What would you want the DLC after Utopia to focus on?

[Krajzen]

Myself I am rather pacifist player but seeing how Utopia will focus on this side of the game...

1) Unstacking space warfare and making it deeper and more enjoyable. Like it or not, it is one of main areas of the gameplay and its tedious nature is one of the most visible problems of Stellaris atm
1b) Doing something with land warfare to make it less terrible At least making armies and attachments more manageable would be nice. Not to mention adding some kind of strategic choices and fun to olanetary invasions.

Then,
2) Deeper economy and inventing some sort of galactic international trade
It would also fit some sort of supply/logistics system for warfare enhancements.
3) Diplomacy enhancements, especially to federations. Personally I'm also very fond of UN-like organizations in strategy games.


So here we go, with Stellaris: Prosperity or some title like that.

To be honest, I think devs shouldn't focus on "ascendancy" and "megastructures" stuff so early in game development cycle, I'd improve more basic systems before adding such 'epic' stuff.

 

[Meneliki]

Bug fixes/engine optimizations!

Just kidding. I'd like to see espionage, and a much deeper combat model.

But seriously, bug fixes and engine tweaks.

 

[Milten]

Diplomacy incuding reach Federation interaction, galactic UN and lots of inter-species interaction.
or
Warfare including Titans, some serius rebalance (does someone still remember about rockets and fighters?), improved fortresses and ground combat rework.

 

[Krajzen]

I forgor to add that. After second expansion focusing on diplomacy, trade/economy and combat (as most people seem to desire), the third one IMO should emhance smaller but underdeveloped features of:
1) Primitive and presentient species
2) Gene modifications (and trait system in general)
3) Leaders
Optional 4) Robots

So we'd get three expansions: Utopia, Prosperity and Evolution.

 

[Drakonn]

A trade system. Hopefully something a little more interactive than click and forget. (Trade factions!) Trading between your own empire and then other empires would add much to the early and mid game. Might make wars more economically unfriendly too.

I say Diplomacy, which in my mind also involves trade, as well as Espionage.

Warfare could also use a major update. War score revamp (ideally with more casus belli for reducing costs and reducing the slog when your trying to claim wargoals against a massive empire/federation) balancing weapon and FTL types, make defensive stations no longer impotent, make planetary invasion more interesting (with having troops on a world for reasons other than possible rebellion actually worth your time) and of course, weapons that can blow up planets, blow up stars, turn stars into black holes, bio-warfare, and other fun ways to wipe your enemies from the face of the galaxy.

I haven't been lucky enough to get CK2 and have only played the demo a few times but how could "casus belli" work for an empire that wants to conquer/enslave/purify others? I enjoy the varied wargoals now so I'm just curious.

The main problem with Warfare right now in Stellaris (balance issue on weapons aside) is the Warscore system and the inability to change your goals if you turn around and completely wipe the floor with someone.

Case in point. My federation and declared Liberation on a one planet empire in a contested system of my own. This dragged his 3 other allies with equal or better fleets than our into. Only, being involved in another war had drained their fleets (the Strength gauges really need tweaking as they are too broad on Empire Diplomacy screens). So we proceeded to completely wreck what was left of their fleets, trash one empire completely, had to conquer 5 additional worlds of theirs before we had peace.

We only won Liberation, an AI ban on an ally, and a Humiliate on another. So yea, that is completely out of wack. (I can however declare war on the allies now with no wait bu only for carving out a huge vassal so ugh).

 

[Meneliki]

I haven't been lucky enough to get CK2 and have only played the demo a few times

The Paradox games seem to go on sale quite a bit on Steam. Next time CK2 is on sale, I highly recommend it. You definitely want that game.

 

[deafhobbit]

Add me to the Economy and Trade vote. I like a lot of the ideas here, but this is the most necessary of them at this time. Could also see Diplomacy and Espionage being included in that DLC as well.

 

[Milten]

2) Gene modifications

Hmm, have you read Dev Diary about Ascension perks?

 

[Fallofthepurple]

Diplomacy (Space UN, Federation mechanics), Trade and of course the Economy - you fools!

 

[Horror In The Deep]

you fools!

I respectfully disagree with this statement

 

[Vjeldan]

Economy and Diplomacy. Yes.

The economy part would most probably also be the best way to improve war and combat, since war is somewhat economy dependent. If there is detailed economy in the game, there will most probably be other ways to wage war, since you can try to sabotage the economy of your enemy.

Diplomacy would also help, since a more complex web of relations between the space-empires will also result in a more complex web of rivalries and reasons to go to war. This could also include covert operations and esspionage and other means to fight dirty when your economy is not strong enough to build your very own doomstack of doomdoom.

 

[ashbery76]

Improved strategic warfare and EU4 style trade.
War is lacking and pretty dull after the first battle and there is no trade.Two holes missing from the game imo.

 

[Exarian]

Diplomacy and Trade. With some of the following:

• Galactic UN (for "good" guys) and Space League for the Extraordinarily Evil (for "bad" guys)

"Bad" guys are not forming any "Space Leagues". "Bad" guys are killing/conquering everything on sight, not wasting time on diplomacy.
Do you know any real, absolute "bad guys" from sci-fi and space operas? I'm not speaking of "incidentally" bad guys like Klingons or . I mean REAL bad bad guys, sinister empires of utter evil.

Some examples:
Daleks from dr. Who
Borg from Star Trek
Shivans from Freespace series
Reapers from Mass Effect

[BTW. Humans from Starship Troopers have huge potential of becoming such civilization too]

All of these "civilizations" are strongly focused on purge/conquest, and their diplomacy is limited to incidental actions. All of them are extremely technologically advanced, so their lack of "classic" diplomacy is not result of their "primitiveness". They are conquering/purging/annihilating worlds, honor no treaty and only way of stopping them is superior brutal force (or sonic screwdriver )

Stellaris is not offering this way of play. Even if You wish to play as genocidal conqueror, game is enforcing You to be part of some kind of "galactic union", which every actions (declaring war, choosing war goals, honoring borders etc.) is strictly restricted by unknown "intergalactic law", extremely limiting possibility to play such empire. You are hitting invisible walls everywhere, and further the game, the more annoying it is.

IMO it is biggest flaw in Stellaris, and next expansion should address it. Trade/Espionage/Diplomacy? Sure, but it all these aspects are related to already viable way of playing game. If Stellaris wish to be real 4X game (Exlore Expand Exploit Exterminate - Trade and Diplomacy are not even mentioned...), and do not turn into "Space Federation Builder", allowing unrestricted aggressive conquest is the way to go.

There is of course way of limiting this kind of gameplay without making player annoyed. It's an excellent mechanic known from EU4:
"Form Coallition Agianst".
If Player is choosing this way of play, and has become significant galactic superpower minoring even Awakened Empires, natural action from remaining empires should be forming wide coalition against this player. It works perfectly in EU4, it will work in Stellaris.

 

[Krein81]

Warfare including Titans

- iirc , Wiz said smg about they want to add Titans and Death Stars to the game in feature patches...

 

[Drakonn]

The Paradox games seem to go on sale quite a bit on Steam. Next time CK2 is on sale, I highly recommend it. You definitely want that game.

Oh, I've enjoyed the demo for that and EUIV immensely and it always pains me to see it go on a 75% sale. Budget constraints mean that I'm stuck with pretty much whatever I have atm (and Utopia when that hits; was lucky and traded games in for credit enough to get it).

Seems that Economy and trade are leading in the thread here.

For those wanting diplomacy what would you like in terms of it added? I'm curious from people who know other Paradox games (or anyone else) as GalCiv2,3, and Civ IV and V are the ones I have experience with.

 

[Kedryn]

1) Economy
2) Trade

The 'economic system' is so bland that it makes every inhabitable planet uninteresting and 'samey'. "Oh look, more 'energy', generic minerals and food in random amounts!". Even the factories produce minerals instead of consuming them.

If I sound overly critical I don't intend to; and, obviously, this is my own opinion only.

 

[BrokenSky]

Note: this was fully edited at 20:38pm, 13 mins after original posting and the entire content was changed (at the time I started, no-one had replied after).
Edit: Actually Trade, some economy and Nomads with diplomacy after that (though the diplomacy could have international trade and economic agreements etc. as a thing worth focusing on).

Mostly things like:
* Planetary food being transported between worlds, introducing the choice between economic independence and interdependence of planets (do your non-colonies grow their own food, or do they specialize and import from dedicated agri-worlds?).

* Minerals being changed to industrial resources; mines and asteroids generate minerals, but you need dedicated buildings to convert them into useful resources. The raw materials themselves need to be moved from where they are gathered to where they are processed, and then to where they are used.

* Better pirates; all this movement of goods had better be protected, lest pirates try to seize them for themselves, potentially even blockading planets and holding them to ransom (pay money or they starve etc.).

* Worldship-type movable habitable ships with buildings similar to orbital habitats, which can't get their own minerals, but can (with the correct buildings) mine planets which are orbited for minerals (rocky planets) or energy (gassy planets and stars).
[Also the ability to be "in orbit" of a star, plus stars are impassible terrain.]

* The ability to play as an exclusively nomadic empire, with only worldships, rather than planets. Will you trade peacefully, scavenge unclaimed space or raid weaker empires to survive?

 

[Sopbucket]

Peaceful victory conditions. The ability to wage economic warfare. A building game that involves more than just aquiring more resources and building bigger fleets. Changing the building game to be more macro focused.

 

[Brent15]

Diplomacy would normally be my first choice - I think that's where the game is lacking the most. It also happens to be my favorite aspect of these games.

However, with the introduction of Megastructures and Habitats, it may make sense to do planet destroying weapons next. It's typically easier to destroy things than create them so I think we've proceeded in the wrong order.

 

[V3N0M1300]

Trade and espionage