Stellaris Dev Diary #129 - Tradition Updates

[BlackUmbrellas]

I get this, but right now I can safely ignore this mechanic with sectors because I don't mind using them. If I hit the limit and want to colonise new planet, I'll simply move one of core colonies to a sector. This means I never get this annoying malus for breaching the limit.
With the upcoming rework I'll have no choice but paying attention to this irritating speedbump. I don't care that some techs will raise it, the fact still remains that I'll have to care about that.

Having a big empire requires some considerations, who knew.

 

[jPaolo]

Having a big empire requires some considerations, who knew.

This is very dismissive and honestly a little insulting.
Making stuff more expensive just because your empire grows is not "consideration". It's annoying hurdle that's negligible when small and frustrating when big.

 

[metalosse]

Administrative capacity is only what replace the current maluses to tech and tradition costs. It has nothing in common with the core system cap

 

[BlackUmbrellas]

This is very dismissive and honestly a little insulting.
Making stuff more expensive just because your empire grows is not "consideration". It's annoying hurdle that's negligible when small and frustrating when big.

Painting the map shouldn't be a cakewalk, and it shouldn't be the default mode of play. Requiring players that play that way to, y'know, invest in it isn't unreasonable.

 

[jPaolo]

Painting the map shouldn't be a cakewalk, and it shouldn't be the default mode of play. Requiring players that play that way to, y'know, invest in it isn't unreasonable.

Where did I mention anything about level of difficulty? All I've been talking about are my feeling of annoyance, not hardship. Sure % increase of costs may make the game hard, but sure as hell doesn't make it interesting or engaging.

Administrative capacity is only what replace the current maluses to tech and tradition costs. It has nothing in common with the core system cap

I see. If this is the case, I'm willing to give it a shot, but I still dislike mechanics like this. Ideal system of restraining growth would work in such a way that your core systems and old, established colonies do not get maluses because your empire colonises new planets, but that these new additions generate resource drains on their own.

I've seen ideas like this in dev diaries threads: spreading technology or tradition bonuses like Institution in EU4. I consider Institutions to be a great rework. Instead of static malus, you have something to interact with, something you can steer. Of course, the actual implementation leaves something to desire: dependence on DLC and that it's another "ruler's mana magically develops wastelands into thriving towns", but it's good idea.

 

[LeSingeAffame]

Because right now I can have galaxy-spanning empire without any ridiculous maluses.

Yes, and it's incredibly stupid.

 

[jPaolo]

Yes, and it's incredibly stupid.

It's not, it's the basis of plaing 4X/Grand strategy games. Game shouldn't punish player for being successful, dunno where this ridiculous mindset comes from.
I also see that all of you ignored all my posts pointing out that's not really about maluses existing, but their annoying and uninteresting form.

 

[LeSingeAffame]

It's not, it's the basis of plaing 4X/Grand strategy games. Game shouldn't punish player for being successful, dunno where this ridiculous mindset comes from.

Expandind mindlessly =/= being successful

 

[James Fire]

I also see that all of you ignored all my posts pointing out that's not really about maluses existing, but their annoying and uninteresting form.

Sure, they were ignored. Because they have no substance. There is nothing there to acknowledge. The maluses might be uninteresting, but not everything has to be interesting, and the maluses are realistic anyway.

Them being annoying is subjective, and entirely removed from any debate whatsoever.

Besides, I don't see you suggesting any interesting alternatives.

 

[Kakotheres]

I think the best solution to this can only come from more depth in the internal politics modelling. With large empires, you should be more at risk of break-away sectors and increased decadence in your core, well-developed worlds, like the classical Roman and Ming empires.

But that's almost a full set of DLC and patching on it's own. My personal opinion is that Administration Cap is a significant improvement on core system limits and increasing tech/tradition costs, at least for now.

 

[jPaolo]

[...]Besides, I don't see you suggesting any interesting alternatives.

Try reading my posts then.

I think the best solution to this can only come from more depth in the internal politics modelling.

Another idea for much more engaging "speedbump".

 

[LeSingeAffame]

Would it be better? Maybe. Is it the right update for that? It looks like not. Is admin cap still far better than the directly controlled colonised systems limit? Yes.

 

[Jorgen_CAB]

Expandind mindlessly =/= being successful

I don't think he is arguing there should not be any speed bumps but merely the fact that it is a simple malus and nothing you can interact with that is boring.

While I think that it is better to have a malus than nothing I think he has a point that some mechanic you can interact with would be much more interesting.

 

[sortulv]

In 2.1 the admin cap is 3 (1 system + 1 colony). And districts didn't count against the cap.
In 2.2. the admin cap is higher, but districts count more, and the penalty for exceeding the cap is higher.

The balance point will be how much higher the penalty for exceeding the cap is.

 

[Jorgen_CAB]

Fact is that you will not care much if you go over the cap... you have to have an extreme amount of admin cap for going over it not being useful.

Since the modifier and income are both linear you will not really care that much. Admin Cap will generally just be an income boost factor... trying to stay at or near the Admin Cap will make no real sense since going over it basically always will be beneficial.

Example...

I have Admin cap 100 and Empire Size 100 with no penalty.

I increase my Empire Size to 200 and increase my income by 100% and get a 30% increase in research cost and +50% increase in Unity cost.

If I increase my Empire size to 1000 and still have admin cap of 100 I increase my income by 10 times and only receive an increase of 270% in research and 400% in Unity.

This mechanic will not make expanding and keep expanding pointless or even a bad thing to do.... it only put some breaks on the snowball effect.
Increasing the Admin Cap will basically be like a sudden tax reduction on your income.

This would not be a bad thing if there are other mechanics in place to curtail big sprawling empires who take land by force or empires that treat their citizen badly or just empires who can't keep their culture homogeneous in some form.

 

[Pointyearedgit]

In 2.1 the admin cap is 3 (1 system + 1 colony). And districts didn't count against the cap.
In 2.2. the admin cap is higher, but districts count more, and the penalty for exceeding the cap is higher.

The balance point will be how much higher the penalty for exceeding the cap is.

If anything, you should have said the 2.1 cap is 20 (16 base homeworld + 2 for planet + 2 for system). You have to consider that the 2.2 cap doesn't penalize your early system expansion at all. All that useless undeveloped homeworld and colony space no longer counts towards your tech penalties in 2.2, just undeveloped orbital resources. 2.1 scaling happens *immediately* upon colonization, and the 2.2 cap only builds as you develop the colonies, the penalties will not hit you nearly as hard in the early game. This is certainly welcome, as +unity traditions are going the way of the dodo (and good riddance).

 

[sortulv]

If anything, you should have said the 2.1 cap is 20 (16 base homeworld + 2 for planet + 2 for system). You have to consider that the 2.2 cap doesn't penalize your early system expansion at all. All that useless undeveloped homeworld and colony space no longer counts towards your tech penalties in 2.2, just undeveloped orbital resources. 2.1 scaling happens *immediately* upon colonization, and the 2.2 cap only builds as you develop the colonies, the penalties will not hit you nearly as hard in the early game. This is certainly welcome, as +unity traditions are going the way of the dodo (and good riddance).

I choose my numbers carefully, 1 point per system and 2 per planet is the current system. This is the same for a 25 fully built world as for a 12 size Just settled.
I don’t know the new numbers, but since they are non-final, I didn’t think it important to dig them up...

 

[jPaolo]

/snip/

Thank you, this is pretty much what I mean.
The ideal system wouldn't make implementing new stuff in your capital harder just because you made something half a galaxy away.

 

[Jorgen_CAB]

Thank you, this is pretty much what I mean.
The ideal system wouldn't make implementing new stuff in your capital harder just because you made something half a galaxy away.

You need to make a system that simulate the problem of extending unity and technology to remote colonies without heavy micromanagement and make it interesting to interact with. You also could make it more or less efficient for different kind of empires. Wars should hinder such expansions while long stretches of peace would speed it up. There should obviously be other ways to interact and influence such matters.

You could also have a more transparent tech and unity bleed from other empires which you have diplomatic and trade contact with. Empires will influence each other whether they like it or not through communication and exposing their population to each others societies.

Getting income from remote planets that don't like you or have high autonomy should also be rather difficult. These planets should then invest their income in their own economy or sector economy rather than the player empire coffers. Thing like that could be a way to curtail empire growth and corruption.

 

[Jorgen_CAB]

In my opinion the new empire size system might not make as much an impact on the snowball effect as we think or at least not caring about the admin cap that much... at least not for research and perhaps also unity.

Example..

Empire with an Admin Cap of 10 has a Empire Size 2000 and earn 2000 research each month. That means that a base tech cost of 1000 becomes 6700 RP which means 3.35 months to research.

Empire with Admin Cap of 200 has a Empire Size of 2000 and earn 2000 research each month. That means that a base tech cost of 1000 becomes 6400 RP which means 3.2 months to research.

I think that increasing Admin Cap will not be a huge priority or something you do if you don't have much else to do since the more over the cap you are the less of an impact more CAP has. It will only matter of you grow roughly as fast as the CAP is rising... if you don't then the CAP will not really matter as much any longer. This is due to the additive nature of the modifier.

It is hard to understand the impact of this... but expanding as fast as possible is not going to be of any concern unless there is something else stopping you. Making sure your grow your economy as your size grow is going to be more important so that additional size you get are not hollow and worth less than the previous size you had.