Stellaris Dev Diary #219 - Selectable Traditions

[Balesir]

Now that a bit off-topic but, maybe having tradition choice change the way the game score is calculated for your empire could be a interesting idea.

Stellaris right now just have the 'paint the galaxy map', 'make galaxy for *boom*' and the 'time limit score' victory conditions. I don't usually play trying to 'end the game' per se (until recently my PC couldn't handle the end game properly, so I mostly tried builds, some more serious, some just memetic RP nonsense), but I get from a lot of what goes around the forum that since 2 of those victory conditions involve 'going to war a lot' and the score is also heavily affected by doing that, we get a lot of the 'optimal way' to play being just around alloys and research (to get better 'pew-pew space cans' or the capability to build then XD).

So maybe having stuff like 'ok you got the whole harmony tree, so now your pops happiness count to your score', or 'full diplomacy tree, now your federation and positive relations with other empires count more to the score', could better approximate some other victory objectives, beyond just military conquest.

(Not that I don't want more crazy empire victory conditions like the 'becoming the crisis' one, but would be nice to build a space post-scarcity utopia without the plan of conquering everything, just doing it for the hell of it XD)

This sounds like the difference between what I think of as a full strategy gamer and a tactical/operational gamer. The second one likes questions that amount to "how (best) should I achieve this (predefined) aim?"; the first one likes to ask themselves the (to me, far more interesting) questions "What do I want to be?" or "What ought I achieve?" or even "What sort of world/galaxy do I want to make happen?" There seems to ba a fairly constant thread of contention between these two, espacially in these fora - possibly because Paradox games can lend themselves to either style.

What if instead of hard limitations, picking certain traditions might increase ethics attraction to certain directions? Supremacy could give you militarist ethics attraction, something you definitely do not want if you're playing a pacifist and want to remain one. Domination could increase either Xenophobe or Authoritarian and Diplomacy Xenophile attractions. Harmony could increase Pacifist or Spiritualist attraction while Prosperity could push you towards being more materialistic.

Ooooh, neetz! I like this idea a lot.

 

[Troyen]

Have we heard for sure that the unity/admin cap rework was coming in Lem, and not a future update? I was under the impression it was coming later, but I lack any direct quotes on the matter.

...Actually considering we are seeing both Unity from perks, and Admin cap from the domination finisher, I think that pretty much confirms the rework hasn't happened yet.

It's post-Lem. From Dev Diary #215:

Beyond Lem, we are also going to take a look at Empire Sprawl and Unity.

Note that these ideas are very much in their infancy and very prone to change. We will probably start talking a bit more about that once Lem has been released...

Usually they discuss fundamental mechanic changes that are in a patch before the patch, so if they aren't talking about it until after Lem, it won't be coming in Lem.

 

[kwheeler]

This seems really interesting. Will probably have to play with a bit to get a full idea of how much impact it makes, but it's definitely looking very neat. Some of those changes feel a bit odd, but I'll leave it up to people who know the game better than I do to work out if those are good or bad.

Expanded Stellaris Traditions is one of my favourite mods, so seeing more tradition stuff is exciting. Though man is it going to break that mod for a bit.

I feel you, man. It's one of my favorite mods too, and I hope it won't be broke for more than a few weeks before the mod-maker can update it.

 

[Carl_Bar]

I notice that a number of posters are complaining about the relatively low number of new tradition trees.
As someone who has worked with software development, I would like to share my perspective:

