Stellaris Dev Diary #152 - Summer Experimentation

[methegrate]

Exactly, there need to be ways that you can always throw resources at something so you will always need more of everything and are always at risk of having shortages.

Personally, I would redesign it so that every resource has both a maintenance function and a surplus function, like how the surplus function of alloys is to buy ships. And that surplus function can't be just an afterthought like planetary decisions. It would need to be something essential, something that you either can't do without or will really notice if you do. (Although I actually really like planetary decisions in theory. Just in practice they're pretty forgettable.)

For example, maybe link population growth directly to surplus food. At 0 food, your population barely grows. The more you grow, well... the more you grow. Or I'd massively expand the edict and leader system such you'd really notice the difference in an empire that had the wealth to spend on governance and powerful leaders.

Every resource should have some reason why you want as much of it as you can possibly get. That way, every time you decide to earn less of one in favor of another, it's an actual decision instead of just the obvious choice.

 

[Ecervele]

For example, maybe link population growth directly to surplus food. At 0 food, your population barely grows. The more you grow, well... the more you grow.

It was the case in pre 2.2 .

It's a little bit too simplistic, since first world country produice the plenty of food and don't have plenty of babies since women empowerment is the main brake for it, but it's good enough.

 

[methegrate]

It was the case in pre 2.2 .

It's a little bit too simplistic, since first world country produice the plenty of food and don't have plenty of babies since women empowerment is the main brake for it, but it's good enough.

And admittedly, I'm definitely not in the camp that's concerned with realism. My vote is that in a game with psychic space dragons, we make the thing play well first and stick in the flavor text to explain those mechanics later.

Still, that particular idea might/might not be the way to go. (Especially given how powerful population growth is in 2.2) I meant more the big picture suggestion: Each resource should have some reason to want an unlimited surplus. Some benefit or spending option to make every single resource as valuable as alloys are now.

 

[Ecervele]

And admittedly, I'm definitely not in the camp that's concerned with realism. My vote is that in a game with psychic space dragons, we make the thing play well first and stick in the flavor text to explain those mechanics later.

Still, that particular idea might/might not be the way to go. (Especially given how powerful population growth is in 2.2) I meant more the big picture suggestion: Each resource should have some reason to want an unlimited surplus. Some benefit or spending option to make every single resource as valuable as alloys are now.

I agree with your suggetion, I was just mentionning it was proviously the case and since the game is going some more complex economy, adding some social layers too could be good but I digress.

I had a similar idea as yours, but what could be the effects without being broken as hell and if the effects depend on your type of empire...

 

[Midn8t]

thing I would really love to see is

1: ships sizes and types redone adding more sizes but also types to those sizes mayabe even classes for bombardment and technology goes with that like nukes germ warfare so forth
2: Performance enhancements
3: better Sector management
4: UI imporvements for 2k and 4k - ability to save templates for designs to use form game to game and ability for those templates to be used by the AI
5: Fleet GFX and Battle improvements specially with formations and ship sizes and clipping issues handled.
6: more technology more technology customization for armys, pop and fleets.
7: better ground warfare and customization for planetary defense and technology go with that.
8: more planet types and habit zone rework
9: more types of weapons of mass destruction like being able to cause stars to super nova
10: more ability to government customization
11: special forces like marines that can be used to invade space stations once the defense are down
12: Combat retreating to be looked at -> if my ships have capability to flee combat with out having to hyperlane and ability to jump form combat with out the Tech then why do i even need Tech to jump drive in first place ? I already got tech right cuz i can do it even from start of the game and if i have ability to jump drive or aka warp out of combat why cant i do that to get around all the time ?

 

[FlyingPhoenix]

The new economy system is demonstrably NOT holding the AI nor performance back.

Performance hits come from a lot of places, but one of them is superfluous checks regarding unemployment. Mods have changed the frequency of those checks and vastly reduced their impact on performance; ergo, the economy doesn't INHERENTLY kill performance.

AI competency has also been vastly improved by mods. The new economy doesn't INHERENTLY kill its competitiveness.

The way consumer goods and alloys work has NOTHING to do with either of those.

Pop jobs are a key component of the economic system, and a component of pop jobs is automatic pop shuffling - not having to deal with the tedious assignment problem of allocating the correct pop to the correct job. Yes, mods improve performance, by axing a core component of what makes the new economic system the new economic system.

And we are discussing the vanilla game as it is presented by Paradox, not the modified game as it is presented by modders.

The way consumer goods and alloys work is that you want as few consumer goods as possible, and want as many alloys as possible, making every production chain support that goal. It's the same dynamic that existed in the previous economy.

 

[UltimateTobi]

What if ships also cost Energy upfront (to kill the Alloys-is-king)? It'll also add it as a transactional currency.

 

[Greenslade]

Love these experiments and I'm glad to see that you're not fixed on the current implementation.

The "fifth district" idea is something that I'd love to see in the game, but MOAR of it.

Specifically, that is to say, I'd like to see a stricter delineation between what districts are and what buildings are - Districts make jobs, buildings modify districts. The idea of having an industrial district which can be retooled to produce alloys or consumer goods with a decision is brilliant. I'd also like to see a science or campus district and a military district.

I can certainly see the issue with adding jobs to the city district rather than through the building, but it sounds like a really good idea in principle even if if doesn't quite qork out because of the upswing. Having more kinds of districts and modifying buildings seems like a good way to solve the issues you've raised - you can see at a glance what a planet is specialising in by the composition of its districts, and you don't have a huge glut of new jobs with every city district.

Hope this is something you'll consider and try out!

 

[naq29]

I would like only districts provide jobs, while buildings provide production bonus instead.

We can have industrial districts, entertainment districts, high tech districts, etc...

 

[eagletrekkie]

Except civilian and trade infrastructure is ultimately capped. Eventually, frankly pretty early on, you've more or less built everything on the civilian side. Then you're right back to the same problem.

As @Coconut_Cookie alluded to, right now the only thing you always need more of is ships because the military is the only part of the game that actively removes resources. When a ship gets blown up, you need to rebuild it. But when you put down a civilian building or a trading post, with rare exceptions it sticks around pretty much for the rest of the game. So the only resource you always need more of is the one that builds ships.

So trade and internal construction peters out pretty quickly. That's what would need to change. The game would need some sort of diplomatic and/or trade mechanic that also somehow has no upper limit.

Personally, I would redesign it so that every resource has both a maintenance function and a surplus function, like how the surplus function of alloys is to buy ships. And that surplus function can't be just an afterthought like planetary decisions. It would need to be something essential, something that you either can't do without or will really notice if you do. (Although I actually really like planetary decisions in theory. Just in practice they're pretty forgettable.)

For example, maybe link population growth directly to surplus food. At 0 food, your population barely grows. The more you grow, well... the more you grow. Or I'd massively expand the edict and leader system such you'd really notice the difference in an empire that had the wealth to spend on governance and powerful leaders.

Every resource should have some reason why you want as much of it as you can possibly get. That way, every time you decide to earn less of one in favor of another, it's an actual decision instead of just the obvious choice.

This is why I was suggesting CG be made the primary unit of trade. If you want to get wealthy and be a merchant empire, you should primarily be dealing in CG. Empire infrastructure is capped after a point, yes, but trade is not.

 

[Coconut_Cookie]

I would like only districts provide jobs, while buildings provide production bonus instead.

We can have industrial districts, entertainment districts, high tech districts, etc...

I like the divide that districts now have. With the city districts focussed on buildings and industry and higher grade products and the other districts focussed on raw materials.

 

[Tyrannical Prince]

I like the current district/building system but I don't mind the experimentation.

 

[methegrate]

This is why I was suggesting CG be made the primary unit of trade. If you want to get wealthy and be a merchant empire, you should primarily be dealing in CG. Empire infrastructure is capped after a point, yes, but trade is not.

I'm not entirely sure what you mean by "unit of trade." Like, you buy things on the market with CG's? Or they replace the "Trade" quasi-resource? In the case of the latter, I don't think I see a change. Trade just becomes energy.

I mean, in theory I think that's a great idea. An active trade system with some core resource at its heart the way resources drive alloys is a really great idea. It's just that the current system doesn't have any moving pieces like that. You build your trade hubs, put down a few clerk buildings and... well, nothing after that. Now you watch trade happen without any further player interaction.

 

[Huchikuchi]

I would devide districts into three groups:
-"production" districts - dependent on planetary features(mining, food, rare resources,...)
-"procesing" districts - generating advanced recourses (forges, civilian industries, rare resources refining,...)
-"utility" districts - cities, research, leisure, military sites

This will allow creation of jobs you need without some weird restriction (if you can create mines and nobody to work at them, you should be able to do the same with forges). Buildings can work as "support infrastructure" to boost wanted servises or sectors of production (replacing current "planet designation". Large platet can support big enough population specialized in more then one sector). It can also make transition to ecumenopolis smoother.

 

[eagletrekkie]

I'm not entirely sure what you mean by "unit of trade." Like, you buy things on the market with CG's? Or they replace the "Trade" quasi-resource? In the case of the latter, I don't think I see a change. Trade just becomes energy.

I mean, in theory I think that's a great idea. An active trade system with some core resource at its heart the way resources drive alloys is a really great idea. It's just that the current system doesn't have any moving pieces like that. You build your trade hubs, put down a few clerk buildings and... well, nothing after that. Now you watch trade happen without any further player interaction.

Specifically I'd have them replace 'trade value.' It makes more sense to have the actual goods/services that would be traded be used rather than having this weird, abstracted value for trade.

I do agree at present the system is lacking - I would hope that the trade system would be improved with the diplomacy update, which would then allow for much greater use of CG.

 

[BlackUmbrellas]

Specifically I'd have them replace 'trade value.' It makes more sense to have the actual goods/services that would be traded be used rather than having this weird, abstracted value for trade.

The abstract value for trade means it can be modified by stuff, though. Energy is already Stellaris' "money", so by default Trade Value becomes energy at a 1:1 ratio, but you can use your policies to make it produce some Consumer Goods or even Unity.

 

[methegrate]

Specifically I'd have them replace 'trade value.' It makes more sense to have the actual goods/services that would be traded be used rather than having this weird, abstracted value for trade.

I do agree at present the system is lacking - I would hope that the trade system would be improved with the diplomacy update, which would then allow for much greater use of CG.

That's actually why I was so massively disappointed with the trade system when it was introduced. I was hoping trade would create new choices and challenges for the player and demand real skill to get right. I envisioned a system of trade ships and civilian outposts every bit as robust as the military system, something that would create a peacetime path to power. This doesn't necessarily need to be complicated, but it does need to be interactive.

Instead, trade is so abstract and passive that it's barely even there. I love the idea of a "unit of trade," but right now there's no such thing because you don't do anything with trade. You plunk down a few buildings, make sure the trade routes run through starbases and it magically becomes energy (or energy/CGs or energy/unity). You then use that energy to buy alloys and build ships, because that's still the only thing that matters.

Honestly, the only time I remember that trade even exists is when the AI stupidly re-routes a trade lane and spawns pirates... Which I shoot down immediately, then fix the problem and go back to ignoring it all.

I like your basic idea, to have an economic resource that the player uses and consumes the same way that we use and consume alloys. But the entire trade system would need to be redone from the ground up to be something that the player does rather than something that the player has. (Which it really should be...)

 

[ashbery76]

I remember looking forward to these.Now they are dull.

 

[Janx14]

Specifically I'd have them replace 'trade value.' It makes more sense to have the actual goods/services that would be traded be used rather than having this weird, abstracted value for trade.

I do agree at present the system is lacking - I would hope that the trade system would be improved with the diplomacy update, which would then allow for much greater use of CG.

While I'm not shooting the idea down, I'm starting to worry about how much people expect from this diplomacy update.

 

[eagletrekkie]

That's actually why I was so massively disappointed with the trade system when it was introduced. I was hoping trade would create new choices and challenges for the player and demand real skill to get right. I envisioned a system of trade ships and civilian outposts every bit as robust as the military system, something that would create a peacetime path to power. This doesn't necessarily need to be complicated, but it does need to be interactive.

Instead, trade is so abstract and passive that it's barely even there. I love the idea of a "unit of trade," but right now there's no such thing because you don't do anything with trade. You plunk down a few buildings, make sure the trade routes run through starbases and it magically becomes energy (or energy/CGs or energy/unity). You then use that energy to buy alloys and build ships, because that's still the only thing that matters.

Honestly, the only time I remember that trade even exists is when the AI stupidly re-routes a trade lane and spawns pirates... Which I shoot down immediately, then fix the problem and go back to ignoring it all.

I like your basic idea, to have an economic resource that the player uses and consumes the same way that we use and consume alloys. But the entire trade system would need to be redone from the ground up to be something that the player does rather than something that the player has. (Which it really should be...)

Yeah, this is the kind of thing I was imagining - I feel like a system like this would actually force a choice between a more militarized economy and a civilian economy. Also it would make Megacorps actually produce, well, things people want to buy instead of just endless monies via Trade Value.