• 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 #215 - Gameplay themes & Balancing considerations

Hello everyone!

First I want to thank you for the overwhelming support that you’ve shown us with announcing the Custodians initiative. It’s been really fun and motivating to see so many positive responses, and for that we’re truly thankful. At the same time, I must admit that it is also a bit scary in the sense that we shouldn’t have the expectation that this will suddenly resolve any issues you might have with the game, or that we’ll be able to deliver large amounts of significant changes with every update. Let’s appreciate this opportunity and make the best of it :)

Species Pack Gameplay Themes
Last week we already talked about what the Lem Update (honoring the author Stanislaw Lem) would focus on, but I’d also like to go into more detail regarding some things.

We mentioned that we would be adding gameplay to the Humanoids Species Pack and the Plantoids Species Pack, and although I won’t talk about the exact details yet, I do want to talk a little about how we approached it, and the themes we chose.

Plantoids was a bit easier, because there are some obvious fantasies. Going around the themes of growth and plants we’re adding some new traits, civics and origin. We felt like it made sense to open up these gameplay additions to both Plantoid portraits as well as for Fungoids.

Humanoids was a bit trickier, because there are no direct fantasies that apply to them in general, so we instead chose to focus on fantasies that align with things like dwarves, elves, orcs or humans. The Civic we showcased last week was an example of how we made something inspired by a traditionally dwarven fantasy.

Let us know about any ideas or thoughts you have regarding those :)

We will be talking more about these in much greater detail later, but that may possibly be in August.

Game Balance
We’re going to take a look at reworking some of the major outstanding balance issues that we’re having.

One example that I want to talk about is the issue with Research Booming, where power players can essentially outpace other empires due to focusing a lot on research. What enables this is usually Districts that provide Researcher Jobs, which is relatively easy to gain access to early on through Origins such as Shattered Ring or Void Dwellers (the latter not being nearly as strong).

For Shattered Ring we are looking into changing the start from a pure “end-game” Ring World, to be more of an actual “Shattered Ring” that you need to repair before you gain access to the powerful Districts of the Ring World. Putting additional emphasis on the fantasy of restoring this ancient megastructure to its former glory can be a fun addition to the Origin itself. Although we haven’t decided exactly what we’re doing, changing the start to be a Shattered Ring that you can restore with the Mega-Engineering technology is a likely route.

Unity & Empire Sprawl
Beyond Lem, we are also going to take a look at Empire Sprawl and Unity. The design for Admin Capacity was never really something that I felt worked out, and we never finished the design that was intended for it. Continuing to use Admin Cap as a mechanic also feels a bit like a dead end due to multiple reasons (ranging from design to technical), so we’re instead going to look into another solution.

I have a design for doubling down on using Unity as the resource for internal management, removing Admin Cap entirely, and to make Empire Sprawl something that you can never mitigate anymore. More sprawling empires will always suffer harsher penalties from Empire Sprawl, and we’ll instead focus on how Unity can be used internally to mitigate some of those penalties. Examples could be Edicts that have a Unity Upkeep Cost, and perhaps reduce the Research Cost Penalty induced by Empire Sprawl. Angry Pops could potentially also have a Unity Upkeep Cost, to represent the drain on your society.

Note that these ideas are very much in their infancy and very prone to change. We will probably start talking a bit more about that once Lem has been released, but I wanted to share some thoughts with you so that we could gather some initial feedback.

------

That’s all for this week folks! We’re in the middle of reviewing our dev diary schedule, so we’re hoping to be back with 2 more dev diaries before we take a summer break. We’ll keep you in the loop as we go.
 
  • 250Like
  • 62Love
  • 27
  • 19
  • 8
Reactions:
Examples could be Edicts that have a Unity Upkeep Cost, and perhaps reduce the Research Cost Penalty induced by Empire Sprawl. Angry Pops could potentially also have a Unity Upkeep Cost, to represent the drain on your society.
What about the Edict Cap?

The Edict Cap mechanic added new life to some of the authorities and civics that were under-used back when they merely reduced Edict costs or increased Edict duration, while still allowing other nations to exceed the Cap with "brute force" by spamming Bureaucrats. I'd hate to see the Sprawl rework undo those positive changes.
 
  • 2
Reactions:
dammit I'm gonna have to buy the plantoid and humanoid packs now. I hate you guys (I love your content).

