• 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.

Stellaris Dev Diary #314 - Pi in the Sky Ideas

Hi everyone!

It’s been exactly 100 dev diaries since we introduced the Custodian initiative alongside the Lem update. With that milestone met, and 314 being funny math number, I thought it would be a good time to review what the Custodians have accomplished, some of the process they use, and where we could go from here.

To review, the original idea behind the Custodians Initiative was to do some of the following:
  • Tweaking game balance
  • Adding new content to old DLC
  • Polishing existing content
  • Bug fixes
  • Performance improvements
  • AI improvements
  • Multiplayer stability
  • UI and quality-of-life improvements

So what have they accomplished so far?​

In my view, the Custodians have been a pretty solid success.

We’ve done a few things:
image9.png

image6.png

image3.png

image2.png

image11.png

image5.png

image1.png

image4.png

image8.png

I promised bad math jokes last week: Why did the Blorg cross the Mobius Strip? To get to the same side.

So how do the Custodians work?​


Ideally, a third of their tasks are dictated by my directives, a third are taken from community requests, and the remaining third are individual developer passion projects. In reality, these segments overlap quite a bit, since we all share many of the same desires.

Before each release, we hold a “Custodian Pitch” meeting, where everybody on the team can write up proposals, give a two minute presentation on what they want to do and why they want to do it, and then a brief but spirited discussion is held debating the merits of the pitch as well as highlighting any concerns or suggestions.

image7.png

Photo from a recent Custodian Pitch Meeting

Accepted pitches go onto a team board, get prioritized, and eventually end up on the schedule. Unlike tasks slated for DLCs, Custodian tasks are intended to be able to slip to a later release if they’re deemed not ready to go live yet, and sometimes accepted pitches wait for a while before getting worked on. Rejected pitches sometimes resurface at a later date, revamped to resolve whatever problems the original pitch had.

image10.png

Part of the Custodian Team Board

As you can see, far more things get pitched and approved than we can actually do, so prioritization is extremely important. More things will move into 3.10 and 3.11 over time.

The Development Oubliette off to the side is for things that we started working on, but had to pause for various reasons.

Following Overlord, we instituted a rule that expansion work cannot absolutely depend on Custodian work, since we intentionally want Custodian work to be able to slip to a different release if necessary - the Situations system came in a little hot and that had negative effects on some of the systems we planned on using them with.

So what are some of those notes?​

From the “In Progress” section under 3.9 Caelum, we have the Diplomacy and Trust changes that we’ve mentioned a few times. We’ll have a dev diary dedicated to this next week, since these have been accelerated to be included in the 3.9.3 release.

Two weeks from now we’ll be providing more details on the Leader Consolidation that we’ve also talked about in the past. Currently these tasks are in the To Do and In Progress sections of 3.10 Pyxis, grouped by dark blue dashed lines that you can barely see in this image.

Other things on the board without planned release dates include a variety of possibilities. Some are larger scope tasks that involve a large number of Custodians, while others might be the type of thing that can be knocked out quickly.

A handful of them include:
  • Espionage enhancements
    • Make Espionage more impactful, but have systems in place to prevent “dog-piling”.
  • Continued work on concepts and nested tooltips
    • Provide information in a clearer way, avoiding walls of text.
  • Improve tutorials
    • They’re really not good at introducing the concepts new players need to learn the game.
  • Improve the outliner
    • Make the Outliner easier to use during different phases of the game.
  • Do somethingwith the Megastructures UI
    • As the number of large space constructions grows, it gets harder to find the ones you want to build.
    • It’s also very confusing to have things that require Mega-Engineering alongside constructions that don’t.
  • Continue after losing
    • Pop up the Select an Empire UI from Multiplayer if you lose a Single Player game, in case you want to continue your galaxy’s story, even if your first empire’s has ended.
  • Improve species modification
    • Address micromanagement and tedium in species modification.
  • Pop performance
    • Pops are one of the greatest sources of late game performance issues. Find ways to reduce their impact.
  • Ship performance
    • Ships (and fleets) are another performance issue to investigate.
  • Investigate number of habitable worlds (and rebalance if necessary)
    • As more scripted systems get added to the game, the habitable worlds slider becomes less accurate.
  • Make AI personalities matter more
    • Review the existing personalities, make them show up in AI weights more often, and differentiate them more.

Next week​

Having come full circle, next week will be about Diplomacy and Trust.

See you then!
 
  • 112Like
  • 40Love
  • 10
  • 1Haha
  • 1
Reactions:
ship performance? = making fleet fights actually make more sense and slowed down too see whats going on and allow more tactics and strategy perhaps? .... cos atm its all just a blur and its unclear if combat computers are actually effective? most fights just look like a swarm of ships together like a school of fish.. fighter spam doesnt help either with visuals..

also any chance of weapon/mod rebalance as a whole.. especially event weapons they just feel awful too have as a research project when 90% of them are just trash tier... i even did a thread on them with 'unique' traits ideas .
I'm pretty sure they mean ship performance as the actual cost to your PC to run the battles. For me, having a dozen or so late game fleets has the same slow down on my machine as about 4-5k pops, especially once they get into a battle.
 
