Stellaris Dev Diary #219 - Selectable Traditions

[SteelCrow]

I am resistant to the idea of traditions helping generate Unity, since Traditions are the only thing Unity is any good for. Feels like a waste of time and resources.

 

[Strangedane]

Old stuff:

Domination gets nerfed to oblivion. The +1 influence was the biggest reason to pick it up at all.

Diplomacy seems ok, but the free favors might break the diplo game.

Harmony changes are really nice.

Supremacy losing the 2 starbases for 20 limit seems ok. Might be an actual option for early aggression now.

Prosperity has a finisher again, which is nice, but the extra clerks from city districts has to go. It's quite litterally a "make your empire worse" button.

New stuff:

Mercantile seems very limited but almost mandatory, which is really sad.
Collection range is cool, but trade protection does nothing unless you're playing bad.
Clerks are still too weak to actually employ even with +1 TV, but the merchant from the commercial zones might make me actually build them now.
All the actual value of mercantile comes from Adaptive Economic Policies. So much value even that either you're in a trade federation or you'll pick mercantile.
Market value and market fee are both decent modifiers, but getting 10% from the finisher looks weak.

Unyielding looks decent, maybe even strong.
Extra starbases are always nice and getting 50% both price reduction and upgrade speed is really awesome.
Bulwark is still good.
Never surrender is cool and might actually be really good against/as genocidals.
Defensive platforms will still be bad, but hey, nothing new there.

Subterfuge looks like trash and I will never pick it up, but that's mostly due to espionage being at best useless and at worst detrimental.

 

[Dragatus]

    ai_weight = {
        factor = 10
        modifier = {
            factor = 5
            years_passed < 10
        }
        modifier = {
            factor = 2
            has_ethic = ethic_materialist
        }
        modifier = {
            factor = 3
            has_ethic = ethic_fanatic_materialist
        }
    }
}

Those ethic weights seem fairly low. Presuming the empire is picking it's second tradition (and the factor = 5 for 1st decade is no longer relevant) and that they all get the initial factor = 10, even a fanatic materialist would only have a 25% chance to pick the Discovery tradition and that is presuming no other traditions have an increased AI weight. That would still leave the empire to have a 75% chance to pick something else and the chance to make a random pick would be 3x as high as the chance to make the favored pick.

IMO if you're going to add weights for flavor, they should make the AI empire picking a flavor favored option the most likely outcome or else there isn't much point.

Assuming the third ethic point is giving a bonus to a single other ethic, that would require a factor = 3 for basic ethics and factor = 5 for fanatic ones. Of course the weights could also be much higher than that.

 

[Tannhäuser Cake]

Having two DLC exclusive trees also means you get to fill 7 slots with only 9 possible trees. That's not much of an improvement over the current situation. There are also no mutually exclusive choices (like cooperation vs confrontation) so there will be little difference between empires and different playthroughs. I was really hoping for more of a change.
I agree that having a hundred different trees like some of those mods is bad, but this isn't enough to really force you to make many choices or to make empires have distinct traditions

A simple way to satisfy both desires at the same time would be gated tradition trees, that are only available for empires that meet certain conditions. We could then get many more tradition trees in the game without causing choice overload. The conditions could involve government types, civics and perhaps even galactic community resolutions, but are perhaps best limited to permanent conditions unless we have a good idea on how to handle acquired traditions whose preconditions are no longer met.

• Origins
  • Could be questioned - why not just include the bonuses in the origin to begin with?
    • It would allow us to sacrifice a tradition tree slot to build further on the origin of the species, and get more thematic bonuses, if we so choose.
    • Thematically, special tradition trees should probably not be granted for origins whose effects already permeate the entire history of the species, where any traditions would reasonably already be in place at the beginning of the game. The tradition trees appear after the start of the game. For any origin to qualify for a special tradition tree, the origin should involve significantly different conditions before and after the start of the game.
  • Doomsday can especially justify a special tradition tree.
    • Thematically: This society is undergoing a traumatic experience that will forever change its outlook on itself and the galaxy. It is learning to be more willing to accept and abandon many things, for the sake of the survival of the species, as well as the need for pragmatism and flexibility. These lessons will remain in living memory throughout most of the rest of the game, forever shaping its values and traditions and making it distinct from other empires.
    • Practically: It could also be designed to help the AI perform better and survive more often with this origin.
    • Design-wise: Plenty of bonuses could be applicable. Colonization speed, devastation recovery speed, pop demotion speed, pop migration speed, pop upkeep, pop growth, ship speed, planetary construction speed, space construction speed, survey speed, capital relocation cost, outpost cost...
    • (this tradition tree could potentially also be extended to Post-Apocalyptic)
  • Some other origins may also be potential candidates for special tradition trees.
    • Post-Apocalyptic, Lost Colony, Remnants, On the Shoulders of Giants: Thematically, these origins have in common that they are aware of having been part of a greater past, and now set out to do better this time and surpass that past. It might be possible to design a shared tradition tree around this theme, and the fact that it could be used for several different origins might make it worth the development time.
    • Necrophage, Syncretic Evolution: Thematically, these have in common that they go from a situation where they have known for centuries or millennia that they are the dominant, superior sapients - to one where they are only one of many competing empires. This presents a cultural challenge.
    • Galactic Doorstep: This origin might technically meet the criteria I outlined above, but there is not a lot to build on - especially when considering that the events surrounding the gateway come around the same time as the other first contacts.
• Ascension perks
  • Much better suited as a requirement for a tradition tree, when compared to most of the other options, even if it feels odd to complete a tradition tree to get an ascension perk to unlock another tradition tree.
  • Ascension perks especially suited as enablers for special tradition trees would be ones that involve or should enable profound societal changes, such as the three ascension paths, and perks where it would be thematically appropriate (and possibly even fun) to allow the player to further develop that ascension perk.
    • Taking this one step further, the first ascension path perk could unlock a tradition tree that must be finished before the second ascension path perk can be taken. While this would prevent players from saving an AP pick for a while and then getting both the first and the second ascension path perks at the same time, it would also mean that the ascension path becomes a journey. You pick the first ascension perk, then begin and progress through the tradition tree as your society adjusts to the changes, and when you finish the tree your society has adapted sufficiently to enable the second leap (ascension perk). Then perhaps another special tradition tree for those who wish to build even further upon their ascension.
• Previous traditions
  • Also well suited for the role, when compared to the other options.
  • By locking tradition trees behind a requirement to finish a specific previous tradition tree, it would be possible to effectively create advanced versions of tradition trees, as well as branches. This could also involve ascension perks in various ways - as requirements, rewards or both at the same time.
• Empire type (normal, machine, hive mind)
  • Would work, but has the drawback that it is a very crude division.
  • Could perhaps work as generic tradition trees, one per type, unlocked by sufficient (government) technology.
• Permanent civics
  • Has the drawback that no civic is completely permanent for normal empires, with the psionic ascension god-emperor event around.
  • Would allow unique tradition trees for inward perfectionism, barbaric despoilers, criminal heritage, fanatic purifiers, determined exterminators, and so on.
• Rare anomalies, unique technologies, event outcomes, precursors
  • Has the drawback that few, one or none of the empires get the special tradition tree during a game.
  • Would probably work better as a "backdoor" to bypass restrictions on tradition trees, under the suggestions above.
• Empires with unique origins
  • Prikkiki-Ti, enlightened species, successor khanates et cetera.
  • Has the drawback that it would be hidden from players, short of using cheats, and anything the tradition tree would accomplish might as well be handled through permanent empire modifiers instead.

 

[Valentin Vattista]

Finally. I hope this will at some point be just as expansive as the EU4 Idea Groups.

 

[evilcat]

Valuable Feedback:
Every Unity tradition is bad, since if i care about Unity i can get it from Tech/Civics/Edicts and there is less usage of Unity in end game, so each time i Unlock Tradition to unlock tradition faster is a waste of slot. Do you want to just nerf Traditions even better? Damm Spiritualists are too meta?
And we had a time like 1.x.x with bunch of traditions speeding up traditions, and we move from that, why are we comming back to toxic ex-solutions?

Domination.
Crime prevention was ok sometimes, unity from tradition is bad.
There is less usage of Influence now, or is it? If you sigh so many threaties the influence tax could be a thing. So maybe influence bonus isnt a bad thing?
Admin cap is useful even with normal empires (not just gestalts). And some bonus could suit domination.

Diplomacy
Unity from Tradition is bad.
There could be a problem with auto gen favours over 100 years even the smallest empire could get some against galaxy conquerors.