Hear me out: Trade rework (probably been posted before, but I like to think I have a new-ish take)

While we're on the topic of sweeping changes to gameplay, is a trade rework something that you guys would consider doing as well? Balancing economy early game is really the only challenge, and it becomes easier and easier to do as tech is researched, not even being a problem in the late game. With this rework that I propose, it would revamp trade value to be a useful resource with more nuance and complexity while maintaining the old buy stuff sell stuff system that makes the early game possible.
Basically, trade value is counted as a resource and players accumulate it like any other resource, and nothing about the collection changes. But instead of using energy credits to buy and sell, trade value is used instead. All of the resources can still be converted to a universal medium of exchange (trade value instead of energy), but at much worse rates, maybe as little as 50%. But trade value is converted 1:1 (at fair prices, not 1 trade for 1 alloy). Research could buff trade production and exchange rates, and some extra effects could be added to market center as well. This could also lead to a lot of story and flavor to megacorps, which currently are just kind of normal oligarchy empires with the ability to open branch offices. Lastly, it would make trade builds, typically a bit weak, have their own niche to fill.
Trade value has always been sort of a special resource that could be turned into other resources, and energy credits have this weird dual purpose of being both energy and intergalactic currency. These changes would give clerks a purpose--balancing economy--as well as making energy more in line with being a resource.
I do have some concerns for newer players--it makes one of the first systems players interact with more complex--but this also doesn't replace current sell resources to buy resources system, it just adds a more complex layer on top that newer players can get better at as they become better at the game.
Anyway, love the work you guys are doing, and thank you for not taking the Blizzard/Activision/EA route. Stellaris (and kind of Paradox) is one of the last bastions of a large company executing a game well.
 
  • 6
  • 1Like
  • 1
Reactions:
Oh yes! If its a worker that goes, its the Culture Worker since its so generic. Bureaucrats would be the Unity producing job. That would mean shifting around some job-swaps (like managers for megacorps) to be swaps of the bureaucrat instead.

We absolutely need to maintain the idea of Trantor.
As much as I like the idea of Trantor, the society model of the game needs to also represent people working on artistic and cultural concerns. If not perhaps for all types of empires, definitely for most of them.

I'd go as far as introducing culture as a resource and culture emanation from colonies. You could tie the research penalty from admin cap and ease it with part of, or just matching of - culture income/points. I'd also like to see the so called culture flip of peacefully getting more space/planets due to that influence (think civ 4) Or some other mechanic to that effect. It would help pacificsts, and I would enjoy works of art, and other events around culture, that the game greatly lacks.

Just laying my thoughts here, now that you're just brainstoriming ideas.
 
  • 3Like
  • 3
  • 1
Reactions:
I feel like having a fixed empire sprawl is a great idea. I think perhaps the base value may need tweaking and it might be altered by things like efficient bureaucracy, perhaps as a flat increase. But it seems like a good way to provide an interesting trade off between many plants and few.

Just thinking out loud with rough numbers. If for example you had sprawl values per worker class and per pop multiplied by number of planets. So for example, 1 planet with 10 pops has 1 ruler, 3 specialist, and 6 workers. If their value was say 3,2, and 1 respectively. So a single planet empire would have a sprawl of 15 while if the same empire had 2 plents at the same level it would be 60 sprawl. Just a thought I was tossing around and wondered what other smarter people thought. Haha
 
  • 4
  • 1Like
Reactions:
Remember that if you make sprawl unmitigatable, you've got to do something with Megacorps, since they receive harsher penalties. I suggest that you let them lean harder into their branch offices somehow by, say, buffing the resources they gain from buildings/providing more slots.
 
  • 3
  • 1Like
  • 1
Reactions:
The problem is, either you focus on tech spam or you get punk'd. There's no middle ground, and nor is there really a downside to spamming research. Take Civ as an example: you can choose to spam out research, but doing so effectively requires you to adopt a tall strat and only have like 4 cities due to size penalties and your army will remain skeletal for ages since building a library stops you building units until it's done. Meamwhile in Stellaris spamming labs doesn't stop you also building ships since they have vastly different construction requirements and you can paint the galaxy as wide as you want as long as you throw down a few admin buildings.
While this is true, "basic research is slower the more cities you have" is a preposterous idea in Civ, and remains preposterous if you substitute "planets" for "cities".

Game devs really need to just accept that "the rich get richer" is an inevitable outcome in strategy games at some point, no matter how many hoops they make players jump through in an attempt to prevent it, and stop trying to hammer down the leader and punish success.
 
  • 10
  • 4
  • 3Like
Reactions:
My small suggestion:

1. Make old and new Phenotype Traits into a set of exclusive 0 cost traits that can be used with any portrait in empire creation.
2. Make Random empire generation always match traits to the appropriate portrait class (exactly like now).

That way you avoid problems with empire generation creating confusing combinations like almost exclusively furry robots (which would otherwise be guaranteed to occur due to the much larger number of organic portraits than machine portraits). Players can create whatever odd, or ugly combinations they desire like metallic looking Plantoid spider trees... hopefully everyone is happy.

Sounds like a perfect solution. It would also allow to make a humanoid plant like Delvians from Farscape.
 
  • 1
  • 1Like
Reactions:
While this is true, "basic research is slower the more cities you have" is a preposterous idea in Civ, and remains preposterous if you substitute "planets" for "cities".

Game devs really need to just accept that "the rich get richer" is an inevitable outcome in strategy games at some point, no matter how many hoops they make players jump through in an attempt to prevent it, and stop trying to hammer down the leader and punish success.
Many players don't find Expansion for Expansion's sake fun. Personally, my eyes glaze over and I want to just close the game if I ever have more than 5-6 worlds I have to micromanage. So I would strongly oppose anything that makes wide playstyles mandatory and tall playstyles dead.
 
  • 8
  • 7
  • 2Like
Reactions:
On the topic of these new portrait traits, does anyone here use the "Species Diversity" mod, because I have for a long time, and these changes remind me very much of it.
 
I don't understand this

I don't understand the issue of "Research Booming." I would expect that an empire that spends more resources towards tech and focuses on it should outpace one that does not. Why is that a problem? Or are you referring to an exploit that provides benefits beyond that of just merely making it a focus for your empire?

I understand the game by design props up weak empires and gives them protections (e.g. war goals to limit the scope of conquest) to make them harder to eliminate, thus giving them a chance to recover. This prolongs the game artificially for a more "epic" experience. Is instead the intention to do this with technology so that no empire can ever really be so technologically inferior that they cannot catch up?
My take on this is that even though you spend more on resources, the more labs on bodies, the more "scientists", the more duplication of research, which could mean that you should have dead end research, thus wasted effort.

One serious issue is the game assumption of instantaneous communications between population nodes.
 
  • 3
  • 1
Reactions:
Everything here again is very welcome news, now please make trade more engaging (at some point, of course, you have limited capacity) and Stellaris will be complete experience to me.
 
Game Balance
We’re going to take a look at reworking some of the major outstanding balance issues that we’re having.

One example that I want to talk about is the issue with Research Booming, where power players can essentially outpace other empires due to focusing a lot on research. What enables this is usually Districts that provide Researcher Jobs, which is relatively easy to gain access to early on through Origins such as Shattered Ring or Void Dwellers (the latter not being nearly as strong).
Sounds like "let's skip the AI having issues with research and do it another (easier for us) way"
 
  • 3
  • 1Like
  • 1
Reactions:
For me removing admin cap is not a step in the good direction because :

- It removes complexity in the game.
- For me unity is kinda the opposite of tech and should be treat as such not as a pseudo replacement of admin cap... To me it sounds that you don't know what to do about unity and since admin cap is not good at the moment, why not merge all of this, delete a bit and see what we can do ?
- We had "logarithm" cap in population... I simply don't understand why admin cap should not have the same thing, it is even more obvious on this one. The bigger you are, the harder it should be to reach the empire sprawl balance. We just have to find a soft cap (for empire sprawl) with some formula linked to the galaxy size and/or number of planets and boum, done... Since I'm French (sorry for my English u_u) I can really say that in a big administrative country 2 more bureaucrats will not solve a problem faster. It is often even the contrary. It can help to some degree but not in a massive and complex system. And we don't have this in Stellaris, your empire is not more "complex" as it size grown up.


and perhaps reduce the Research Cost Penalty induced by Empire Sprawl.
Seems to me that this is a hole in the dam you are trying to build against the "tech boum"...


With an exponential growth of admin jobs needed, it also should expose big empires / empires which ignore bureaucrats to harder downsides. The research penalty should be higher, at some point this should also create criminal jobs (aka undeclared casual work), this also should affect stability etc.

It is way more easy to balance such thing than to put unity in the basket. For me... Going on that road will just create the same problem that occured with the new pop system and clearly we don't need that at the moment since the new population system is not yet perfectly balanced...

To be simple, I agree that in the current state admin cap' and unity are not well used but clearly even if we agree on that, the current propositions are not convincing me...

=====

UNITY on the other side should be used to be the counter part of Nemesis. Like a peaceful/prosperous/architectural way to win the game thru projects/constructions/etc. It should also give other bonuses (with some of course must be military) etc...

For me both systems are already here, they need some ideas to balance the whole thing without blowing up a part of the game...
 
  • 6
  • 4Like
Reactions:
I love the hell out of this but it makes being able to disable those damn space fantasy elves, orcs, and dwarves even more important to me.

I just want to be able to turn off certain portraits I feel make no lore sense without turning off the DLC associated with them.
 
  • 1
  • 1Like
Reactions:
dammit I'm gonna have to buy the plantoid and humanoid packs now. I hate you guys (I love your content).

Hear me out: Trade rework (probably been posted before, but I like to think I have a new-ish take)

While we're on the topic of sweeping changes to gameplay, is a trade rework something that you guys would consider doing as well? Balancing economy early game is really the only challenge, and it becomes easier and easier to do as tech is researched, not even being a problem in the late game. With this rework that I propose, it would revamp trade value to be a useful resource with more nuance and complexity while maintaining the old buy stuff sell stuff system that makes the early game possible.
Basically, trade value is counted as a resource and players accumulate it like any other resource, and nothing about the collection changes. But instead of using energy credits to buy and sell, trade value is used instead. All of the resources can still be converted to a universal medium of exchange (trade value instead of energy), but at much worse rates, maybe as little as 50%. But trade value is converted 1:1 (at fair prices, not 1 trade for 1 alloy). Research could buff trade production and exchange rates, and some extra effects could be added to market center as well. This could also lead to a lot of story and flavor to megacorps, which currently are just kind of normal oligarchy empires with the ability to open branch offices. Lastly, it would make trade builds, typically a bit weak, have their own niche to fill.
Trade value has always been sort of a special resource that could be turned into other resources, and energy credits have this weird dual purpose of being both energy and intergalactic currency. These changes would give clerks a purpose--balancing economy--as well as making energy more in line with being a resource.
I do have some concerns for newer players--it makes one of the first systems players interact with more complex--but this also doesn't replace current sell resources to buy resources system, it just adds a more complex layer on top that newer players can get better at as they become better at the game.
Anyway, love the work you guys are doing, and thank you for not taking the Blizzard/Activision/EA route. Stellaris (and kind of Paradox) is one of the last bastions of a large company executing a game well.

I agree completely with the basics of this idea. Have the marketplace run on trade, not energy. (Admittedly it's not a new idea, but still a good one! ; ) I don't think it would be a silver bullet to fix the economy, but it would really help.

Plus, I think one of the big things that the economy needs is a clearer role for its resources. Personally, I would break them down into tiers (basic, advanced, strategic, intangible). Each tier should have a clear role in the game.

For basic resources (food, energy, minerals), I think maintenance costs are a very good role. Food is the upkeep for your people, minerals are the upkeep for your buildings and planetary infrastructure, energy is the upkeep for your ships and space infrastructure. That seems straightforward and clear to me. They have a few other things you can do here and there (pay for a leader or a building), but for most of the game most of what you would do with those resources is balance upkeep.

Then advanced resources (alloys, research, cg's) could drive internal player choices about their economy. What do you need, and how do you balance those needs? (Although cg's need to be entirely rewritten, since they are a pure upkeep resource right now.) Strategic resources (gas, motes, crystal) could be reworked to drive conflict and external player choices about the galaxy. And intangible resources (influence, unity and trade) can be reworked to determine what choices a player has.

But definitely, I like starting with a marketplace based on trade rather than energy. Plus it would give a reason to have trade in the first place, since right now it's basically just an ersatz energy.
 
  • 1Like
Reactions:
the issue with Research Booming, where power players can essentially outpace other empires due to focusing a lot on research.
...
The design for Admin Capacity was never really something that I felt worked out, and we never finished the design that was intended for it. Continuing to use Admin Cap as a mechanic also feels a bit like a dead end due to multiple reasons (ranging from design to technical), so we’re instead going to look into another solution.

I have a design for doubling down on using Unity as the resource for internal management, removing Admin Cap entirely, and to make Empire Sprawl something that you can never mitigate anymore. More sprawling empires will always suffer harsher penalties from Empire Sprawl, and we’ll instead focus on how Unity can be used internally to mitigate some of those penalties. Examples could be Edicts that have a Unity Upkeep Cost, and perhaps reduce the Research Cost Penalty induced by Empire Sprawl. Angry Pops could potentially also have a Unity Upkeep Cost, to represent the drain on your society.
Oh yes! If its a worker that goes, its the Culture Worker since its so generic. Bureaucrats would be the Unity producing job.
Thank you for sharing ideas in their infancy. In return, I will share my own experience with Admin Cap: the period starting from Admin Cap's introduction until the Bureaucrat job's introduction was a time when I could not motivate myself to push a single Stellaris campaign beyond 2250 or so. I was adjusting to the no-more-planet-tiles economy and seeing hefty research penalties for going wide early killed my motivation.

The earlygame is defined by "land grabbing": so many unclaimed systems to "plant your flag on". Anomalies and other narrative events don't hold as much traction for the repeat player. Your economy and diplomacy options haven't ramped up yet. Your meagre fleet is waiting on the economy to get big. You could pump out lots of alloy, but with trade lanes letting you control when pirates first appear, there's much less earlygame urgency to build up your fleet. So instead you pump out consumer goods so you can research and expand more. If the RNG happens to spawn your empire far away from other empires, you have all this empty space wanting to be claimed.

The idea of "research is your number one priority" is baked into player mindset and for good reason: it's sci-fi, we want to get to the cool tech faster as well as unlocking the big guns sooner. Seeing your 3 research bars go up faster and faster in the earlygame is a key reward of the earlygame experience. Even without selecting the OP research origins, the player still wants to maximise the experience rewards of the earlygame: secure more land, finish more tech. The no-bureaucrats-yet Admin Cap's research penalties made me feel punished for wanting to maximise my enjoyment of the earlygame, if only because the other reward structures of Stellaris hadn't kicked in yet. The rest of Empire Sprawl's penalties felt right - more expensive leader upkeeps, tradition prices and edict costs just made sense. Nerfing research with no way to mitigate was a deal breaker.

On the other hand, you don't want players to "power level" their tech really fast and break any challenge in the campaign (unless they're doing some stunt like 2250 End Game Year, x25 Crisis Strength). It feels like the only player stories I get to see involve Fallen/Awakened Empires, The Crisis and maybe the Khan. The regular empires played by the AI are mere speedbumps holding no substance after the first war with any of them.

I do not think Empire Sprawl -> Research Cost Penalty is the right way to slow down the research-focused player. Two lines of thought come to mind:

1) make other jobs more 'competitive' for the player to prioritise them

One obvious competitor is alloy jobs. More earlygame fleet demands (or other alloy sinks) to make player think twice and going all-in on consumer goods + research jobs. Doesn't have to mean military threats, could be events needing a certain fleet size for Xenophile purposes. For example "omg we need some concentrated firepower on this inanimate object to save these aliens!" or "oh shit, we need X alloy in the next Y months to save something valuable!"

Another would be unity jobs. Bad Things must happen to the player completely neglecting unity jobs to go all-in on research. Things like rebellions, pirates (even if trade lanes are secure), research progress loss, resource loss, internal sabotage (perhaps flavoured as espionage operations your own people do to each other), etc. An organic stick to make the player diversify from going all-in on research.

2) introduce soft caps per tech tier

Taking a page out of HoI4 (and a lesser degree, EU4) have tier-specific Research Cost Penalty if a player is trying to spike through a narrow slice of the possible techs to rush towards their goals. I don't think those penalties should be tied to the game year (which is an arbitrary number) but something more organic. Maybe whether other regular empires have similar tech (even without research agreements), or perhaps on having a certain number of the previous tech tier being researched, or even "it takes X years for this discovery to become commonplace in your empire". Actually that last one is based on an issue with most games' tech trees (which HoI4 subverts): "research complete" is immediately followed by "now everyone uses the new tech". EU4 institutions and HoI4 production line efficiencies paint a more granular picture - time is needed for new tech to become everyday common sense.

It'd be a much bigger feature than a simple balance change, but maybe that last idea has promise: the research bar represents the progress to the first successful prototype demonstration. That progress isn't affected by Empire Sprawl, but the rate at which tech is ADOPTED is affected. Not sure what it'd mean for a tech to be invented but not yet adopted: perhaps its benefits can only be found in the capital and specialised research colonies?
 
  • 4
  • 1
  • 1
Reactions: