Stellaris Dev Diary #325 - 3.10.3 "Pyxis" Released [d2aa] + Further Beta Plans

[DarkSafire]

If i understand correctly Breakthrough Technologies are per area (physics etc.) and not per category (field manipulation etc.). Please make them the latter, it would be more thematic.

 

[BlankLines]

So will the beta version include multiple languages or only English?

 

[BoltLaser]

Thinking about it, I’ve always been fine with the hidden tech tree/tiers, but with this new proposed system it might make sense to clearly signpost what tier each tech is, outside of it’s cost.
Maybe make tally marks on the colored banner of the tech?

 

[Zetesofos]

Thinking about it, I’ve always been fine with the hidden tech tree/tiers, but with this new proposed system it might make sense to clearly signpost what tier each tech is, outside of it’s cost.
Maybe make tally marks on the colored banner of the tech?

Well, they did say the breakthrough Techs will have a big moving border to let people know its a bottleneck or some such.

 

[Juboboman]

I would rather see ship cost/upkeep reductions reduced to be reasonable rather than outright removed and even to add insult to injury replaced with something worthless like ship build speed.

 

[Zetesofos]

I would rather see ship cost/upkeep reductions reduced to be reasonable rather than outright removed and even to add insult to injury replaced with something worthless like ship build speed.

A good rule of design when you are doing balancing, is to do the harshest change first, and then ease off by gradually adding back in bonuses. Psychologically, its easier to take one nerf, and then get an series of smaller buffs, rather than a small nerf, then another, then another as devs dial in.

 

[Peter Ebbesen]

The open beta research changes sound interesting, and I have no doubt I'll greatly enjoy research being slowed down once it has been through a few balance passes, but frankly, at this point all I want is a 3.10.4 that

1. Is stable
2. Has AIs that expand and thus provide some measure of opposition
3. Fixes almost all of the bugs that 3.10 inexplicably introduced to the old game mechanics as part of the Custodian work, since breaking something functioning is often more frustrating to the player than dealing with bugs in new functionality

Such that I can have fun playing the game during holidays rather than playtesting.

Thank you for your attention.

 

[Corpus Festerheart]

Good to see science change and hope economy change will come soon after, given how badly space resources scale into mid-late game.

 

[Thiend]

I really like the look of those research/ship build cost changes. Three comments before I even get a look at it in-game;

1. Eater of Worlds upkeep penalty for not being at war is going to go from "bad unless you have upkeep reduced to nothing in the first place by build and upkeep reductions" to just plain "bad," as the build cost reductions will no longer be able to save you from that extremely high penalty. On the other hand, a longer delay on repeatables makes the bonuses much more valuable.

2. Whisperers in the Void will actually be stronger, I didn't spot a reduction to its bonuses. Still might be too weak, it and the Eater have been kind of bad since the psionics rework.

3. This is purely speculative, but it seems like breakthrough techs might create a game of chicken where those furthest ahead in tech have a strong incentive to delay researching breakthroughs for as long as possible so that someone else has to eat the actual research time on it and they get techs they don't quite want as much instead of wasting that time. Conversely, this makes strong intel gathering much more valuable than it has ever been.

Stuff to keep an eye on, in my opinion.

 

[Zetesofos]

I really like the look of those research/ship build cost changes. Three comments before I even get a look at it in-game;

1. Eater of Worlds upkeep penalty for not being at war is going to go from "bad unless you have upkeep reduced to nothing in the first place by build and upkeep reductions" to just plain "bad," as the build cost reductions will no longer be able to save you from that extremely high penalty. On the other hand, a longer delay on repeatables makes the bonuses much more valuable.

2. Whisperers in the Void will actually be stronger, I didn't spot a reduction to its bonuses. Still might be too weak, it and the Eater have been kind of bad since the psionics rework.

3. This is purely speculative, but it seems like breakthrough techs might create a game of chicken where those furthest ahead in tech have a strong incentive to delay researching breakthroughs for as long as possible so that someone else has to eat the actual research time on it and they get techs they don't quite want as much instead of wasting that time. Conversely, this makes strong intel gathering much more valuable than it has ever been.

Stuff to keep an eye on, in my opinion.

I mean, feels getting the breakthrough is still going to give you an edge, it just means you won't be able to accelerate away at an infinate pace.

