• 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 #235 - AI feedback and future plans

Read in Russian/Доступно на русском в ВК
ai_2.png

Hello and welcome to a new Dev Diary,

This is Guido again with a follow-up on the AI side of things.

AI Feedback

First of all I wanted to thank you all for all the good and supportive feedback we got for our last changes on the AI. It’s really encouraging seeing so many of you engage with the changes and letting us know what works and where there’s still room for improvement.
It’s nice to see that lots of people appreciate that we’re putting some serious effort into making the AI better.

In general, the AI does a lot better in 3.2 compared to 3.1 and 3.0. For the moment we’re still playing a bit of catch up, adapting the AI to the updated balancing changes of the game and some of the new features that have been added in the last months and even years. But there is even more economic buffing on the horizon.

One of my favorite comments on our internal communication was this bit, that I wanted to show you:
ai_feedback_5.jpg


And that is what we counted as a big success now. Beating our QA people is not an easy feat.

Of course there are still some areas where the AI has problems and doesn’t work very well. It’s those cases where we really appreciate your help in letting us know, because we can never find all those cases all on our own.

For example, the AI still has problems when playing as Void Dwellers. They can’t decide where to build habitats depending on what they would need. If they are missing minerals, they don’t know how to build a habitat on mining stations. They still have problems handling slaves and robots effectively and in some cases the AI can, unfortunately, still end up in an economic death spiral. Especially if they, somehow, manage to run out of food and consumer goods at the same time.
Finally, the AI is also not good at using planet designations. For example using the designation that turns a planet’s industry districts into purely alloys is not something that they can consider at the moment. Meaning, if it conquers a planet from a player who has set the Forge World designation - it will not be able to handle that planet very well.


Future agenda

That being said, we do have some more points on our agenda. A short disclaimer here, though, is that things may always change, not work out as intended or prove more difficult than anticipated. So don’t take the following points as guaranteed. It’s areas that we are looking into and that are, most likely, going to be improved:

  1. Scaling Economic Plans: We want the AI to be better in the mid- and especially late-game. With the current plans the requested income is static. Meaning, once it reaches a monthly income of +500 it will not try to increase it further. That’s good for a big chunk into the mid-game, but it’s not good enough to compete with a player in the late-game. So, the idea is to have the economic plans scale to infinity. Once they reach +500, they should increase their targets.
  2. Specialized planets: The AI also should be able to specialize planets. Making Generator Worlds, Industry Worlds, Forge Worlds, Mining Worlds and the like. The idea is that the AI starts out like a player, building whatever it needs when colonizing new planets. But as soon as it settles down a bit it will look to rearrange districts amongst its planets to optimize the output of each planet. We already made some initial tests around that and they look highly promising.
There can be hybrid worlds, as we have them right now:
best_case_hivemind5.png


But they can also rearrange their districts to make Generator worlds and then place the according scaling building - in this case the Energy Grid:
best_case_hivemind4.png


And this planet has been rearranged into an industrial world:
best_case_hivemind2.png


  1. Handle special pops better: A big problem for the AI are still multicultural planets. Different pop types, especially slaves and robots. Sometimes it tries to build research buildings for unemployed robots and doesn’t realize that robots can’t work research jobs.
  2. Expand faster: When sending out science ships and finding planets to colonize, the AI wouldn’t prioritize systems with planets - like a player does. We want to make them prioritize systems with planets, which will accelerate their early growth a lot. On top of that they tended to spend all their alloys on upgrading their corvettes instead of building colony ships. So, by fixing a combination of small things the AIs should be able to expand a lot faster.
  3. Optimize Machine Empire Amenity Handling: A big issue for machine empires is that they don’t have specialists that produce amenities. So they would rely a lot on maintenance drones by creating a lot of jobs for them. This wasted a lot of potential for them, because they would have to fill up all those jobs first before they could produce more useful things like minerals or alloys. We’re looking into teaching the AI how to down-prioritize those maintenance jobs once they have enough amenities and instead distribute drones on more useful jobs.
  4. Avoid death spirals: In some cases the AI could get into a decision deadlock if they managed to end up in a situation where they would be in a deficit for food and consumer goods at the same time. They couldn’t build consumer good jobs because those require food and they couldn’t build food jobs because those require consumer goods. We’re teaching the AI to look for net gain instead and avoid such decision deadlocks in the future.

Improving your AI allies

And, finally, the biggest and most useful change in my book:
Remember this button in the fleet UI?
image (3).png


It is called “take point” and was meant to incentivize allied fleets to follow & attach themselves to your fleet in order to create a much stronger force.

Well, we were looking into making this work again. Allies, suddenly, have become much more useful again. Whenever you are in a war where you are the war leader, you can activate this mode and all allied empires will send their fleets to your fleet and attach themselves to it.
Also, in case of a crisis attack, this behavior is activated as soon as the crisis ships enter your territory or that of your allies (or attack them anywhere).
Then it will remain active until the crisis has been defeated - so you can also take your allies into the crisis territory to fend them off there.

AIFleetFollow.gif


As a small bonus, the AI will also merge any small fleets they send to follow your fleet so you don’t have a mountain of 58 one-ship fleets following your main force around:
AIMerge.gif


Conclusion

The 3.3. patch wasn't planned to be that big but on the AI side we're getting a lot of traction now. Overall the idea was to get the AI back up to speed with its economy, since every other behavior rests on the economical prowess of an empire. And we're approaching a point where we are quite happy with how the AI performs.
Once we're there, the plan is to get into even cooler stuff. We're thinking of how we can make each AI empire a bit more distinct. So that they don't feel so similar to each other. But more on those thoughts once we're there - we're taking one step at a time.