Huh, I wonder how we tag them as implemented.
I certainly don't know either. Maybe move the whole thread?
But it's one thing I always noticed when I go there. I once reported a thread as 'Can this be moved to implemented' (it was the construction ship automation), and it got replied to as 'We can't do this at the moment, sorry'.
 
  • 1
  • 1Like
  • 1
Reactions:
I'd say this is accurate. The logistic system would work far better if there's a much lower growth on newly colonized worlds, and they rely on immigration to handle the "rush". The minimum floor was intended to let those colonies grow by themselves on a reasonable timescale, but ended up incentivizing colonizing everything because it's "growth from nowhere".

I'd want to look over proper immigration before touching anything there though.
Population growth does need a lot of work, and I hope you can try out a few different solutions until you find one that works for balance, performance and is a bit more sane than the current situation.

Small suggestions:
1. Calculate migration first, before any effects that lower or set growth to 0
Currently going from slightly overcrowded to very overcrowded (-4 to -5 available housing and +50 emigration push)
Or enacting population controls (+100 emigration push) means you go from some emigration to NO emigration... that's obviously a bit broken.

e.g. A habitat at -4 housing and +3.2/month growth (+1.5 growth from Pops) has only -1.2 migration. Add 1 more pop (or declare population controls) growth is set to 0 and migration, calculated from growth is also set to 0 (+100 from population controls, +50 from overcrowding, a tiny +4.54 from newly founded colonies = +154 Emigration Push x 0 = 0 migration).
I would instead calculate:
Initial Growth, then migration, then apply multipliers to the remaining growth (like x0, x0.5 or x0.25) to determine final growth value.
That way you can have people actually flee overpopulation, martial law or population control measures.

2. Display planet capacity and the effects clearly somewhere (especially if it doesn't make intuitive logical sense)
The above habitat has 80 capacity. Growth goes:
<10 = +3 +0 growth
11-16 = +3 and gradually increasing growth
17-30 = +3 and capped at +1.5 growth
31+ = x0 Growth

There is no way you could guess that sort of population growth "curve". It's only a curve at 6 population numbers, so few you can count them: 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16. Every other population number hits a cap and suddenly sticks to arbitrary fixed values. A lot of problems arise from forcing arbitrary caps rather than letting the population growth curve do its thing and slow growth naturally at high and low values (habitat spam, pop-growth meta). Planet capacity doesn't really work in the current form and the UI doesn't help.
For planet capacity to be useful it needs to be seen and understood.
Currently it's almost invisible (hidden in the planet size tooltip... why would you ever even look there?) and hard to intuitively understand (why do you stop growing faster at 17 population with 30 housing and 80 planet capacity?)
Arbitrary limits aren't great.

I hope any changes to population growth have a lot of testing time, as changes will impact everything. And I don't envy you the task, as there's a lot that could go wrong and balance is going to be impacted everywhere.
 
  • 8
  • 2
Reactions:
  • Pops are one of the greatest sources of late game performance issues. Find ways to reduce their impact.
As soon as I read this a thought popped into my head. Maybe a pop can reach a level of 'contentedness.' Once a pop is 100% content maybe they'll never look for another job, never look to move, and never look to join or change factions, so they don't have to be tracked by the game in any way. Unless something happens, of course.
 
  • 2Like
Reactions:
I am really glad you got your idea of establishing the Custodian Initiative through.
Such a great development concept that has massively improved the game in a way that is usually never time for. And introducing improvements/bugfixes/system changes alongside new content (and new bugs) is more risky than treating those things separately. And the results speak for themselves. Massive boon to the game.
 
  • Pops are one of the greatest sources of late game performance issues. Find ways to reduce their impact.
As soon as I read this a thought popped into my head. Maybe a pop can reach a level of 'contentedness.' Once a pop is 100% content maybe they'll never look for another job, never look to move, and never look to join or change factions, so they don't have to be tracked by the game in any way. Unless something happens, of course.

That sounds like it would be annoying. Setting up planets in the late game you want people to move and when you gene mod pops you want them to swap jobs for what is better for them.

Reducing the performance issues is obviously important but it shouldn't be done in ways that lead to frustration.
 
  • 3
Reactions:
  • Pops are one of the greatest sources of late game performance issues. Find ways to reduce their impact.
As soon as I read this a thought popped into my head. Maybe a pop can reach a level of 'contentedness.' Once a pop is 100% content maybe they'll never look for another job, never look to move, and never look to join or change factions, so they don't have to be tracked by the game in any way. Unless something happens, of course.

