• 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 #371 - 4.0 Changes: Part 5

Hi everyone!

This week we’re looking more at the economic changes of the Stellaris 4.0 ‘Phoenix’ update, and how we’re going to update the Planet UI to work with them.

As this is all still in development, things are still subject to change, and I’m going to be using a lot of the UX Design Mockups in this dev diary. The final versions will not match these work-in-progress designs precisely. The Open Beta will definitely not be at these polish levels. Also be aware that numbers on these mockups are all placeholders meant to help the rest of the team get the layout right, so things like the Pop Counts or Production numbers aren’t accurate.

Planets - Districts - Zones - Buildings - Jobs​

As mentioned last week, one of the fundamental changes we’re making to the economy behind the scenes is that planets are now the source of production rather than the pops themselves. This is a generally subtle change from your perspective as a player, but this opened up an opportunity to revamp exactly how planets are structured, and to formalize some of the job hierarchy. A few of you have already guessed some of the things I’m going to share with you.

We’re introducing a new planetary feature: Zones. By specializing Districts, Zones function similarly to how the Forge World, Factory World, and Industrial World designations previously modified the jobs provided by Industrial Districts – only now as a more structured, intuitive, and flexible mechanic.

The 4.0 Planet Hierarchy is:
  • Planets produce and consume resources.
  • Districts provide a base number of Jobs for each level of development.
  • Zones manipulate what Jobs are provided by their District.
  • Buildings typically modify the production of Jobs themselves, though may also provide static numbers of Jobs.
  • Jobs are filled by Workforce, and make the planet produce a single resource by default (unless they have been modified).

Standard planets have a City District that contains your urban development, and remains capped by planet size as it is in 3.14. The City District has four Zones - one will always be locked to a Governmental Zone and contains your Capital Building, while the other three will be selectable. Normal planets also have Mining, Agricultural, and Energy Districts which each have one Zone, and - like 3.14 - are gated by planetary features. Industrial Districts have been removed, as their function has been replaced by Zones.

image3.png

Upgrading Districts is now clearly shown as a button on the Planet UI - this should reduce the number of “it took me X months to realize you can build districts” posts. As part of the increase in differentiation between Districts and Buildings, we’ve changed some of the terminology slightly - instead of building a dozen Districts across a planet, you will upgrade their development level. Functionally this remains the same.

image11.png


Zones are our new addition to the Planet Hierarchy. Zones let you change the nature of their District. By default, the City District will provide Housing and increase the maximum number of Civilians that your planet can support. (Based on design discussions over the past week, we’re leaning towards your Empire Capital having a bonus increasing this number significantly, which has the nice secondary effect of making the conquest of Homeworlds in the early game carry the societal challenge of suddenly creating many angry Dissidents that will be unable to promote back to Civilians as this bonus is lost.) If you build a Foundry Zone, the City District will replace some of their Civilian capacity and housing with Metallurgist jobs for each level of development. If you then build a Factory Zone, the City District will provide both Metallurgist and Artisan jobs, but with further reductions to their Citizen capacity.

image12.png

While you can build multiple Zones of the same type (in your City District, for example), the first Zone of each type built on a planet gains three slots for Buildings. (Duplicate Zones do not grant additional Building slots.) Buildings typically modify the production of their associated Job, and most are now Planet Unique. The majority of Buildings are restricted to the specific relevant Zones that they can be built in, but some can still be built anywhere. The Government Zone and Urban Zone can, however, accept most Urban buildings. The build list will be filtered appropriately.

The majority of Jobs will now have a single output by default, so Researchers are being broken apart into Physicists, Biologists, and Engineers.

Origins and Civics that previously replaced Jobs will now typically instead have a Building that modifies the associated Job. A benefit of this is that it should now be able to stack better with other similar Civics - we hope to be able to reduce restrictions so perhaps you’ll be able to sacrifice willing Pops by flinging them into a black hole for money.

The Planetary Surface​

Your homeworld is a bit of a special case in Stellaris - it’s not a brand new colony, but it’s also not very specialized. It needs to provide a little bit of everything, but could really use some cleanup after all those years of development (becoming an Early Space Age civilization is a dirty job.)

Here’s the work-in-progress UX mockup of what Earth may look like at the start of the game:

image8.png

The unspecialized mess of being an Early Space Age civilization gives us a relatively unspecialized zone that provides us with the basic resources necessary at the start of the game. We’ll eventually want to replace that Zone with a more specialized one.

As we head to the stars, we’ll naturally want to colonize our Guaranteed Habitable Worlds. The new Colonization UI will let us immediately set the desired planetary designation for our brand new colony.

image2.png

Don’t worry, you’ll be able to select something other than Factory World...

Here’s what our new colony could look like once the colonization process finishes:

image7.png

...But why did you choose Mining World for a planet with Poor Quality Minerals?

The Reassembled Ship Shelter provides Colonist jobs that will provide the Amenities and Stability previously granted by the Colony designation. As shown, the technologies required to expand on an alien world are not necessarily the same as those you need back on your home planet.

Our UX designer has created these explanations of the new UI:

image6.png


image1.png

And here’s what our two planets might look like after some time has passed.

image9.png


image10.png

Special Cases​

Ever since MegaCorp, paving the entire world has always been a grand ambition of Empires.

We’re currently thinking that an Ecumenopolis should act like the megacity it is. The Ecumenopolis will have multiple Urban Districts - one large main one and three more smaller Arcologies.

image4.png

Wait, this means you can make a Fortress Ecumenopolis…

Although the gameplay of upgrading a Habitat Complex by building orbitals throughout a system made Habitats more interesting, having to hunt down that last moon to place the orbital proved incredibly annoying.

For 4.0, we’re removing this pain point. Upgrading Districts on a Habitat will spawn Orbitals throughout the system as their Development Level increases. Some of the district capacity will be available immediately upon colonizing the Habitat Central Complex, with the remainder gated by upgrading the Capital Building. We’re also considering having the district capacity for Habitats more closely linked to the deposits available in the system instead of the current behavior where each mineral deposit grants a static amount of capacity.

We expect to see some unique or former districts for habitats be reimagined or return as Zones, such as the Order’s Demesne for KotTG or Sanctuary Districts for Rogue Servitors.

image5.png

Goodbye, hunting for where that last minor orbital is hiding!

Next Week​

Next week, @Gruntsatwork will go into some of the scripting details of Jobs and Pop Groups. We should also have some more information about the upcoming 4.0 livestream.

See you then!
 
  • 121Like
  • 109Love
  • 11
  • 4
  • 4
Reactions:
I feel like the ludonarrative structure here has gone completely out of the window. Things are far too abstracted.

So... I have a planetary feature (like a waterfall) which... allows me to "upgrade" the single, globe spanning "district" that is for energy on the planet? Does this satisfactorily represent colonising an alien landscape?

Another example, this snippet:

View attachment 1256728

So what are we looking at here. It's the "city district". Just the one. So, there is no delineated sense of multiple cities?

Agree, if "Build district" and "Upgrade district" are functionally identical, then "Build district" should be retained, it gives a better sense of filling out a world
 
  • 10
  • 2Like
Reactions:
Since each district will have zones with buildings based on the zone type, isn't this removing choice from the players? We are now limited by global building slots, so we need to make a decision and trade off what buildings to place. However, with districts and zones, there will always be building slots for that district to be buffed, removing the choice of what to build there. For example, with three slots in a mining zone, one of them will always be the mineral refinery, creating the argument: why even have that slot in the first place if I will always use my first building slot for my mineral refinery? This is just busy work then!

This can only be offset by a really interesting and vast selection of buildings per zone, but I doubt you want to or can create more than three interesting buildings around digging up rocks from the ground.
If no buildings add flat outputs, then you end up with specialised worlds, lots of empty slots, unused UI space, and no reason to make colonies on small worlds.
(small worlds will not be adding growth, and would cost more per job to build)
If some buildings add flat outputs (like Class-3 Singularity/Waste Reprocessing Center/Silos/Housing) then you'll probably put them on the Generator/Agriculture/Mining Zones of every world you can no matter the designation to use the otherwise empty zones and the building slots they provide. (making worlds look identical)

If the trade lost to planetary deficits is negligible, then we will still have mostly specialised worlds,
If the trade lost to planetary deficits is significant, then we will want more self-sufficient worlds (e.g. you expect to build 1 Agriculture district per X City Districts built locally instead of having that district on an Agricultural breadbasket world).
If the trade loss varies (negligible then increasingly significant, or significant then negligible as specialised planet output increases), then redevelopment of districts and trade/logistics-related buildings may be optimal (silos, ports, recycling, waste reprocessing etc)

No idea what the balance will actually be like without final numbers. But personally I think worlds would look more unique if you picked rural districts, and had more options than the base 3 to choose from.
I'm trying to pick which zones the current 3.14 buildings would belong to. The majority of buildings I consciously build would belong in some Urban Zone or other. There are very few that I can think of going into a Mining-only District. Without knowing what buildings 4.0 will have, I have to concur that having a "Rural District" combining the basic resource gathering jobs would give Zoned building slots more meaning.
 
  • 1Like
  • 1
Reactions:
Script weights. I expect that we'll look mostly at what zones you have and the development level, but we can also use what technologies you have unlocked. (So no Fusion Power until you have that tech!)

They are purely flavor, and are thus lower priority than implementing the rest of this, will probably start less robust than I'd like it to be in the long term. There's a lot of flavor benefit we can harness there though, which is why we wanted it added there.

Suggestion for the art team and devs - Make the District have unique names and art depending on civics and origins. Such as looking something like HoMM3 Necropolis background for a Necromancer Mines. Or Dystopian Society and Pleasure Seeker civic ones looking Cyberpunk AF, With names such as "Slum district" or "Death Mines" or "Sapient Farms" in case you want some McXenos on the menu.
 
  • 7Like
  • 1
Reactions:
If no buildings add flat outputs, then you end up with specialised worlds, lots of empty slots, unused UI space, and no reason to make colonies on small worlds.
(small worlds will not be adding growth, and would cost more per job to build)
If some buildings add flat outputs (like Class-3 Singularity/Waste Reprocessing Center/Silos/Housing) then you'll probably put them on the Generator/Agriculture/Mining Zones of every world you can no matter the designation to use the otherwise empty zones and the building slots they provide. (making worlds look identical)

If the trade lost to planetary deficits is negligible, then we will still have mostly specialised worlds,
If the trade lost to planetary deficits is significant, then we will want more self-sufficient worlds (e.g. you expect to build 1 Agriculture district per X City Districts built locally instead of having that district on an Agricultural breadbasket world).
If the trade loss varies (negligible then increasingly significant, or significant then negligible as specialised planet output increases), then redevelopment of districts and trade/logistics-related buildings may be optimal (silos, ports, recycling, waste reprocessing etc)

No idea what the balance will actually be like without final numbers. But personally I think worlds would look more unique if you picked rural districts, and had more options than the base 3 to choose from.
I personally hope it's mainly the first (no or few flat effect buildings). As you said you would have no reason to colonize small worlds... until you need them. I like the idea of having only as many planets as you can fill. The current meta of having a colony on every single vaguely habitable celestial body is tiring. Colonizing a handful of great planets should be enough for the early game and you should slowly expand during the mid and late game as I envision it. We will see if that's indeed the case with the new system.
I agree that trade cost will impact specialization but I am not too worried. As I said before, there are a LOT of ways to gain a specific bonus for a specific colony and most won't go away. If you can stack +100% mineral production on a planet through various mean (governor, features, pops, etc...) the trade deficit will normally easily be offset by the miner jobs on other planets you can replace by clerks by switching districts there where miners are way less efficient.
 
  • 1
Reactions:
Oh, I love this.

Does this mean ringworlds will get their generator districts back for non-gestalt empires?

