Stellaris Survey Insights 2020

[King Harkinian]

The problem with Stellaris is performance slows down so much, discovering strange new worlds, playing till 2300-2350 or so and then starting a new game, basically becomes the entire game. I have never, not in over a thousand hours of Stellaris, actually fought the War in Heaven or the Crisis, because of performance issues. 2.7 let me break the ~2300 mark with more regularity to the 2350s, but otherwise, nope! Please, please, please, reduce the number of pops, and increase their production to compensate. We went from starting with 8 pops in 2.1 to 24 pops in 2.2. That's a three-fold increase! Increase pop production and impact on ethics by a factor of 3, and cut number of starting pops and pop-growth by the same amount for a quick and dirty fix. Make buildings more powerful since they'll still open at intervals of 5, for example by adding more upgrades that either don't need strategic resources, or, make strategic resource buildings upgradable for the mid/lategame, and add some early game buildings that produce a little of everything, but aren't specialized, and are suitable for that early game when you don't have many planets and building slots.

@grekulf

While the game has many problems, the one you are outlining here is entirely and completely your own. I just completed a multiplayer game today with 3 of my friends by defeating the (x5 strength) Crisis. 3 out of 4 of us play on 5+ year old laptops and we had absolutely no problem finishing the (medium size galaxy) game at a good pace, even though we also used AI mods that slowed the performance down more than usual. This was the third game I finished just since the latest patch.

I know there were big performance problems in Stellaris between 2.2 and 2.6, and I didn't play in that period for that reason as well as because of all the other bugs and design flaws I heard about, but Stellaris was highly playable before 2.2 and is highly playable now. You can't complain that the game runs poorly when you are trying to run it on a vintage toaster. It absolutely runs great right now.

The real problem with the game at present is that the military AI literally doesn't work, resulting in fleets doing nothing during wars for years on end. AI mods shouldn't be mandatory to play the game, and we shouldn't have to wait for months and months for this kind of stuff to be fixed.

Secondarily, there are of course huge balance and micromanagement problems that have been there since 2.2(tech spiraling out of control, resettlement spam...) and design flaws such as the exploration phase being too short and all the other empires being unveiled too quickly with too little fanfare(trading communications is too strong and the galactic community speeds up the process even further). But honestly, just fixing the AI would make Stellaris already a complete experience right now, just requiring some tweaks to default settings for balance reasons (fewer habitable planets and endgame starting in 2300-2350 to curb too much snowballing and tedious micro before the crisis).

 

[Mauer]

Should be in reverse order

Doesn't matter, these are all fantasy (and fantasy in space) franchises.

 

[Tvarog]

The survey is selected randomly from people who subscribe to the newsletter

like an e-mail newsletter? Is it really still a thing?

 

[Ridixo]

Random sampling is always more representative than an open survey. With an open survey, there's a strong bias towards people with strong opinions canvassing for people to take the survey in support of their "side" of something. Controlling for those kinds of biases is way more important than the raw number of samples taken.

I agree, but what worries me is how much big the sample is. Lets say that a thousand play the game, a hundred and fifty visit he forum, but the random picking of the newsletter only got twelve people. You got an too small sample to get any meaningful insight and and even less to present it later as something people want, ask or like. Think that even among the people subscribed to the newsletter only got a fraction, and then we should consider that of that fraction how much people took its time to answer the survey. So in the best case we got a fraction of a fraction. So for me these insights they got only represent a too small sample to be meaningful. If people is vocal with what they want is for a reason. The game has problems, the players want to have these problems resolve, so far the Devs have failed on that and the players have good reasons to be strong opinions in them and the game. Yet, that strong opinions doesn't necessarily will taint the whole survey. In a question about which spaceship design they like the more is difficult to rant over the performance. If they need to rank their favorite species pack, they will have difficult to ask for a better AI. Also the survey would be individual so it's fairly difficult for as you said: "canvassing for people to take the survey in support of their "side" of something."

A newsletter lets them get word directly from the source without any additional "noise".

Because otherwise people will not be able to enter the forum and read only the STICKY THREADS part?
I will not say that there isn't any toxic post or even threads on the forum, but from that to say that the whole forum is toxic is quite the gap. Normally the toxic, uninteresting, complaining and boring parts are under the Sticky threads part. So people, if they want, could come and read what they want. The newsletter is in my opinion for some to get a resume of what was said. People like that don't care to read the DDs. That don't invalidate their opinion but doesn't make it meaningful either

That is not to say that they shouldn't be addressed, just that priorities may differ between us and the rest of the players out there.

And a good and insightful thing would be to know all of these diverse opinions about the game, don't you agree?

 

[Darth.]

Was performance/endgame mentioned in any questions?
Did they ask you what do you think the worst problem of Stellaris is/ what can be improved?

The questions asked were only regarding the answers you saw in the infographic. It seemed to be a marketing survey more than anything.

These surveys really help guide the future development of Stellaris, as well as provide valuable feedback for marketing activities

 

[Maethendias]

uhm, which survey...

 

[UltimateTobi]

Should be in reverse order

Star Wars and Star Trek shouldn't be in there anymore.

 

[Keizer Harm]

Star Wars and Star Trek shouldn't be in there anymore.

That's just recency bias. Measured over the entire run, Star Trek has 600 good episodes, Star Wars has two and a half good movies. The winner is obvious to me.

 

[UltimateTobi]

That's just recency bias. Measured over the entire run, Star Trek has 600 good episodes, Star Wars has two and a half good movies. The winner is obvious to me.

I agree with that and love everything of SW and ST up to Revenge Of The Sith and Enterprise respectively.

 

[macd21]

And a good and insightful thing would be to know all of these diverse opinions about the game, don't you agree?

Which is why they used the sampling method they did. There were some forum-goers in the selection, they just weren’t over-represented.

 

[Dragatus]

I just want to point out that if the standard 300 year game is too much of a slog (which I do agree it is), you can use game settings to condense it to a 200 year game. If you feel particularly adventurous I'm fairly sure you can even make it a 100 year game.

 

[GnoSIS]

I just want to point out that if the standard 300 year game is too much of a slog (which I do agree it is), you can use game settings to condense it to a 200 year game. If you feel particularly adventurous I'm fairly sure you can even make it a 100 year game.

Some game settings are impossible,: a 100 year game with high crisis strength does not give you the time you need to prepare a defense and you will be wiped out! But sure, on easy and low strength you can pull it off in that time.

You see these are galaxy settings for a reason, because it varies from player to player and what you wish to play that day - there is no standard stellaris game.

 

[ChrisOhm]

I'm pretty sure that Paradox won't publish the full question list here, especially not regarding topics which are controversial in the forum here. And players who participated at the survey, probably won't tell anything as well because of NDA they had to sign during survey (don't know if there is an nda but I would be very surprised if not)
They want to have a representative view of all players opinions. A view of fans discussing, often in "self-catalytic" threads, in the forum they have every day. For this they don't need a survey, just asking the community manager here The only question is if a taking a sample of players subbed to the newsletter is representative to all players or not. A question which nobody can answer easily. Hopefully they choose this method carefully following "research in sampling in customer surveys" and not by quick and easy decision.

 

[monkeypunch87]

I'm pretty sure that Paradox won't publish the full question list here, especially not regarding topics which are controversial in the forum here. And players who participated at the survey, probably won't tell anything as well because of NDA they had to sign during survey (don't know if there is an nda but I would be very surprised if not)

There wasn't a NDA, I would tell you all the questions, but I can't remember.

 

[Orion88]

Would have been nice to even get the survey as well as info on when the dev diaries will be released. So where do I have to sign to get some basic info like this automatically to my email?

 

[nestorius]

I find my biggest issue with stellaris is that it feels like the game tends to end before the end game. Usually by the time the Khan appears (if he appears that is usually most marauders are destroyed before that) the game in essence ends. yes it can be more interesting on some difficulties but at a certain point you know you cannot lose and its just cleaning the galaxy up.

 

[Franton]

I find my biggest issue with stellaris is that it feels like the game tends to end before the end game.

It's not really that it ends, just that once you get to the point where you know there's no challenge left that you can't beat with one arm tied behind your back, there's no real goal to work towards, and therefore nothing that feels like an end. Not even the crisis.

It would be better if the galaxy wouldn't develop in such a homogenous way, with all empires basically at the same level. If the galaxy were splintered instead, with clusters connected by hyperlanes, and travel to other clusters gated by advanced technology, then we could delay the exploration and conquest of other parts of the galaxy to a later point in game, and the game could be designed in such a way that other clusters feature tougher oponents. Then thelater exploration and conquest could feel almost as satisfying as the early part, or even more so! And the goal of the game would be not to conquer or control all of the galaxy that you'd currently see after 50-70 years top, but to explore the last hidden corners of the galaxy and uncover the last mysteries.

When I say gated, I mean different variants of long distance travel throughout the game, such as:
- phase 1: exploring the local cluster (3-5 systems) at sublight speed. At most 2-3 habitable planets right there. An exploration storyline leads to the discovery of a single hyperlane exit leading to another part of the galaxy: another nearby cluster
- phase 2: exploring the local clusters within your cluster of the galaxy (maybe 5-10 local clusters), all of which are connected through hyperlanes. One or two AIs at similar level could be discovered here, and maybe a primitive race. Another storyline leeds to the discovery of a stable wormhole.
- phase 3: Wormhole tech allows single, small ships (science ships, constructors) to pass through, and discovering pathways to other clusters of the galaxy. You may now meet advanced AIs, and Marauders. But some parts of the galaxy are still locked off, until you discover a dormant gateway.
- phase 4: after activating the dormant gateway, you discover most of the rest of the galaxy. There will be very advanced AIs, Leviathans, and Fallen Empires. And L-Gates.
- phase 5: through the L-Gates you discover the origin of the gate builders, and a way to reach another galaxy. But, unfortunately, upon activating the L-Gates again, you draw the attention of an aggressive race from another galaxy. They will arrive as your final opponent of the game within just a few dozen years.

By staging the game in such a manner, there will be new stuff to explore and new challenges throughout the entire game, as well as a sense of accomplishment for reaching the next stage, and, finally, the end.

 

[nestorius]

It's not really that it ends, just that once you get to the point where you know there's no challenge left that you can't beat with one arm tied behind your back, there's no real goal to work towards, and therefore nothing that feels like an end. Not even the crisis.

It would be better if the galaxy wouldn't develop in such a homogenous way, with all empires basically at the same level. If the galaxy were splintered instead, with clusters connected by hyperlanes, and travel to other clusters gated by advanced technology, then we could delay the exploration and conquest of other parts of the galaxy to a later point in game, and the game could be designed in such a way that other clusters feature tougher oponents. Then thelater exploration and conquest could feel almost as satisfying as the early part, or even more so! And the goal of the game would be not to conquer or control all of the galaxy that you'd currently see after 50-70 years top, but to explore the last hidden corners of the galaxy and uncover the last mysteries.

When I say gated, I mean different variants of long distance travel throughout the game, such as:
- phase 1: exploring the local cluster (3-5 systems) at sublight speed. At most 2-3 habitable planets right there. An exploration storyline leads to the discovery of a single hyperlane exit leading to another part of the galaxy: another nearby cluster
- phase 2: exploring the local clusters within your cluster of the galaxy (maybe 5-10 local clusters), all of which are connected through hyperlanes. One or two AIs at similar level could be discovered here, and maybe a primitive race. Another storyline leeds to the discovery of a stable wormhole.
- phase 3: Wormhole tech allows single, small ships (science ships, constructors) to pass through, and discovering pathways to other clusters of the galaxy. You may now meet advanced AIs, and Marauders. But some parts of the galaxy are still locked off, until you discover a dormant gateway.
- phase 4: after activating the dormant gateway, you discover most of the rest of the galaxy. There will be very advanced AIs, Leviathans, and Fallen Empires. And L-Gates.
- phase 5: through the L-Gates you discover the origin of the gate builders, and a way to reach another galaxy. But, unfortunately, upon activating the L-Gates again, you draw the attention of an aggressive race from another galaxy. They will arrive as your final opponent of the game within just a few dozen years.

By staging the game in such a manner, there will be new stuff to explore and new challenges throughout the entire game, as well as a sense of accomplishment for reaching the next stage, and, finally, the end.

I agree thats what is great with all the other paradox games but there you already have a setup map and different countries. I dont rally know how this could be done in stellaris.