• 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 #109 - 2.0 Post-Release Support (part 2)

Hello everyone and welcome to another Stellaris development diary. As mentioned in last dev diary, we are still in full post-release support mode and until we are ready to get back to regular feature dev diaries, we're not going to have full-length dev diaries. Instead, we'll use the dev diaries to highlight certain fixes or tweaks coming in the rolling 2.0.2 beta update that we feel need highlighting. All the changes listed below will be coming in the next 2.0.2 update, which we expect to have with you soon.

Species Rights Changes
Both in order to fix some bugs caused by traits that alter species identity (such as Psionic ascension path traits), and to expand player freedom, we've made some changes to species rights. There are no longer any traits that cause a species to be considered entirely distinct from its parent species, so a Psionic or Hive-Minded Human pop is still considered to be a subspecies of Human. As it would then no longer make sense for all Human subspecies to share the same rights, we've added the ability to set rights for subspecies, so you can have, for example, different levels of military service and living standards for different subspecies of the same species living in your empire. However, there will still be certain restrictions for subspecies of your primary species, so if your empire is Human, you will not be able to purge a Human subspecies unless that subspecies has been majorly altered (such as being turned into Hive-Minded humans)
2018_03_22_3.png


Food Trading & Negative Food Spirals
We've had a bunch of feedback on AI and player problems with ending up in negative food spirals where a lack of food would cause starvation, reducing happiness and causing unrest, which would reduce food production, making starvation worse and creating a vicious cycle. To address this we've made a couple of changes. First of all, unrest and low happiness no longer reduce food production (they still reduce food from processing/livestock, as that represents the pops fighting back against being eaten). Secondly, we've improved the AI's understanding of food trading, so that it should heavily prioritize trading for food when in starvation. Finally, for those with Leviathans, we've added the ability to trade Minerals/Energy for Food and vice versa with the Trader Enclaves.
2018_03_21_1.png


New Marauder Events
In order to make it less of a pure loss prospect to start near Marauders, we've added some positive events that can only fire if your empire is bordering Marauders. These benefits might include gaining resources, pops, free ships and leaders, or temporary buffs to the effectiveness of your fleets.
2018_03_22_1.png


Occupation Armies
Since the army rework in 2.0, it's become significantly easier to snipe back planets that were recently taken by the enemy, as these planets lack a garrison to defend them. For this reason, we've implemented a new type of army type called Occupation Armies. When a planet is occupied, the occupier now spawns a garrison force of these Occupation Armies (the exact type varying depending on species just as with defense armies). Unless destroyed by battle or bombardment, the garrison force remains until the planet is either annexed or reverts to the owner's control.

Weapon Range Modifier
Since this is a topic that keeps coming up (because the way weapon range is implemented in the code is extremely complex and there is no one single weapon range modifier bug to fix, but a bunch of different places where it has to be hooked in correctly), I just wanted to mention that we've done some additional fixes, and believe that the modifier should now be fully functional. We've also implemented a separate ship_modifier entry for ship sizes that can be used to apply certain modifiers (such as firing rate and weapon range) that do not work in the regular ship_size modifier (as that modifier is applied to the ship design, and not the ship itself).

That's all for now! Remember that these are just a selection of tweaks/fixes, and there are many more that were not listed here but will be included in the patch notes when we next update 2.0.2. See you next week!
 
Having all these additions is nice but multiplayer is totally broken and unplayable due to major out of sync issues rendering some of these additions mute, when can we expect to have additional patches for the out of sync?

Some friends and I have been playing MP since 2.0 and we've noticed that when the out of sync message occurs, it pauses the game, but if we give it a sec and unpause it seems to be working just fine. What behavior have you seen?
 
I wonder, after the initial mention to alter food-based campaigns (and energy for robots?) from 50-100 to 500 a couple dev-diaries ago.. if there will follow with the result of such alteration / testing and mainly, the reasoning behind such changes?

I know firing all 3 campaigns for 200 food is quite cheap... yet, for 500 each, that high cost for 20% is a tad expensive.. comparing to food surpluss gain on early expansions when that surpluss is quite low.

Mostly wondering what the devs will do with food as a resource.. and their plans for it on the future.
 
While I think the food trading to enclaves is a good idea I want to say that I would be careful with setting the price as it is(the same as minerals/energy) I always assumed food was supposed to be valued LESS then the other two resources, a change like this might make agrarian ideal(idk if thats what its called, the plus 1 unity on all farms) broken again if you can play with farms only and buy minerals with food.

