• 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 #33 - The Maiden Voyage

Hi everyone!

Well folks, here we are again, one week later… The development team has mostly weathered the release jitters and nerves are starting to calm down. The ship we worked so hard on for the last three years has been successfully launched and is currently on its maiden voyage. The crew seems mostly happy but some of the inspectors have raised concerns about mid-ship structural issues. As chief architect, I am not entirely surprised, but the reports will allow us to commence upgrades as soon as HMS Stellaris returns from its round-trip to Alpha Centauri. Alright, enough with the metaphor, let’s talk about our future plans for Stellaris!

First off, for those of you who are unfamiliar with our post-release policies, we will release a lot of expansions over the coming years. Each expansion will be accompanied by a major update (for Stellaris, these free updates will be named after famous science fiction authors) containing a whole bunch of completely free upgrades and improvements to the game in addition to regular bug fixes. As long as enough players keep buying paid content for the game, we promise to keep improving the game for everyone, almost like an MMO.

Now, before we begin the expansion cycle in earnest, we will spend the rest of May and June only focusing on bug fixes and free upgrades to the game. We carefully listen to all your feedback, which has already made us alter our priorities a bit. As a veteran designer of our complex historical games, I was anticipating a fair amount of criticism regarding the mid-game in Stellaris compared to that of our historical games, but I was more concerned with the depth of the economy than the relative lack of diplomatic options, for example. I also find much of the feedback on the Sector system interesting; the GUI and AI concerns will receive the highest priority. One area I was not at all surprised to get flak for is the lack of mid-game scripted content, however. We simply took too long getting all the early and late game stuff in, and neglected a whole category of events called “colony events”, which were supposed to be the bread and butter of the mid-game for the Science Ships.

We’ve been digesting and discussing your feedback and how to best go about improving the mid-game to make it more dynamic, both in the short and long run. Let’s start with our short term plans. When the game was released, we had already proceeded to fix a lot of issues. Together with some other pressing issues that have been reported, the plan is to release the 1.1 update - “Clarke” - near the end of May. We will try to cram as much as we can into this update, but the more fundamental stuff will have to wait until the next update (“Asimov”), which is scheduled for the end of June. The “Clarke” patch will mainly be a bug fix and GUI improvement update. Here are some of the highlights:

"CLARKE" HIGHLIGHTS
  • Fixes to the Ethic Divergence and Convergence issues. Currently, Pops tend to get more and more neutral (they lose Ethics, but rarely gain new ones.)
  • The End of Combat Summary. This screen looks bad and also doesn’t tell you what you need to know in order to revise your ship designs, etc.
  • Sector Management GUI: There are many issues with this, and we will try to get most of them fixed.
  • Diplomacy GUI issues. This includes the Diplomatic Pop-Ups when other empires contact you, but also more and better looking Notifications, and more informative tooltips on wars, etc.
  • AI improvements: Notably the Sector AI, but also plenty of other things. This kind of work is never "finished"...
  • Myriads of bug fixes and smaller GUI improvements.
  • Late game crises bugs. There were some nasty bugs in there, blocking certain subplots and various surprising developments.
  • EDIT: Remaining Performance Issues. We know about them; they might even be hotfixed before Clarke.
  • EDIT: Corvettes are too good.

Stellaris_new_Diplo_Notification_Mockup.png

New Diplomatic Notification. This is a mock-up, not an actual screenshot!

Stellaris_End_of_Combat_Mockup.png

New Fleet Combat Summary. This is a mock-up, not an actual screenshot!


After that, we’re moving on to the “Asimov” update, and this is when we can start making some major gameplay improvements to especially the mid-game. As you might have guessed, we plan to add some new diplomatic actions and treaties. Another thing that struck me during our discussions is that the normal lack of access to the space of other empires makes the game feel more constricted than intended. It limits your options since you can’t really interact much with the galaxy beyond the borders of your empire, and you only tend to concern yourself with your direct neighbors. This is bad for your Science Ships too, of course, since they might not be able to finish some of the grander “quests”. Compare the situation with Europa Universalis, where you usually have access to the oceans and can thus reach most of the world, or Crusader Kings, where you can even move through neutral territory with your armies. We also intend to add as much mid-game scripted content as we can. Thus, this is currently the plan for “Asimov”, but it’s not set in stone yet, so please bear with us if something gets pushed or altered:

"ASIMOV" HIGHLIGHTS (NOT SET IN STONE!)
  • Border Access Revision: Borders are now open to your ships by default, although empires can choose to Close their borders for another empire (lowering your relations, of course.)
  • Tributaries: New diplomatic status and corresponding war goals.
  • Joint Declarations of War: You can ask other empires to join you for a temporary alliance in a war against a specific target.
  • Defensive Pacts.
  • Harder to form and maintain proper Alliances.
  • More war goals: Humiliate, Open Borders, Make Tributary, etc.
  • Emancipation Faction. We had to cut this one at the last minute. Needs redesign.
  • Diplomatic Map Mode. Much requested!
  • Diplomatic Incidents: This is a whole class of new scripted events that causes more interaction with the other empires.
Past “Asimov”, I can’t give you any kind of specifics yet, but I am currently leaning towards honing in on the following general areas for the “Heinlein” update (these are not promises!):

CURRENT "HEINLEIN" INTENTIONS
  • Sector and Faction Politics: We are working on a design for this. I always wanted to make Factions more closely tied to Sectors, for example...
  • Federation and Alliance Politics: As a player, you need more ways of interacting with the other members, push your will through, and get elected, etc.
  • Giving Directions to Allies and Subject States.
  • Strategic Resource Overhaul: You should need these and search for them far and wide. They should be extremely important.
  • Battleship Class Weapons. Some Battleship front sections will be repurposed for an XL size weapon slot. There are currently four ship sizes but only three sizes to weapons, creating an imbalance. Also, Battleships should have fewer small weapon slots and have to rely on screens of smaller ships.
  • Fleet Combat Mechanics: Formations and/or more complex ship behavior is needed.
  • Mid-game scripted content: Guarded “treasures”, mid-game crises, colony events, etc.
  • Living Solar Systems: Little civilian ships moving around, etc.
Again, remember that we need to be somewhat flexible when things don't work out or when something else takes priority, so please take these later plans with a large grain of salt. As always, we also listen keenly to your feedback, so keep it coming!

Now, I am sure you are full of questions about the details, but hold your horses; it will all be explained in the coming dev diaries!
 
Last edited:
  • 1K
  • 289
  • 6
Reactions:
I disagree. There IS a fleet limit, it is your naval capacity. One mega stack is not as effective as: one mega-stack plus several support stacks which behave in more complex ways. I think you need to play more to see what I'm talking about.

You must be kidding, naval capacity is a different thing.. I am talking about something similar to EUIV supply limit.
 
2 things regarding federations that i would like to see changed.

If you are a member of a federation that is at war, and you leave the federation during the conflict, you are branded a traitor and the federation you left instantly declares war on you, in addition to the federations target still being hostile towards you.

If you are in a federation as a non-leading member, you should get something for any effort given for a successful victory. Example: 5 influence per percentage contributed to the war goal.
 
  • 2
  • 1
Reactions:
I'd also like to see a bit more resource management in the game; strategic and luxury resources in addition to the current basic ones, and ways to use and benefit of them, trade them... There doesn't have to be dozen of them for it to become too much of micromanagement, but at the moment there's only so much in terms of resources, and what you can do with them (energy credits, minerals, food + few strategic ones). Deeper resource management would need slight expanding the core rules of the resource management system as whole, though - planning a new bonuses for new type of resources, trading and demand etc.
 
Last edited:
  • 2
Reactions:
  • Mid-game scripted content: Guarded “treasures”, mid-game crises, colony events, etc.
  • Living Solar Systems: Little civilian ships moving around, etc.
Cant wait for this, would love more scripted content and more life in the systems.
 
  • 4
Reactions:
Depends on what the "Hubbard" expansion/patch would be about... Espionage maybe? Ways to mess about with another empires space by funding pirates? You know, generally being a dick to your neighbors....
The Hubbard patch adds new content for Fanatic Spiritualist empires.
 
I know it is not a massive feature, but seeing a living universe with little civilian ships flying to and fro would make this game for me. I loved it in distant worlds, and at present the universe does seem.....sterile.

Fantastic to see it is on the list at some point :) Thank you dev's :)
 
"Again, remember that we need to be somewhat flexible when things don't work out or when something else takes priority, so please take these later plans with a large grain of salt. As always, we also listen keenly to your feedback, so keep it coming!" This worries me Asimov really should be in the game already so if they decide to make the patch a DLC i will be so disapointed. As Arumba said in his Q&A last night its time for paradox to move away from their DLC policy now that they have money, we all bought the DLC in the past because you needed it as you were smaller but now that you are more successful i think its time to do your loyal fans a service and release Asimov free.
 
  • 1
Reactions:
"As Arumba said in his Q&A last night its time for paradox to move away from their DLC policy now that they have money, we all bought the DLC in the past because you needed it as you were smaller but now that you are more successful i think its time to do your loyal fans a service and release Asimov free.

Normally, I would be against such reasoning because Paradox is a for profit organism and quality games are bound to be more expensive than less interesting ones. Paradox also has a quasi monopole on grand strategy. However, they don't have a monopole on 4x and I think Stellaris is really lacking in some regards. Given their good sales of this game, it would be good to have some "core" mechanics added for "free" (in reality because Stellaris did better than expected on launch. There is nothing like a free lunch). It would support the interest in the game and would put it close, in replayability, to other 4x, thus incentivizing more people to buy the game and its DLCs.
 
Last edited:
Really nice, cos sometimes it is rather hard to war for humilation (against some races), you need to take control after planet, then start the genocide and take minuses for happines in your empire (if you, for example, pacifist).
 
No need to be a douche about it...

I haven't bought the game. But if it's as incomplete and full of not just missing mechanics but placeholder text as the Steam reviews say, if it's just a barebones skeleton setting up another DLC black hole like I've gotten stuck in with EU IV, then this guy is spot on. So I guess you're saying the Steam reviews are wrong and this is a completed game with just a few kinks that need to be worked out, in which case yes his comment was over the top.

I don't understand one bit how people are "Respectfully" Disagreeing with this post. If I'd said the game was a barebones skeleton like the Steam reviews say, sure. But I said if it was. And that if it wasn't, the original "you should be ashamed for releasing this at full price" comment was over the top. What does that leave for you to disagree with? Are you actually saying you would be fine paying full price for a barebones skeleton waiting for additional-cost DLC? Because if so you're responsible for the downfall of gaming and please please please please please stop.
 
Last edited:
  • 4
Reactions:
Normally, I would be against such reasoning because Paradox is a for profit organism and quality games are bound to be more expansive than less interesting ones. Paradox also has a quasi monopole on grand strategy. However, they don't have a monopole on 4x and I think Stellaris is really lacking in some regards. Given their good sales of this game, it would be good to have some "core" mechanics added for "free" (in reality because Stellaris did better than expected on launch. There is nothing like a free lunch). It would support the interest in the game and would put it close, in replayability, to other 4x, thus incentivizing more people to buy the game and its DLCs.
You know the DLC policy really doesnt bother me all that much as paradox does make pretty good DLC some are MEH but i do think and agree that having Asimov free would be a smart business move. It would really close the gap on whether one should buy stellaris OR another 4x, i always see forum threads on stream asking should i buy stellaris or X and having asimov would really just make answering that question much easier
 
  • 1
Reactions:
You know the DLC policy really doesnt bother me all that much as paradox does make pretty good DLC some are MEH but i do think and agree that having Asimov free would be a smart business move. It would really close the gap on whether one should buy stellaris OR another 4x, i always see forum threads on stream asking should i buy stellaris or X and having asimov would really just make answering that question much easier

We agree on the principle, but when I read that :
Doomdark said:
Now, before we begin the expansion cycle in earnest, we will spend the rest of May and June only focusing on bug fixes and free upgrades to the game.

[...]Together with some other pressing issues that have been reported, the plan is to release the 1.1 update - “Clarke” - near the end of May. We will try to cram as much as we can into this update, but the more fundamental stuff will have to wait until the next update (“Asimov”), which is scheduled for the end of June.

It makes me think that Clarke AND Azimov are meant to be "free". Clarke arrives at the end of may, Azimov hopefully at the end of june, which is still in the "free" period announced.

So it is Heinlein, with internal politics and improved federations and alliances which I am hoping to be free as well. Maybe hoping for three major patches without expansions is asking a bit much, especially since, if the two first deliver, Stellaris will already be in a good position to compete with other games, but I have this never-ending hope that PI games could be more about internal politics, and Heinlein is really what I'm the most looking for as an addition to 4x, while I consider Azimov as a must and, frankly, something that should already be in the game (by my own standard, I know the game is playable and enjoyable as is, but diplomacy is important for me).
 
  • 1
Reactions:
We agree on the principle, but when I read that :


It makes me think that Clarke AND Azimov are meant to be "free". Clarke arrives at the end of may, Azimov hopefully at the end of june, which is still in the "free" period announced.

So it is Heinlein, with internal politics and improved federations and alliances which I am hoping to be free as well. Maybe hoping for three major patches without expansions is asking a bit much, especially since, if the two first deliver, Stellaris will already be in a good position to compete with other games, but I have this never-ending hope that PI games could be more about internal politics, and Heinlein is really what I'm the most looking for as an addition to 4x, while I consider Azimov as a must and, frankly, something that should already be in the game (by my own standard, I know the game is playable and enjoyable as is, but diplomacy is important for me).
i most definitely agree that asimov should have been in the game at launch but i personally think there was some pressure to launch it early. I think Clarke will have more in it than they mention in this post TBH. Maybe we will see it sometime next week. i am hoping for asimov by mid june.
 
I haven't bought the game. But if it's as incomplete and full of not just missing mechanics but placeholder text as the Steam reviews say, if it's just a barebones skeleton setting up another DLC black hole like I've gotten stuck in with EU IV, then this guy is spot on. So I guess you're saying the Steam reviews are wrong and this is a completed game with just a few kinks that need to be worked out, in which case yes his comment was over the top.
It is not incomplete imo, is it lacking in depth in some areas yes but they work perfectly fine and you will still probably enjoy playing them.
I hate how so many people view paradox DLCs, they are adding content years after the game releases and people get annoyed about that. If you do not want to spend any more money on the newer features on EU4 or Stellaris when it gets DLC then just do not buy them. EU4 and Stellaris base games are both complete games, the DLCs just add more and more on top that was not part of the original plan for the game.
Also what you mean the steam reviews are wrong? As of me checking right now there are just over 5,560 reviews with 89% positive reviews, what reviews have you been reading saying it has place holder text?
 
  • 1
Reactions:
I haven't bought the game. But if it's as incomplete and full of not just missing mechanics but placeholder text as the Steam reviews say, if it's just a barebones skeleton setting up another DLC black hole like I've gotten stuck in with EU IV, then this guy is spot on. So I guess you're saying the Steam reviews are wrong and this is a completed game with just a few kinks that need to be worked out, in which case yes his comment was over the top.

Well, uh, EU4 was not a barebones skeleton at all at launch. The more appropriate comparison is CK2, which was, and it was a fundamentally different game after a year.

There is a small amount of placeholder text that either wasn't found by mistake or is something that shows up when something happens in the middle of the month but a variable attached to it isn't calculated until the beginning of the next month; for example, empires that spawn mid-game will have the "Despicable Neutral" placeholder personality until the month ticks and their real personality is calculated. It isn't a serious issue.
 
  • 1
Reactions:
I think this game Needs as first DLC a flasher DLC. A DLC cheap but totaly awesome in Content. A DLC what adds many nice things from the mod section (more traits, more map Color, etc...)
Than they Need to reduce the micro. It is pain in the ass to readd planetary polices...you do not get message when they end, you cannot add them to planets over planetary overview. exspecially if a planet is inside a sector....
checking if all planets including sectors have a spaceport....pain.
 
  • 1
Reactions:
It is not incomplete imo, is it lacking in depth in some areas yes but they work perfectly fine and you will still probably enjoy playing them.
I hate how so many people view paradox DLCs, they are adding content years after the game releases and people get annoyed about that. If you do not want to spend any more money on the newer features on EU4 or Stellaris when it gets DLC then just do not buy them. EU4 and Stellaris base games are both complete games, the DLCs just add more and more on top that was not part of the original plan for the game.
Also what you mean the steam reviews are wrong? As of me checking right now there are just over 5,560 reviews with 89% positive reviews, what reviews have you been reading saying it has place holder text?

I occasionally watch the DLC conversations in EUIV, and while you are right that DLCs don't rend the game unplayable, there are criticism that "core" features are sometimes replaced by paid features. It is the case with development, which replaced the way you could previously upgrade a province by constructing buildings which partially cost monarch points, while now you need the DLC in order to use monarch points to upgrade a province. Some mechanics like the national focus are also criticized because they give more agency to a player which has the DLCs enabling it while another player who plays without them don't have this option. Yet, in my opinion, the second example is far less troublesome than the first one and it is necessary for Paradox to incentive the players to buy its DLCs, otherwise there wouldn't be any free content patch anymore.

Critics of the DLC policy often don't make the link between the DLCs and the constant improvement of the games. One simply cannot go without the other, because they have to pay the developpers. I can ask for a free Heinlein because the sales were, I suppose, very good. But past that, it would be crazy to ask for more expansions without any influx of money to make the game.