For Ecumenopolis, are the zones used by the three smaller districts the same as the urban district zones, or do they use a more limited set? What will be the mechanical difference between giving a zone their own district instead of putting them in the urban district?
It might let me abandon some of my mod changes if so which is often welcomed
 
  • 1
Reactions:
I'm trying to pick which zones the current 3.14 buildings would belong to. The majority of buildings I consciously build would belong in some Urban Zone or other. There are very few that I can think of going into a Mining-only District. Without knowing what buildings 4.0 will have, I have to concur that having a "Rural District" combining the basic resource gathering jobs would give Zoned building slots more meaning.
I mean, I would guess we always have the three resource gatherers: Minerals, Food, and Energy, and based on that, the typical buff buildings. So as long as these districts and zones cannot hold anything else but a modifer for the explicit output, I really fear that we will get three building slots only to always fill them with the same three buildings. This is not creating any decision or trade-off; this is just boring busywork, as I stated.
 
Any chance we could have more control over which species takes a job? Especially non-sentient robots, I've wanted to play a mechanist oppressive autocracy that uses droids as enforcers, but the current system doesn't allow for playstyles like that
 
  • 1
Reactions:
Probably just a factor of being new but the zone UI feels like a downgrade from the district UI. The buildings seem minute and not obvious.

Also likely a factor of being new but the zones don’t seem intuitive. If zones modify districts what does having multiple types of zones do.
 
  • 1
Reactions:
Mechanically, this seems alright, though an unnecessary change that probably won't be worth the year-ish of terrible game balance it heralds.

UI-wise it looks like a mess though. The previous planet UI was always pretty bad as well, but now things are even less organized. It's very hard to get an immediate grasp on what the planet is supposed to be like, when it's just an incoherent jumble of boxes and icons. All those various stats that appear along a banner at the top also seem poorly thought out - more important stats should have more prominent positions in the UI. And the planetary features - what is supposed to give planets their unique identity - seem to be hidden away even more than before, further increasing the spreadsheet-ification of planets.

I also strongly echo the sentiment that it's essential to keep DistrictS, plural. Having a single district for each type is cartoon sci-fi level stuff. You know all those stories where each planet has just one city and like 3 other points of interest. Star Wars is guilty of this a lot, but Stellaris should be better.
 
  • 15
  • 1Like
Reactions:
If no buildings add flat outputs, then you end up with specialised worlds, lots of empty slots, unused UI space, and no reason to make colonies on small worlds.
(small worlds will not be adding growth, and would cost more per job to build)
If some buildings add flat outputs (like Class-3 Singularity/Waste Reprocessing Center/Silos/Housing) then you'll probably put them on the Generator/Agriculture/Mining Zones of every world you can no matter the designation to use the otherwise empty zones and the building slots they provide. (making worlds look identical)

If the trade lost to planetary deficits is negligible, then we will still have mostly specialised worlds,
If the trade lost to planetary deficits is significant, then we will want more self-sufficient worlds (e.g. you expect to build 1 Agriculture district per X City Districts built locally instead of having that district on an Agricultural breadbasket world).
If the trade loss varies (negligible then increasingly significant, or significant then negligible as specialised planet output increases), then redevelopment of districts and trade/logistics-related buildings may be optimal (silos, ports, recycling, waste reprocessing etc)

No idea what the balance will actually be like without final numbers. But personally I think worlds would look more unique if you picked rural districts, and had more options than the base 3 to choose from.

Meaningful zone designations for the rural districts will likely be instrumental in making the new system work. Otherwise there is little point in giving them zones and locking building slots behind them. And if so, there isn't much point to have zones being attached to districts in the first place.

That said, I do like the idea of zones replacing planetary designations and spamming city districts for building slots, so I don't think the idea is a total loss. Just needlessly complex.
 
  • 1
Reactions:
Environmentalist has some pretty significant changes as is to build priority, and wanting to keep blockers. How will they work now with the "one output type per job" paradigm, or are they exempt, or does the civic now cause the blockers themselves to create jobs?
 
  • 2
Reactions:
Currently the rural districts have a different set of zones available to them. For now, they'll be fairly limited - the Mining District has a Mineral Purification zone, but I see a lot of potential for the future with the system, where there might be different zones available based on rare planetary features. I'd like to see planets have more uniqueness, but we won't have the time to delve deeply into the possibilities for the initial 4.0 release.
I was wondering about Ecumenopolis and Habitats specifically.

For instance what's the difference between selecting one of the three "secondary" districts to be a Trade Arcology, versus creating a Trade Zone in the Residential Arcology?

Will it be something like "secondary" districts adding more jobs than the urban districts gets from zones to justify having to develop them independently from the main urban district?
 
  • 1
Reactions:
If no buildings add flat outputs, then you end up with specialised worlds, lots of empty slots, unused UI space, and no reason to make colonies on small worlds.
(small worlds will not be adding growth, and would cost more per job to build)
If some buildings add flat outputs (like Class-3 Singularity/Waste Reprocessing Center/Silos/Housing) then you'll probably put them on the Generator/Agriculture/Mining Zones of every world you can no matter the designation to use the otherwise empty zones and the building slots they provide. (making worlds look identical)

If the trade lost to planetary deficits is negligible, then we will still have mostly specialised worlds,
If the trade lost to planetary deficits is significant, then we will want more self-sufficient worlds (e.g. you expect to build 1 Agriculture district per X City Districts built locally instead of having that district on an Agricultural breadbasket world).
If the trade loss varies (negligible then increasingly significant, or significant then negligible as specialised planet output increases), then redevelopment of districts and trade/logistics-related buildings may be optimal (silos, ports, recycling, waste reprocessing etc)

No idea what the balance will actually be like without final numbers. But personally I think worlds would look more unique if you picked rural districts, and had more options than the base 3 to choose from.
Just a glance at the current UI setup makes me think that zones are locked to certain buildings. I doubt you can build a planetary shield on a farm, so choosing to make your cities Religious Science Industrial would completely lock you out of building it.
 
Those windows look so cluttered. Is that really the best way to arrange this? Stellaris wasn't intentionally complicated, once. Is this meant to be a space production game or a paperwork simulator?
Agreed it's cluttered, hopefully they can fix that.
And planets can't consume resources (unless there are things like swamp worlds or storm worlds). Paradox is just shifting the labels from the pops to the planet. If there are good reasons for it, those haven't been 'revealed' yet.
This was explained: It improves performance to have the consumption and production attached to the planet instead of the individual pops.
We’re also considering having the district capacity for Habitats more closely linked to the deposits available in the system instead of the current behavior where each mineral deposit grants a static amount of capacity.
More habitats looks like a good thing. But having habitat pop levels be linked to the mineral amounts is nonsense. You're talking population number instead of production number. Of course a mineral deposit grants X amount of mineral production. Why change that?
I think you misunderstood that whole statement. They're not talking about more habitats or any change in "habitat pop levels" at all.

Current situation: Building an orbital on a 2 mineral asteroid adds 3 Mining District slots to the Habitat Central Complex in the system. Building an orbital on a 4 mineral asteroid also adds 3 Mining District slots to the Habitat Central Complex in the system.

Presumably planned situation: Building an orbital on a 2 mineral asteroid adds 2 Mining District slots to the Habitat Central Complex in the system. Building an orbital on a 4 mineral asteroid adds 4 Mining District slots to the Habitat Central Complex in the system.

With some additional modification because you won't be actually building those orbitals yourself anymore, they will get automatically built as you upgrade the "Mining District" on the system's Habitat Central Complex.
 
How will they work now with the "one output type per job" paradigm, or are they exempt, or does the civic now cause the blockers themselves to create jobs?
I think the way it will work, is that every job will have a single primary resource.

So for example, Researchers that used to produce all three research types are now split up to produce research individual research types so that things like research output bonuses can properly apply workforce bonuses when employed in those jobs.

  • Jobs are filled by Workforce, and make the planet produce a single resource by default (unless they have been modified).

"by default" and "unless they have been modified" suggests that jobs can still have secondary output, and the workforce bonus will also boost the secondary output as well as an additional bonus.
 
Last edited:
I personally hope it's mainly the first (no or few flat effect buildings). As you said you would have no reason to colonize small worlds... until you need them. I like the idea of having only as many planets as you can fill. The current meta of having a colony on every single vaguely habitable celestial body is tiring. Colonizing a handful of great planets should be enough for the early game and you should slowly expand during the mid and late game as I envision it. We will see if that's indeed the case with the new system.
I agree that trade cost will impact specialization but I am not too worried. As I said before, there are a LOT of ways to gain a specific bonus for a specific colony and most won't go away. If you can stack +100% mineral production on a planet through various mean (governor, features, pops, etc...) the trade deficit will normally easily be offset by the miner jobs on other planets you can replace by clerks by switching districts there where miners are way less efficient.
I think the removal of base population growth already discourages settling on smaller/low habitability worlds.

I hope small worlds still have some potential to look and feel different in 4.0 instead of just always inferior to large planets. I want a little Tatooine or Arrakis that is valuable even with a small population and fewer zones but each being special in some way like smuggling, sandcrawlers harvesting desert spice, or solar generators - districts with lower workforce requirements but more limited in number so there's a visual and mechanical distinction between the big populous worlds and tiny backwaters.

Meaningful zone designations for the rural districts will likely be instrumental in making the new system work. Otherwise there is little point in giving them zones and locking building slots behind them. And if so, there isn't much point to have zones being attached to districts in the first place.

That said, I do like the idea of zones replacing planetary designations and spamming city districts for building slots, so I don't think the idea is a total loss. Just needlessly complex.
I agree, and I do hope that eventually when you click the "Zone available" button on a mining district there are interesting choices to be had (and ideally different art for the district), but it sounds like that will have to wait for a future update:

Currently the rural districts have a different set of zones available to them. For now, they'll be fairly limited - the Mining District has a Mineral Purification zone, but I see a lot of potential for the future with the system, where there might be different zones available based on rare planetary features. I'd like to see planets have more uniqueness, but we won't have the time to delve deeply into the possibilities for the initial 4.0 release.

The potential is there, and on the to-do list at least. So hopefully rural zones will be more interesting in future updates. It'll all need a lot of balancing anyway with such drastic changes.
 
  • 4
Reactions:
Just a glance at the current UI setup makes me think that zones are locked to certain buildings. I doubt you can build a planetary shield on a farm, so choosing to make your cities Religious Science Industrial would completely lock you out of building it.
Yes, I actually really like filtering the build options so the build list will be a little less overwhelming. Although when I saw it my first thought was, ok, no more FTL-inhibition on every world. I doubt making entire fortress zones will be worth it to make a Fortress building to mess with AI pathfinding (I also wonder if some zones will have enough options to fill all the slots).

The question I have is will there be any buildings that you want to spam on every world?
A Class-3 Singularity in the Generator district Zone, a Nourishment Complex in the Agricultural district Zone, a Quantum Drilling Plant in the Mining district Zone and so on for the same districts and zones on every world - making them more self-sufficient and using an otherwise empty slot that would be going to waste... while also making your planets more identical and less unique (unless those buildings are all re-worked significantly).

I'm just wondering about the balance of it all and trying to think it all through to the logical conclusion.
What other changes are needed to make it all work as intended?
 
I think the removal of base population growth already discourages settling on smaller/low habitability worlds.

I hope small worlds still have some potential to look and feel different in 4.0 instead of just always inferior to large planets. I want a little Tatooine or Arrakis that is valuable even with a small population and fewer zones but each being special in some way like smuggling, sandcrawlers harvesting desert spice, or solar generators - districts with lower workforce requirements but more limited in number so there's a visual and mechanical distinction between the big populous worlds and tiny backwaters.


I agree, and I do hope that eventually when you click the "Zone available" button on a mining district there are interesting choices to be had (and ideally different art for the district), but it sounds like that will have to wait for a future update:



The potential is there, and on the to-do list at least. So hopefully rural zones will be more interesting in future updates. It'll all need a lot of balancing anyway with such drastic changes.
In that case, I'd love for the devs to reveal some of their ideas at to what buildings currently would be available in rural district zones. As has been mentioned several times, there aren't many beyond the typical increase output buildings that would fit, and it's sounds like it would be better to make a single zone for rural districts rather than each district type having it's own zone.

One idea I could see is that not all buildings are exclusive to a specific type of zone. For example (going by the entirely-placeholder-do-not-repeat-DO-NOT-take-as-intended pics) maybe you could build your robots out of the mining district as well as the capital district, or buildings that reduce trade value costs for import/export going in both the trade zone or the zone for the resource it's reducing the TV cost of.
 
Last edited:
  • 3
Reactions: