• 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.
"Here's another look at a feature that's currently in early development in the internal @StellarisGame build. For details, you'll have to wait until feature dev diaries return."

Dh5WdR1XUAE-pQt.jpg


https://twitter.com/Martin_Anward/status/1017345674394955776
30% MARKET FEE?!?! WHAT KIND OF GALACTIC SCAM EXCHANGE IS THIS?!
Almost 100% spread between buying/selling. This is worse than trading sh*tcoins on a dex.
 
No, no no no no no NO.

There's already no conflict-generation over key systems in Stellaris. All solar systems are fungible because there's nothing (good) you can get in System A that you can't get in System B, and so why bother going to war over System A?

Making geostrategy even less important with a "Don't have Neutronium? Don't worry man, just buy it from the market!" is exactly the WRONG direction to take because it makes territorial control of even the weaksauce strat resources we have now nigh-worthless.

My warnings have gone unheeded
While I do somewhat agree, you can ask generate conflict by making resource scarcity more of a thing and also make the things strategic resources do much more important.

Even though it's not a great comparison look at hoi4. You can trade for resources there but some of the prime reasons to invade certain areas is to take the resources present.

The way I see it is that if trade is balanced properly then peaceful(ish) empires can compete with out needing to expand as much, whilst aggressive empires that are diplomatically isolated will need to eat for the resources. If course that really depends on implementation and balance. Let's hope for the best.
 
No, no no no no no NO.

There's already no conflict-generation over key systems in Stellaris. All solar systems are fungible because there's nothing (good) you can get in System A that you can't get in System B, and so why bother going to war over System A?

Making geostrategy even less important with a "Don't have Neutronium? Don't worry man, just buy it from the market!" is exactly the WRONG direction to take because it makes territorial control of even the weaksauce strat resources we have now nigh-worthless.

My warnings have gone unheeded
You're making a lot of assumptions about how this is going to work.
 
You're making a lot of assumptions about how this is going to work.
I invite you to suggest a plausible meaning behind the visible neutronium, zro, dark matter, and enegos symbols in the marketplace that doesn't increase their fungiblity.
While I do somewhat agree, you can ask generate conflict by making resource scarcity more of a thing and also make the things strategic resources do much more important.
Well, sure, if you add a very good change on top of a bad change then you end up with an aggregate good change, but the bad part is still bad and we'd still all be better off if they didn't do the bad part.
 
You're making a lot of assumptions about how this is going to work.
Even if there are assumption the point still stand, at least from my PoV. You hardly have any reasons to start a war. Stabilize your borders, prevent other Empires from ganging on you and amassing resources for incoming crisis is basically everything. Even in early game, peaceful expansion is so much cheaper than aggression. I understand that it was done to fix early aggression that was a meta in older versions, but, IMO they went overboard. They need an early phase of wars, before claims system, that allow easier system swapping (but with limitations to avoid original problem).
 
Wait, didn't they remove exchanging minerals to energy in 2.0 because people were just ignoring energy and focusimg on minerals? Now it looks like they are putting it back in.

What about the traders we have from the levithians DLC, will the new market replace them?
It looks like there is a limited amount of resources on the market, so if nobody is selling then you can't buy. Unlike the old trade station which had infinite resources to buy or sell.
 
You're making a lot of assumptions about how this is going to work.
He's not assuming anything. This exact system is present in Endless Space 2 and all it does is that it makes luxury resource deposits worthless, since you can straight up buy them off the market, while in terms of strategic resources you just focus on the last two (Quadrinix and Orichalcix to be precise) and simply ignore the rest since again, you can simply buy them from the market. And if your race has bonus to money production, you can ignore resource deposits completely and get everything just from the market.
It went so far, that system which has 3 habitable planets but no resource deposits is much more valuable than a system that has 1 habitable planet but 2-3 resource deposits.
 
Me back in May:
Here's hoping we get a complete rework of Strategic Resources that is more akin to, for example, Gal Civs 3 resource system where you actively produce small amounts of strategic resources (like you would produce Minerals) and those can then be used for special ship modules, buildings or be traded away. Would also align really well with a future trade & diplomacy update. ;):rolleyes:

Now:

"Here's another look at a feature that's currently in early development in the internal @StellarisGame build. For details, you'll have to wait until feature dev diaries return."

Dh5WdR1XUAE-pQt.jpg


https://twitter.com/Martin_Anward/status/1017345674394955776

If we really get a rework for Strategic Resources similar to GalCiv III that'd be fantastic. :oops:

Ladies, Gentlemen and Aliens. The possibilities are endless!
 
