• We have updated our Community Code of Conduct. Please read through the new rules for the forum that are an integral part of Paradox Interactive’s User Agreement.

Stellaris Dev Diary #19 - Diplomacy & Trade

Greetings!

Today our humble offering covers some of the possible Diplomatic Actions and Trade Deals that can occur between Empires. As most of you may know, the basic diplomatic model used in our previous games work quite well and we will use something similar in Stellaris. All Empires will have opinions of all other known Empires, and different actions, events and internal politics will often affect that opinion. The ethics of each Empire will of course play a heavy role here, as pacifist Empires will react quite differently to aggressive wars than would a xenophobic militarist one.

In Stellaris trade between Empires is a very direct affair. Players can create two-way deals lasting a set amount of time, and our ambition is that most diplomatic actions should be available here as tradeable objects. For example, you can offer another Empire a monthly payment of Minerals in exchange for Military Access and updated Star Charts for a period of 5 years, or receive a vital supply of the rare Garanthium resource by offering a nonaggression treaty as well as a guarantee of independence should the other Empire feel threatened. If you want to simply gift or demand something you can leave one side of the trade-deal blank, and the AI will react accordingly.

stellaris_dev_diary_19_01_20160201_trade.jpg


However, these kinds of trade deals will only happen between equal Empires and as most rulers know, it is better to gain something without having to give up something else. This is where more static diplomatic relationships come into play.

Tributary
A Tributary is forced to pay a set amount of their income to their Overlord each month and is most often established as the result of a lost war. The Overlord will not automatically defend them in wars, so the Tributary is caught in quite an unfortunate position until they have the military strength to either demand an end to their servitude or declare a war of independence.

Protectorate
A Protectorate is a subject protected by a (to them) technologically superior Empire. The Protectorate gains a major research-bonus to all technologies that their Overlord has already researched, and is automatically converted to a Vassal when having progressed far enough technologically.
Any pre-FTL species that is technologically enlightened is automatically created as a Protectorate under whichever Empire granted them the ability to space-travel. The Overlord in turn gains political Influence each month and the eternal gratitude of a bright-eyed new member of the galactic community.

Vassal
A Vassal is the most controlled type of subject-Empire. They will automatically join their Overlord’s wars, aggressive and defensive, and they have no autonomy when it comes to foreign policy or diplomatic relations. A vassal also run the risk of a full diplomatic integration by their Overlord.

Subject-actions
All types of subjects have a Liberty Desire expressing how content they are living under their Overlord’s rule. If a subject's Liberty Desire becomes very high they have a chance to start a war for independence, often waiting for an opportunity when they sense weakness (a taxing war, a larger uprising, a galactic crisis etc.). The Liberty Desire is a compound of a few different parameters but the main ones are the subjects opinion of the Overlord, the total military strength of all the subjects relative to the Overlord as well as if the subject can find someone who supports their cause.
As you would expect from our other games you are able to support the independence of another Empire’s vassal. Doing this will greatly increase their Liberty Desire (assuming the supporter has a fleet rivaling their Overlord) and may cause them to rebel. If they do, the Empire supporting them automatically joins their war for independence. You are also able to guarantee the independence of a smaller Empire, automatically entering the war on their side should they be attacked.

stellaris_dev_diary_19_02_20160201_diplomacy_insult.jpg


We’ve also added another vital diplomatic action to ensure that we can realistically model the complicated diplomatic interactions going on between advanced nations; the insult. Make sure to clearly express your feelings towards your enemy by insulting them, instantly lowering the opinion between your Empires greatly.

That was all for this week. Next dev diary will be written by Doomdark, expanding further upon War & Peace.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
  • 149
  • 68
  • 3
Reactions:
A good alternative for a mechanic to limit vassal numbers would be a feedback loop. The more vassals you have the higher all of their liberty desires, with vassal of above or below a certain desire adding extra draws to liberty desire in that direction.

This is how it works in EU4 where your colonies or vassals get increasing unhappy the more powerful they are relative to you.
 
Space empires get to have tributary states but Ming in EU4 does not.

Paradox, I love you, I really do, but pls, stop trolling me like this.
 
  • 7
Reactions:
Just because we don't see nations using these terms, doesn't mean they don't exist in a real way. What we have today are economic dominance and subservience, without such messy terms as "vassal".

It's not semantics - Vassals don't exist today.

Economic dominance and subservience more-or-less do and would be a much better representation.

I tell you what does exist: socio-cultural hegemony...

Would love to see a system in Stellaris where loose socio-cultural groups (i.e. Traits) become more powerful as the members do and act like a collective entity (based on their power) to agitate or war to bring different minded members to their group.

For example, if the most powerful empires are xenophobic, pacifists then the pressure is on small systems to become more xenophobic and pacifist. The more they 'culturally' assimilate the more protection they get from the powerful members and the more they can contribute to the cause. If they stay isolated then they face existential threats on both sides and are subject to interference or they can commit to the opposite ideology to potentially strengthen the defence - which might end up in war - or light be enough to the deter the more powerful unit.
 
  • 9
  • 3
  • 1
Reactions:
I know Liberty Desire is a great concept lifted out of EUIV, and mechanically seems like it should work very well here. In the context of Stellaris, however, would it be better to contemplate renaming it something a little more general ("Autonomy Desire," or "Independence Desire," or something like that)? After all, it isn't like the militarist arachnid hive cluster of Alpha Orion 7 has stumbled upon the writings of Locke and Paine and are suddenly yearning to cast off the shackles of tyranny in favor of enlightenment liberalism. They just want to call their own shots and stoping having to ask permission before devouring their neighbors and laying eggs in their leftover husks.

A fair point. The name is not set in stone so suggestions for what we could call this value are appreciated. However, we do want to keep it somewhat "grounded" so it's clear at a glance what it actually means (so no super-esoteric terms).
 
  • 32
  • 7
Reactions:
It's not semantics - Vassals don't exist today.

Economic dominance and subservience more-or-less do and would be a much better representation.

I tell you what does exist: socio-cultural hegemony...

Would love to see a system in Stellaris where loose socio-cultural groups (i.e. Traits) become more powerful as the members do and act like a collective entity (based on their power) to agitate or war to bring different minded members to their group.

For example, if the most powerful empires are xenophobic, pacifists then the pressure is on small systems to become more xenophobic and pacifist. The more they 'culturally' assimilate the more protection they get from the powerful members and the more they can contribute to the cause. If they stay isolated then they face existential threats on both sides and are subject to interference or they can commit to the opposite ideology to potentially strengthen the defence - which might end up in war - or light be enough to the deter the more powerful unit.

I agree. This does exist, but what of say....the U.S. with its proclamation of liberty for all, supporting the Saudi family, or Mubarak's regime. In such situations, it seems more that there is a public proclamation of cultural ideals, but it can all be thrown to the wind if the vassal nation can benefit the host in some way. So....say, securing Israel's southern border - in this case. Also, what does a historian make of the relationship of the US to Israel? Is it always so clear to the public?

I think what we see is just a more sophisticated way to hide the power imbalance, and what or who is being forced into agreements by whom.
 
  • 3
  • 1
Reactions:
Very good dev diary that looks like it will support complex empire relationships. Especially happy to see no explicit tech trading, always such an easily abusable part of 4X games.
 
  • 1
  • 1
Reactions:
A fair point. The name is not set in stone so suggestions for what we could call this value are appreciated. However, we do want to keep it somewhat "grounded" so it's clear at a glance what it actually means (so no super-esoteric terms).

In that case I actually think that proposed "Independence desire" is much clearer.
 
  • 10
Reactions:
In that case I actually think that proposed "Independence desire" is much clearer.

Sounds a bit odd though, Liberty seems good enough for me; it is about the king (or equivalent title) wanting to be free to rule himself rather than by you, it does not necessarily have to do with liberalism as we think of it.
 
Currently it looks (at least like I see it) so that I can't develop pure trade based empire. Pitty...
 
So, we know that tributaries have to pay their masters. Probably we can even choose what they pay with. So there is only one logical question about this:

Can we force them to pay with a few slaves every month, that we can use to feed our population, or just to have slave workers? :D

And also, can I declare that my vassal has to change all of his economy to agriculture, or war industry, or research? So I could turn them into cheap production sectors for certain things, instead of having to get used to what they want to produce? After all, they are my vassals, so they have to do what I want, no matter wether they want or not.
 
I am really enjoying the pointless geometric shapes in the window behind the Mushroom King.
 
  • 2
Reactions:
Ah okay, so you're for an organic limitation. I think that's a good goal to strive for.

Sure, but I also think it's better to allow for imbalance and gamey strategies then place too many limitations in. IMHO it's less of a problem if the player can get an OP vassal arrangement then if the player can't get an interesting vassal arrangement.
 
  • 1
Reactions:
A fair point. The name is not set in stone so suggestions for what we could call this value are appreciated. However, we do want to keep it somewhat "grounded" so it's clear at a glance what it actually means (so no super-esoteric terms).

How about Self Determination Craving or SDC (because in space everyone love a Three Letter Acronym( or TLA))
 
  • 3
Reactions:
As far as the use of terms like "vassal" and "protectorate" go, I think they would be fine in such a setting, for the reason of information travel. One reason why terms such as vassal or protectorate are rarely used today (beyond the movement of linguistics) is that the speed at which information travels renders such ideas of less-connected areas fairly moot. A reason vassals had such autonomy back in the day, was because it was simply manageable to allow a level of autonomy, as opposed to having to constantly send orders and envoys every other second.

In a sci-fi setting, where distances will be measured in tens of light-years, the term can gain some recognition again, even if such FTL communication is possible, like an ansible, it would still take a considerable amount of time to move military or civilian assets around, and thus certain parties would be granted a similar amount of autonomy out of a need for efficient governance. Thus, the terms retain relevance. Especially so if your empire is particularly old, and may have penchant for drawing on older terminology, as actual empires tend to do, exemplified by Napoleon's use of Roman symbols or by Mussolini's attempt to connect his ideology to that of the Romans.

I would not be surprised if future powers draw parallels between their reality and their past, and thus use similar words to describe situations that share some commonalities, though they may not use terms exactly the same as "vassal," Stellaris has to abstract such words somehow.

However, I do agree that depending on the type of central governance, different terms and arrangements would likely be used, a Republic may call its vassals "territories"or something like that, as opposed to using a term which has some sense of subjugation attached.

I can't wait for this game because of stuff like this.
 
  • 8
Reactions:
I could have used some more novel diplomatic options and results ... like "Threaten - Requirement that you have a fleet at their border" or "Create March - Requirement that the vassal species be militaristic or you can genetically mod them" or "Close dialogue - embargoes all contact with a species, causing a massive hit in relations and perhaps tech growth for the weaker empire." ... I don't know, just more stuff would be preferable to stripped down versions of older titles' options and classic 4x games stuff. Nothing to write home about here.
 
  • 2
  • 1
Reactions:
Cool. two questions though :)

1.) Is it possible to play or have Loyal Vassals(such as protecterates) without their overlord annexing them? I am thinking of something like the Volus from Mass Effect which are a protectate under the Turians.

2.) In regards to trade, how would civilian side of things be effected should their be trade between two empires? Mostly wondering how corporations/mega corps might react. :)

P.S: YAY for more images of reptilians :D
 
Can you not have deals which are indefinite? The interface doesn't appear to support that at first glance.

That would be interesting, or at least a "re-negotiate" slider that stipulates when a deal is up for renegotiation.
I miss more granular criteria in general from diplomacy in PDS titles such as "validity eternal unless participants go to war with X" etc.
 
  • 1
Reactions: