Home Trending Latest threads New posts Developer diaries

2.2 & Megacorp Teasers

Jump to latest Follow Reply
  • 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 51294 Bug Reports 32001 Suggestions 19779 Tech Support 2990 Multiplayer 383 User Mods 4697 Stellaris AAR (After Action Reports) Console edition 1237
Show only dev responses
Reader mode
The Founder said:
If I put Enforcers at a low Priority, of course the Slave planet would rebel. Enforcers are Specialist class pops at leat.
Slaves might not cost you a lot of housing. The additional Enforcers you need to keep them from overthrowing you, do.
Click to expand...
The point is that @Mitten 's assertion that there's effectively just a big red button with "PUSH TO CAUSE PLANET REVOLT" is not true.

It is not ridiculously implausible that you might find yourself in a situation where you need raw resources for warfare stat, so you want to reassign pops from enforcement to mining, and 3 of your slave planets can handle that but 1 of them can't, so you grit your teeth and accept a high probability of one-planet slave revolt in order to prevent 5 planets being lost to the enemy war machine.

I mean, I agree that currently in 2.1 you have to be willfully negligent to get a slave revolt, but if the inter-mechanical balance is improved in 2.2 then maybe not.
 
Oscot said:
Happiness currently buffs planet production proportionally.
But still nobody cares about happiness, because the advantages of cranking it up to 100 aren't worth the effort. The only thing anyone cares about is preventing insurrection.
Click to expand...
That is only true because there are so many other sources, particular of percentile bonuses.
With districts at least multiple levels of Mines/Farms/Plants will be gone. So why would the rest of economic bonuses - including the percentile ones - not change?

It is also worth noting that it is all Job Outputs. +10% Minerals from slaves is not worth a lot for your Miltary, if you need a Alloy Foundary with Metallurgist Sepcialists to actually turn that into Miltiary Ships. The stabiltiy bonus might well be the only bonus that affects all resoruces.
 
Riftwalker said:
actually an uprigged faction system is quite easily DLC material(as opposed to free patch stuff we're seeing now).
Click to expand...

i got a lot of downvotes, but i don't particularly see why. I was just saying have a complex faction system could be part of a DLC, while people without the DLC would have what we currently have.
 
Riftwalker said:
i got a lot of downvotes, but i don't particularly see why. I was just saying have a complex faction system could be part of a DLC, while people without the DLC would have what we currently have.
Click to expand...
I can't downvote you because I'm a probie, but I would have if I could because you're wrong.

It's a very bad idea in practice to rework core mechanics in DLC. Because then:
A) Devs have to maintain / bugcheck / playtest 2 different versions of the game rather than one
B) You can't build off faction mechanics in another DLC (say, a story pack that adds more political events) because some people won't have those faction mechanics

DLC content kinda has to be restricted to semi-cosmetic ephemera, because anything you might want to build on later needs to be in the base game.
And the faction system (may, should) be more than cosmetic ephemera.
 
Oscot said:
I can't downvote you because I'm a probie, but I would have if I could because you're wrong.

It's a very bad idea in practice to rework core mechanics in DLC. Because then:
A) Devs have to maintain / bugcheck / playtest 2 different versions of the game rather than one
B) You can't build off faction mechanics in another DLC (say, a story pack that adds more political events) because some people won't have those faction mechanics

DLC content kinda has to be restricted to semi-cosmetic ephemera, because anything you might want to build on later needs to be in the base game.
And the faction system (may, should) be more than cosmetic ephemera.
Click to expand...

but stuff like this happens all the time in paradox games, look at the most recent EU4 dev dairy, where governments are being changed a bit, and if you don;t have the DLC they'll be the same as before, but with DLC they got all these added bells and whistles, it's actually what gave me the idea.
 
Riftwalker said:
but stuff like this happens all the time in paradox games, look at the most recent EU4 dev dairy, where governments are being changed a bit, and if you don;t have the DLC they'll be the same as before, but with DLC they got all these added bells and whistles, it's actually what gave me the idea.
Click to expand...

It completely goes against their design philosophy for this game though. They even added ascension perks to the base game because they were considered too essential, and this is in my opinion a far more basic part of the game.
Furthermore, as has been said before, they basically have to maintain two different games, which also means they are limited in what they can do with them in the future. That EU4 does it ( I wouldn't know, haven't played it in a long time) , doesn't make it any less problematic to do.
 
Riftwalker said:
but stuff like this happens all the time in paradox games, look at the most recent EU4 dev dairy, where governments are being changed a bit, and if you don;t have the DLC they'll be the same as before, but with DLC they got all these added bells and whistles, it's actually what gave me the idea.
Click to expand...
The fact that they can do it and they have done it doesn't mean that they should do it.

They can and did put a tile system in 1.0. But they shouldn't have.

Ditto core-mechanic DLC, for the reasons outlined.
 
Riftwalker said:
but stuff like this happens all the time in paradox games, look at the most recent EU4 dev dairy, where governments are being changed a bit, and if you don;t have the DLC they'll be the same as before, but with DLC they got all these added bells and whistles, it's actually what gave me the idea.
Click to expand...
Yeah, and it's a very bad idea. Stellaris handles free content / DLC quite well, when EU4 fails completely on that matter. It seems they're the only team left who still struggles with it. CK2 seems to handle it better with Holy Fury than with say Jade Dragon (*cough* rally points *cough*), and we don't know enough about Man the Guns, but hey at least they can't do worse than putting the minimap in a DLC, right?

Also, look at the same EUIV patch. What was put behind a DLC before and is now released for free? Estates. What do they represent? Internal groups, fighting for influence and which have to be placated for bonuses or else they'll revolt.
What do say should be put behind a DLC? Interal groups, fighting for influence and which have to be placated for bonuses or else they'll revolt.
 
Last edited:
Economic policies
  • Index
    • Twitter

    Going to start writing today's dev diary shortly! For now, here's a peek at some new economic policies in the Le Guin update that allow you to specialize your economy.

    Dl1fVqAX4AAi71L.jpg
     
  • Add bookmark
  • Index
    • LeSingeAffame said:
    Twitter

    Going to start writing today's dev diary shortly! For now, here's a peek at some new economic policies in the Le Guin update that allow you to specialize your economy.

    Dl1fVqAX4AAi71L.jpg
    Click to expand...
    Presumably Mixed is no bonus or malice and civilian is the opposite, I mean not final number but if its really just those 3 choices that seems a little shallow, but maybe there is more, it would be neat if this is tied to Ethos, so like this example is Militaristic Egalitarian so each Ethic can give you a different way to plan your economy
     
    Salix said:
    I'm very interested in the Food Policy. Dietary Balance?
    Click to expand...
    I think it'll tie the food upkeep to the pop growth
    More food upkeep = higher pop growth
    Lower food upkeep = lower pop growth
     
    This is propably convenient in situations where you discover that you need to change the balance of your economy, but want to avoid extensive retooling.

    Something similar propably applies to that food policy.
     
    Reader mode
    You must log in or register to reply here.
    Top Bottom
    Back