to building construction cost or speed (to give a few different ideas) to make them more valuable compared to regular planets.
Or perhaps something I saw mentioned by someone else: jobs unique to each special planet. Similar to Priests being ''improved cultural workers'' or the Ruler version of jobs.


While not that big of a change, I like what was done to Wenkwort in 3.0:

+30% to research and +60% to cultural output. (or +40%/70% if you include the Gaia bonus)
The new Wenkwort is a pretty good place for cultural workers/priests. Normally you wouldnt build those, but that planet makes it worth doing something different there. The research bonus is still too high tho, imo. Too many special planets get a research bonus. That too, makes them feel less unique.

I feel that it would improve the special 'planet' types if they made them more unique in terms of the bonusses they provide, and imo giving huge bonusses is better if applied to them (but very specific ones so they still feel unique) rather then all of the empire.


Another idea is giving more planets in the galaxy those special modifiers like ''Titanic Life'' etc.
Their effects could be buffed to provide a higher boost. (and/or penalty to create variety)

That would make Pops more powerful in a (imho) more natural way.
Maybe its just me, but I find the amount of districts or size of a planet 'boring'.
Its not as interesting as a planet modifier icon that you can mouse over and will give some info to what works better or worse, with a little background as to ''why''.
Straight up buffing resource production of everything doesn't feel that interesting to me and (imho) it devalues the more unique planets.

 

[Ferrus Animus]

The +33% is also a multiplier so its much stronger then a +33% bonus to resource from jobs would be.

I think you completely misunderstand the post you are quoting.

All that math you are execising here is quite irrelevant to it.

In 3.0.2. upgrading an alloy forge or civilian industries on any planet, adds +1 to the available jobs per district foe each upgrade.
EXCEPT for Ringworlds, where it adds 5 extra jobs.
These jobs are all base production so all that multiplier math doesn't chagne a thing, the only relevant factor is if they can be filled with pops. Or rather how many districts upkeeps you need to pay for the same number of pops.

in the 3.0.3. beta, the upgraded forges and industry buildings on ringworlds provide the same +1 base production, +2/+1 mineral upkeep as they do on any other planet.
My question here is
"There was a decision made when balancing 3.0.0, that ringworld industrial segments should have a quite high production potential per segement. compared to any other type of planet. With the change from extra jobs to extra base production in the 3.0.3. open beta, ringworlds get the same increase as all other planets. Is this an intentional change in balancing, or is this an oversight, where a higher effect for ringworlds was forgotten to implement."

 

[rhaak]

[Balance] Buildings that increased basic resource production and added jobs to basic resource producing buildings or districts (Energy Grids, Mineral Purification Plants, etc.) now increase the base production of the relevant jobs by 1 or 2 based on tier instead of their previous modifiers. Machine empires still gain the extra resource district slots as before.

That's a shame. It added some meaningful decision making to the game. Now you don't have to specialize your planets anymore. I guess the AI couldn't handle it ?

 

[Moonspring]

I think you completely misunderstand the post you are quoting.

All that math you are execising here is quite irrelevant to it.

In 3.0.2. upgrading an alloy forge or civilian industries on any planet, adds +1 to the available jobs per district foe each upgrade.
EXCEPT for Ringworlds, where it adds 5 extra jobs.
These jobs are all base production so all that multiplier math doesn't chagne a thing, the only relevant factor is if they can be filled with pops. Or rather how many districts upkeeps you need to pay for the same number of pops.

in the 3.0.3. beta, the upgraded forges and industry buildings on ringworlds provide the same +1 base production, +2/+1 mineral upkeep as they do on any other planet.
My question here is
"There was a decision made when balancing 3.0.0, that ringworld industrial segments should have a quite high production potential per segement. compared to any other type of planet. With the change from extra jobs to extra base production in the 3.0.3. open beta, ringworlds get the same increase as all other planets. Is this an intentional change in balancing, or is this an oversight, where a higher effect for ringworlds was forgotten to implement."

I'm not sure I understand then.
Are you saying that Ringworlds in 3.0.2 are stronger then their regular planet counterparts?
I don't see how that is the case as in 3.0.2, Ringworlds have a hard time filling their jobs. Too many jobs, and not enough Pops!

Or are you saying that Ringworlds getting 5 more Jobs was stronger then the +1 job for regular districts? It was the same relative amount: +50%. It did not change the relative value of the districts in terms of upkeep.

Could you elaborate?

 

[Hansatron]

That's a shame. It added some meaningful decision making to the game. Now you don't have to specialize your planets anymore. I guess the AI couldn't handle it ?

The forge vs factory world designation game is fun. But only because you couldn't build both buildings. I wouldn't mind bringing them back as mutually exclusive.

 

[guiskj]

No Dev Diary today?

 

[sillyrobot]

No Dev Diary today?

Announced in the OP:

"That's all for this week. Since we're currently in a post-release cadence (as well as next Thursday being a holiday in Sweden), the next Dev Diary will be two weeks from now on the 20th of May."

 

[Sirbab]

So all of my information is from Aspec's patch review, but may i say i'm not a fan of the rollback of the exclusivity of industrial/commercial districts on a planet? I thought that was a neat mechanic.

 

[Larva]

Completely random question - can one get achievements in BETA branch?

 

[Chicossauro]

Completely random question - can one get achievements in BETA branch?

Yes. I've been playing the beta, first time playing stellaris without mods, and already got like 50 achievements since 3.0.

 

[Larva]

Yes. I've been playing the beta, first time playing stellaris without mods, and already got like 50 achievements since 3.0.

Thanks!

PS: FIRST TIME? Now that's astonishing...

 

[Mik_C]

So all of my information is from Aspec's patch review, but may i say i'm not a fan of the rollback of the exclusivity of industrial/commercial districts on a planet? I thought that was a neat mechanic.

I hope the betas don't end here and we keep testing changes. For example this possibility.

But I think it's not that overpowered with the latest changes:
- In 3.0 the buldings created a lot of jobs and 2 of them at the same time were too much.
- Now a building slot is used to improve the performance of the existing jobs. It still makes sense to specialize the planet to get the the % bonuses from designation while shifting the artisan jobs into metallurgist ones.

 

[CrazyJ]

always lovely to see you guys at least trying to clean up the mess the new growth system left.