Stellaris Dev Diary #159 - Galactic Community

[semisweet]

@semisweet

Well you said it yourself. Its like a Federation you are not part of and they could see you as a possible threat. I think there will be a resolution to force / pressure empiers into the GC or even declare them as enemys the GC has to eliminate.

We'll have to see more from the devs and maybe see how it plays out. I'm concerned that this will behave as just another federation that only the most powerful group of empires can have access to. Why not just loosen the restrictions on federations and bake these resolutions into federations?

 

[semisweet]

You know that thing when you're working on something, and something goes wrong, and then everyone DEMANDS answers and DEMANDS your time of day and feels like you OWE them whatever they DEMAND of you....How's that going to let you work on anything? And even if you still had some time for it, you're just going to lose motivation if all you get is a bunch of yelling and trash-talking.

So I totally understand developers who simply do not respond to the umpteenth iteration of the same thing popping up in unrelated threads. That's the thing, PDX isn't even the only one doing this (or not doing this, whichever way you want to look at it). There's simply nothing to gain by engaging with people who already decided that all they have for you is scorn and disdain.

Why would anyone want to talk to me if they know all I'll do is be obnoxious and disagreeable? And why would I even feel that they owe me to respond to me? They don't.

Maybe you should instead consider meeting Paradox halfway if you want them to actually "bother to comment on the issues".

I mean I agree that being hostile isn't going to encourage Paradox to open up and talk. However I disagree that they don't owe anything. They've made a fortune off of the game. They owe it to people to try and make the game functional.

 

[Radene]

I mean I agree that being hostile isn't going to encourage Paradox to open up and talk. However I disagree that they don't owe anything. They've made a fortune off of the game. They owe it to people to try and make the game functional.

Time and resources spent on PR is time and resources not spent on fixing the game.

 

[Ur-Quan Lord 13]

Those too, but also:

Would Purifiers be more willing to join the GC if there are others of their species in it? Would Exterminators be willing to join a GC to safeguard the interest of other machines on it?

In most cases I can't imagine the GC would want them as members, but what if there's a lot of machines and an exterminator wants to join? Or synth-ascended empires?

There's so many special cases.

That is an interesting thought. Like, if half the members of the GC are machine empires, they could say "naw fam, we're letting the X2 eradicators in, we want to hear what they have to say".

The problem would be with the killer empires themselves...

I've never tried, and the wiki doesn't make it clear, but I've always assumed devouring swarms hate absolutely everyone. Another empire of the same species is still "the other" that must be devoured. But fanatical purifiers and determined exterminators, they canonically refuse to do diplomacy with their enemies, even if it's beneficial; the player controlling them cannot voluntarily break that rule. They would only join the GC if there are no alien/organic members, and would immediately leave if a new one joined.

And, most importantly... Paradox has a bad record of keeping nuanced mechanics free of bugs. So, considering how unlikely those situations are... Probably best to keep them out of the game.

 

[Uxigadur]

I love the features, and the UI and presentation... Espectacular!

 

[Methone]

I've never tried, and the wiki doesn't make it clear, but I've always assumed devouring swarms hate absolutely everyone.

They do. Even if you have 2 Swarms of the same species, they still want to eat each other.

 

[Verx90]

What actually is disrespectful, is that they don't even bother to comment on the issues. They told us that there will be more bug fixes after 2.4.whatever. Until now they released a species pack, and announced a new expansion, while we still don't know if the issues are going to be solved anytime soon or not.
I don't need a dev diary, that advertises new features for a DLC I'm not going to buy until the issues are fixed, anyway. Especially, if it stands to reason, that Federations will worsen the problems even more.

actualy, i remember reading theyr comments on the issues, they talked about that , and that they have a team that is working exlusively on those parts ( AI, performance) .

the fact that new contements come out, doesn't mean they are ignoring the issues or negleting it .

 

[kalauer]

Depends very much on what resolutions you pass.

Initially? Pretty much just a strongly worded letter.
Later? Some of the sanctions can get pretty crippling.

So when these sanctions get pretty crippling, I may just leave the Galactic Community. I take it, the downside of this are some other penalties. What are these? Not being able to trade with any member of the Galactic Community, permanent CB against me or just the absence of benefits of being a member (what are those?)?

Also, this 'in breach of galactic law'. Any more intel on that?

 

[Eladrin]

[...]even declare them as enemys the GC has to eliminate.

Sounds like you may have let the militarists run unchecked in your Galactic Community.

Sure, they may say "Mutual Defense" and "Renegade Containment", but we all know that really just means "Preemptive War".

 

[Cat_Fuzz]

Time and resources spent on PR is time and resources not spent on fixing the game.

To use your earlier example about working on something and it going wrong. Key difference here is when I'm working on something, I communicate with a client to set expectations, so they know what they are getting. When it doesn't go right, you can see what wasn't met and you work with them to change problems.

If you said you'd deliver something and you get problems, then go radio silent, in your example I would very much expect that client would think twice about hiring you again.

This update looks great, and is something I have hoped for since 1.0 released around 3/4 years ago, but I would hesitate to purchase on the first day, given quite rightly people's concerns about bugs and broken mechanics that don't get fixed for a long time, as we've seen in the years since release.

EDIT: Back on topic - if you don't opt into the GC initially, can you apply later, and get voted in?

 

[CMDR_HERNE]

So what does breaking the galactic law do?

Yes what does The Galactic Naughty Step look like?

 

[Eladrin]

So when these sanctions get pretty crippling, I may just leave the Galactic Community. I take it, the downside of this are some other penalties. What are these? Not being able to trade with any member of the Galactic Community, permanent CB against me or just the absence of benefits of being a member (what are those?)?

It depends on what Resolutions the Community has passed. As I mention in a different response, if you let the militarists have their way, they might pass resolutions that condone and enable "containment" of threats to the Community.

Also, this 'in breach of galactic law'. Any more intel on that?

It means that you're doing something the Community has outlawed. By itself, it has no teeth. If the Community enacts certain Resolutions, you could get Denounced, have various Sanctions applied to you, or be a valid target for "corrective" action.

 

[MaeltneMealtime]

I'm super excited about the galactic council and federation style of play; but unless something changes the current murderfest style of play (particularly in multiplayer, but also in single player) all these features will never be experienced.

Sadly though murderfest play is the most effective style of play; so hopefully that is adjusted. Early capital sacking is likely the biggest (but not the only) culprit of this.

 

[Sifer2]

This all looks pretty neat. Especially useful for manipulating the AI into actually helping deal with Crisis events. Although I now feel like the game needs more Crisis events to make this more interesting. Especially mid game.

 

[Coconut_Cookie]

Will there be a possibility to disband this community or the possibility of it failing under certain circumstances? Like how the league of nations failed because none of the great powers wanted to commit to it, so in the end it became pointless as a platform for debate. When the UN was created in the context of WWII, diplomats wanted to prevent it from having the same fate as league of nations. To that end the superpowers and other major allied powers were given permanent seats on the security council and veto's to keep them onboard of this new project. Will there be anything that can simulate this?

Also will there also be events related to this galactic community that can break the status quo of a game. For example how Hammerskjöld died when his plane crashed on his way to try to negotiate a peace between Katanga and Congo.

 

[Ridixo]

Congratulations, you took the ONU and make it kinda funny
Will be able to destroy the Galactic community or through emergency resolutions accumulate enough power to transforme it into the First Galactic community to bring peace to the galaxy while the democracy dies in thunderous claps?
Also will i need to wait a whole week to know this?

Next week we will be showing all the Origins!

 

[BlackUmbrellas]

So what does breaking the galactic law do?

Per the released Achievements, you can pass Sanctions on empires, and this is probably easier if they're in breach of galactic law.

 

[Dmitrius]

Stellaris has quite a number of different empire types with unique mechanics, so do all resolutions affect everybody?
I mean for example the screen shows a penalty to the upkeep of bureaucrats, but Hive Minds or Machine Intelligence don't have them. Won't the Community have less influence over Gestalts, since they play in a different way, so anything concerning individual pops does nothing to them?

Also don't you find it weird that the talking mineral deposit on one of the screenshots proposed a vote and a normal message for communication is displayed, so they ask a voting empire what do they want... like to vote, I guess?

I mean that tends to be the case with blanket policies right?

So the southern states didn't want slavery banned because they knew it would screw up their economy. The states that wanted abolishment had little or no slaves.

That's an extreme example, but my point is that this stuff will always apply asymetrically.

That said, I agree with the example you've given. One would think that empires with absolutely no stake in the decision would abstain.

 

[Ren Nobody]

We'll have to see more from the devs and maybe see how it plays out. I'm concerned that this will behave as just another federation that only the most powerful group of empires can have access to. Why not just loosen the restrictions on federations and bake these resolutions into federations?

Because of that:

Sounds like you may have let the militarists run unchecked in your Galactic Community.

Sure, they may say "Mutual Defense" and "Renegade Containment", but we all know that really just means "Preemptive War".

Because you will most likely always be only part of one Federation.
Because a Fedartion is always only be an alliance to protect / play around your core (trade/war etc.)
Because you can also be a part of the GC and a Fedartion and your allies my not always want the same in the GC as you do.
Because the GC is the Stage for DIPLOMACY in the Galaxy.
It can be a threat for you if all the rest of the Galaxy is primary Pacifist and they bend together against you.
Because someone can be a threat to your Militiristic GC or Pacifistc and depending on which naturly forming faction has the most sway will influence the GC.
In one playthrou it can be nothing to you, in another it will help you out bigtime.
Because depending on who owes you favours and who do you, your strategies for what resolutions passes and what you can stop changes.
Depending on what you focus, you may want to pass resolutions as fast as possible to give you an edge in diplomatic weight calculation.
Because if all the big shots in the Galaxy are in the GC you may still get something done in it if you can leach onto a bigger leader who is maybe opose of all the things the other big shots do.
Because when the swarm of bigger empires in the gc gets big enought to go against you it can become a threat.

Per the released Achievements, you can pass Sanctions on empires, and this is probably easier if they're in breach of galactic law.

Well from i understand, nothing in the begining, cause you need to pass resolutions first, about what happens to people who breach the galactic law and what happens to outsider / "traitors".

 

[Tamwin5]

Congratulations, you took the ONU and make it kinda funny
Will be able to destroy the Galactic community or through emergency resolutions accumulate enough power to transforme it into the First Galactic community to bring peace to the galaxy while the democracy dies in thunderous claps?
Also will i need to wait a whole week to know this?

Step One: Form Security Council
Step Two: Get on Security Council
Step Three: Lower Security Council membership number to 1
Step Four: Say "I love democracy"