And .. how do you think you can check that ? :D
thats the whole problem , that they have to check ... i've the umpopolar opinion that pops single entities should simply go, the game is too big for them all .
 
Pops are one of the greatest sources of late game performance issues. Find ways to reduce their impact.

my mod solution. reduce housing of cities to 3. no bonus housing through tech. no building gives more than 2 jobs. quick an dirty fix. balancing is... well... not my job fortunately but it kind of works fine. you could try that.
 
  • 1
Reactions:
If I remember correctly, the resettlement UI lists the destination planets in order of number of available jobs, as the typical use case is to move pops from overpopulated to underpopulated colonies.
It doesn't - unless you changed it in 3.9 or my memory fails me utterly (in which case I'll blame crashing on my bike 2 weeks ago, which aftereffects prevents me from checking right now.)

Even if it did.... moving POPs where the game thinks POPs are needed? That's handled by automatic resettlement over time, and while inefficient for getting the most out of POPs, it is very convenient and a great feature to reduce micromanagement.

But my typical use case is moving POPs to specific planets where I need them according to strategy; The targets will typically be planets with available jobs, since outside edge-cases that is what you want to do, but having open jobs is not in an of itself a reason to choose a planet as destination for deliberate resettlement: Unless you micromanage to turn off all low-value jobs including clerks, many planets will have open jobs - and even if you do, jobs are not created equal.

Here are my most common use-cases for the manual resettlement list:
  • Moving unemployed (or employed POPs) from a planet with overemployment to specific planets where high-value jobs I want filled are available (e.g. I want more metallurists, not clerks)
  • Moving a POP from a planet with overemployment to planets where jobs are available, where the planet has the same habitability as the POP I want to move to reduce overemployment (which POP to move may or may not be a currently unemployed POP on the planet)
  • Moving from planet with jobs to another planet with jobs, to do a different job that I know is done on that planet
  • Moving from planet with jobs to another planet with jobs, because of better habitability
  • Moving from planet with jobs to another planet with jobs, because of higher productivity on that world (higher tier, bonuses, better buildings, Gaia, Ecumenopolis, Ring World)
  • Moving from planet with jobs to another planet with jobs, because I am force building it up to 10, 25, or 50 POPs in order to increase its tier
  • Deliberately depopulating populated planets to move their population to specific ascended planets for higher productivity/higher value jobs/lower empire size
  • Choosing another planet to start moving POPs FROM, rather than exiting the resettlement interface, scrolling through the outliner to find that planet, then hitting the resettlement button to focus the planet

Now, the thing is, so long as I only have few colonies, having the colony list for resettlement not match the outliner's list doesn't matter that much - I can see everything at a glance and select based on that even if the ordering isn't helpful. But when I control a lot of colonies and the resettlement list is pages long, which is a common use-case in wide play even on medium maps, this is not the case.

I guess once I recover from my current injuries in a week or two and gain access to my game computer again I need to start up Stellaris, take screenshots, and file an UI improvement suggestion for this low-hanging fruit.
 
Last edited:
  • 1Like
  • 1
Reactions:
Investigate number of habitable worlds (and rebalance if necessary)
  • As more scripted systems get added to the game, the habitable worlds slider becomes less accurate.
If I might suggest a possibly stupid solution... what about adding a planet size slider? Maybe with a few checkboxes to determine what it applies to? So, for example, you generate the First League home system with the slider on .5, the planet generates at half the size. The checkboxes could be for if it applies to event generated planets, RNG planets, or both. Then, as an example hypothetical, you have:

.75 habitable worlds
.75 world size, checked to apply only to event-generated worlds

Now, instead of that First League homeworld being more valuable because it exists in a galaxy with fewer than expected planets, it is (roughly) equally valuable to how it would be on 1.0 habitable worlds because it shrank 25% to compensate. Or maybe you play on 5.0 habitable worlds, you put event-generated worlds to 5.0, so the First League homeworld is five times as large.

Perhaps additional checks for built worlds, so that similarly the relative value of ringworlds/habitats is preserved on any habitable planet setting.

This would also mean players could opt for, say, .25 habitable worlds at 4.0 normal size throughout the galaxy, which personally I would probably play on to dramatically reduce pop shenanigans incentives and unbloat my outliner.

Or maybe this is a really stupid idea, which I won't lie - that's very possible.
 
  • 2Like
Reactions:
ship performance? = making fleet fights actually make more sense and slowed down too see whats going on and allow more tactics and strategy perhaps? .... cos atm its all just a blur and its unclear if combat computers are actually effective? most fights just look like a swarm of ships together like a school of fish.. fighter spam doesnt help either with visuals..
I actually miss the old pre-Apocalypse combat speed where fleets would slow down once combat starts and steadily advance toward each other while trading blows
back & forth.

