• 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 #42 - Heinlein patch (part 3)

Hello everyone and welcome to another Stellaris development diary. This is the third part in a multi-part dev diary about the 'Heinlein' 1.3 patch that we are currently working on. This week's dev diary will be about more miscellaneous changes and improvements coming in the patch, currently planned for release sometime in October.

Federation/Alliance Merger
When Federations were given the ability to vote on invites and wars, alliances became a bit of an odd duck in the Stellaris diplomacy. A middle layer between the 'loose' diplomacy of defensive pacts and joint DOWs, they ended up as little more than a weak form of Federation that's usually swapped out the moment the latter becomes available. In Heinlein, we've decided to retire alliances altogether and have Federations be the only form of 'permanent' alliance. When you unlock the technology for Federations, you will immediately be able to invite another empire into a Federation with you, 4 empires no longer being necessary to start one. Once a Federation has been formed, the technology is not required to invite new members or to ask to join it.

Federation Association Status
Another issue we ran into with the changes to diplomacy in Asimov is that Alliances and Federations had trouble bringing in new members - since non-aggression pacts, defensive pacts and guarantees were no longer possible with outside powers, building trust is difficult and you have to mostly rely on large bribes to get new members to join, something that just didn't feel right. To address this, we're adding a new diplomatic option to Heinlein called 'Federation Association Status'. This works similarly to an invite to the Federation in that it can be offered and asked for with any member of the Federation, but must be approved via unanimous vote. A country that has Federation Association Status is not actually a part of the Federation, but has a non-aggression pact with all Federation members and will gain trust with them up to a maximum value of 100. Revoking association status can be done via majority vote, or on the part of the associate at any time they like.
h4Xxg1d.png


Planet Habitability Changes
The planet habitability wheel is a mechanic we were never quite happy with - it makes some degree of sense, but it's hard to keep track of how each planet relates to your homeworld type, and it ends up nonsensical in quite a few cases (Desert being perfectly fine for Tropical inhabitants, or Arid for Tundra, etc). We found that most players tend to intuitively divide planets into desert/arid tundra/arctic and ocean/tropical/continental, and so we decided to change the mechanic to fit player intuition. Instead of a wheel, planets are now divided into three climate groups (Dry, Wet and Cold) and two new planet types (Alpine and Savanna) were added so that each group has 3 planet types. Habitability for the climates now works as follows (numbers may be subject to change):
  • Habitability for your main planet type is 80% (as before)
  • Habitability for planets of your climate is 60%
  • Habitability for planets of other climates is 20%
As such, you no longer have to keep track of anything other than which climate your planet type has to know whether a particular type of world is suitable for your species.
tAcBgqB.png


We also felt that the number of habitable planets in the galaxy was too large overall, but that we couldn't really decrease it so long as the player only had access to 1/7 of those types at start, which would now become 1/9. We also felt the colonization tech gating could be rather arbitrary, particularly if you had a species suited to a particular planet type but still couldn't colonize it due to lacking the tech. As such, we've done away with the tech gating on colonization, and instead instituted a 30% minimum habitability requirement to colonize a planet. You will also be unable to relocate pops to a planet if their habitability there would be under the 30% minimum. With this change we've also majorly slashed the number of habitable worlds in the galaxy, though if you prefer a galaxy lush with life you will be able to make it so through a new option outlined below. We are, of course, looking into and tweaking the effects that having less habitable worlds overall will have on empire borders.

More Galaxy Setup Options
There is an old gamer's adage that says 'more player choice is always better'. We do not actually agree with this, as adding unnecessary/uninteresting choices can just as well bog a game down as it can improve it, but in the case of galaxy setup in a game such as Stellaris, it is pretty much true. With that in mind, the following new galaxy setup options are planned to be included in Heinlein:
  • Maximum number of Fallen Empires (actually setting a fixed number is difficult due to the way they spawn and how it's affected by regular empires)
  • Chance of habitable worlds spawning
  • Whether to allow advanced empires to start near players
  • Whether to use empire clustering
  • Whether endgame crises should be allowed to appear

Sector Improvements
Since barely a day goes by without a new thread on the topic of sectors and enslavement, we would of course be remiss not to deal with this particular bugbear. We intend to spend a considerable amount of time on the sector AI for Heinlein, but I'm not going to go into specifics on bug fixing/AI improvements but rather on a series of new toggles that we intend to introduce to give the player more control over their sector. In addition to the current redevelopment/respect tile resource toggles, the following new toggles are planned for Heinlein:
  • Whether sector is allowed to enslave/emancipate
  • Whether sector is allowed to build spaceports and construction ships
  • Whether sector is allowed to build military stations (this will replace the military sector focus)
We're also discussing having a sector toggle for building and maintaining local defense fleets, but we don't think we'll have time for it in Heinlein.

That's all for today! Next week we'll be talking about Fallen Empires, how they can awaken, and the War in Heaven.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
  • 254
  • 71
  • 11
Reactions:
Since you have Dry and Wet climates, it seems you are tackling water availability and the state of water molecules instead of actual climate. It would make a lot more sense to have Cold changed to Frozen instead, so all 3 "climate" types reflect that.

Or, spin the setup slightly to combine temp/water. The habitability changes are a nice step in the right direction.
But maybe tweak them further...

Hot
Cold
Temperate


And then each of the 3 types down the list could go from dry to wet.

EDIT
Trying to fit the existing types in the matrix does something like this :

Code:
               Hot            Warm            Cold
Dry           Desert          Arid            Alpine
Humid        Savanna       Continental       Tundra
Wet          Jungle          Oceanic         Arctic

Yeah, this is the kind of thing I was thinking.

[: the habitability could then depend on 2 factors but that would make contiental more ideal than others.
Why would continental necessarily be more ideal?
 
  • 4
  • 3
Reactions:
I hope this means we'll be able to genetically engineer someone for this. A xenophile pacifist can get a tomb world up to a base of 30 or 35% habitability, but they can't construct the necessary buildings until after the planet has already been colonized. If you're saying we have to rely on uplifted species, then those need to be made a lot more common; I don't get even a basic species in more than a third of my games (maybe a quarter), and I've never got a species with Tomb World preference.

Just use a droid settler as first one and construct the buildings (run by droids) then you can relocate someone there. Even if possible genetically altering settlers for the wrong group beforehand might be a very bad idea since you always alter populations of whole planets. Sou you would create some very unhappy pops until the planet is finally developed enough for them to move there.
 
  • 1
Reactions:
I feel the term "federation" doesn't fit the current mechanic. They aren't centralised at all.

Yeah, it's more of a confederation. But that word has a negative connotation (Confederate States of America, Confederacy of Independent Systems, etc) in our world. There are few examples in the real world of confederations, the EU might be the best one, although whether it even is one is debated. Considering this is a science fiction universe, and doesn't have to strive for historical accuracy in terms of names, I think they can get away with the slight misinterpretation of the federation term.
 
  • 4
  • 1
Reactions:
I love everything I just saw in this DD:

1) Alliances out of the game? Amazing!!! Now I can have my federation when I only have one friend in the neighborhood.
I only hope that the fed policies comes for free in the future, I don't have a credit card anymore, but I will be ok with them being paid, you know, the devs need money constantly so they can update the game

2) "Association", at last! Now I can have more friends in the fed and my fed friends will not be like "I don't know this empire you want to invite so I vote NO". My only concern is the "unanimously" of the votes required, I hope that someone that is constantly saying "no" because of ethos contradiction gains negative points of diplo with every fed member that says "yes" so it can be kick out.

3) New way to see planet types by weather instead of having a wheel that destroys immersion, I am in love! And so will be my GF that loves biology and will found this a great addition in flavor. Plus I can colonize anything without a specific tech, YES!

4)
Chance of habitable worlds spawning
I can have, at last, a galaxy were habitable worlds are weird.
  • Whether to use empire clustering
  • Whether endgame crises should be allowed to appear
No more empires appearing around me, no more endgame crises, but I have a question Wiz: can I have "multiple" end game crisis playing at the same time so I can taste pandemonium in a galactic scale?

5) This is something that I look eager to. I only hope that the "enslave/emancipate" means a check option is separate for "enslave" and "Emancipate". And what about building robot pops?
Well, I’m looking forward to this future in stellaris!!!!!

"War in Heaven" O_O
 
  • 1
Reactions:
The two flat +5% might work since they don't require you to build something first. What definitly won't work is buildings that add +5% (though they might be enough to relocate someone there).

Well genetic alteration would be one way but then you would create a very unhappy population at some planet in your empire just to be able to switch to a different planettype. So you would only do that, if you plan to resettle or migrate them afterwards. Of course they might take away our ability to freely chose the new habitable type and lock it down to only planets from the same group (since they might not like that this way you more or less create a population that has less than 30% habibility for the planet they are currently living on). On the other hand it would be nice to still have the option should the two +5% techs be enough.

The best/easiest option would likley be to use a differen species that is part of your empire. Though since noone of the other two groups will migrate into your empire before you already have one of those planets that seems to be an option for conquerers only (unless you manage to peacfully get someone to be your Vassal and then integrate them).

But how will migration treaties work, then?
Maybe they will be possible only for planets in the same column, so only 3 options will be available to us. That kinda sucks because I like to have pop for each planet type in my empire. :/
 
Hang on, without me missing something major it seems to me that doing away with an Alliance option is a bit of a sh**er on anyone that previously wanted an arrangement where they and their friendly neighbors could wage offensive wars together without neccisarily being tied up under a joint regime (ala federations). So now I can only have allies that will aid me if i'm attacked rather if I am the attacker, unless my species wants to sign away it's sovereignty? Isen't that a bit of out character for many millitaristic style empires.
 
  • 9
Reactions:
As such, we've done away with the tech gating on colonization, and instead instituted a 30% minimum habitability requirement to colonize a planet. You will also be unable to relocate pops to a planet if their habitability there would be under the 30% minimum.
So, what will happen if I turn a desert world with desert people into an arctic iceball via terraforming? Will they disappear, or leave, or will the game just glitch out horribly?

Also, one galaxy gen option should be changed a little: In my opinion we should be able to play without ANY other FTL-capable empires, only with pre-FTLs instead. Basically, setting the minimum of empires to 0 instead of 1 would be everything that's needed.
 
  • 1
Reactions:
Hang on, without me missing something major it seems to me that doing away with an Alliance option is a bit of a sh**er on anyone that previously wanted an arrangement where they and their friendly neighbors could wage offensive wars together without neccisarily being tied up under a joint regime (ala federations). So now I can only have allies that will aid me if i'm attacked rather if I am the attacker, unless my species wants to sign away it's sovereignty? Isen't that a bit of out character for many millitaristic style empires.

You know you can invite other empires to war without being allied to them, right?
 
  • 15
  • 9
  • 1
Reactions:
Just use a droid settler as first one and construct the buildings (run by droids) then you can relocate someone there.
Yeah, I was quite about to ask is droid colonisation possible. Please don't wipe it out completly. It's quite sensible to have automatic stations on planets where you can't build a normal colony.
I know it can break balance (just build a robotic colship in the beginning so you can colonise EVERY planet; not I'm against it, but "balance" issues always quite often take precedence before roleplaying and logic), so, maybe, it can be possible just to add new type of station? Or maybe add a negative modifier to a pure low-tech robotic world (you know autonomous low-tech robots works worse without constant supervision)?
 
Are you still working on a Strategic Resource Overhaul for Heinlein 1.3 ?
In this regard, It would be neat to have a setup option which clusters 70-80% of each specific ressource in few small areas of the galaxy (like in the Civilization games).
This would induce a lot of interesting diplomacy/trading and fighting.
 
Hang on, without me missing something major it seems to me that doing away with an Alliance option is a bit of a sh**er on anyone that previously wanted an arrangement where they and their friendly neighbors could wage offensive wars together without neccisarily being tied up under a joint regime (ala federations). So now I can only have allies that will aid me if i'm attacked rather if I am the attacker, unless my species wants to sign away it's sovereignty? Isen't that a bit of out character for many millitaristic style empires.

Being able to invite non-allied / federated empires to join your war (whether aggressive or defensive) was added in Azimov.
https://forum.paradoxplaza.com/foru...aris-dev-diary-36-asimov-patch-part-1.947827/
Joint War Declarations
Another new diplomatic feature is the possibility to invite other empires to your wars. The AI will not join your wars if their Attitude towards you is not at least neutral and they have something they also want from the target.
 
  • 3
Reactions:
Why would continental necessarily be more ideal?

Because it has four neighboring planet types instead of three. Also, four of the types would only have two neighboring types.

One could solve this problem, if one had a 5 by 5 planet type matrix, but only the center 3 by 3 could by valid species preferences. Then all starting planet types would have their surrounding 3 by 3 matrix of somewhat compatible planets.
 
  • 2
  • 1
Reactions:
We are, of course, looking into and tweaking the effects that having less habitable worlds overall will have on empire borders.
Any chance you might add in starbases at some point, a sort of combination spaceport and outpost?

3) You will be able to colonize tomb worlds from the start so long as you have something that can live there.
Will having the tech to build robots let me colonize Tomb Worlds?
 
Will having the tech to build robots let me colonize Tomb Worlds?
Robots - no. Droids and Synthetics - yes.

Also, I take it, with the new model, basic terraforming will let you change the planet's type within its 'default' column (e.g. Ocean → Continental or Alpine → Arctic), and advanced ("Atmospheric manipulation" tech.) will let you change planet's column (e.g. Continental → Alpine).
 
Good that you can turn empire clusters off though.

Hmm, I generally don't mind occasional clusters, as having empires consistently spaced evenly apart would be weird. I just don't want to always have neighbors right next door to my starting position -- *that* is what I'd like to be able to turn off.