Personally I think food should be a 3 for 1 or even 4 for 1(40 food for 10 minerals)
 
I will update the combat computer descriptions to include range numbers.

Cheers for the DD Wiz, and the good range of responses to the questions asked in the thread :D. Looking forward to the changes (and, after finally getting the time - to playing Stellaris Apocalypse - first game should kick off sometime in the next hour, I look forward to my coming oblivion :)).
 
Some friends and I have been playing MP since 2.0 and we've noticed that when the out of sync message occurs, it pauses the game, but if we give it a sec and unpause it seems to be working just fine. What behavior have you seen?
The games we play when they go oos are always ruined, and it is usually all players going oos. reloads, changing hosts, etc gives varying results but ultimately game goes out of sync and then becomes unplayable, this always seem to happen around mid game. So we have been waiting for updates to try again.
 
While I think the food trading to enclaves is a good idea I want to say that I would be careful with setting the price as it is(the same as minerals/energy) I always assumed food was supposed to be valued LESS then the other two resources

Erm. Why? It's just as easy to get as minerals. Harder, actually, as it doesn't come from space resources.

The prices shouldn't be set based on how much you personally value the resource, but based on how easy it is to produce. Food buildings are on par with energy and mineral buildings, so having the same exchange rate as them makes sense. A 4:1 ratio would be laughable - the mechanic might as well not exist then.
 
Ok...I get the AI having food problems. AI in such games hasn't notably improved in terms of overall capability, they can just handle more (still broken) mechanics as poorly as they handled everything else over the years of 4x games. All of the AIs in such games always suck...that's just apparently some stupid rule that exists for no good reason. It's fine, I guess.

But PLAYERS are having the food issue? HOW? How can a player possibly run low on food? The worst a player could do, is just not have a very good overall resource income, and maybe expand too far too fast. But that's not a game problem, that's a player problem. How can anyone ever run low on anything? The game practically throws so much stuff at you that it's stupid and entirely strategically laughable. You can't run into an unrecoverable deficit unless you're radically overexpanding AND starting wars you couldn't win to begin with.

Sure, sometimes you get a bad start between a Ravenous Swarm, Fanatic Purifiers, a Determined Exterminator, and a Xenophobe FE...but otherwise, in and of itself, you shouldn't run out of things unless you're doing it wrong to begin with. Newer players, sure, that makes sense...everyone's gotta learn their own way at their own pace, but that's still a player issue, not a game issue.

Rant over...

I like the addition of trading food for things and vice-versa. It makes it somewhat worthwhile to keep using food tiles for food, using the trade deal to turn that food into whatever you might need or want more of, and just ending it if you start to run short of food.

Still, I think it's high-time a system were implemented where the opinion of the enclave affects the quality of the deals offered. Curators should charge an outrageous monthly sum for their research bonus...reduced by higher opinion over time. Same with their other offerings, and with the other enclaves. You can pay through the nose early game, or wait a while and get on their good side for a better deal. And maybe Curators and Artisans can offer "levels" of deals like the Traders where the more you pay, the bigger your bonuses gained. Like the Curators allowing you access to their YA fiction section for the lowest price, and their "Library of Congress" for the highest price.

Also, while I like the inclusion of the monthly income deals, I'm still finding that I end up with stockpiles of resources I don't really need, and I'd kind of like to sell it out. Maybe I have too much energy, but I need minerals for my ringworlds...or perhaps I've got minerals for eons but not enough power to terraform my multitude of otherwise not particularly hospitable worlds. But, I've got nowhere to dump it all in trade, because everyone else in the galaxy either dislikes me (I seem to get a LOT of militant xenophobes and spiritualists), can't afford to give up what I need, or has no use for what I'm offering.

Perhaps there could be a soft cooldown on reintroduced instant trades with the enclave where if you trade too much too soon, the trade value gets worse because you're depleting their stock and giving them too much product they don't really need otherwise, and now they have to get that sold. Perhaps such "overtrading" causes an opinion loss.

Neither type of deal should ever be quite as good as what you could potentially get from another empire with maxed opinion of you, but they should get reasonably close, I think. It should probably mean that the traders start with a much worse set of deals to begin with. 3, or even 4, to 1...steadily improving little by little as their opinion rises, or again getting worse if you take too much of their stuff too often.
 
Erm. Why? It's just as easy to get as minerals. Harder, actually, as it doesn't come from space resources.

The prices shouldn't be set based on how much you personally value the resource, but based on how easy it is to produce. Food buildings are on par with energy and mineral buildings, so having the same exchange rate as them makes sense. A 4:1 ratio would be laughable - the mechanic might as well not exist then.

Ignoring the 2nd half of my post to make your point. Hard core argumentation strats. And just try trading food with other players in MP and you will see "why".

Food has a hard limit on its usefulness. Food does nothing if you are not actively growing, and even while growing has reduced return, it is needed only in limit.
MInerals and Energy can never be too much, there are infinite ways to spend it. No one sane would trade his valuable resource for something they don't even need.
 
@Wiz Is the Gateway construction site bug fixed? Currently you can only make 1 construction site at a time. Also would it be possible to display finished construction sites on the Galaxy Map the same as with non-activated gateway? It is impossible to see where you have constructed a Gateway Site previously. You basically have to go through your systems one by one if you forgot where you built the Gateway Construction Site.
 
I have three points on the matter of food and its exchange.

1: Food vs fuel is an issue with our current technology level. A bio-fuel processor should be a reasonable way to convert food into fuel (energy credits). If implemented in the game, it would look like a resource replicator that converts food to energy at the same 30-50 ratio. Similarly, if minerals can be replicated, it should be much less energy intensive to produce food.

2: All games begin with a complete lack of one resource and more than enough of others. If you really want to take scarcity into account, changing the ratios for the whole game doesn't make much sense. Instead, the combined trading guilds could have a base stock at a base price. The stock returns to that base value at a speed proportional to the excess/deficit. Similarly, the price scales up/down with scarcity/overabundance with caps at 1/2 and 2 times normal cost. After the price is set that way, the merchants only need to take 50% in order to prevent game imbalance. In a game with tons of food and no energy, you would then trade away 7.5 energy for 20 food, or 30 food for 5 energy.

3: In the U.S. most of us don't eat just grain. Producing meat requires much more food value than it contains, yet we spend more food to produce better food. Maintaining a high standard of living requires more food. I think it makes logical sense and improves balance to scale pop food consumption along with the mineral cost of their consumer goods. You want to keep your pops in Utopian bliss, you might need some agricultural upgrades to accomplish that. You can easily imagine merchants trading for quality livestock, even if grain is plentiful.

These would be a lot to add to the game right now, but I think it shows that trading food for other resources and vice-verse is still quite a reasonable feature. If the trade off can't be accomplished in your own empire, it makes sense that one of the guilds has a giant bio-fuel converter sitting in space to turn the excess into valuable commodities.
 
Also, if you've already mentioned a problem, Wiz probably has it on a list with its own priority. Please stop asking if it's been addressed or when the next patch will be done. I'm anxious for it too, but he would have set a time by now if he knew. Also, once it's out, you'll know if your pet peeve has been fixed. The rapid development we've seen was necessary to address problems with the update, but it simply couldn't be maintained for long.
 
What behavior have you seen?
usually an out of sync will propagate slowly into weird anomalies, but most likely people will realise it when they cannot move units or order issues.
however it can be anything really, since sync issues mean that the simulations start to diverge. some crazy stories are to be found on this forum, like that guy who won a war on his client, but lost it in reality.

usually in mp games, everybody continues until someone has an issue. usually that means that particular someone most likely has to quit, since rehosting a public lobby is almost always a fail (losing players), there is no total resync option, and there is not even a host saved game lobby, it just works via hotjoin, which needs out of game coordination.

But PLAYERS are having the food issue? HOW? How can a player possibly run low on food?
i would not be so fast to dismiss that problem, if it happens to you, and you get trapped in that circle you will notice it aswell

Good Lord, no. Managing armies is already a chore. Introduce manpower, have each occupation cost minerals or energy, anything really, as long as it is passive. Don't make me click even more, for the love of God.
hm, that is a valid thing. would preparing them and being automatically transfered passively be okay? so you dont have to bring them, just build them?
however sometimes i dont understand why we should make it easy to capture planets, its already pretty dumbed down.
even if i agree that right clicking is also quite annoying. i like the solution in blizzard games where you can rightclick the action button to get an autocast, and autocasting attack could lead an orbiting army to invade at 50% garrison strength vs own power or sth. (although the attack button is really handy)

what about transforming some of the invading forces to occupying forces automatically, so at least the attacker has to bring enough armies (starting with the weakest)?
for me it simply does not make sense that taking planets is done with one blob of armies, that almost suffers no casualties, and the only minigame about them is to kill the transport ships, or wait for bombardment to equal some numbers out.

waht do you mean with manpower
 
Last edited: