Stellaris Dev Diary #206: Directing Nemesis

[Mik_C]

I wouldn't say we outright design things to make them reusable, but its more so the opposite. Look at what existing systems exist within our games and see what can be reused/borrowed. There's advantages to having systems work similarly across different game titles, as it makes the process of learning a new system less difficult when you recognize parts of it.

We do consider the long-term when designing a system though. You generally don't want to take on too much risk at once, so sometimes it's good to design a more robust system and keep your more specialized ideas for future opportunities. Have a plan for what you want the system or feature to achieve, but also consider how you may expand upon it in the future, after you've gained your learnings from it being live for a while.

The system for Becoming the Crisis (the progression itself) is in some ways similar to the federation system. Unlock a level and gain access to a list of perks that are linked to that level. On a technical level, unlocking crisis levels & perks is therefore quite similar to how you unlock federation perks through levels. The process of gaining "XP" or Menace, is entirely different however.

I think there's a lot of interesting aspects of the federation system and the galactic community that could, if put into one system, be quite interesting.

I see, thanks for the insight!

Another question that comes to my mind is if this practice has some negatives, like that it may become repetitive for a player to have too similar systems in a game. Have you encountered problems from reusing systems like this example or another ones?

 

[Mastikator]

I have a question for the devs:

Will it be possible for multiple empires to take the Nemesis path? For example in multiplayer, would two players be able to become the Crisis, or does one get locked out when the first player becomes the Nemesis?

Are Nemesises automatically hostile to each other? Do they have to fight for the throne?

 

[Verx90]

Will it be possible for multiple empires to take the Nemesis path? For example in multiplayer, would two players be able to become the Crisis, or does one get locked out when the first player becomes the Nemesis?

i remember that they said there is no actual limit to the number of empires that pick nemesis, but AI will tend to pick it only with 1 empire ( if there are no other empires that picked nemesis)

 

[Libertine Angel]

i remember that they said there is no actual limit to the number of empires that pick nemesis, but AI will tend to pick it only with 1 empire ( if there are no other empires that picked nemesis)

That, plus if a player's already trying it they're weighted against it further.

 

[Verx90]

mh... i've a question about the developement .


how did you come up with the use of darkmatter as the resources to use for the crisis ?

why not a new resource ?
did you want it to be buyable by the market ?

 

[hart30]

A new ressource solely for the crisis perk? Would this not be completely useless for every non-crisis empire? I believe dark matter was a good solution, as it does not have many uses aside from T6 ship components (zro probably also would have worked, but creating that stuff by destroying stars would not have made any sense storywise)

 

[Verx90]

A new ressource solely for the crisis perk? Would this not be completely useless for every non-crisis empire? I believe dark matter was a good solution, as it does not have many uses aside from T6 ship components (zro probably also would have worked, but creating that stuff by destroying stars would not have made any sense storywise)

i'm well aware, but they did create a new resource for nanites , and gave them new ways to be used.

it was possible, but they didn't follow with it , and i can see the reasons .

but i find anyway the desire to know what made the weight for going with it .


there are multiple reason not to create a new resource, as there are to create a new resource .

for example, the expense of adding the new resource to the UI , the use of said resource in creative way and not simply another nanite\special resource with classic edicts , adding another factor of powercreep .

or opposite the desire for more possibility if resources , new rarity , new effects and a desire-dependency . diversification .

 

[Colonizor48]

Since the next dev diary is on April Fool's Day are you going to do something cruel to troll us?

They are going to say they are going to finaly bring back wormhole/warp travel or an internal politics update.

 

[Mímisbrunnr]

They are going to say they are going to finaly bring back wormhole/warp travel or an internal politics update.

Introducing the Stellaris Dating Sim!

April Fools!

 

[Nyrael]

We've had pretty generic "filler" DDs for a month or more, and now we have a DD that makes a point of pre-apologizing in advance for the DLC not being everything it could be. Every paragraph mentions how the team wanted to do more... but couldn't.

And people wonder why Developers are getting stingier to talk about development and their plans and why something isn't there.
This part is nitpicking as there is no game in existence for which developers don't have a huge list of things they wish they could have added and things they hope they'll add.

 

[Mr. Wiggles]

Utopia was about internal politics?

 

[Verx90]

Utopia was about internal politics?

not realy?

it had some things about economy, esploration , direction of an empire ...

i would say that Utopia gave a way to define better your empire.

it is more about diplomacy , esploration and science than internal politics .

 

[Mr. Wiggles]

not realy?

it had some things about economy, esploration , direction of an empire ...

i would say that Utopia gave a way to define better your empire.

it is more about diplomacy , esploration and science than internal politics .

Well, devs said that. I agree with you. just saying that talking about internal politics for a game that has none sounds a bit delusional...

 

[Tamwin5]

Utopia was about internal politics?

The free update alongside Utopia added civics, authority type, overhauled ethics, and added the current faction model that we use currently. So yes, I'd say it covered internal politics, at least concerning the Utopia Dev cycle.

 

[Mastikator]

Utopia was about internal politics?

The free patch that came with Utopia (1.6) did in fact drastically transform internal politics. Factions used to be a strictly detrimental thing.

 

[Mr. Wiggles]

The free update alongside Utopia added civics, authority type, overhauled ethics, and added the current faction model that we use currently. So yes, I'd say it covered internal politics, at least concerning the Utopia Dev cycle.

They just added more modifiers, internal politics are struggle and dynamism.

 

[Tamwin5]

They just added more modifiers, internal politics are struggle and dynamism.

When I say "added civics", I mean the civic system didn't exist before. And factions ARE struggle and dynamism to some extent, trying to keep them all happy in exchange for influence. I fully agree that they need a full, dedicated internal politics update delving into the systems, but utopia's patch does count as internal politics.