But yeah, fleets just merging into one massive blob at the centre of the system is not great to look at.
Especially when your admiral suffers an aneurysm and starts combat by engaging the starbase first, pulling every fleet in the system into combat, instead of starting with that one fleet at the outer edge of the system -.-
 
Last edited:
  • 4Like
  • 1
Reactions:
I'm curious, what things are in the Oubliette currently? And has anything ever been placed in there and escaped later?
The Kaleidoscope situation that was recently added to Nemesis was a prisoner of the Oubliette! I started working on it last spring, had to put it aside when I was moved to the DLC team, and then finally got a chance to finish it this summer.
 
  • 11Like
  • 7
Reactions:
I actually miss the old pre-Apocalypse combat speed where fleets would slow down once combat starts and steadily advance toward each other while trading blows
back & forth.

But yeah, fleets just merging into one massive blob at the centre of the system is not great to look at.
Especially when your admiral suffers an aneurysm and starts combat by engaging the starbase first, pulling every fleet in the system into combat, instead of starting with that one fleet at the outer edge of the system -.-

There are some mods that bump the cost of ships and reduce the number. I feel like that could be something to look into for performance and visuals. Late game fleets do6 look particularly cool outside of combat with all the giant ships clipped through each other.
 
  • 1
Reactions:
I'd say this is accurate. The logistic system would work far better if there's a much lower growth on newly colonized worlds, and they rely on immigration to handle the "rush". The minimum floor was intended to let those colonies grow by themselves on a reasonable timescale, but ended up incentivizing colonizing everything because it's "growth from nowhere".

I'd want to look over proper immigration before touching anything there though.
I'm sure you've noticed this yourself, but, IMO, the biggest thing with immigration is that the immigration push modifiers take egregious mismanagement before they kick in, so there doesn't really exist much of a pool to pull from for immigration attraction. (Quick edit: and someone else laid out how the egregious mismanagement also suddenly turns into no addition to the immigration pool by multiplying in the wrong order. That's definitely going to do it!) For example, there's no emigration push until there are literally unemployed workers, and those are going to try to resettle themselves, so that's self-correcting. Similarly, being out of housing generates emigration push, but being close to carrying capacity just reduces overall growth, without putting any of it into the emigration pool. Even with the "new colony" push/pull modifiers, the colonial immigration ends up being tiny compared to base pop growth, so it feels better to just resettle a bunch of pops manually than to try to work with it.

(And then there's the part where I have no idea if the sedentary species drawback results in some emigration growth just sort of disappearing. I suspect it does, especially in a monoculture empire. That's kind of here nor there, though, as, after all, it's a drawback, and there are much more impactful ones already.)
 
Last edited:
  • 2
Reactions:
Reading a few things about pops and performance got me thinking.

As there’s likely hundreds of properties related to the class of a pop. They are likely very well defined which is good for both functionality, readability and adhere probably to many considered standards in design but…

You would be forgiven if you wanted to combine and thus slim down some properties and instead look at using ints or what use to be called ‘magic numbers’ (or enums).

an example of this would be combining the use of booleans into an int.

IsMilitarist = 1
HasBrainSlug = 1


You could instead use an array or an int and, as long as you document / mark out how you parse or read that int or array, it would just be looking up a specific value at a specific position.

So that example above would be 11 or 10, 01 or 00 instead in a single type in a single property. You could then group maybe many dozens of existing properties into a single one.

That all being said, I don’t know if that would be any faster but I thought it worth posting. It also maybe not worth effort over reward, if it’s even a valid suggestion.

[Edit] Copied a bit of a project I have for a more visual suggestion. This is from my console project that shows the bottom end of a function where I've built up an int array. So with an int array like that, as long as you know the index, you can retrieve any value. Hope its helpful :)

1695366343832.png
 
Last edited:
The Kaleidoscope situation that was recently added to Nemesis was a prisoner of the Oubliette! I started working on it last spring, had to put it aside when I was moved to the DLC team, and then finally got a chance to finish it this summer.
Because of you I had to rush to get tributary subjects to help me pay my energy costs, all that when I wasn't doing a Subject Hoarding playthrough xD
I gave in to the dark urge (even after the event) and ended up subjecting the entire galaxy, with Shared Destiny being my final AP :3
And I never used the reward because I already had Odryskia xD but it was an amazing event!
 
  • 1Like
Reactions:
One minor UI suggestion: use different color, border or such to mark council only and ship/fleet/planet/army differently from each other. Eg. Council ones darker green, other traits lighter green. It's bit annoying to check many tooltips to see if the traits are council or not when deciding on what leader to place where, as least I don't remember what each icon does.

Turns out there already is small icon differenting them, which I hadn't noticed before, the small yellow markings at bottom of the two first traits in the example below in case anyone else is blind as I am.

1695323010246.png
 
Last edited:
  • 2Haha
  • 1
Reactions: