Stellaris Dev Diary #84: Čapek Feature Roundup (part 2)

[Wizzington]

Hello everyone and welcome to another Stellaris development diary. Today's dev diary is a continuation of the feature round-up in the 1.8 'Čapek' update that we started in last week's dev diary. In this one, we'll be talking about some new policies being added to the game. Everything mentioned in this dev diary is part of the free update.

Land Appropriation
The first new policy added is called 'Land Appropriation'. This policy is available to all ethics and governs whether or not newly conquered planets should have land appropriated from non-citizen species. If this policy is on, any newly conquered planet with less than 5 tiles of unblocked free space will have some non-citizen pops removed to clear way for citizen pops. These pops are either simply removed outright (simulating being driven into slums and fringe regions) or become refugees that will attempt to flee to an empire that will have them. Additionally, any planet that has land seized will get a temporary 'Land Appropriated' modifier that massively increases migration attraction and prevents non-citizen species from reproducing and migrating there while in effect. Non-multispecies AI empires will make use of this policy, meaning that even regular wars of conquest will generate refugees, indirectly boosting refugee haven empires.

Pre-Sapient Policies
The policies for Pre-Sapients (previously Pre-Sentients, we have changed the Sentient/Sapient terminology in 1.8) have been expanded in 1.8. The following policies are now available for choosing how to deal with pre-sapients:
* Extermination: Pre-Sapients are quickly and efficiently exterminated to make room for your Pops.
* Livestock: Pre-Sapients are hunted and eaten, producing food for your empire, though this will slowly deplete their population. They can also be manually purged at will. Depletion is mostly done for balance reasons, as otherwise there would be no reason *not* to eat them.
* Tolerated: Pre-Sapients are tolerated and will generally not be interfered with, though they can be manually purged or killed off via terraforming.
* Protected: Pre-Sapients are protected from purging and worlds they are living on cannot be terraformed.

Initial Border Status
A new policy has been added that controls the initial border status you have towards other empires: open or closed. This only affects the status of borders after establishing communications and has no effect on empires you have not contacted. It also does not prevent manual opening or closing of borders towards select empires.

Robotic Workers
The last new policy ties into the changes to artificial intelligence policies discussed in dev diary 78 and is simply a blanket policy for whether robotic workers should be permitted to be built and maintained. If banned, all robot pops in your empire will automatically be disassembled.

Manual Purging
Finally for today, also as a result of feedback given after dev diary 78, we have brought back the manual Purge button for organic pops as well, though its use is highly restricted. You can manually purge selective Pops only if they are Slaves, non-protected Pre-Sapients, or robotic Pops without citizen rights. The rules for which Pops can be Purged/Disassembled are fully moddable.

That's all for today! Next week we'll continue the feature roundup by talking about changes to Ascension Paths and Megastructures and the addition of Awakened Empire Decadence.

 

[Wizzington]

there should be no restrictions on manual purging at all, if I want to purge my own citizens then I should be able to do that from the start

No, for reasons already discussed. You can easily mod the game to allow that though.

 

[Wizzington]

If we haven't announced a release date, you'll have enough time to start and finish a new game unless you play very infrequently.

I can't give any more details than that.

 

[Caligula Caesar]

Cool With new policies for pre-sapients, does that mean that there will be more of them around? At the moment, there are so few of them that it isn't really worth the effort to pay attention to them.

Also, are there any plans to do a bit more with primitive civilisations? Not that I really mind the current options (I think that purgers should have the option of simply exterminating them, though), what I mean is rather to get the AI to do more with them - I often find that the AI hasn't even built observation posts on the planets, which it kinda should even if it only wants to get the society bonus. There's also some conceptual stuff that's a bit iffy on early space civs - surely they would notice your activity in their system (especially if you inhabit another planet, fight space battles in their orbit, etc)?

 

[Wizzington]

Why does livestock represent them being hunted with slow population decline?

Surely livestock implies they're kept and bred for the purposes of maintaining a sustainable food supply.

I spelled out the reason in the OP. There would be zero reason to use Tolerated instead of Livestock if it had no downsides.

 

[Wizzington]

How does this work for Caste System Pops? I've felt in the past there's been some frustrating limitations with the Caste System, and here it seems ripe for exploitation (put a Pop of undesired ethics on a miniral/food tile and purge them). What I'd like to see:

1. Caste System slaves can't be purged.
2. Caste System free Pops can migrate. (Last time I played, it was very annoying that you couldn't give free migration to Caste System Pops.)

Caste System pops can indeed not be purged, only fully enslaved species. The reason they can't migrate is that they could end up migrating into slavery, so that's not changing.

 

[Wizzington]

Could we suggest changing the name then ? It doesn't mean the same thing to pre-sapients and sapients species, which can be a bit confusing

I can change it to 'Hunted'. Not guaranteed to make it into 1.8 though.

 

[Wizzington]

maybe a xenophage opinion modifier?

They're not sapient. At most xenophiles might be a little miffed.

 

[Wizzington]

Assuming the closed border policy generates negative modifiers from all other empires?

Not beyond the usual -20 from closed borders, but having a lower opinion on first contact makes AI-controlled empires more likely to take a negative strategic stance towards you.

 

[Wizzington]

I'd rather you fixed the poorly designed faction/ethics system then limit purging to slavery. I don't think you expose enough of the faction system for mods to properly balance it and it's nearly impossible to play with them in multiplayer anyway.

The faction system is completely moddable and does not differ in single and multiplayer. What on earth are you rambling about?

 

[Wizzington]

1. Expanded fleet control (formations, postures)? No?
2. Empire ship prefix midgame change? No?
3. Empire color and emblem midgame change? No?
4. Buildable titans/dreadnoughts? No?
5. Lunar bases/research or military installations? No?

Why smallest features keep going while big and important giants, such as these 3 above aren't even commented/announced? How such basic things are still being ignored? I can understand Story Packs and other kinds of DLC - business is business, money come first, BUT why "Land Appropriation" comes BEFORE midgame faction customization or even basic combat?

Different things take different amount of times to implement, and your pet issues are not automatically everyone else's pet issues.

 

[Wizzington]

I wouldn't call them "pet issues", but if you used to it, fine. And that's not the answer. Some things, such as midgame customization, were required a long time ago. I just wondered why other non-paid things get priority and why their "pet issues" must be more important than those of others people.

Because as Game Director, I chose them to get priority, because I thought they were important, or because they were simple to implement, or because a lot of people asked for it, or because they fit thematically into an update or expansion/story pack, or any number of other reasons. You're free to disagree with my choices, but just because you think something is 'required' does not make it so.

 

[Wizzington]

I was more suggesting towards the wants of quality of life changes people have been asking for since launch.. Not whatever the guy said about lunar bases.

We have implemented a vast number of QoL changes requested by people since launch. Expansion Planner, Rally Points, Track All just to mention a few off the top of my head. Hell, the open/closed borders policy is precisel such a frequently requested QoL change.

 

[Wizzington]

I recognize this and I applaud a lot of these, I don't want to give off that I dislike the approach you've made on the game though I disagree with your DLC policy, there are some things that I assume are small that have been asked for for a long time.

Like the army equipment stuff, specifically comes to mind. upgrading a certain tier building in bulk - as in when you research a new energy station upgrading all energy stations on the planet in one click rather than 14.

So, you recognize that we implement things based on request, but you think I'm lying about implementing things based on requests. Okay then.

Anyway, army attachmentsis because we're almost certainly going to overhaul the army system entirely when we get to warfare, and the gameplay impact of attachments is minimal, so we don't want to waste time making a new interface for it. The upgrade all is a little trickier than you might think, but it's on the priority list. It's mostly an issue in the endgame if you have a lot of core sector planets, which most people don't, so that's why it hasn't been given highest prio.

 

[Wizzington]

Egalitarians can seize land? What?

Egalitarians may not necessarily be about equality between species. They can't seize land from citizens (nobody can).

 

[Wizzington]

Hey come on man, I haven't disrespected you as many of the others you've faced today. I do not imply you don't see and implement things we've wanted to a long time rather that the loudest of things seemingly get addressed last. You said this in your post, that you will prioritize things based on how easy they are to implement sometimes, I question this when there are larger issues that are more prevalent that should be addressed before the fluffy, small things.

This is what I question, in a respectful way to your persons. Not insulting your abilities or competence as a game director.

I read your post as saying I wasn't being honest about us implementing things based on request (because I did say it was just one of our priorities when making decisions). If that's not what you meant, then fair enough.

 

[Wizzington]

I do not like the philosophy of the dev diaries. we now have announced changes, updates and fixes for stellaris, that were announced three months ago, that are still not in the live game. I would much rather be kept in the dark about dev progress, than have to see common-sense changes being put into builds that I cannot even have in my live games until months and months later.

We're going to continue to update our players on our development process, I'm afraid. You're of course free to dislike it but I can only suggest not reading teasers and dev diaries if so.