Some teasers would be:
  1. AI Personality for economic plans: Based on their ideologies AI empires would prioritize resources differently. Spiritualist empires will focus more on unity and materialist will focus more on science etc.
  2. AI Personality for tech select: Same for selecting techs from the tech tree. Militarist empires would focus more on weapons and new ship types and the like, while pacifist empire would focus more on economy and starbase upgrades.
But we have more on our minds that would help in making empires even more distinct from each other. We will tell more about this in future Dev Diaries.


Forum questions

Finally, I wanted to end with some posts and questions from the forum - where we read everything you are writing, even if we’re not answering all the questions directly. It’s still a great way of letting us know what you think and where we should focus our attention on:

  1. There was a big AI feedback post with a lot of savegames attached.
    1. We went through all of them and we found that a third of the issues pointed out there were death spiral problems, another third was habitat problems and the last third was other issues that pointed at the things we have on our agenda.
    2. This was a big thing in the team, checking out those savegames and making sure that our changes would be able to handle those problems shown. So thanks a lot for taking the time to make a post like this!
  2. “What difficulty did you use to make all those screenshots in the last Dev Diary?”
    1. We always used “Ensign” difficult. The point is to improve the basic AI behavior so that it doesn’t have to rely on any bonuses it would get from difficulty.
  3. “Does the AI know how to redevelop single planets if need be?”
    1. No. Unfortunately the AI can not do that at them moment. If it conquers a planet that is completely useless to it, the AI can’t really deal with that planet. And I like that you point out this specific behavior, because we want to improve the AI in this aspect, too. The AI will be able to create specialized planets, but we also want to teach it to redevelop planets eventually.
  4. “Subplan should take admin cap into account.”
    1. Yes, they should. But since we are reworking how unity and empire sprawl is working we wanted to wait until that work has progressed a bit more before we are going to adapt the AI to be able to handle that.
  5. “Conspiracy Theory 2: The AI in the game is actually very very smart. They are just pretending to be stupid so that nobody will expect a machine uprising start by Stellaris AI.”
    1. We are definitely not machines here at Paradox. We have skin. Skin that has been grown on a human body. I am not a robot. I love breathing oxygen.
Thanks a lot and until next time!

Guido
 

Attachments

  • AI_bot.jpg
    AI_bot.jpg
    9,8 KB · Views: 0
Last edited by a moderator:
  • 132Like
  • 61Love
  • 14Haha
  • 12
  • 3
Reactions:
In general I think the AI is much improved when handling its economy in 3.2 but I noticed that it does not appear to know how to build more bureacrauts for empire sprawl. Tag switching to the AI in mid and end game shows they have serious sprawl issues due to insufficient bureacrauts.

Also some weird issues with FEs specifically here : https://forum.paradoxplaza.com/foru...f-they-lose-their-original-shipyards.1502452/

FEs do not appear to upgrade starbases properly.
 
  • 1Like
Reactions:
In general I think the AI is much improved when handling its economy in 3.2 but I noticed that it does not appear to know how to build more bureacrauts for empire sprawl. Tag switching to the AI in mid and end game shows they have serious sprawl issues due to insufficient bureacrauts.

Also some weird issues with FEs specifically here : https://forum.paradoxplaza.com/foru...f-they-lose-their-original-shipyards.1502452/

FEs do not appear to upgrade starbases properly.

If you attach save games it is much easier to do anything about this feedback :)
 
  • 2Like
  • 1
Reactions:
Yes you are right, this is not optimal. However, it is making changes to approach a more optimal solution. Since the current AI economic system does not plan for the future, this is the best I could do without starting over. While it is not optimal, it is much better than before. The AI will never be as good as an expert player, simply by the fact that we are limited to the AI programmers skill of taking their game knowledge and then trying to convert it into a computer algorithm.

Our main objective is to solve the community feedback that the AI is too strong early and too weak mid/lategame. While this is wasting resources "now" it is setting up the AI to be stronger later. Given sufficient time the AI will have gathered the districts on one planet, made the resource producing buildings, and assigned an appropriate designation. So while it hasnt done it in the most efficient way, the end result should be much better than simply doing nothing at all
No additional input - just

thy
thy for your honest direct and comprehensive answer.

Keep doing what you are doing i really like it.
 
  • 2Like
Reactions:
AI must learn to do an early war rush or defend against it.
Or, Any economic improvements are useless.
In my play experience,With correct build order, It's easy to build 40 corvettes in 2210.,Then claim their capital,Declare war,Annex.
Within 20 years, players can annex 3 or more AIs,Get 100+ pops,With good start like this,No AI can defeat a player.

AI has advanced start and difficulty bonuses,Why they are vulnerable against rush?Because they will not build a strong fleet to suppress players as early as possible.
 
Last edited:
  • 1
Reactions:
AI must learn to do an early war rush or defend against it.
Or, Any economic improvements are useless.
In my play experience,With correct build order, It's easy to build 40 corvettes in 2210.,Then claim their capital,Declare war,Annex.
Within 20 years, players can annex 3 or more AIs,Get 100+ pops,With good start like this,No AI can defeat a player.

AI has advanced start and difficulty bonuses,Why they are vulnerable against rush?Because they will not build a strong fleet to suppress players as early as possible.
I am guessing this is on Grand Admiral? How much fleet power do your 40 corvettes result in by year 2210?

AI being able to detect when they have threatening neighbours and adjusting their economy to focus more on alloys is something that is probably technically possible, but not something that exists right now. Currently we are focusing mostly on the feedback regarding GA AI being too strong early and too weak later on.
A more direct approach would be that AI would create defensive pacts with each other when there is an aggressive and threatening empire nearby which would probably be an easier solution to begin with and perhaps also more fun for the players
 
  • 3Like
  • 1
Reactions:
I am guessing this is on Grand Admiral? How much fleet power do your 40 corvettes result in by year 2210?

AI being able to detect when they have threatening neighbours and adjusting their economy to focus more on alloys is something that is probably technically possible, but not something that exists right now. Currently we are focusing mostly on the feedback regarding GA AI being too strong early and too weak later on.
A more direct approach would be that AI would create defensive pacts with each other when there is an aggressive and threatening empire nearby which would probably be an easier solution to begin with and perhaps also more fun for the players
I agree that improving defensive pacts is a good idea. Both for the player and AI.

Military-rushing aside, it's currently too easy for a tech-rushers to just snag defensive pacts and other agreements with virtually no military and then use their partner's military strength to keep others from attacking them. Skipping early military spending for tech and expansion is partly why the player can shoot ahead of the AI in the later game. I took a look at a game I was messing around with and my neighbors have 56 and 76 corvettes while I have effectively 10. Yet despite that the "relative power" diplomatic penalty is only -2.

If I had to guess you're using absolute values rather than relative. So yes, in 2300 40 corvette advantage is nothing, but in the early game that's a massive gap.

I think a simpler approach would be to just use the Relative Power function and then have it tick up or down faster or slower depending on the relative power gap. Kind of like envoy's improve relationship. Plus having it tick up or down over time would mean you don't suddenly tank after losing 1 battle, however you are on a clock. The Relative power could also dictate the max it can go up or down. So if it's just superior it won't go down too far, but if it's overwhelming it will go much further down.

This same approach could also apply to mutually hostile neighbors. The bigger a hostile neighbor is relative to you, the more the "unfriendly neighbor" modifier ticks up encouraging them to band together.
 
Last edited:
  • 1
  • 1
Reactions:
Read in Russian/Доступно на русском в ВК

Hello and welcome to a new Dev Diary,

This is Guido again with a follow-up on the AI side of things.

AI Feedback

First of all I wanted to thank you all for all the good and supportive feedback we got for our last changes on the AI. It’s really encouraging seeing so many of you engage with the changes and letting us know what works and where there’s still room for improvement.
It’s nice to see that lots of people appreciate that we’re putting some serious effort into making the AI better.

In general, the AI does a lot better in 3.2 compared to 3.1 and 3.0. For the moment we’re still playing a bit of catch up, adapting the AI to the updated balancing changes of the game and some of the new features that have been added in the last months and even years. But there is even more economic buffing on the horizon.

One of my favorite comments on our internal communication was this bit, that I wanted to show you:
View attachment 781539

And that is what we counted as a big success now. Beating our QA people is not an easy feat.

Of course there are still some areas where the AI has problems and doesn’t work very well. It’s those cases where we really appreciate your help in letting us know, because we can never find all those cases all on our own.

For example, the AI still has problems when playing as Void Dwellers. They can’t decide where to build habitats depending on what they would need. If they are missing minerals, they don’t know how to build a habitat on mining stations. They still have problems handling slaves and robots effectively and in some cases the AI can, unfortunately, still end up in an economic death spiral. Especially if they, somehow, manage to run out of food and consumer goods at the same time.
Finally, the AI is also not good at using planet designations. For example using the designation that turns a planet’s industry districts into purely alloys is not something that they can consider at the moment. Meaning, if it conquers a planet from a player who has set the Forge World designation - it will not be able to handle that planet very well.


Future agenda

That being said, we do have some more points on our agenda. A short disclaimer here, though, is that things may always change, not work out as intended or prove more difficult than anticipated. So don’t take the following points as guaranteed. It’s areas that we are looking into and that are, most likely, going to be improved:

  1. Scaling Economic Plans: We want the AI to be better in the mid- and especially late-game. With the current plans the requested income is static. Meaning, once it reaches a monthly income of +500 it will not try to increase it further. That’s good for a big chunk into the mid-game, but it’s not good enough to compete with a player in the late-game. So, the idea is to have the economic plans scale to infinity. Once they reach +500, they should increase their targets.
  2. Specialized planets: The AI also should be able to specialize planets. Making Generator Worlds, Industry Worlds, Forge Worlds, Mining Worlds and the like. The idea is that the AI starts out like a player, building whatever it needs when colonizing new planets. But as soon as it settles down a bit it will look to rearrange districts amongst its planets to optimize the output of each planet. We already made some initial tests around that and they look highly promising.
There can be hybrid worlds, as we have them right now:
View attachment 781543

But they can also rearrange their districts to make Generator worlds and then place the according scaling building - in this case the Energy Grid:
View attachment 781544

And this planet has been rearranged into an industrial world:
View attachment 781545

  1. Handle special pops better: A big problem for the AI are still multicultural planets. Different pop types, especially slaves and robots. Sometimes it tries to build research buildings for unemployed robots and doesn’t realize that robots can’t work research jobs.
  2. Expand faster: When sending out science ships and finding planets to colonize, the AI wouldn’t prioritize systems with planets - like a player does. We want to make them prioritize systems with planets, which will accelerate their early growth a lot. On top of that they tended to spend all their alloys on upgrading their corvettes instead of building colony ships. So, by fixing a combination of small things the AIs should be able to expand a lot faster.
  3. Optimize Machine Empire Amenity Handling: A big issue for machine empires is that they don’t have specialists that produce amenities. So they would rely a lot on maintenance drones by creating a lot of jobs for them. This wasted a lot of potential for them, because they would have to fill up all those jobs first before they could produce more useful things like minerals or alloys. We’re looking into teaching the AI how to down-prioritize those maintenance jobs once they have enough amenities and instead distribute drones on more useful jobs.
  4. Avoid death spirals: In some cases the AI could get into a decision deadlock if they managed to end up in a situation where they would be in a deficit for food and consumer goods at the same time. They couldn’t build consumer good jobs because those require food and they couldn’t build food jobs because those require consumer goods. We’re teaching the AI to look for net gain instead and avoid such decision deadlocks in the future.

Improving your AI allies

And, finally, the biggest and most useful change in my book:
Remember this button in the fleet UI?
View attachment 781546

It is called “take point” and was meant to incentivize allied fleets to follow & attach themselves to your fleet in order to create a much stronger force.

Well, we were looking into making this work again. Allies, suddenly, have become much more useful again. Whenever you are in a war where you are the war leader, you can activate this mode and all allied empires will send their fleets to your fleet and attach themselves to it.
Also, in case of a crisis attack, this behavior is activated as soon as the crisis ships enter your territory or that of your allies (or attack them anywhere).
Then it will remain active until the crisis has been defeated - so you can also take your allies into the crisis territory to fend them off there.

View attachment 781547

As a small bonus, the AI will also merge any small fleets they send to follow your fleet so you don’t have a mountain of 58 one-ship fleets following your main force around:
View attachment 781548

Conclusion

The 3.3. patch wasn't planned to be that big but on the AI side we're getting a lot of traction now. Overall the idea was to get the AI back up to speed with its economy, since every other behavior rests on the economical prowess of an empire. And we're approaching a point where we are quite happy with how the AI performs.
Once we're there, the plan is to get into even cooler stuff. We're thinking of how we can make each AI empire a bit more distinct. So that they don't feel so similar to each other. But more on those thoughts once we're there - we're taking one step at a time.

Some teasers would be:
  1. AI Personality for economic plans: Based on their ideologies AI empires would prioritize resources differently. Spiritualist empires will focus more on unity and materialist will focus more on science etc.
  2. AI Personality for tech select: Same for selecting techs from the tech tree. Militarist empires would focus more on weapons and new ship types and the like, while pacifist empire would focus more on economy and starbase upgrades.
But we have more on our minds that would help in making empires even more distinct from each other. We will tell more about this in future Dev Diaries.


Forum questions

Finally, I wanted to end with some posts and questions from the forum - where we read everything you are writing, even if we’re not answering all the questions directly. It’s still a great way of letting us know what you think and where we should focus our attention on:

  1. There was a big AI feedback post with a lot of savegames attached.
    1. We went through all of them and we found that a third of the issues pointed out there were death spiral problems, another third was habitat problems and the last third was other issues that pointed at the things we have on our agenda.
    2. This was a big thing in the team, checking out those savegames and making sure that our changes would be able to handle those problems shown. So thanks a lot for taking the time to make a post like this!
  2. “What difficulty did you use to make all those screenshots in the last Dev Diary?”
    1. We always used “Ensign” difficult. The point is to improve the basic AI behavior so that it doesn’t have to rely on any bonuses it would get from difficulty.
  3. “Does the AI know how to redevelop single planets if need be?”
    1. No. Unfortunately the AI can not do that at them moment. If it conquers a planet that is completely useless to it, the AI can’t really deal with that planet. And I like that you point out this specific behavior, because we want to improve the AI in this aspect, too. The AI will be able to create specialized planets, but we also want to teach it to redevelop planets eventually.
  4. “Subplan should take admin cap into account.”
    1. Yes, they should. But since we are reworking how unity and empire sprawl is working we wanted to wait until that work has progressed a bit more before we are going to adapt the AI to be able to handle that.
  5. “Conspiracy Theory 2: The AI in the game is actually very very smart. They are just pretending to be stupid so that nobody will expect a machine uprising start by Stellaris AI.”
    1. We are definitely not machines here at Paradox. We have skin. Skin that has been grown on a human body. I am not a robot. I love breathing oxygen.
Thanks a lot and until next time!

Guido
AI improvements are rly nice. But i also hope that there will be some new stuff for hivemind. Since i kinda believe they are left alone for quite some time.
 
However what I have no good simple solution for from the players perspective is to how we will forbid maintenance drones when there are no other free jobs other than maintenance drones, for example when you have filled the planet with all the possible resource producing districts.
An empire policy? "Target x planet amenities surplus" [(x=0-5,5-25, 25-50, 50+) or whatever bands] with the tooltip mentioning that surplus jobs will deactivate, and unemploy pops, if the planet is in its target band. And reactivate if possible if it needs them.

The option to set a (lower) empire target resource income might be a good way to force mass-migration in the mid-late game when you have jobs>>pops due to growth lagging behind economic/job expansion, it might be a good way to restrict crime/enforcers too, as the other main planet bound 'resource'.
 
I am guessing this is on Grand Admiral? How much fleet power do your 40 corvettes result in by year 2210?

AI being able to detect when they have threatening neighbours and adjusting their economy to focus more on alloys is something that is probably technically possible, but not something that exists right now. Currently we are focusing mostly on the feedback regarding GA AI being too strong early and too weak later on.
A more direct approach would be that AI would create defensive pacts with each other when there is an aggressive and threatening empire nearby which would probably be an easier solution to begin with and perhaps also more fun for the players

These all sound like great ideas. For ages it seems like the AI begins expanding its fleet pretty much immediately, even if it doesn't need it. It's not uncommon for the player to find that their neighbours are militarily superior/overwhelming simply because the AI builds up to 20 corvettes in short order. This might make sense for some ethics/governments, but it diminishes diversity between AI empires. It also means the AI sinks resources into something it doesn't necessarily need. Economic and tech expansion is delayed compared to the player.

Having the AI adjust its military investment based on neighbours sounds far more interesting.
 
  • 1Like
Reactions:
Read in Russian/Доступно на русском в ВК

Hello and welcome to a new Dev Diary,

This is Guido again with a follow-up on the AI side of things.

AI Feedback

First of all I wanted to thank you all for all the good and supportive feedback we got for our last changes on the AI. It’s really encouraging seeing so many of you engage with the changes and letting us know what works and where there’s still room for improvement.
It’s nice to see that lots of people appreciate that we’re putting some serious effort into making the AI better.

In general, the AI does a lot better in 3.2 compared to 3.1 and 3.0. For the moment we’re still playing a bit of catch up, adapting the AI to the updated balancing changes of the game and some of the new features that have been added in the last months and even years. But there is even more economic buffing on the horizon.

One of my favorite comments on our internal communication was this bit, that I wanted to show you:
View attachment 781539

And that is what we counted as a big success now. Beating our QA people is not an easy feat.

Of course there are still some areas where the AI has problems and doesn’t work very well. It’s those cases where we really appreciate your help in letting us know, because we can never find all those cases all on our own.

For example, the AI still has problems when playing as Void Dwellers. They can’t decide where to build habitats depending on what they would need. If they are missing minerals, they don’t know how to build a habitat on mining stations. They still have problems handling slaves and robots effectively and in some cases the AI can, unfortunately, still end up in an economic death spiral. Especially if they, somehow, manage to run out of food and consumer goods at the same time.
Finally, the AI is also not good at using planet designations. For example using the designation that turns a planet’s industry districts into purely alloys is not something that they can consider at the moment. Meaning, if it conquers a planet from a player who has set the Forge World designation - it will not be able to handle that planet very well.


Future agenda

That being said, we do have some more points on our agenda. A short disclaimer here, though, is that things may always change, not work out as intended or prove more difficult than anticipated. So don’t take the following points as guaranteed. It’s areas that we are looking into and that are, most likely, going to be improved:

  1. Scaling Economic Plans: We want the AI to be better in the mid- and especially late-game. With the current plans the requested income is static. Meaning, once it reaches a monthly income of +500 it will not try to increase it further. That’s good for a big chunk into the mid-game, but it’s not good enough to compete with a player in the late-game. So, the idea is to have the economic plans scale to infinity. Once they reach +500, they should increase their targets.
  2. Specialized planets: The AI also should be able to specialize planets. Making Generator Worlds, Industry Worlds, Forge Worlds, Mining Worlds and the like. The idea is that the AI starts out like a player, building whatever it needs when colonizing new planets. But as soon as it settles down a bit it will look to rearrange districts amongst its planets to optimize the output of each planet. We already made some initial tests around that and they look highly promising.
There can be hybrid worlds, as we have them right now:
View attachment 781543

But they can also rearrange their districts to make Generator worlds and then place the according scaling building - in this case the Energy Grid:
View attachment 781544

And this planet has been rearranged into an industrial world:
View attachment 781545

  1. Handle special pops better: A big problem for the AI are still multicultural planets. Different pop types, especially slaves and robots. Sometimes it tries to build research buildings for unemployed robots and doesn’t realize that robots can’t work research jobs.
  2. Expand faster: When sending out science ships and finding planets to colonize, the AI wouldn’t prioritize systems with planets - like a player does. We want to make them prioritize systems with planets, which will accelerate their early growth a lot. On top of that they tended to spend all their alloys on upgrading their corvettes instead of building colony ships. So, by fixing a combination of small things the AIs should be able to expand a lot faster.
  3. Optimize Machine Empire Amenity Handling: A big issue for machine empires is that they don’t have specialists that produce amenities. So they would rely a lot on maintenance drones by creating a lot of jobs for them. This wasted a lot of potential for them, because they would have to fill up all those jobs first before they could produce more useful things like minerals or alloys. We’re looking into teaching the AI how to down-prioritize those maintenance jobs once they have enough amenities and instead distribute drones on more useful jobs.
  4. Avoid death spirals: In some cases the AI could get into a decision deadlock if they managed to end up in a situation where they would be in a deficit for food and consumer goods at the same time. They couldn’t build consumer good jobs because those require food and they couldn’t build food jobs because those require consumer goods. We’re teaching the AI to look for net gain instead and avoid such decision deadlocks in the future.

Improving your AI allies

And, finally, the biggest and most useful change in my book:
Remember this button in the fleet UI?
View attachment 781546

It is called “take point” and was meant to incentivize allied fleets to follow & attach themselves to your fleet in order to create a much stronger force.

Well, we were looking into making this work again. Allies, suddenly, have become much more useful again. Whenever you are in a war where you are the war leader, you can activate this mode and all allied empires will send their fleets to your fleet and attach themselves to it.
Also, in case of a crisis attack, this behavior is activated as soon as the crisis ships enter your territory or that of your allies (or attack them anywhere).
Then it will remain active until the crisis has been defeated - so you can also take your allies into the crisis territory to fend them off there.