He's not assuming anything. This exact system is present in Endless Space 2 and all it does is that it makes luxury resource deposits worthless, since you can straight up buy them off the market, while in terms of strategic resources you just focus on the last two (Quadrinix and Orichalcix to be precise) and simply ignore the rest since again, you can simply buy them from the market. And if your race has bonus to money production, you can ignore resource deposits completely and get everything just from the market.
It went so far, that system which has 3 habitable planets but no resource deposits is much more valuable than a system that has 1 habitable planet but 2-3 resource deposits.
The assumptions are that these market resources come from nowhere (as opposed to needing to be sold by some other empire to become available), that strategic resources work the same way they do now (i.e. having just one gives you an empire-wide bonus), that those icons directly map to existing resources and aren't simply being used as placeholders (there's only one of each category- one gas, one crystal, one ore, etc), that all assets remain totally interchangeable (which a switch to raw vs. refined materials would likely run counter to), etc...
 
Even if there are assumption the point still stand, at least from my PoV. You hardly have any reasons to start a war. Stabilize your borders, prevent other Empires from ganging on you and amassing resources for incoming crisis is basically everything. Even in early game, peaceful expansion is so much cheaper than aggression. I understand that it was done to fix early aggression that was a meta in older versions, but, IMO they went overboard. They need an early phase of wars, before claims system, that allow easier system swapping (but with limitations to avoid original problem).
You are assuming that these resources will always be available and in abundance. Owning a deposit gives you stable flow of that resource, while market can dry out for various reasons in most unexpected moment.
 
You are assuming that these resources will always be available and in abundance. Owning a deposit gives you stable flow of that resource, while market can dry out for various reasons in most unexpected moment.
No, i wasn't guessing about future implementation, just commenting that in current version, IMO, we do have a problem with not having enough reasons to go for wars and almost no long standing plans. And i hope that their new mechanics won't make things worse.
 
The assumptions are that these market resources come from nowhere (as opposed to needing to be sold by some other empire to become available), that strategic resources work the same way they do now (i.e. having just one gives you an empire-wide bonus), that those icons directly map to existing resources and aren't simply being used as placeholders (there's only one of each category- one gas, one crystal, one ore, etc), that all assets remain totally interchangeable (which a switch to raw vs. refined materials would likely run counter to), etc...

You are assuming that these resources will always be available and in abundance. Owning a deposit gives you stable flow of that resource, while market can dry out for various reasons in most unexpected moment.

No, resources in ES 2 are not pulled "out of nowhere", they are placed on the marked in abundance either by empires/races that are all about peace (i.e. build fleet once in a lifetime and all resource expenditures end there) or races that have bonuses to said resource production.
 
"Here's another look at a feature that's currently in early development in the internal @StellarisGame build. For details, you'll have to wait until feature dev diaries return."

Dh5WdR1XUAE-pQt.jpg


https://twitter.com/Martin_Anward/status/1017345674394955776

Regarding Strategic Resources, what I get from this is that now the facilities will gather a monthly amount, which will be stockpiled. This stockpile will allow us to sell (or buy) amounts of resources while in a fashion similar to editcs, we will be able to activate buffs that consume these resources. Sounds very neat.
 
that strategic resources work the same way they do now (i.e. having just one gives you an empire-wide bonus)

This is what I'm questioning the most right now after seeing the image. Two resources(strategic?) had values of over five hundred while some had around fifty.

This is just guesswork, but me thinks strategic resources may be required to build stuff.
 
Wait, didn't they remove exchanging minerals to energy in 2.0 because people were just ignoring energy and focusimg on minerals? Now it looks like they are putting it back in.
[...]
The problem was more that the exchange rate was fixed.
If it works anything like in AoE2 or SoSE, your 5000 food will be worth close to nothing after a short while if there isn't actual demand on the market.

I invite you to suggest a plausible meaning behind the visible neutronium, zro, dark matter, and enegos symbols in the marketplace that doesn't increase their fungiblity.

Well, sure, if you add a very good change on top of a bad change then you end up with an aggregate good change, but the bad part is still bad and we'd still all be better off if they didn't do the bad part.
I haven't been in the office for a while, so I have no idea how it is supposed to work either, but if you look at ES2 you also have all ressources in the trade screen - with the actual available quantity for purchase is equal to what was actually sold by another empire in the past.
 
If it works anything like in AoE2 or SoSE, your 5000 food will be worth close to nothing after a short while if there isn't actual demand on the market.
That sounds amazing, I really hope it turns out like that. So far this looks like the kind of trade system I always wanted from Victoria 2: dynamic, based on supply and demand, yet actually intuitive to use. If this alongside the pop and planet mechanics live up to their potential, looks like this could be an even better update than Cherryh/Apocalypse.