Stellaris Dev Diary #143 - Changes to megastructures

[AlphaAsh]

Or you could spread out the megastructure unlocks behind appropriate ascension perks, thus buffing those in the process.

Someone should try that.

edit - Because snark isn't a useful contribution:
10,713 other Stellaris players seem to agree with this suggestion: https://steamcommunity.com/sharedfiles/filedetails/?id=1588513621

 

[Kapitalisti]

This looks good! Will the outputs/bonuses also be reworked, or no?
Also, will we eventually see new megastructures? A Matrioshka brain would be a great galactic wonder - although it could edge out the science nexus.

I recommend checking out the Gigastructures mod. It has that and many, many other delightfully insane structures. Like 3 (4?) layer ring worlds.

 

[Spaceception]

I recommend checking out the Gigastructures mod. It has that and many, many other delightfully insane structures. Like 3 (4?) layer ring worlds.

I have! A couple versions ago XD I need to get that mod again.

 

[Cahokia]

One option is instead of increasing the number of megastructures an empire can build is to actually make them feel like megastructures. As it stands right now by the time you can build them the ROI makes them feel meh. Compare that to an ecumenopoli that you can build sooner and gives a ridiculous boost to your economy. That feeling when you build your first ecumenopoli is great and you can feel the steroid shot you just gave your economy as you develop it.

That is the feeling we should get with ringworlds, since you know, its a RINGWORLD!!! With the surface area of three million Earth sized planets it should feel more impactful than a city planet. As it stands right now, it is 4 planets that have double food/energy output. That's meh by the time you can bring it online. I don't want to recommend a lot of changes cause I really just want to point out this one important point. The megastructures would feel mega if they felt the same as when you start developing your first ecumenopoli (When you build those first 5-10 districts they feel so impactful because of the size of your economy at that point). Go for that feeling. So since ringworlds come in the late game it does need to be a lot stronger to give that same feeling.

We should only ever need one ringworld honestly it feels weird to use so many. They shouldn't have size/build slot constraints the only limit being your population since you know, the entire population of the galaxy could fit in one with room to spare for practically eternity. Of course that needs to be balanced I understand but double districts certainly doesn't give that feeling. (By the way love the fact that you removed mining on them, that's like taking a pick to a thin ice sheet on a lake )

One neat thing that would realistically happen if an empire built one would be deciding to leave all their worlds and just settle the ringworld. Now that would be cool! Of course they don't have any minerals so that could lead to some interesting events that come to mind I would love having you know who as a mini end game crisis from the books. It would be a very different crisis and would be fun for role play games. Make the flavor different of course but the way they could just wreck the galaxy barely lifting a finger would be great and you would have to research new tech to save yourself as it spreads.

Hope you have read the Ringworld series, highly recommend them, possibly my favorite series so slightly biased

 

[Tavior]

Hello everyone!

We are back with a dev diary outlining some of the changes we’re making to megastructures in a future update. We’ve recently felt that the Galactic Wonders ascension perk feels a little bloated when it unlocked up to 8 different things, in addition to it being a little awkward that you suddenly got access to so many vastly more powerful structures.

We didn’t like that Galactic Wonders became so much of a non-choice due to unlocking so many things, so it will now be possible to unlock most of the megastructures without having to dedicate an ascension perk for it.

I sorta of agree with you on that galactic wonder perk is really bloated.

However I don't agree on which megastructure is powerful vs lower tier ones. Many already have stated my concerns such as ringworlds being capable of out-produce a dyson sphere on a one-to-one ratio. I will not suggest any change which megastructure is unlocked by galactic wonder perk given that galaxy condition can be distinct from each other on countless factors. For example, if you are playing as a tall mega-corp then you will be rolling in lot of energy so you will need more mineral. The opposite can be true for a galactic-wide genocide empire etc..

Instead I will say something about bloated list of ascension perks. I am not happy that there are some nearly worthless perks, some might call them filler perks, being ranked on the same slot used by galactic wonder and other game-changer ones.

I would like an overhaul of the ascension perks so that they fall into two separate group. You will unlock filler ones much quicker but the game changers one come into play much later on. For example, first two unlocks will be filler ascension perks. Then 3rd will be game changer one. 4th filler then 5th game changer etc...

Otherwise my meta is pretty always 10% research first then the admin capacity if needed, one of the three ascension paths, second of the three ascension path, arcology project if need, voidborne if boxed in, and galactic wonder.

If there was no change to voidborne ascension perk along with what you suggested. This just move voidborne up to the top of the list with master builder being a second. All I have to do is beeline for star fortress tech and grab voidborne first or second depending on RNG. As you can image it mess with the meta in an ugly way as it strongly favor those who go for a heavy research build. If we had two distinct different group of ascension perks for fillers and game-changers perk then you won't run into this issue and lets be honest the full ascension list need a bit of cutback.

Assuming you had no ethos/restriction on picking ascension perks; there is a total 33 possible picks for 8 slot... One too many for my taste and unfortunately those filler ascension perks? They don't even make the list for my preference ascension perk past the third ascension perks. They will be lucky to be considered for those limited slots.

 

[Alastor]

Mismanagement of an empire is not an argument for an objective balance discussion. Since you gave no more information than 5-6 Ecumenopolis I will try to give you some general tips: As you can read from my earlier post, make use of clerk jobs and consumer benefits in the lategame. You should have a lot of pops so the Clerk job becomes attractive as a pop-inefficient, but ressource efficient job. Don't forget that Clerk jobs literally create energy and consumer goods out of nothing. When balancing your mineral economy you have to keep this in mind. Make sure to turn high mineral district planets into Gaia worlds and create Mineral Purification Plants on them. If you ascend into a Synthethic Empire, a mineral purification plant will grant you 4 additional mining districts. Essentially your Gaia worlds turn into budget- Hive worlds. You can easily get 17 or more mining districts depending on the size. Don't forget to make use of minerals bonuses from edicts and unity ambitions. The 33% mineral bonus from unity ambition even applies to a matter decompressor and this should be one of the first structures to buid. Also make use of the market. There can be times when Minerals are very valuable or there can be times when all prices drop heavily. Set your economy up so you benefit the most from the market. Selling excess strategic ressources is always a great way to generate energy.

Once you have your economy under control, you will realize the huge bonus of Ecumenopoleis and they are in fact the end all be all. No one is asking to "cripple" Ecumenopoleis. Their design will make sure they will always stay relevant. We are simply asking for a reasonable decrease to bonuses like flat ressource output and pop growth which put them way over the top compared to all other projects or megastructures.

So your answer basically is, "you didn't powergame enough, if you powergame then this happens". I mean reread what your wrote. It's like a playbook for optimal play. You are basically saying, you want the best? Synth ascend, get gaia perk, get ecu perk and do xyz. I'm sorry but powergaming is not but one viable way to play. And I personally do not min-max or powergame or follow such a playbook, I roleplay. I mean I wonder what your take on the other elements there are, should Gaia worlds be nerfed? Should synth ascension?

And again, I never said they are not powerful. But they are not everything you will need, so they aren't the be all end all, indeed you agree with that, because as you mentioned they require Gaia mining worlds to function. And btw who's "we"? Am I not speaking to a person but some collective consciousness?

 

[FleetingRain]

We need empores to be less similar in tech and setup. This doesn't help.

Please tie the MS techs to other perks. Science Nexus to Transcendent Learning, Art Installation to One Mind etc.

 

[Methone]

We need empores to be less similar in tech and setup.

And how do you propose this? Arbitrarily smack some empires with a mental lock that makes them unable to ever conceive of a certain tech?

 

[Gothbert]

Yeah, I'd like to do something with habitats in the future. I agree with your sentiment.

I think the cost for vanilla Habitats should be greatly reduced (and possibly remove the ascension perk requirement). I like using them to boost research and expand my empire's advanced manufacturing base (alloys and strategic resources). However, the cost in both alloys and influence can make them hard to build in numbers if I want to maintain decently sized and well-upgraded fleets to protect my empire's borders. They can also make nice little fortress outposts in border systems with no habitable planets to slow enemy invasions.

One solution might be:

1. Reduce base Habitat cost to 1500 alloy and 100 influence
2. Have two levels of Habitat upgrades that cost 1500 alloy and 100 influence each
3. Each level of Habitat upgrade expands number of districts that can be built
4. Maybe each upgrade takes 5 years to build and adds capacity for 4 districts

Also, if you update Stellaris to allow select-able planetary specializations that drive AI built behavior, then we also need Habitat specializations too.

 

[Tavior]

We need empores to be less similar in tech and setup. This doesn't help.

Please tie the MS techs to other perks. Science Nexus to Transcendent Learning, Art Installation to One Mind etc.

That will not solve anything really...

There are at least 8 distinct mega-structure (dyson sphere, ringworlds, habitat, and etc...). Worse yet the first 3 can't be any of those mega-engineer enabler perks.

 

[Roddo]

So inconsistent... Why?
Just make a perk for every different megastructure and FORCE the player to make a meaningful decision for once in this game.
You are just removing the bad stuff out of galactic wonders and saying it's now more of a choice. It isn't really, it's still a must.

Now if I had a perk for a dyson sphere. A perk for a ringworld. A perk for a matter decompresor... now THAT would be a choice. I'd actually have to stop, look at my income, decide what will I need most in the next 100 years and make a choice.

And since we're at it, how about taking it further and making it impossible for a regular empire to have more that ONE "megastructure" built.
You could build one, but have multiple ruined ones around and claim those, not impacting on the max. You could go to war with other empires to get other "megastructures" and still not impact in the total. BUT, player empires could build only ONE, and that's it.

As they stand right now, "megastructures" are more "structures" than "mega".

 

[Zentay]

I'm not sure how I feel about this.

Anyway, ring worlds are crap in their current state.

The matter decompressor is the best megastructure because planets have a low capacity for mining districts. I'm actually frustrated that so many planets are crap because they can't support enough generator and mining districts.

 

[Malech]

I would like to have multiple levels of habitats, but that also requires more planning since you want the visuals to also reflect that. I can't promise anything more than saying I like the idea.

@grekulf visuals could be easy. Just shrink the habitat modal, and with each starbase tech the model could get bigger. That way it's easier to notice, and an easy implement. If you want more visual aids, add a couple lights to the models edges, the bigger it gets, the more lights signify additional docking areas since its larger.

 

[Saluki.exe]

Great! I really like this - it will make the game a lot more balanced and make it a bit more interesting later on.

 

[Cahokia]

Also before tackling habitats, I would highly recommend reading The High Frontier by Gerard O'Neill. While it is dated and not everything is accurate anymore (especially the fact about exponential population growth), it does give a very good representation of what a space faring empire could be like and how easy it would be to live entirely in space after a certain point even with our current level of technology. In a future like Stellaris these would be even more doable and I would love to see the tiers you mentioned of habitats following something like what O'Neill mentioned. Start with Island One and then progress to something like the O'neill cylinder. Of course you can make them a lot grander since this is Stellaris and your own IP but I would love to see some giant cylinders and the artwork for the city would be amazing!

It's a quick read too.

 

[FleetingRain]

And how do you propose this? Arbitrarily smack some empires with a mental lock that makes them unable to ever conceive of a certain tech?

Huh, you know we already have such locks, right? You can't research Dragonscale Armor if you didnt kill the Ether Drake, for example. Hell, this very DD says three Megastructure techs will be locked behind a perk.

That will not solve anything really...

There are at least 8 distinct mega-structure (dyson sphere, ringworlds, habitat, and etc...). Worse yet the first 3 can't be any of those mega-engineer enabler perks.

...sorry but I didnt understand what you mean.

 

[BeJones]

Would it be possible to link pop jobs to the construction of megastructures?

What I mean specifically is that the base construction speed of all megastructures is changed to be abysmally slow. In order to speed up the construction your planets automatically get 'construction jobs' that you can assign your pops to (or you get a planetary decision that creates those jobs). The more pops you dedicate to this job the faster your megastructure is finished, but at the same time it will hurt your economy. So it would be an actual player choice to find the right balance between the quick construction of a megastructure and the overall economy of your empire.

I also imagine that this system could be used for joint megastructures with other empires (something I hope to see in a future diplomacy patch).

 

[King Harkinian]

I like the idea of separating the "lesser" megastructures into rare techs, but I'm worried about one thing:

Will this change mean the loss of the Mega-Engineering prerequisite tech and the complex relationship between that tech and the Ascension Perks Master Builders, Galactic Wonders and Voidborne? This relationship is particularly elegant and my favourite part of making megastructures feel special. For reference:

• Galactic Wonders requires Mega-Engineering, a rare tech
• Master Builders guarantees getting Mega-Engineering
• Master Builders requires either Galactic Wonders or Voidborne

This is such an interesting set of relations that allows multiple different advancement paths. Please never remove it.

 

[Gaussia]

Any plans on a megastructure solution that does not include a build cap.

They were more fun before the cap. I care much more that they are modified so that the cap is not needed, than that they are a perfectly balanced thing which is a valid option in competitive builds.

 

[gustavotoniato]

Hello everyone!

We are back with a dev diary outlining some of the changes we’re making to megastructures in a future update. We’ve recently felt that the Galactic Wonders ascension perk feels a little bloated when it unlocked up to 8 different things, in addition to it being a little awkward that you suddenly got access to so many vastly more powerful structures.

We didn’t like that Galactic Wonders became so much of a non-choice due to unlocking so many things, so it will now be possible to unlock most of the megastructures without having to dedicate an ascension perk for it.

Galactic Wonders
We are making some changes to Galactic Wonders so that it no longer unlocks all megastructures, but rather only unlocks the most powerful megastructures. In addition, they are also unlocked as technology options rather than as finished schemes ready for construction. This means that you will still have to research the technology to build a Dyson Sphere, which also means it becomes a choice if you want to first focus on the Dyson Sphere or the Matter Decompressor (they are both Physics technologies).

View attachment 470549​

Megastructures
The other megastructures – Strategic Coordination Center, Mega Art Installation, Interstellar Assembly, Science Nexus and Sentry Array – are now instead of their own unique technologies. It is now possible to build these without having the Galactic Wonders ascension perk.

View attachment 470550​

The megastructures are split into different research categories. Strategic Coordination Center, Mega Art Installation and Interstellar Assembly are all Society research. Science Nexus and Sentry Array are Physics. All of these new technologies have mega-engineering as their prerequisite.

At the same time we are also taking the opportunity to look over the placement rules for megastructures, as they were not entirely consistent. The 5 mentioned here above should now follow similar rules for placement.

------------

That’s it for this week! Next week we’ll be back again

Why not make every step of a megastructures a technology to represent the gradual advancement of the project?