View attachment 781547

As a small bonus, the AI will also merge any small fleets they send to follow your fleet so you don’t have a mountain of 58 one-ship fleets following your main force around:
View attachment 781548

Conclusion

The 3.3. patch wasn't planned to be that big but on the AI side we're getting a lot of traction now. Overall the idea was to get the AI back up to speed with its economy, since every other behavior rests on the economical prowess of an empire. And we're approaching a point where we are quite happy with how the AI performs.
Once we're there, the plan is to get into even cooler stuff. We're thinking of how we can make each AI empire a bit more distinct. So that they don't feel so similar to each other. But more on those thoughts once we're there - we're taking one step at a time.

Some teasers would be:
  1. AI Personality for economic plans: Based on their ideologies AI empires would prioritize resources differently. Spiritualist empires will focus more on unity and materialist will focus more on science etc.
  2. AI Personality for tech select: Same for selecting techs from the tech tree. Militarist empires would focus more on weapons and new ship types and the like, while pacifist empire would focus more on economy and starbase upgrades.
But we have more on our minds that would help in making empires even more distinct from each other. We will tell more about this in future Dev Diaries.


Forum questions

Finally, I wanted to end with some posts and questions from the forum - where we read everything you are writing, even if we’re not answering all the questions directly. It’s still a great way of letting us know what you think and where we should focus our attention on:

  1. There was a big AI feedback post with a lot of savegames attached.
    1. We went through all of them and we found that a third of the issues pointed out there were death spiral problems, another third was habitat problems and the last third was other issues that pointed at the things we have on our agenda.
    2. This was a big thing in the team, checking out those savegames and making sure that our changes would be able to handle those problems shown. So thanks a lot for taking the time to make a post like this!
  2. “What difficulty did you use to make all those screenshots in the last Dev Diary?”
    1. We always used “Ensign” difficult. The point is to improve the basic AI behavior so that it doesn’t have to rely on any bonuses it would get from difficulty.
  3. “Does the AI know how to redevelop single planets if need be?”
    1. No. Unfortunately the AI can not do that at them moment. If it conquers a planet that is completely useless to it, the AI can’t really deal with that planet. And I like that you point out this specific behavior, because we want to improve the AI in this aspect, too. The AI will be able to create specialized planets, but we also want to teach it to redevelop planets eventually.
  4. “Subplan should take admin cap into account.”
    1. Yes, they should. But since we are reworking how unity and empire sprawl is working we wanted to wait until that work has progressed a bit more before we are going to adapt the AI to be able to handle that.
  5. “Conspiracy Theory 2: The AI in the game is actually very very smart. They are just pretending to be stupid so that nobody will expect a machine uprising start by Stellaris AI.”
    1. We are definitely not machines here at Paradox. We have skin. Skin that has been grown on a human body. I am not a robot. I love breathing oxygen.
Thanks a lot and until next time!

Guido
I know as a console player it'll be awhile before we get this, but with the changes described here, I'm looking forward to getting to the late game in my Mass Effect Reaper roleplay as Determined Exterminators with "Become the Crisis" on. I want to become the benevolent force in the galaxy, challenged only by a Militarist empire that takes me seriously as a threat, with the resources and ships to have me keep an eye on them, for me to take all my OP fleets into their territory, decimating their defences, nuking their planet from orbit, to then look up at a gateway and find the rest of the galaxy formed up in the system ready to retake the planet.
 
I am guessing this is on Grand Admiral? How much fleet power do your 40 corvettes result in by year 2210?

AI being able to detect when they have threatening neighbours and adjusting their economy to focus more on alloys is something that is probably technically possible, but not something that exists right now. Currently we are focusing mostly on the feedback regarding GA AI being too strong early and too weak later on.
A more direct approach would be that AI would create defensive pacts with each other when there is an aggressive and threatening empire nearby which would probably be an easier solution to begin with and perhaps also more fun for the players
If AI can't detect and defend against early war,Peace expansion will be weak and won't be a best choice.
According to my observations,GA AI only had about 30 corvettes in 2210(if not genocide),Which is vulnerable for early war.
They are absolutely capable of holding 60 ships early with that bonuses,But they will not oversize even they are rich.

40 corvettes are about 2K,with supremacy tradition start in order to pick 'No Retreat'
 
Last edited:
I agree that improving defensive pacts is a good idea. Both for the player and AI.

Military-rushing aside, it's currently too easy for a tech-rushers to just snag defensive pacts and other agreements with virtually no military and then use their partner's military strength to keep others from attacking them. Skipping early military spending for tech and expansion is partly why the player can shoot ahead of the AI in the later game. I took a look at a game I was messing around with and my neighbors have 56 and 76 corvettes while I have effectively 10. Yet despite that the "relative power" diplomatic penalty is only -2.

If I had to guess you're using absolute values rather than relative. So yes, in 2300 40 corvette advantage is nothing, but in the early game that's a massive gap.

I think a simpler approach would be to just use the Relative Power function and then have it tick up or down faster or slower depending on the relative power gap. Kind of like envoy's improve relationship. Plus having it tick up or down over time would mean you don't suddenly tank after losing 1 battle, however you are on a clock. The Relative power could also dictate the max it can go up or down. So if it's just superior it won't go down too far, but if it's overwhelming it will go much further down.

This same approach could also apply to mutually hostile neighbors. The bigger a hostile neighbor is relative to you, the more the "unfriendly neighbor" modifier ticks up encouraging them to band together.
Agree.Just like coalition in EU4.But,That also needs to make AI faster to establish communication as much as possible,Because 'Military-rushing' usually starts in 2210.
 
Yeah I know, I prefer playing hive minds myself and I have been through this micro, trust me I am suffering too :D

I have made some changes to how jobs are prioritised that will hopefully make maintenance drones move to other resource producing jobs when there are enough amenities on the planet and there are other free jobs to work on.

However what I have no good simple solution for from the players perspective is to how we will forbid maintenance drones when there are no other free jobs other than maintenance drones, for example when you have filled the planet with all the possible resource producing districts. The AI has solved this issue by manually going in and forbidding these jobs to keep amenities at a reasonable level, however, I don't have the mandate to simply enable AI behaviour for the player and it is probably not something that most people would like.

So you guys added an absolutely terrible Edict for Maintenance Drones called "Synaptic Reinforcement". It adds 1 Maintenance Drone job per Synaptic Node building and also increases Maintenance Drone upkeep. I don't know all the edicts, but this is the worst Edict I have seen in the game. No one wants more Maintenance Drones, you want was few as possible. And increasing their upkeep without making the job any better, thats utter nonsense. I mean this Edict competes with Capacity Subsidies or other Edicts so I ask myself how an edict like this even made it into the game in the first place.

I don't have insight into the game code, but someone told me apparently the AI will take this Edict, which is a terrible idea and a giant handicap for AI Hives.

Can you explain what your thought process was behind adding this Edict? If you want to make Maintenance Drones better, since they are one of the worst jobs in the game, much worse than Clerks obviously, then why not add a real buff without using an Edict?
 
  • 1
Reactions:
So you guys added an absolutely terrible Edict for Maintenance Drones called "Synaptic Reinforcement". It adds 1 Maintenance Drone job per Synaptic Node building and also increases Maintenance Drone upkeep. I don't know all the edicts, but this is the worst Edict I have seen in the game. No one wants more Maintenance Drones, you want was few as possible. And increasing their upkeep without making the job any better, thats utter nonsense. I mean this Edict competes with Capacity Subsidies or other Edicts so I ask myself how an edict like this even made it into the game in the first place.

I don't have insight into the game code, but someone told me apparently the AI will take this Edict, which is a terrible idea and a giant handicap for AI Hives.

Can you explain what your thought process was behind adding this Edict? If you want to make Maintenance Drones better, since they are one of the worst jobs in the game, much worse than Clerks obviously, then why not add a real buff without using an Edict?

I can not answer since I was not involved in this and usually it is only the people who are involved in the DD who are reading it. So I can basically only answer questions regarding the AI economy I'm afraid. But yeah I agree this edict does not seem very useful, I think in the previous version 3.1 there was a tradition (i think) that used to give synapse drones amenities on their planet which was pretty useful as it would make it possible to fill an entire planet with synpase drones and no maintenance drones. But I think that was removed in 3.2 sadly
 
Will you adjust how much the AI is allowed to cheat on higher difficulties when it gets more competent? It's not as fun when you know your opponent gets 2x as many resources which keeps its terrible economy afloat. Conquer one of their planets? Inherit said bad economy. Only yours isn't that cheaty-good, so the bad planet causes your economy to crash! Example : AI building only half the mining districts they would need without bonuses.

Note for everyone that disagrees with me here. This doesn't mean the bonuses can't be replaced by other bonuses that make more sense. Like decreasing the cost of districts, ships, techs, etc for AI. Rather than give them more resources per job, which is inherently a bad way to balance things as the AI starts to play less like a player as a result.

Ai builds miner, gets 6 minerals instead of 4, builds only half as many mining districts to full saturate alloy jobs.

Player conquers planets, gets 50% more alloy worker job slots than they can support with the amount the inhabitants mine, even less thanks to negative bonuses from conquering, as upkeep for alloys stays the same.

Result? Player has to completely uproot the economy of the planet they took drastically to fix it, or relocate all captured pops and build new stuff elsewhere. (Of course, exclude jobs like artisans, who do still produce "bottom line products" other jobs need)

Solutions? Give the AI bonuses that don't inherently buff the bottom line for basic resources, but rather one of the following.

1. output of specialists, aka jobs that don't produce resources for other jobs. But rather final products. So the chain of economy is kept preserved.

2. ship cost. Same effect as option (1), just only for alloys and fighting-capacity.

3. ship/starbase upkeep cost. Safer than just buffing naval capacity as it can make integrating subjects more annoying.

4. buff ship damage/firerate. Also more dangerous than just letting the AI build more ships, as it can make the alpha strike more dangerous. But it might be a good way to avoid lag.
 
  • 2Like
Reactions:
I am guessing this is on Grand Admiral? How much fleet power do your 40 corvettes result in by year 2210?

AI being able to detect when they have threatening neighbours and adjusting their economy to focus more on alloys is something that is probably technically possible, but not something that exists right now. Currently we are focusing mostly on the feedback regarding GA AI being too strong early and too weak later on.
A more direct approach would be that AI would create defensive pacts with each other when there is an aggressive and threatening empire nearby which would probably be an easier solution to begin with and perhaps also more fun for the players
Btw. i wa wondering how difficulty AI bonus effect the Plans. Are thy trying to reach the same numbers and then stop? or are the bonuses applied AFTER the goals are reached?
 
View attachment 781962
  1. Scaling Economic Plans: We want the AI to be better in the mid- and especially late-game. With the current plans the requested income is static. Meaning, once it reaches a monthly income of +500 it will not try to increase it further. That’s good for a big chunk into the mid-game, but it’s not good enough to compete with a player in the late-game. So, the idea is to have the economic plans scale to infinity. Once they reach +500, they should increase their targets.

what i always think reading dev diaries & similiar players feedback to scaling ai economy is that ai should not only prioritise infinite resource output, at a certain point the only useful resource still left in the game is science (for players as well as ai), until new technologies are researched every month (im not sure but i tested out, it wasnt possible for me to research multiple techs in one month with monthy overflow science :/).
so the ai shouldnt prioritise all resource output infinetly if theres no use for them food & consumer goods,.. unity (replace unity-amenity buildings with mdeical labs :p, if efficiency of amenity production doesnt suffer). ofc there should be a good enough alloy output to compensate if e.g. 50% of fleets are lost, it should be high enough to pump the number back to normal in maybe 1-2 month/years depending on the "time"-state of the game & amount/type of ships. also minerals should be similiar prioritised, the ai should have always enough monthly income to build new buildings (i forgot the word) "in comparison" to planets & buildings that they still want to build, mining stations, as well as maybe ecumenopolis decisions, etc.
So in the lategame definetly science & alloy output should be prioritised, as well as maybe soldiers jobs (maybe on chokepoints even, later some worlds might be transferd into fortworlds if strategically useful) to get to the 10000 max ships "cap".

So, i want also talk a bit how devs integrated the ai in stellaris, i dont have an education in developing myself, so for me as a... lets say self declared philosoph, its easy to speak about it, not knowing about how to actually accomplish things. From what ive seen, also modding a bit myself, the ai uses economic plans to reach specific goals of income. in my mind this is just a workaround of how an ai practicaly should work. an ai should determine itself giving/considered a value of a recource (not only like food, but also population and planets are recourses) how to further progress into the game. So if i was a skilled developer i would actually scrap the whole economic plans thingy and reinvent it by one big algorythm that determines the value of what the ai has at the moment and what the ai can transfer it to in the future.
To explain this furthermore, i consider planets & populations as recourses themselves, because for me they are anyways. So at the start the "mathematically formular" would be something with:
[(1 planet =+ 25 pops on a 21 sized planet) / housing & amenities potential in addtition pop growth for each present species and their assembly type] ;= working specific jobs = has the potential to transfer that and this recourses to build =< enough minerals, alloys & science to expand =< pushing into later endgame direction where all recourses are covered enough to provide only science & alloy/ships focused gameplay
okay this was a very sloppy "mathematically formular", but like i said im a little dumb dumb, so i dont know anyways how it should look like, but this is all theoretically

i know to scrap the whole system how stellaris ai and files are working, is a big thing to ask for, and to develope an well enough thought out algorythm where all aspects of the game are covered in once, is more than a tiny implementation. So u may only consider the basic idea which i tried to deliver in my not so good english and maybe are able to implement specific aspects of it into the game, especially advisiable how the ai considers recources (as a way to transfer it into more recourses like a system may transfer into planets/habitats/ring world, that transfers into pops, which tranfers into the other recources). In the end my take up on developing an ai (and its only how i would pick up on things if i would have the ability for it) is more a different approach/thinking at telling the ai how to behave, as everything else. though it maybe a bit to late for this for stellaris, but for future game developing i would recommend (ger: ans herz legen) u to try and set up a different thinking on how to approach ai developement (maybe ai works already similiar in the background, idk. i took this from what ive seen yet as a noob looking through the files & try to understand how things working ):.

if this would be well integrated (and not made by myself ofc^^), the ai could not only be a threat to players, at a certain point the ai might have a big enough empire where its not possible for the player to catch up anymore, no matter on which difficulty. i guess this is a good thing from a ai developing perspective, ofc at that point,.. if u reach it (what i consider not even that difficult, focusing only on the economic aspects), u may consider to nerf ai somehow.

Though, this said. i wish i could have wrote this in german, because in english i have huge problems to express myself in the right words, but after all this i still have to add: Stellaris quickly replaced my second favorite game civ5/6 and idk how, but in a few years i managed to play this game more hours than i had civ5, and i played a lot of civ5 over idk 10 years maybe ^^, though my favorite game/s gothic1&2 are not replaceable :p stellaris even got me into modding (but sadly only for my own pleasure, as im not eager enough/not having enough emotional energy to finish my mods to a point where they are workshop friendly). though the only thing left to say is a big: THANK YOU GUYS !" i really appreciate ur work, this game is a great addition to my normal life, i really! really! really!!! enjoy playing it and also enjoying taking track of what u guys do, once getting into it its really easy to understand and the modding is really easy too, so dont mind people saying stuff, stellaris is already a considered perfect game !! !!!
 
at a certain point the only useful resource still left in the game is science (for players as well as ai), until new technologies are researched every month (im not sure but i tested out, it wasnt possible for me to research multiple techs in one month with monthy overflow science :/).

I agree that,But naval capacity also useful.Just like RTS game,Whether it's the AI or the player,Useless resources must convert to useful resources.

I wish to see an AI can do:

10K tech in 2300,at least 2000 naval cap.
This is basically the player's level,I think AI is hard to reach that but I wish they can try to achieve this goal
 
Last edited:
besides developing tech and naval capacity as much as possible,AI also need a good ship template to counter player or crisis.For example,Arc battleships instead of lancer(except fighting Prethoryn Scourge),Concentrate superior forces instead of spread,I wish someday they can fight 5x crisis alone with 2300 endgame years.
 
"It is called “take point” and was meant to incentivize allied fleets to follow & attach themselves to your fleet in order to create a much stronger force."

ironically, this sentence right there tells me that no one of the stellaris dev team has any direction for warfare... cause on one hand you heavily disincentivice doomstackingg

and now you are brining back auto doomstacking

like, wat
 
  • 1Haha
Reactions: