Stellaris Dev Diary #108 - 2.0 Post-Release Support (part 1)

[Slynx]

I have to disagree. Yes such penalties are more realistic than just an artificial forced peace, but they are not good for the game because they always punish the loser even more.

Imagine, You lost the first battles. You did not just lose more ships and systems you also get a punishing penalty making a coming back or recovery even harder.

Favouring blobbing wars again.

and why punishing the loosing side is bad? they've lost and totally deserve it.

 

[Lordban]

and why punishing the loosing side is bad? they've lost and totally deserve it.

Because it easily transforms into both a total war mechanic and into a griefing mechanic if there's nothing the losing side can do to get out.

 

[NemoRow]

I'm sorry that loosing side looses more, but this is how it is a bit - isn't it? So the option should be not to punish the wining side, but to give a loosing one an ability to defend itself. Inviting others to defend you and in return agreeing on paying them in strategic resources or minerals, or becoming their vassal, or just saying them, if they wont defend you - they will be a next target and there will be no one to help them: those are options the loosing side may have.

If attackers are exhausted but don't want to or can't settle a piece, its their problem, and they can invite more attackers or settle for less. But forcing to peace is far too artificial.

 

[AntiMachiavel]

I generally like this system. Status Quo peace is ok by me but I would like to have some option to negotiate for a more sensible system swap when both sides have conquered some systems, there are occupied "islands" within enemy territory etc. Maybe let the forcing side to submit an alternative selection of claimed systems and the side being forced can then select between the standard Status Quo and the alternative proposal. AI should try to minimize the number of systems exchanged (you won't take my system and I won't take yours), getting rid of isolated "islands" and so on when negotiating.

I like the idea of Pacifist faction attraction being tied to high War Exhaustion.

 

[Slynx]

Because it easily transforms into both a total war mechanic and into a griefing mechanic if there's nothing the losing side can do to get out.

yes. and it's great.
after all you wage wars to totally destroy\humiliate\etc your enemy(at least I do). and as a side effect maybe gain something too.
and if he doesnt' want you to wreck chaos on "his" systems - he can always surrender

that's probably the reason I like colossus in 2.0.2beta patch. every war will end in one go. no artificial truce.

 

[TheTam]

Progressing penalties and global war exhaustion for your empire (with ethos/empire type modifiers) would be better as well IMO
Though I like the idea of forced peace as well IN GENERAL
What about at the end of the war exhaustion scala there is some kind of faction/rebell takeover of your government that ends all wars? Think Russia in WW 1

 

[NemoRow]

In my experience, I usually wind up expanding or conquering my way to 'chokepoints' and then ceasing my expansion there until I am ready to push to the next chokepoint because when you have 'wide' lanes or multiple points of access, it just becomes too much of a pain to chase down that 600 power corvette fleet that slipped past and is taking outposts.

Out of the topic, but its possible to build up to 3 defensive platforms at any outpost and this helps with such cases. Painful to look for them and disband them later though.

 

[ParasiteX]

yes. and it's great.
after all you wage wars to totally destroy\humiliate\etc your enemy(at least I do). and as a side effect maybe gain something too.
and if he doesnt' want you to wreck chaos on "his" systems - he can always surrender

that's probably the reason I like colossus in 2.0.2beta patch. every war will end in one go. no artificial truce.

Yeah, well that's not a very balanced game mechanic.. If you want that kind of unbalanced gameplay. Then you're totally free to mod that into your own games.

 

[Admiral_Obvious]

yes. and it's great.
after all you wage wars to totally destroy\humiliate\etc your enemy. and as a side effect maybe gain something too.
and if he doesnt' want you to wreck chaos on "his" systems - he can always surender

I think thats more of an exploit of the system than an intended feature.

In my opinion, the attackers should have a 20-30% lower cap to their war exhaustion, that way defenders can get a slightly easier time on the war. The recent change to HOI4 did this by smacking your government stability by 30%, so I don't see why Stellaris can't do this.

 

[Kavok]

If my friends, my children and my siblings all died to the xenos, I'm possibly not going to want to die next. If I feel personally the pain of half of my drones dying instead of eating, I'm possibly going to want the pain to stop. If my algorithms say I'm wasting horrendous amounts of resources in a fruitless attempt to eliminate organics, I'm going to kill the waste, not the organics.

None of this same logic applies thematically to the Khan or any of the crisis, which essentially fit these same stereotypes. The three empire styles I listed aren't even capable of diplomacy - peace is literally diplomacy. A truce would need to be mutually agreed upon.

Maybe I should rephrase my statement:

Fanatical Purifiers, Devouring Swarms, and Determined Exterminators shouldn't be subject to attrition war exhaustion thematically.

Often I'll be in a war as a Fanatical Purifier - own 100% of enemy systems, destroyed all enemy fleets, destroyed all construction vessels, destroyed all science vessels. Just waiting for the planet cracker to arrive to take out the last 2-3 worlds. Forced truce. What? Why would a Fanatical Purifier with 100% dominance over an enemy just truce out and abandon the war? They've already won!

The no-diplomacy empire types should only truce out due to losses in combat or losses of territory, not attrition. The entire culture is geared towards war, a state of 'being at war' isn't a big deal for them - especially the Devouring Swarms and Determined Exterminators. Those two don't even suffer unrest or happyness issues.

 

[MateusMat]

@Wiz Any changes to the War in Heaven regarding war exhaustion? Because at the moment War in Heaven is totally broke. What was supposed to be this epic war now ends after a couple years with an status quo peace.

I think there should be no war exhaustion for the War in Heaven... or at least tick at 0.01% of the base value.

Also... why occupation doesn't count towards war exhaustion? If I take someones capital... and several planets... that should greatly count towards their willingness to give up those uninhabited border systems.

 

[Lordban]

yes. and it's great.
after all you wage wars to totally destroy\humiliate\etc your enemy(at least I do).

Most people don't.

 

[Slynx]

Yeah, well that's not a very balanced game mechanic.

not sure if I understand.
if I want to destroy you and I think I have ability to do so (like when you're pathetic to me and no DP) then nothing will force me to push status quo or surrender button in 2.0.2beta and I don't see it as a bad sign.
on the other hand you, as my enemy, have a right to surrender whenever you'll think that you can't go on with this war. where is exploit? as far as I know you can push surrender on the day1 of war

 

[Heretic Saint]

I have to disagree. Yes such penalties are more realistic than just an artificial forced peace, but they are not good for the game because they always punish the loser even more.

Imagine, You lost the first battles. You did not just lose more ships and systems you also get a punishing penalty making a coming back or recovery even harder.

Favouring blobbing wars again.

You have a point there, though that would depend a lot on where the penalties trigger. If after only just the first few battles you're already at 60% War Exhaustion, the chance of a comeback seems fleeting. And this is just where (in my hasty example) Pacifist attraction would kick in, which at this point should be manageable.

The problem concerns mostly empires that keep fighting after 100% WE, which is also what Wiz' new approach is trying to solve. But at 100% War Exhaustion, the loser is in a position where the penalties won't even matter any more, as their military is in shambles. Meanwhile, the victor will finally start to feel handicapped.

And if War Exhaustion were to persist after the conclusion of the conflict, the victor has an incentive to not drag it out needlessly, to avoid making themselves vulnerable to others. Granted, a previously victorious empire that still fought until achieving 100% War Exhaustion might not even care for the penalties as long as they can keep bullying the target of their first campaign -- but if they will maintain 100% Exhaustion the moment someone else declares war on *them*, things would look a lot different!

"Social penalties" could also be adapted to behavior. Refusing to accept a peace offer from a beaten enemy could add Threat to your empire's portfolio, as others would see you as bloodthirsty. And if you're at 100% War Exhaustion, refusing peace could trigger revolts.

... hells, even the last paragraph alone could already suffice as an alternative to Forced Peace.

 

[ParasiteX]

not sure if I understand.
if I want to destroy you and I think I have ability to do so (like when you're pathetic to me and no DP) then nothing will force me to push status quo or surrender button in 2.0.2beta and I don't see it as a bad sign.
on the other hand you, as my enemy, have a right to surrender whenever you'll think that you can't go on with this war. where is exploit? as far as I know you can push surrender on the day1 of war

Pressing surrender loses the game instantly... Doesn't make sense to add more penalties to someone that is already losing...

 

[scaper12123]

So basically instead of a war immediately ending or a war going on till the end of time, there's a maximum of two years that the enemy can stall for to try and regain some footing. That seems like a good compromise.

 

[Lordban]

on the other hand you, as my enemy, have a right to surrender whenever you'll think that you can't go on with this war. where is exploit? as far as I know you can push surrender on the day1 of war

Well, that's the thing - if the "pathetic" enemy have managed to drive you up to 100% War Exhaustion, one of two things happened - or a combination of both: the "pathetic" enemy was better than you at war and managed to make you pay a far higher price than you should have paid, or you wasted so many men and ships in the process your own people have had enough of your war. That's what leads to being forced into status quo (not a surrender, which is pointless anyway if your approach is total destruction).

 

[Slynx]

Pressing surrender loses the game instantly... Doesn't make sense to add more penalties to someone that is already losing...

but if there are no penalties why would you ever press this button?

 

[Baddazs]

@Wiz

Can we please have a pop up peace screen where we can see in detail all the systems and planets that have changed hands? The peace notification is not clear enough.

Along those same lines, the status quo button needs to be clearer in the negotiation screen. It is hard to tell who will end up with what.

 

[Pale Blue]

Maybe I should rephrase my statement:

Fanatical Purifiers, Devouring Swarms, and Determined Exterminators shouldn't be subject to attrition war exhaustion thematically.

Often I'll be in a war as a Fanatical Purifier - own 100% of enemy systems, destroyed all enemy fleets, destroyed all construction vessels, destroyed all science vessels. Just waiting for the planet cracker to arrive to take out the last 2-3 worlds. Forced truce. What? Why would a Fanatical Purifier with 100% dominance over an enemy just truce out and abandon the war? They've already won!

The no-diplomacy empire types should only truce out due to losses in combat or losses of territory, not attrition. The entire culture is geared towards war, a state of 'being at war' isn't a big deal for them - especially the Devouring Swarms and Determined Exterminators. Those two don't even suffer unrest or happyness issues.

I like this idea, no passive WE gain for genocidal empires.