Stellaris Dev Diary #219 - Selectable Traditions

[Kaoru Sen'nin]

I think Black Bagging someone aggressively wouldn't priorities over anyone unless the Popnapper is trying to free the slaves by Popnapping.

"You can't take me away ! I'm a free Citizen and I have rights !"
"Aha stungun go brrr"

 

[Wonoz]

I suppose expansion and domination will get their replacer and proper reworks once the devs figured out what to do with Empiresprawl/Unity.
Internal administration seems like a good "theme" for at least one of them.

My hope would be that Domination will get something that has a more enforced "convoluted state affairs"-flavor for the secondary choice that really plays a little harder
on better govenours/leaders, influence and propaganda , whilst the original tree enforces its police-state, labourer abuse, elitism-flavor.

For Expansion I´d like to see some split into expansion at any cost with maybe things like reduction of penalties for low habitability or something.

 

[slv]

Calling it now: No one is going to pick Unyielding. Its boring. It doesn't offer anything worthwhile. Its bad design and should not have been added into the game.

Why? Because defense is boring. This tradition does almost nothing apart from additional starbases and saving some energy credits if you are not getting attacked. Defending is not a winning strategy in this game. Starbases are useful in the early to midgame, but in the endgame, big fleets can easily overwhelm them.

Doesn't have much use in a singleplayer, but looks like it's a fairly strong endgame multiplayer tradition. Not because of the starbase bonuses, but rather because of the army bonuses and the bonus to orbital bombardment. Making a chokepoint fortress habitat filled with 4k+ armies is already a great idea and it would be even more so with -100% planetary bombardment damage (-50% from shield, -25% from adaptability and -25% from unyielding) and extra defense army health from unyielding.

 

[Mímisbrunnr]

Doesn't have much use in a singleplayer, but looks like it's a fairly strong endgame multiplayer tradition. Not because of the starbase bonuses, but rather because of the army bonuses and the bonus to orbital bombardment. Making a chokepoint fortress habitat filled with 4k+ armies is already a great idea and it would be even more so with -100% planetary bombardment damage (-50% from shield, -25% from adaptability and -25% from unyielding) and extra defense army health from unyielding.

If someone has 4K armies, I [rather, whomever you are playing against] can just drop 6K armies onto it. All that you will accomplish is driving up my war exhaustion and protracting the invasion out for a few more months, not prevent me from actually taking over. Unless you have a superior navy to me, I'm still going to conquer territory from you in the end, putting me into a stronger position and you into a weaker on. At best, you slow your defeat to a death of a thousand cuts [excepting that it will be far less than a thousand cuts] rather than an immediate one if you do not have the navy or allies with navies to defeat me.

This tactic would work better against the AI (where its not really needed) because they will hang around stupidly bombarding (wasting there time, as its so slow and ineffectual) rather than building an army deathstack to conquer the world swiftly, thus stalling out their advance utterly.

On this note, as a comment for the devs, if you want Orbital Bombardment improvements in the traditions to really be worthwhile, it really needs to give a MUCH larger boost to Orbital Bombardment damage, so that it would actually be a reasonable alternative to invasions - that it doesn't cost so much war exhaustion from attrition to generally make doing bombardment to save the attrition from invasion rarely worthwhile.

 

[Ninjamestari]

Ask yourself this question: Would you rather spend your alloys into a mobile fleet and be able to attack, or spend your alloys on a starbase which can't move and can get outmaneuvered by jump drives? Easy answer.

A more powerful starbase at a choke point that allows me to sit on my thumbs while my research snowballs out of control? Yeah, that really is an easy answer. Why would I waste my alloys on boring fleets when a much smaller investment is going to keep me safe? Offensive wars are super boring after all, and destroy your economy unless you're so much stronger than your opponent that it isn't funny. Which happens easily by the way if you can develop peacefully behind the protection of your STARBASES.

 

[Pancakelord]

tree_11_111" is this in the gui file, and is used as a set template for a 2:3 shaped tradition tree (so you can have 15 tradition trees just using the same gui layout by specifying it in the tree, if you so please)

So will we be able to extend this with new templates? For example can I make pancake_traditions_list.gui and stick a few templates in there (3/2/1 V shape, a chain of 5 traditions in a line etc), and have the game read/reference it no problem from a custom GUI file without overwriting a vanilla file?

adoption_bonus = "tr_discovery_adopt"
finish_bonus = "tr_discovery_finish"

Just to double check (am away from pc) are these just keys to static modifiers? Or can we fire an event on_tree_finished/adopted, now too.
Just thinking about adding civics as a reward for finishing some modded trees (I suppose just adding requiring X tradition is finished in the civic trigger + in the tooltip for the tradition, would work for this too)

 

[slv]

If someone has 4K armies, I [rather, whomever you are playing against] can just drop 6K armies onto it. All that you will accomplish is driving up my war exhaustion and protracting the invasion out for a few more months, not prevent me from actually taking over. Unless you have a superior navy to me, I'm still going to conquer territory from you in the end, putting me into a stronger position and you into a weaker on. At best, you slow your defeat to a death of a thousand cuts [excepting that it will be far less than a thousand cuts] rather than an immediate one if you do not have the navy or allies with navies to defeat me.

Thing is, at some point you will have more ships than anchorages can support and at that point soldiers become a good job economy-wise. So you need to have soldiers anyway and it doesn't really matter where they are. Might as well put them on your choke and have time to repair your fleet while opponent invades them. That's the point, there is no economy cost to this fortress habitat, you want soldiers anyway.

Obviously it would be dumb to rely exclusively on them, you need to have the fleet either way, didn't intend to imply it.

 

[Mímisbrunnr]

Thing is, at some point you will have more ships than anchorages can support and at that point soldiers become a good job economy-wise. So you need to have soldiers anyway and it doesn't really matter where they are. Might as well put them on your choke and have time to repair your fleet while opponent invades them. That's the point, there is no economy cost to this fortress habitat, you want soldiers anyway.

Obviously it would be dumb to rely exclusively on them, you need to have the fleet either way, didn't intend to imply it.

Okay, THAT makes far more sense, and I regularly deploy large numbers of soldiers too - though generally I've dispersed them across my worlds, admittedly. I have built an occasional fortress habitat or ran with a fortress world that an AI previously started, that said, but really just for the naval cap.

 

[Carl_Bar]

Mostly good stuff here. Some specific points.

1. To the people complaining about the names. I'm pretty sue they asked paradox's marketing department for the names, makes them more realistic. /s

2. I'm just going to echo everyone else, unity from traditions isn't a good idea.

3. Again going to echo everyone on the point that defence platforms are weak, micro heavy, and not very fun.

4. Another eco of Dominion being a complete dead end tree now. Te crime bonus and the finisher where the only reasons to take it before. Extra housing and extra level caps are nice, but not amazing, and the leader caps especially have the issue that between all the other sources and the difficulty of reaching the higher levels, (XP needed, keeping them alive, and avoiding negetive traits), it's hard to take advantage of them. The tree really needs a more thorough overhaul than this.

 

[Mímisbrunnr]

Mostly good stuff here. Some specific points.

1. To the people complaining about the names. I'm pretty sue they asked paradox's marketing department for the names, makes them more realistic. /s

2. I'm just going to echo everyone else, unity from traditions isn't a good idea.

3. Again going to echo everyone on the point that defence platforms are weak, micro heavy, and not very fun.

4. Another eco of Dominion being a complete dead end tree now. Te crime bonus and the finisher where the only reasons to take it before. Extra housing and extra level caps are nice, but not amazing, and the leader caps especially have the issue that between all the other sources and the difficulty of reaching the higher levels, (XP needed, keeping them alive, and avoiding negetive traits), it's hard to take advantage of them. The tree really needs a more thorough overhaul than this.

Yeah, unfortunately, the modified Domination is simply not worth taking, so I strongly urge Paradox to alter it (in a way that significantly strengthens it) before launching Lem.

 

[Lavilledieu]

I love that the traditions are getting revisited, but I see an issue, and I want to warn the devs for that. Important background info is that I was modding an idea group mod for eu4, and I gained a lot of experience and insight from that. Idea groups, or traditions, should not be hyper focused on one aspect, instead, they should have generally useful stuff as well. Looking at Unyielding and Subterfuge, both look incredibly focused on a specific aspect of the game. Except for the reduced maintenance, which is a "generally useful bonus", all are bonuses for people who are "losing" (you want to be the one pushing forward!). Defense platforms remain a terrible investment as well (I had an idea on how to make the system a little better). One of the aspects that I found interesting in a mod I played, is giving strongholds their own housing space. It made the building much more affordable, and the extra housing had positive effects on the general development (and economy) of planet. Subterfuge is in a worse position. It has no "generally useful bonuses", it's completely focused on an aspect of the game that afaik isn't very rewarding either. Some bonuses linked to "secret police forces" or shady networks could've been cool here. Like the crime-related bonus that got removed from domination. Or perhaps also a bonus where you still get the yields from your systems that are occupied (secret police smuggling stuff from those to your worlds).

Let's contrast what I noted with another seemingly focused tradition: Discovery. Extra research alternatives means you get much easier the techs you need for your strategy, whatever it is, it can be offensive, defensive, economic,... Leader experience gain and cap helps your economy and combat, as well as research. Reduced researcher upkeep is a somewhat significant economic boost. Survey speed, anomaly discovery chance and disengage chance are great assets early game. This makes the tradition versatile, always impactful and significant. I even ignored the fact that gaining techs quicker is both strong and versatile. Compare that to two traditions I mentioned, and you should see the differences.

Another issue I see, is repeating bonuses inside the same tradition. That looks strange and lazy, as if there are absolutely no other bonuses that could've been used. +20% total trade value is nice, but why had it to be split? +10% trade value is many times only a small increase.

 

[methegrate]

Calling it now: No one is going to pick Unyielding. Its boring. It doesn't offer anything worthwhile. Its bad design and should not have been added into the game.

Why? Because defense is boring. This tradition does almost nothing apart from additional starbases and saving some energy credits if you are not getting attacked. Defending is not a winning strategy in this game. Starbases are useful in the early to midgame, but in the endgame, big fleets can easily overwhelm them.

Ask yourself this question: Would you rather spend your alloys into a mobile fleet and be able to attack, or spend your alloys on a starbase which can't move and can get outmaneuvered by jump drives? Easy answer.

Oh and what about that reduced War exhaustion gain? That looks like a strong bonus to me. And its extremely annoying for your opponent. Nothing is worse than having a war end because of the war exhaustion meter going to 100%. Its not fun for the attacker and it doesn't reward skillfull play. I get why its in the game. But I would rather have wars end because one side surrendered or was wiped out and not because some number hit 100%.

Subterfuge

The best part of Nemesis was that Paradox listened to me and fixed the economy. Finally Energy is produced at 6 base output per job, same as food with it 6 base output per job. That means we no longer have to sell food to make Energy while keeping sell price above 0,67 conversion.

Apart from installing spy network and stealing tech, I almost do not use the spionage options at all. I could see this being useful for a science rush empire. You just keep stealing tech and get a bunch of Energy back when successful. Apart from that its hard to judge how good these bonuses actually are. If I remember correctly the system uses dice rolls, so if anyone has analysed the dice rolls, maybe you could give us an explanation on how strong these bonuses are.

Maybe Unyielding’s adoption bonus could be regenerating defensive platforms?

I mean, tbh I think this should be just a mechanic of defensive platforms in general. They should just regenerate with their starbase for free. Or, perhaps, constructors should be able to repair them for a nominal cost. (That way it’s a little harder for someone to conquer a starbase and just turn all those guns around.)

But absent that, regenerating platforms could make Unyielding a more useful pick.

Although, like others, I’m unclear on why it’s gated behind the Nemesis DLC.

 

[Mímisbrunnr]

@Lavilledieu

Not to mention that in earlier versions of the game Strongholds/Fortresses used to provide that population. Perhaps it should be reintroduced, whether by default or as part of a Tradition?

 

[Darklight731]

A beautiful change Custodians! I love it very much. Good to see that discovery stayed the same, It is almost always the first one I pick, it`s somewhat useless later on anyway.

But also, as many others have mentioned, the changes to the domination traditions seem very bad. More unity from enforces will have minimal impact with how few enforcer jobs there are, removing the crime reduction is a problem for when I want to lower crime on large planets. And finally, the finisher change to the tree is TERRIBLE. I remember that most of the time, it was the only thing I really wanted from the domination tree, the upgrades to level cap are wasted most of the time anyway. With this change, I believe no one will ever pick domination again.

 

[Fersin II Veros]

I'll join those who say that we need more traditions. For the sake of diversity and roleplay, et cetera, et cetera.

 

[Objulen]

Calling it now: No one is going to pick Unyielding. Its boring. It doesn't offer anything worthwhile. Its bad design and should not have been added into the game.

Why? Because defense is boring. This tradition does almost nothing apart from additional starbases and saving some energy credits if you are not getting attacked. Defending is not a winning strategy in this game. Starbases are useful in the early to midgame, but in the endgame, big fleets can easily overwhelm them.

That really depends on the person. Stellaris has Pacifists, and other empire types (like Rogue Servitor) don't support conquest very well. There's already a Supremacy tradition - this is built for more defensive play styles.

Ask yourself this question: Would you rather spend your alloys into a mobile fleet and be able to attack, or spend your alloys on a starbase which can't move and can get outmaneuvered by jump drives? Easy answer.

Depends on what stage of the game you're in. Jump drives are late-game technology. Starbases are good for choke points for most of the game. Even in the end game, they're good for bolstering defenses in key systems. Late game defense is generally about linking systems with Gateways and having a defensive fleet or two to ensure that you're never caught off guard. Jump drives impose a -50% penalty to fire rate and damage - adding an extra 100K fleet power to a key system is a nice boost even during the end-game.

Oh and what about that reduced War exhaustion gain? That looks like a strong bonus to me. And its extremely annoying for your opponent. Nothing is worse than having a war end because of the war exhaustion meter going to 100%. Its not fun for the attacker and it doesn't reward skillfull play. I get why its in the game. But I would rather have wars end because one side surrendered or was wiped out and not because some number hit 100%.

War exhaustion is pretty realistic. Forever wars don't tend to do all that well or be terribly realistic. If you're not able to capture all of your objectives, your going to grind down on the enemy defenses until you're no longer willing to fight. Defensively, this means it's harder for the opponent to grind you down. This can important for defensive empires who don't necessarily have the fleets to conquer other empires - a big function of this Tradition tree is making it so you're not an inviting target for conquest from other empires.

 

[grekulf]

Alright. I'm back today (got knocked out by 2nd dose yesterday), and I'm going to try to respond to some of your comments and make some changes according to the feedback.

1st of all some of you mentioned that you felt like Unyielding was out of place for Nemesis, and I don't disagree. We will shift it over to Apocalypse where it might feel like it fits better.

But Hiveminds still get additional Synapse Drones, right? I hope you didn't remove those, because it made this Tradition quite good.

No, it was changed to be +5 stability for all empires. Synapse Drones don't really fit as much in Prosperity, it would make more sense in Synchronizity.

• Finisher: no longer provides +1 monthly influence, but rather increases +10% ruler output for regular empires, or +10% admin cap for gestalts

That one is pretty sad. Getting more influence was good. It reflected the empire being more dominating and doing stuff around. +10% ruler output for regular empires, or +10% admin cap for gestalts feels like a bad trade. +1 influence per month was way better

Agreed that it could be a bit stronger. Changed it to +20% Admin Cap for all empires.

Is taking insider trading as the host empire still a mean to increase by one the number of branch offices buildings ? Because I can't see why a non trade focused empire would ever take mercantile and thus, it would indirectly nerf megacorporation that would never see their clients taking insider trading. Maybe trans stellar company (from properity tree) OR insider trading could unlock the building slot ?

It was also a point of concern we came across. The +1 branch office buildings that used to be in Prosperity was actually only applied to the target country, so it did nothing for the megacorp itself. It felt very strange to have a bonus in a tradition that gave nothing to yourself, but rather gave a bonus to a third party. We've changed so that the captital building now unlocks the 4th slot, instead of the Prosperity tree. We probably want to find a better solution later down the line, but for now that was removed due to it being odd to get a "bonus" that didn't apply to you.

Will some ascension perks be locked behind some other traditional trees? e.g, you can't use grasp the void without picking a supremecy tradition, or can only pick galaxy contender with domination tree?

No current plans for such changes. If we do something like that, like some people have suggested in this thread, would be to add a new AP that unlocks a new Tradition Tree. That could potentially be interesting. We'll have to see what the future brings.

So is Adaptive Economic Policies pretty much a dead trait if you're going to form a trade league?

Trade League empires get a swap called 'Federal Trade Fleets", which increases federation fleet contribution, similar to Entente Coordination.

This seems like a great time to introduce repeatable Traditions; as it stands now, you get to a point--even without building any Unity buildings--where the only use you have for Unity is just refreshing the Ambitions whenever they drop off.

Repeatable traditions is unlikely to be a thing.

How about +5 Stability AND an additional +5% production from jobs (which would effectively be a +8% bonus to production) - this would thus also make the finisher something more impressive (as it would outclass Synthetic Thought Pattern's +5% bonus) as the reward for the devotion to finish this specific tree.

Agreed, we can add a small buff like that. +5% more production sounds fine.

I was hoping for the Domination tree to get a +1 edict capacity bonus. That would have made the Domination tree a competitive option in the midgame, perhaps even the early game. Considering how few the ruler pops are, a +10 % ruler output bonus may not make any notable difference.

Edict Cap could be added to bolster Domination a bit. I think it could be added to Privy Council.


I'll update the main post to reflect some of these changes.

 

[Fersin II Veros]

Calling it now: No one is going to pick Unyielding. Its boring. It doesn't offer anything worthwhile. Its bad design and should not have been added into the game.

Why? Because defense is boring. This tradition does almost nothing apart from additional starbases and saving some energy credits if you are not getting attacked. Defending is not a winning strategy in this game. Starbases are useful in the early to midgame, but in the endgame, big fleets can easily overwhelm them.

Ask yourself this question: Would you rather spend your alloys into a mobile fleet and be able to attack, or spend your alloys on a starbase which can't move and can get outmaneuvered by jump drives? Easy answer.

Oh and what about that reduced War exhaustion gain? That looks like a strong bonus to me. And its extremely annoying for your opponent. Nothing is worse than having a war end because of the war exhaustion meter going to 100%. Its not fun for the attacker and it doesn't reward skillfull play. I get why its in the game. But I would rather have wars end because one side surrendered or was wiped out and not because some number hit 100%.

Subterfuge

The best part of Nemesis was that Paradox listened to me and fixed the economy. Finally Energy is produced at 6 base output per job, same as food with it 6 base output per job. That means we no longer have to sell food to make Energy while keeping sell price above 0,67 conversion.

Apart from installing spy network and stealing tech, I almost do not use the spionage options at all. I could see this being useful for a science rush empire. You just keep stealing tech and get a bunch of Energy back when successful. Apart from that its hard to judge how good these bonuses actually are. If I remember correctly the system uses dice rolls, so if anyone has analysed the dice rolls, maybe you could give us an explanation on how strong these bonuses are.

I tend to disagree. Unyielding is just perfect for my playstyle with an empire consisting of small amount of highly developed systems, which makes pretty much everyone want to take them.

 

[methegrate]

Alright. I'm back today (got knocked out by 2nd dose yesterday)

That can be a rough one. Best wishes on feeling better from the States!

 

[Mímisbrunnr]

@grekulf

I'm flattered to see that you are taking up one of my suggestions, the one with the prosperity tree finisher. Thank you for listening!

Are you going to do anything about the Unity from Embassies tradition that lots of people were pointing out doesn't really scale very well, plus has questionable value because while it boosts unity rate taking it also means you future traditions are more expensive?

While I also like the idea of the favor generation from envoys as a cool expansion as a concept for the player, I feel it does need some method of counter-play for also negating opponent efforts to get those favors, as you cannot stop people from sending envoys and they will be used for the AI to block player resolutions with nothing to stop it. That is to stay, while fun for the player, I think its too dangerous of a mechanic to give to the AI, in being very not fun to be on the receiving end of, unless there is a way to counteract it.

I like what you've done with the Admin Cap +20% finisher for Domination. While its still generally a nerf relative to the Influence we used to get, it feels like a far worthier bonus than what we had before.

I'll also second your idea that I like your idea of introducing an Edict Cap bonus to Domination - that's a good power increase that it desperately needs - plus it provides either an alternate to the one in Harmony or a way or doubling down on a strategy if you choose to take both Domination and Harmony.

I've glad that you thought of the need for a Tradition Swap for Trade League Empires on the trade policy tradition, as if it wasn't there it would have been a "dead tradition" for them.

Also, thinking on Kinship, while its nice to be buffed, its unusual for a player to purposefully induce a demotion (unemployed rulers/specialists is more commonly caused by new pops with better traits moving in or being gene-modded to be better). Maybe, in this light, a better or supplemental bonus may be appropriate? Unity traditions generally aren't great mechanically, especially if they are flat buffs instead of percentages, as previously noted, but I believe it was mentioned in the past that pops might soon have a Unity upkeep cost to tie into a changed sprawl system? Maybe reducing this upkeep could be an appropriate effect for Kinship>

Also, as a final note, congratulations on getting your 2nd shot, and hope that you're feeling better today! The side-effects from the 2nd shot are generally rougher than the first (as you've likely experienced first hand), but its a sign that immunity is being built and its just so crucial to get protection from the awful scourge that is COVID.