Being ahead in tech should be valuable, but it shouldn't be a case where empires reach a point where no one can catch up, which I think can happen very frequently.

That said, maybe they could give the 1st empire to discover a breakthrough some extra bonus (Unity, Influence, Happiness, etc) for being the 1st to do X.

 

[Juboboman]

That said, maybe they could give the 1st empire to discover a breakthrough some extra bonus (Unity, Influence, Happiness, etc) for being the 1st to do X.

I like this idea a lot.

 

[Tannhäuser Cake]

I really dig the research changes. Taken together they may significantly overshoot the goal, but that's also what experimental open betas are for, so...

• Research Speed Bonuses now usually come with increased Researcher Upkeep.
  • By changing these to throughput bonuses (cost + production), a technology focused empire will require more Consumer Goods or other resources depending on who they use to research. This puts a partial economic break on runaway technology.

The first bullet point above references research speed, but the subpoint mentions research production. The cost increases aside: are research speed bonuses being replaced with research production bonuses?

What "other resources" can be involved, and when?

Will the tech-world designation reduction of researcher upkeep be changed in the beta?

[Also: If this output-to-throughput move pans out well, I hope that similar switches of bonuses from output to throughput will be considered for the production of non-research resources as well.]

• Reduction in most Research Speed bonus modifiers.

What is the fate of the +10% research speed from the Curator Order's research aid?
What is the fate of the +15% research speed from the Curator Order's leader's trait?
(Also, will the cost cap of 5,000 credits for their research aid be removed? A cost cap is the opposite of a rubberband mechanic and seems undesirable. Perhaps it would also be more cpu-effective if the cost was just X credits per pop, rather than 1000 per 60 pops with a cap of 5000. And perhaps it might also make even more sense to use Empire Size, rather than pop count, for the purpose of calculating the cost.)

[Also: I hope that the similarly overpowered and underpriced Festival of Worlds will get looked at in the future. Also, if it still costs Influence to divert attention from a festival stampede, perhaps Unity should be used instead.]

• The +20% Research Field technologies have been removed. In their place we have introduced new "Breakthrough Technologies". These technologies are required to reach the next tier of research.
  • Whether it be the transistor, the theory of relativity, or faster-than-light travel, occasionally there are technologies that redefine a field of science.
    • The intent of these breakthrough technologies is to slow down the front-runners a little bit, while still letting the slower empires get pulled along.
  • Breakthrough technologies start off more difficult than regular technologies but have a variant of tech spread - the more nations you have at least low Technological intel on who have already discovered them, the cheaper they are to research (even down to instant research once the theory is commonplace). This tech spread varies based on galaxy size.
    • Enigmatic Engineering prevents this tech spread.
  • Breakthrough technologies have animated borders to stand out.

Will there be repeatable "Breakthrough Technologies" (BT) for the repeatable technologies as well?
Or will the repeatable technologies themselves feature this rubberbanding mechanic?
Or will research be "unrestrained" once the repeatable stage is reached?

Will any Scientist traits, civics, traditions or ascension perks help with BT research in particular?
(For instance, the "Technological Ascendancy" ascension perk could be a good place for a BT research bonus.)

Which research fields will the BT belong to - if any?
(Will Statecraft, Biology, et cetera have their own Breakthrough Technologies? Or will there be a single common BT for all Society research fields, perhaps not belonging to any research field at all?)

Will higher levels of Technological Intel (TI) produce more research bonuses towards BT?
(Will 100% TI be better than 50% TI for the purposes of BT research bonuses? Or is the bonus the same, regardless of the level of TI?)

[Also: I hope that this utilization of Intel turns out well and is followed by further practical benefits from Intel, and perhaps also a rework of how Base Intel is calculated so that it is possible to defend against.]

• Reduced Output of Researcher Jobs:
  • Researchers and their gestalt equivalents now produce 3 of each research instead of 4
  • Head Researchers now produce 4 of each research instead of 6
  • The effectiveness of Ministry of Science has been halved
  • Astral Researchers now produce 5 physics and 1 of each other research instead of 5 physics and 2 of the other researches.
  • All other researchers, such as Necromancers, have been left alone for now

After the technology rebalancing, I hope a similar review can be done for traditions and Unity.

• It is currently trivial to complete the traditions relatively early; empires not focused on Unity can achieve that outcome while ignoring Unity specialist jobs altogether. If the amount of Unity from other sources was reduced, it could increase the value of the Unity specialist jobs.
• One option is to shift ruler stratum jobs from Unity to Edict Funds.
• Perhaps Unity specialist jobs could both 1) produce Unity directly, and 2) influence faction Unity production from pops on the world?
  • It would make (some of) the Unity specialist jobs especially valuable (and common) on densely populated worlds, if this is a desirable outcome.
  • It might also make it seem more intuitive that "Bureaucrats" boost Unity production (since it would now be more about organizing, channeling and directing the Unity from the masses, and less about the jobs themselves being some sort of charismatic inspiration of Unity).
  • This would also have the benefit of adding an easy way to distinguish between different Unity jobs, such as Bureaucrats and Priests (where Priests may no longer need to be strictly superior to Bureaucrats via the additional Amenities production; where Priests and Bureaucrats may have different strengths in regards to Unity creation). Throw in Edict Funds production and it becomes possible to effectively have three different types of "Unity" jobs at the same time.
  • One possibility could be to remove the current ethic-specific Culture Worker bonuses, and instead make Culture Workers the strongest job in either direct Unity production or in boosting faction Unity.
  • This could also be another way to distinguish ruler jobs more from each other and from Unity specialist jobs, besides the suggested Unity-to-Edict-Funds switch.
  • A further, theoretical, possibility could be a "separation of church and state" (or - more accurately - of religion and Spiritualist ethics), by allowing Spiritualists to build Administrative Offices and non-Spiritualists to build Temples (this would allow Spiritualist empires to pick Byzantine Bureaucracy). It could reflect that religions still exist under secular states and bureaucracy still exists under religious states, and could make it much easier to represent profoundly materialist religions such as
    • adamant rejecters of disincarnation (souls departing bodies) and witchcraft (psychic powers) and strong believers in a mechanically rules-based creation (on a religious basis),
    • machine cults (Cult Mechanicus), and
    • profit prophets (Ferengi Calvinists).

• The Technology curve has been changed from 1000 × 2^n to 500 × (2^n + 3^n), making the difference between an early and late-game tech more distinct.

Does Empire Size's impact on research cost remain unchanged?



While it does not necessarily matter much to the overall balancing of technology, is there any chance of moving Psionics to Physics and moving L-Gate Insight from Engineering? It could help improve the relative sizes of the three research areas, where Physics still remains rather underfilled.

Any chance of the Statecraft field gaining a repeatable technology, perhaps a boost to trade value?
(Is the "Administrative Efficiency" repeatable being removed? A previous dev comment implied that it should be. Otherwise, it could also be a good fit for Statecraft.)

 

[Zetesofos]

I like this idea a lot.

It should be pop growth. Them scientists will be so ...uh...excited, once they discover quantum theory, that there is only one way to celebrate.

 

[RoverStorm]

Will the Researcher Upkeep increase apply to the base upkeep or will it be a modifier?

Will there be more incentives for militaristic empires to maintain large fleets rather than deleting fleets in peacetime to avoid paying upkeeps and then abusing lots of ship build speed to replace their fleets right before/during a war?

Many of the ship upkeep/cost changes listed include replacement mechanics, but some do not. Are those items just nerfed, or are there modifiers/mechanics that are yet to be revealed/determined?

And finally, not feedback but a curious idea I just had:
Could mechanics with set ratios, such as "35% Enslavement Ratio" from Slaver Guilds or possibly the ratios of Trade Policies, become "Sliders" under the policy settings, so we can determine the exact breakdown we want?
Sometimes I'm running Oppressive Autocracy and want 70% enslavement ratio, and sometimes I get tired of bouncing back and forth between "Consumer Benefits" and "Wealth Creation" to juggle Energy and CG deficit/surpluses and wish I could just set an in-between trade conversion ratio.

 

[Thiend]

I mean, feels getting the breakthrough is still going to give you an edge, it just means you won't be able to accelerate away at an infinate pace.

Being ahead in tech should be valuable, but it shouldn't be a case where empires reach a point where no one can catch up, which I think can happen very frequently.

That said, maybe they could give the 1st empire to discover a breakthrough some extra bonus (Unity, Influence, Happiness, etc) for being the 1st to do X.

That works. Slowing tech focus down is absolutely great, I just want to preempt the scenario where being ahead means you specifically ignore the breakthrough and it actually doesn't slow you down at all...

 

[Tannhäuser Cake]

If you've researched all the techs you currently have available to you, eventually the breakthrough tech will be your only choice in that field.

Does this mean that you can "force" rare and/or dangerous technologies to appear, by not researching the breakthrough technology (edit: until all rare technologies of a tech tier are researched)?

Will there be any direct benefit from researching breakthrough techs? Maybe a temporary research boost now that you’ve suddenly gained access to technologies previously thought impossible?

I think a research boost would be contrarian to the stated purpose of rubberbanding. A temporary bonus to diplomatic weight from technology seems rather appropriate, however.

This is like saying you shouldn't hit max level in an RPG until right before the final boss battle. People's opinions on this may vary, but I'd argue that it's nice having some time with a fully-developed character, or with a fully teched-out empire.

The setting sliders (technology, traditions) allow players to customize the game experience to their liking. Aiming for the technology and tradition completion to occur during the endgame phase on average, for "average" empires, seems like an intuitive ambition for the default technology and tradition settings.
(Edit: since this allows all tiers of technology/tradition content to be experienced during a playthrough, while not getting too far into the less interesting repeatables content.)

That, is an absolutely insane change. The people celebrating this don't seem to realize just how insane this is in terms of tech cost increase alongside removing bonuses and increasing costs. This is even more heavy handed and extreme than the early leader changes and restrictions.

The beauty of running an experimental open beta is that balance issues and unexpected complex interactions can be identified and addressed. There is no guarantee that any of the proposed changes will make the final cut, depending on the results of the experimental open beta.

Why and how? These aren't nations living right next to each other on the same planet. These are aliens living across the void of space. Even nowadays we have nations like South and North Korea existing right next to each other where the technology doesn't magically spread like some kind of plant. But somehow star empires that have nothing to do with each other, no exchange whatsoever, magically spread their tech level like some kind of contagion?

The "tech spread" effect requires having at least Low Intel (Technological), and is blocked by Enigmatic Engineering.

I agree that there should be no spread between empires that have nothing to do with each other, and this will be the case at Technological Intel below 30 (or in the presence of Enigmatic Engineering). Though I would like to see a Base Intel tweak that makes it possible to "defend" against others' Base Intel bonuses as well.

 

[Telenil]

This change alone will make a huge difference in stretching back the timescale!

Tier 1: 2000 -> 2500
Tier 2: 4000 -> 6500
Tier 3: 8000 -> 17500
Tier 4: 16000 -> 48500
Tier 5: 32000 -> 137500

Conversely the research changes are very heavy handed and I'm afraid they're going to make the game a lot slower paced. Maybe ship components should also scale more dramatically to compensate so you actually feel the massive tech investment. Same for repeatables too.

I play with x1.5 tech cost and don't min-max so I'm in somewhat familiar territory. Taken alone, these numbers wouldn't scare me that much. They certainly mean a massive change of pace for people who put crises in 2300, but if you keep it in the 2400s the effect is mostly that it takes more years to reach the same point. You keep destroyers and cruisers for longer, and you notice the effect of economy techs more because they will be further apart.

But. If the +20% research techs are removed, that's effectively an additional +20% time per tier (give or take) and then base research was also reduced, resulting easily in x8 more time for tier 5: megastructures, repeatables and colossi. Stacking with empire spread penalties. That's where there is obvious overkill, especially for megastructures which already take decades to upgrade. There is no way the release version will be this harsh.

 

[-Marauder-]

Good to see science change and hope economy change will come soon after, given how badly space resources scale into mid-late game.

"Nerf everything to the ground, forever." Alternatively buff the space resources?

 

[GnoSIS]

Is this a coordinated effort to make the game unwinnable for Grand admiral with crisis multipliers?

Because otherwise these changes don't make sense, unless of course paradox plans to sell more power creep with their next expansion.

But then again, as always, we're free to mod away the game to being fun again.

 

[Peter Ebbesen]

Is this a coordinated effort to make the game unwinnable for Grand admiral with crisis multipliers?

Has the last year been a coordinated effort to make the game easily winnable for Grand Admiral with crisis multipliers?

I'm just wondering if your thinking in that regard works both ways, i.e. both with regards to power creep and nerfs.