• The big change is not the new tradition trees, but the ability to choose tradition trees.
• Introducing a new system takes a lot of work, and has a significant potential for introducing new bugs.
• The potential for new bugs increases with the number of new features introduced at the same time, as does the potential for design oversights and missed opportunities. On top of this, the time needed for fixing system-wide issues increases proportionally (sometimes almost exponentially) with the amount of features affected by the system.
• The smart, responsible way to add a new system to an existing product is to not go wild and crazy with the number of features that use the system, but instead only introduce a limited number of new features along with the new system - just enough to verify that the system works, as far as bugs and design are concerned. Once the foundation is in place, and you are satisfied and confident with what you have, you can begin working on the implementation of the next step. By then you will hopefully also have gotten insights, ideas, feedback and user/customer wishes and requests that allow the next steps to be much better than what would otherwise have been the case. Rome was not built in a day, and all that.
• This is a software development principle that was used by God himself and has been forwarded to this day through oral history and scriptures for thousands of years. First you make sure that the changes you just introduced work as intended and are good, then you take the next step, and hopefully when it all comes together the final product will not just be good but verygood.
  • And God said, “Let there be light,” and there was light. And God saw that the light was good.
    - Genesis 1:3-4
  • God called the dry land Earth, and the waters that were gathered together he called Seas. And God saw that it was good.
    - Genesis 1:10
  • The earth brought forth vegetation, plants yielding seed according to their own kinds, and trees bearing fruit in which is their seed, each according to its kind. And God saw that it was good.
    - Genesis 1:12
  • And God set them in the expanse of the heavens to give light on the earth, to rule over the day and over the night, and to separate the light from the darkness. And God saw that it was good.
    - Genesis 1:18
  • So God created the great sea creatures and every living creature that moves, with which the waters swarm, according to their kinds, and every winged bird according to its kind. And God saw that it was good.
    - Genesis 1:21
  • And God made the beasts of the earth according to their kinds and the livestock according to their kinds, and everything that creeps on the ground according to its kind. And God saw that it was good.
    - Genesis 1:25
  • And God saw everything that he had made, and behold, it was very good.
    - Genesis 1:31
  • The story so far: In the beginning the Universe was created. This had made many people very angry and has been widely regarded as a bad move.
    - Douglas Adams, The Restaurant at the End of the Universe

TL/DR:
The big change is the ability to choose tradition trees, not the new tradition trees.
More new tradition trees are coming in the future, and they will be better than if they had been rushed now with less experience, inspiration and player feedback to build upon.
(And if that is not soon enough for your tastes, odds are that a mod will be able to satisfy your personal desires before long.)

To be clear my own comments where aimed more at "Going forward i think we need more tradition tree". Rather than at the here and now, Lem is a big update with a lot of things in it, not just this, they have to pick and choose where to fight their battles with it.

 

[Carl_Bar]

Kind of late to the discussion, but I like the look of these changes! However, considering the new finisher for Domination is a whole ascension perk's level of admin capacity (+20%), it kind of makes Harmony's (and Synchronicity's) finisher look kind of pathetic in comparison (-10% Pop-sprawl). It is effectively the same just worse. What if it reduced edict cost or, more uniquely, improved baseline faction approvals?

That Ascension Perk is one of several that honestly have allways felt noticeably weak TBH. SO i'm not sure this is a great argument.

 

[kwheeler]

Great! Traditions reaIly meed an actualization and I like the direction you have taken. Only two week sides:
- Harmony and domination still don't adjust to any particular playstile. IMO domination should give bonus to slavers, and Harmony should give bonus to 1 species-societies (multiple species are just way stronger and easier for Colonization)
- A 12th tradition with bonuses to your core system, benefiting tall empires (similar to foundation traditions in "expanded traditions" mod) will be increase balance and fix the "window-gore" of having an empy space.

Just brainstorming here--I'd say that a buff to one-species societies should be some sort of "Isolationist" tradition tree rather than Harmony. Something that would mesh well with Xenophobes rather than Pacificists.

 

[Objulen]

Just brainstorming here--I'd say that a buff to one-species societies should be some sort of "Isolationist" tradition tree rather than Harmony. Something that would mesh well with Xenophobes rather than Pacificists.

I'm not sure it's good to have Traditions that specific. Isolationists are Pacifists, so any tradition tree that benefits Pacifists will also benefit Isolationists.

Similarly, the Domination tree can be taken by anyone, but it's been changed to offer up Extended Shifts on a silver platter - an edict that provides some benefits for every empire, but is doubly effective for empires with slaves. That kind of additional bonus for specific play styles seems better suited than outright ethic-specific traditions.

 

[kwheeler]

I'm not sure it's good to have Traditions that specific. Isolationists are Pacifists, so any tradition tree that benefits Pacifists will also benefit Isolationists.

Similarly, the Domination tree can be taken by anyone, but it's been changed to offer up Extended Shifts on a silver platter - an edict that provides some benefits for every empire, but is doubly effective for empires with slaves. That kind of additional bonus for specific play styles seems better suited than outright ethic-specific traditions.

I understand your unease about making Traditions too specific, which is a good point.
I'm less convinced (or rather not convinced at all) that Isolationist = Pacifists.

North Korea is isolationist, but it's arguably also one of the most combative and heavily militarized (per capita) societies on earth, for heaven's sake! The Hongwu Emperor in China was extremely isolationist, banning external trade and maritime shipping, but he also oversaw one of the most heavily militarized and combative periods of Chinese history, etc., etc.

I guess when I hear fanatic isolationist, I think "Sentinelese Islanders," not monks in remote temples.

 

[HFY]

Just brainstorming here--I'd say that a buff to one-species societies should be some sort of "Isolationist" tradition tree rather than Harmony. Something that would mesh well with Xenophobes rather than Pacificists.

I'm not really into Isolationists but it'd be neat to see something that rewarded me for NOT going full Nihilistic Acquisition on every system in every war -- like it buffs your Founder Species only, somehow -- and that would have applications outside of Isolationist play, but would definitely benefit isolationists and FPs.

 

[Objulen]

I understand your unease about making Traditions too specific, which is a good point.
I'm less convinced (or rather not convinced at all) that Isolationist = Pacifists.

North Korea is isolationist, but it's arguably also one of the most combative and heavily militarized (per capita) societies on earth, for heaven's sake! The Hongwu Emperor in China was extremely isolationist, banning external trade and maritime shipping, but he also oversaw one of the most heavily militarized and combative periods of Chinese history, etc., etc.

In real life, Isolationist != Pacifist, but in Stellaris it's the line between the typical Xenophobe Empire, which has militaristic and expansionist faction goals, compared to Pacifist Xenophobes, who just want to be left alone and preserve a peaceful existence separated from the rest of the galaxy.

While the terminology isn't reflective, I think it is reflective of many real-life situations. Xenophobes are always isolationists, as a rule of thumb - when they aren't conquering other empires, they just want to be left alone and not have to deal with outsiders. There is every reason to believe that North Korea would invade other countries if they could get away with it, and it is only Chinese and American pressure that stops them from engaging in military adventurism.

As for Hongwu, please correct me if my 5-minute Google search is wrong, but from what I'm reading he wasn't especially Xenophobic. He renovated Mosques, for example. It's also difficult to characterize a civilization based on one ruler.

 

[kwheeler]

In real life, Isolationist = Pacifist, but in Stellaris it's the line between the typical Xenophobe Empire, which has militaristic and expansionist faction goals, compared to Pacifist Xenophobes, who just want to be left alone and preserve a peaceful existence separated from the rest of the galaxy.

Err... The Sentinelese and North Korea are real life, and they are not Pacifist. I'm not saying you can't have Isolationist cultures that are Pacifist, and I'm not even saying that such Pacifist/Isolationist cultures are rare. I'm just saying they are not equivalent to each other in the real world. I think Stellaris reflects and maintains or mimics that distinction by allowing "Xenophile + Pacificist" as well as "Xenophobe + Pacifist" combinations. There's a reason Stellaris designers do not collapse the Xenophile/Xenophobe axis and combine it with the Militarist/Pacifist axis.

While the terminology isn't reflective, I think it is reflective of many real-life situations. Xenophobes are always isolationists, as a rule of thumb - when they aren't conquering other empires, they just want to be left alone and not have to deal with outsiders. There is every reason to believe that North Korea would invade other countries if they could get away with it, and it is only Chinese and American pressure that stops them from engaging in military adventurism.

I agree that North Korea would probably invade South Korea except for external pressure. However, that's partly because they consider South Korea to be part of their own culture and want to reabsorb them as a unified political entity.

We might speculate that North Korea would engage in military adventurism outside of South Korea, but if so, their designation as the "Hermit Kingdom" and their propaganda about cultural contamination from foreign nations doesn't seem at all Pacifistic to me. Nor do the Sentinelese Islanders look to me like they are militaristic expansionists, even they are profoundly hostile to non-Sentinelese. I confess I'm no expert on Korean politics, but to my knowledge, there's no evidence in the last half-century of even propaganda suggesting the Koreans want to engage in conquest of non-Koreans. They instead usually depict the bulk of the North Korean population as innately innocent and naively virtuous, but luckily brave and plucky enough to fend off the machinations of foreign devils. To preserve their innocence and virtue (or so the propaganda goes), the government stresses minimal contact with outsiders and keeping them forcefully at bay.

That's the absolute definition of isolationism, as far as I can tell.

I'd also note that the "Isolationist" ethic in Stellaris specifically allow genocidal purges and enslavement in a way that "Pacificist" ethic doesn't in Stellaris. As I see it, that design choice suggests strongly the game designers are not thinking of the two as being the same, even if you think of them as being the same.

As for Hongwu, please correct me if my 5-minute Google search is wrong, but from what I'm reading he wasn't especially Xenophobic. He renovated Mosques, for example. It's also difficult to characterize a civilization based on one ruler.

Fair enough. Maybe he's not the best example. What do you make of my other example of the Sentinelese though? Are they Pacifists simply because they don't engage in wars of conquest? Or is "kill-outsiders-on-sight" not an example of Isolationism combined with Military-minded culture rather than Pacifism?

 

[majikero]

There's already Inward Perfection if you want to go pacifist. They get a lot of bonuses already.

 

[Zetesofos]

I definitly would love to see some traditions that focus are based on origins, ascention paths (robotics, bioengineering), and or a few other perks (a dedicated tradition for ecumenopolis, ringworld, or habitats makes a lot of sense).

Also, a tradition for general politics stuff (ease of changing government, faction manipulation - move the bonus civic to this tree) would also be very cool.

Otherwise, the change looks great.

 

[Objulen]

Err... The Sentinelese and North Korea are real life, and they are not Pacifist. I'm not saying you can't have Isolationist cultures that are Pacifist, and I'm not even saying that such Pacifist/Isolationist cultures are rare. I'm just saying they are not equivalent to each other in the real world. I think Stellaris reflects and maintains or mimics that distinction by allowing "Xenophile + Pacificist" as well as "Xenophobe + Pacifist" combinations. There's a reason Stellaris designers do not collapse the Xenophile/Xenophobe axis and combine it with the Militarist/Pacifist axis.

Sorry about the typo - It was supposed to be, "Isolationist != Pacifist" in real life.

Anyway, Xenophobic cultures are going to be isolationist by and large, avoiding trade and exposure to other cultures except on their terms and likely limited degrees. That doesn't mean that they won't kick in the door and invade a nation, pillage it, enslave its population, etc. In Stellaris, the default Xenophobes are willing to do this, while Isolationists (i.e. Pacifists) won't.

We might speculate that North Korea would engage in military adventurism outside of South Korea, but if so, their designation as the "Hermit Kingdom" and their propaganda about cultural contamination from foreign nations doesn't seem at all Pacifistic to me. Nor do the Sentinelese Islanders look to me like they are militaristic expansionists, even they are profoundly hostile to non-Sentinelese.

As far as the Sentinelese, they seem like a pretty good example of Xenophobic Pacifists. Pacifist in Stellaris doesn't meant you don't have a military or won't fight, but that you don't seek out armed conflict or attack other nations, and would prefer other means if they are available. Now, it's really hard to say aobut the Sentinelese, because I don't believe anyone knows much about their culture, but killing others who encroach on their territory, but otherwise sticking to their own space and leaving the rest of the outside world alone, is a pretty good example of Stellaris Isolationists.

Japan under the Sakoku policies of the Tokugawa shogunate are a pretty perfect example of a Pacifist Xenophobe empire, at least in relation to the rest of the galaxy. Internal pacifism doesn't really exist for most of human history.

I confess I'm no expert on Korean politics, but to my knowledge, there's no evidence in the last half-century of even propaganda suggesting the Koreans want to engage in conquest of non-Koreans. They instead usually depict the bulk of the North Korean population as innately innocent and naively virtuous, but luckily brave and plucky enough to fend off the machinations of foreign devils. To preserve their innocence and virtue (or so the propaganda goes), the government stresses minimal contact with outsiders and keeping them forcefully at bay.

Yeah, the propaganda from their leaders who know they can't fight China or America. While it is possible that they might be content to stay in Korea, I have no difficulty seeing North Korea invading China if it could get away with it. It's pretty isolated, so the pickings are slim, but nothing about North Korea indicates that it wouldn't invade any other given nation if politics and logistics allowed it. I don't see believe they are true isolationists. Their "divine" ruler could easily change their propaganda on a whim to pursue an expansionist mandate, using either "divine right" or "divine justice" as excuses.

I'd also note that the "Isolationist" ethic in Stellaris specifically allow genocidal purges and enslavement in a way that "Pacificist" ethic doesn't in Stellaris. As I see it, that design choice suggests strongly the game designers are not thinking of the two as being the same, even if you think of them as being the same.

So, I don't think of them as the same thing. Pacifist Xenophobes can also enslave and purge other species, they just don't go out and do it proactively. Isolationists in Stellaris are a blend of Pacifism and Xenophobia. They are differentiated from standard Xenophobes because the goals of standard Xenophobe factions are incompatible with Pacifism.

Without Xenophobia, Pacifists wouldn't go off and kill or enslave other species... and they can't. Isolationist empires in Stellaris typically don't either, simply because they don't end up with Xenos to persecute - they don't accept refugees and don't conquer. The only other way to get Xenos is from special events, and most of those give you options to get rid of the Xenos right then and there. Depending in how Xenophobic they are, these Xenos might be killed, enslaved, or made second-class citizens.

Fair enough. Maybe he's not the best example. What do you make of my other example of the Sentinelese though? Are they Pacifists simply because they don't engage in wars of conquest? Or is "kill-outsiders-on-sight" not an example of Isolationism combined with Military-minded culture rather than Pacifism?

It's kind of hard to say. Does anyone really know anything about the Sentienelse? GTFO of my land to the point of killing any outsiders, but avoiding conflict with others, and refraining from expanding, is pretty spot on for a Fanatic Xenophobe, Pacifist society. If they avoid violence among their own members, and/or refrain from a warrior ethos, then they might be one of the very examples of real-world, human Pacifist Xenophobes by Stellaris standards. I doubt we'll ever really know, however.

 

[TTJ]

A different idea for traditions: Imagine having 16 traditions, 2 corresponding to each ethic. Adopting a tradition that corresponds to your empire's ethic costs 25% less unity (50% less for fanatic ethic) and adds 25% (50%) to all bonuses. Adopting a tradition that contradicts your noderate ethic costs you 100% more unity and halves all bonuses. Traditions contradicting your fanatic ethic are entirely blocked.

Such a system would make sure that different traditions woud be picked in different playthroughs.

 

[Calvax]

If your going to make defense a tradition, are you going to buff defense stations? The time it takes to actually fill out the slots is too long since it builds the platforms one by one. The platforms themselves are weak. We can build titans but we can't build a damn battleship with no engines.

The time it takes to upgrade a station and fill out its platform slots, I can build enough corvettes to roll over it in seconds.

It would be so much better if defence stations weren’t destroyed, but were deactivated like the station. By all means have them come back on line slowly, one by one, anything but the clickfest of rebuilding.

 

[kwheeler]

Sorry about the typo - It was supposed to be, "Isolationist != Pacifist" in real life.

Anyway, Xenophobic cultures are going to be isolationist by and large, avoiding trade and exposure to other cultures except on their terms and likely limited degrees. That doesn't mean that they won't kick in the door and invade a nation, pillage it, enslave its population, etc. In Stellaris, the default Xenophobes are willing to do this, while Isolationists (i.e. Pacifists) won't.



As far as the Sentinelese, they seem like a pretty good example of Xenophobic Pacifists. Pacifist in Stellaris doesn't meant you don't have a military or won't fight, but that you don't seek out armed conflict or attack other nations, and would prefer other means if they are available. Now, it's really hard to say aobut the Sentinelese, because I don't believe anyone knows much about their culture, but killing others who encroach on their territory, but otherwise sticking to their own space and leaving the rest of the outside world alone, is a pretty good example of Stellaris Isolationists.

Japan under the Sakoku policies of the Tokugawa shogunate are a pretty perfect example of a Pacifist Xenophobe empire, at least in relation to the rest of the galaxy. Internal pacifism doesn't really exist for most of human history.




Yeah, the propaganda from their leaders who know they can't fight China or America. While it is possible that they might be content to stay in Korea, I have no difficulty seeing North Korea invading China if it could get away with it. It's pretty isolated, so the pickings are slim, but nothing about North Korea indicates that it wouldn't invade any other given nation if politics and logistics allowed it. I don't see believe they are true isolationists. Their "divine" ruler could easily change their propaganda on a whim to pursue an expansionist mandate, using either "divine right" or "divine justice" as excuses.



So, I don't think of them as the same thing. Pacifist Xenophobes can also enslave and purge other species, they just don't go out and do it proactively. Isolationists in Stellaris are a blend of Pacifism and Xenophobia. They are differentiated from standard Xenophobes because the goals of standard Xenophobe factions are incompatible with Pacifism.

Without Xenophobia, Pacifists wouldn't go off and kill or enslave other species... and they can't. Isolationist empires in Stellaris typically don't either, simply because they don't end up with Xenos to persecute - they don't accept refugees and don't conquer. The only other way to get Xenos is from special events, and most of those give you options to get rid of the Xenos right then and there. Depending in how Xenophobic they are, these Xenos might be killed, enslaved, or made second-class citizens.



It's kind of hard to say. Does anyone really know anything about the Sentienelse? GTFO of my land to the point of killing any outsiders, but avoiding conflict with others, and refraining from expanding, is pretty spot on for a Fanatic Xenophobe, Pacifist society. If they avoid violence among their own members, and/or refrain from a warrior ethos, then they might be one of the very examples of real-world, human Pacifist Xenophobes by Stellaris standards. I doubt we'll ever really know, however.

Interesting points. I've enjoyed the discussion, though I think we're just going to end up defining these things a bit differently in our heads. In any case, I wish you well in your Stellaris endeavors. May your games be filled with fun, and I'll see you around the forums.

 

[Balesir]

A different idea for traditions: Imagine having 16 traditions, 2 corresponding to each ethic. Adopting a tradition that corresponds to your empire's ethic costs 25% less unity (50% less for fanatic ethic) and adds 25% (50%) to all bonuses. Adopting a tradition that contradicts your noderate ethic costs you 100% more unity and halves all bonuses. Traditions contradicting your fanatic ethic are entirely blocked.

Such a system would make sure that different traditions woud be picked in different playthroughs.

I disagreed because I much prefer the suggestion above that traditions (which are picked for practical reasons) affect the attraction of the various ethics. You can build any traditions you like, but your population will be guided by them towards particular ethical standpoints; so lovely!

 

[Grenartia]

It will therefore no longer be possible to convert Trade Value into Energy + Consumer Goods/Unity unless you have the (3) Adaptive Economic Policies tradition.

Please do not, thanks.

 

[SeekingEtermity]

I'm going to echo the idea of making ascension paths into actual *paths*, where you take the Perk to unlock a new unique tradition tree, and then the tree's finisher gives you the second perk's benefits (more or less). Each path gets some benefits earlier and some later than they otherwise would, and may get some new benefits to cover gaps.

Engineered Evolution: -25% species modify special project cost. Unlocks the Biological Ascension tradition tree. (Lets bio ascension go a little harder on having The Best Bio Pops)

1. Biological Ascension adoption: +3 species trait points.
2. (Req #1) Mass Reproduction: Unlocks Clone Vats building.
3. (Req #1) Pain Is Optional: +20% army damage. +20% army HP. (A minor bonus that helps bio excel in an area it currently is merely OK)
4. (Req #1) Genetic Miracles: +1 species trait pick. (Some room for diversity in your species design, rather than just taking the same set of special traits)
5. (Req #3) Super-Soldier Project: Unlocks Gene Warrior armies. (Replaces Gene Seed Purification tech, comes later to represent the would-have-been-spent research time)
6. (Req #4) Evolutionary Mastery: +3 species trait points.
7. Biological Ascension finisher: Unlocks the Genetic Resequencing research option as soon as Glandular Acclimation is researched. Can add or remove Hive-Minded trait by assimilation. Unlocks an ascension perk slot.

Mind Over Matter: Primary species gains the Latent Psionic species trait. Increased Spiritualist attraction. Unlocks the Psionic Ascension tradition tree. (Lets Psi ascension get a few more of its benefits through unity rather than research, and moves up the timelines on some benefits including access to the Shroud project; can't fully fix the balance problems because so many of those come after "completing" the path)

1. Psionic Ascension adoption: New leaders have a 20% chance to get the Psychic leader trait. Existing leaders can get the Psychic leader trait through events.
2. (Req #1) Psi-Cops: Unlocks Psi Corps building.
3. (Req #1) Warriors of the Mind: Unlocks Psionic armies. (Replaces Telepathy technology)
4. (Req #2 + #3) Mental Networks: +2 Codebreaking. +2 Encryption. +10 Base Intel level.
5. (Req #2) Thoughtcrime: Telepaths increase Governing Ethics attraction by 10%. Unlocks Thought Enforcement edict. (Replaces Thought Enforcement technology, which is pretty bad, and adds a benefit that is thematic for psychics even if you don't want the edict)
6. Req #4) Transcendence: Primary species gains the Psionic species trait (losing Latent Psionic). Primary species leaders gain the Psychic leader trait.
7. Psionic Ascension finisher: Enables special project Breaching the Shroud. Enables Assimilation citizenship option. Unlocks an ascension perk slot.

The Flesh Is Weak: Special project to turn all pops into cyborgs. Unlocks the Synthetic Ascension tradition tree. (Speeds up some benefits but delays others, doesn't replace any techs)

1. Synthetic Ascension adoption: +10% pop assembly speed.
2. (Req #1) Efficient Bodies: -10% robot upkeep.
3. (Req #1) Cybernetic Enhancements: Adds the Cyborg leader trait to all leaders. Leader cost +100% unless leader species is already Cybernetic. (Cybernetic pops no longer automatically give Cyborg leader trait, but splits off part of the benefit such that you can get it without needing the research)
4. (Req #2) Versatile Bodies: +1 robot species trait points.
5. (Req #3 + #4) Rapid Retooling: -50% robot modify species project cost.
6. (Req #4) Perfected Bodies: +10% robot output from jobs.
7. Synthetic Ascension Finisher: Unlocks the Synthetic Ascension special project as soon as Synthetics tech is researched, Synthetic Personality Matrix tech is researched, and The Flesh Is Weak special project complete. Unlocks an ascension perk slot. (Until you have the techs and prior project completed, does nothing but the perk slot)

Maybe something for Machine Age too, the red-headed stepchild of the ascension paths?