Harmony:
This tree could have perks like:
+5% global happiness
Clerks job giving +1 Amenitties.
But overall it is ok, Kinship demoting specialists is ultra rare.
Leaders caps, the more source of that the less value it have.

Supremacy
This one is actully cool. If you want to deal with Xenos in proper way. That in your face naval cap in early game will make thins spicy in early game and i like it.

Prosperity
Ok.

Mercantile
It is sad that we cant get extra amenities from clerks. Having ammenties from workers (slave) job could have great value and be somehow unique effect instead of calculating if Technicans or Clerks are currently better. This could be in Mercantile or Harmony up2u.
You could be more creative with trade policies. Like trade value giving science (patents trade), or naval cap (recruting merchant vessels) or reducing trade alltogether for more local happiness (local markets). Be creative.
there could be a perk to reduce trade pact influence cost.

If you want to make Trade Value happen there need to be technologies and edicts giving trade value bonuses, or some other gimmick.

Trade protection could be higher, 5 does too litle.

Unuielding
Unity in tradition tree is bad.
There could be a change to give X cannons to starbases so they will not get sniped. Or at least can fight back.

There could be a gimmivk to rebuild lost defensive platforms even by draining resources, this things fall fast. And it is tedious to rebuild them manually. With fleets there is one button to rule them all.

Subterfuge
Envoys!
It is hard to be evil when you want to spy on your enemies (and everyone who isnt us is the enemy) but you lack envoys. Envoys please?

If we need more Unity in game, can we buff cultural workers maybe? Like 4u 2s? Or give spiritualists civics to make them less backwater killjoy?
Spiritualists can spam temples, so if someoen wants more Unity there is a way. As well as several unity dedicated civics. If everything gives unity no matter if you want it, then you take away player decision to actually spec in unity.

Personal request:
Discovery: Can we swap opener with survey speed? What you need first survey speed or anomally research, huh? You could also throw in some archeosite speed if it does not count as anomally.

Despite my complains the whole idea of giving players CHOICE which trees to pick is generally ok. Players like choices.

 

[zZander56]

Mercantile looks pretty amazing, and seems like a massive boon to trade focused empires. Glad to see it. (As a side note, do you think Commercial Enterprises should also effect trade districts like those found on habitats?)

Not sure why Domination was changed the way it was. The tree has been pretty bad for a long time, but I would occasionally select it for the sake of the +1 influence finisher. Ruler output is absolutely worthless, since a modifier like that wouldn't actually effect what rulers produce (amenities and trade value) besides unity. Even the enforcer change seems like a downgrade. Now one needs to employ even more enforcers to suppress crime, but gains a miniscule amount of unity while doing so. Just a bizarre change. Maybe replace it all with some sort of subject focus? Allow the user to demand subjugation from empires equivalent to them? I don't know.

I could see Subterfuge being useful for the codebreaking and infiltration speed, but anything relating to operations is pretty worthless with the current worthlessness of operations (unless those changed?)

Overall pretty excited to get my hands onto the new system, and I'm especially excited to see what else you've changed.

(Edit: The Diplomacy tradition that allows you to passively generate favors is terrible for the player, since it seems there is no defense for it. Imagine a multiplayer game in which any small empire could spam envoys on say the Custodian and completely overrule them on important votes. This destroys the point of boosting one's own Diplo weight in a multiplayer lobby, and would get extremely frustrating in single player as well.)

 

[Arithmetician]

Edit: The Diplomacy tradition that allows you to passively generate favors is terrible for the player, since it seems there is no defense for it. Imagine a multiplayer game in which any small empire could spam envoys on say the Custodian and completely overrule them on important votes. This destroys the point of boosting one's own Diplo weight in a multiplayer lobby, and would get extremely frustrating in single player as well.)

This is very true. Also, more concerningly, could it be used to force you to accept vassalization by another power? Since as we know, getting vassalized by an AI is basically a death sentence, unless you can sufficiently build up in 10 years to win independence (and hope they don’t get into another war first that prevents you from doing so). I very purposefully do not trade favors to AIs early on so that I can’t be forced to sign unfavorable deals.

 

[3Davideo]

Oh, that reminds me of a change I wanted to propose! Currently, in the Expansion tradition tree, the opener gives increased Colonization Speed, and one of the first level traditions gives an Influence Cost Reduction to build outposts. I propose that they should be swapped, because almost every empire is going to want to build more outposts before starting any new colonies.

 

[zZander56]

This is very true. Also, more concerningly, could it be used to force you to accept vassalization by another power? Since as we know, getting vassalized by an AI is basically a death sentence, unless you can sufficiently build up in 10 years to win independence (and hope they don’t get into another war first that prevents you from doing so). I very purposefully do not trade favors to AIs early on so that I can’t be forced to sign unfavorable deals.

Favors on a player can only be used in the community, so it would only have the effect of making sure your vote doesn't actually count. I'm imagining massive factions in a galaxy all desperately improving relations as hard as possible with each other, ending with the effects of just everyone negating everyone else's votes.

 

[MathyM]

Some of these new names are kinda bad.



Those are just plain bad.


This is already used in the game, and re-using the same name is going to be confusing.


Information security is a subset of operational security.

NDAs ("non-disclosure agreements") are a reference to a real-world corporate thing -- they belong in Megacorps, not in every regular empire -- and they are an anticompetitive tool, not an espionage tool. Foreign operatives aren't worried about being taken to court for disclosing against the agreement, they're worried about being shot for treason.

I fully support this post, except for "Marketplace of Better Ideas" being a bad name. It made me chuckle.

 

[Arithmetician]

Favors on a player can only be used in the community, so it would only have the effect of making sure your vote doesn't actually count. I'm imagining massive factions in a galaxy all desperately improving relations as hard as possible with each other, ending with the effects of just everyone negating everyone else's votes.

Good to know. One learns something every day. Thanks for the clarification.

 

[scaper12123]

• (3) Adaptive Economic Policies: Can convert parts of their Trade Value into Unity or Consumer Goods

Honestly feels like this should be the finisher rather than a mid-tree upgrade. It feels like the traditions that unlock new abilities or gameplay adjustments (rather than simple buffs) should be all the finishers, and like they should be the big reasons we decide to go down any tree rather than any of the unlocks by themselves.

 

[firespark 84]

It feels like the devs have just shafted domination completely since they don’t see a place for it in the game. There is legit no reason to ever pick it now. It should give larger bonuses to slaves, like reducing slave political power and increasing ruler political power, increase in influence gain, reduced chance of negative slave events like slaves radicalizing, maybe even a new slavery type or boosts to existing ones. Domination should be a sort of authoritarian/xenophobe/slaver pick to give it a place in the game.

 

[methegrate]

Unyielding should not be part of Nemesis. That tree has nothing whatsoever to do with espionage, but would benefit any player of the game.

Having two DLC exclusive trees also means you get to fill 7 slots with only 9 possible trees. That's not much of an improvement over the current situation. There are also no mutually exclusive choices (like cooperation vs confrontation) so there will be little difference between empires and different playthroughs. I was really hoping for more of a change.
I agree that having a hundred different trees like some of those mods is bad, but this isn't enough to really force you to make many choices or to make empires have distinct traditions

That was kind of my first impression as well. I am a huge fan of this move in general, and I completely understand how the devs wanted to avoid the wall of traditions created by many mods.

But I feel like they went too far in the other direction. Instead of having a narratively meaningless wash of choices, this system will be more along the lines of picking which two traditions your empire won’t adopt. We’re also not changing the abundance of unity, so empires will still get every tradition relatively quickly, nor are we changing the incentives that funnel players into a pretty set build order.

I don’t mean to be overly critical, I think having multiple choices among traditions is terrific! This is definitely a great move for the tradition system. But my guess is that we will mostly see real impact on the edges of the mechanic. You’ll still have your standard build, and will still get every tradition, but there’ll probably be like one tradition that you swap out from one game to another. A good change, but not the major adjustment that traditions needed.

Personally, I think mutually exclusive choices were definitely the way to go.

Elsewhere in the forum, someone suggested what I thought has been (by far) the best idea on traditions yet:

- Have seven tradition categories, one for each pick that players get.
- Then create two or three mutually exclusive tradition trees within each category.

So you would have like a category of Diplomacy, but then you might get to choose between a tradition of Belligerence, Cooperation or Isolation. Whichever one you pick would close off the other two.

That way you kill two birds with one stone. You don’t have choice overload, because players are only ever picking between two or three choices at once. And as long as each set of traditions is built around a specific play style, you eliminate the issue of having the same build every time. Players will still always get all seven picks, and may still always get Expansion or Technology traditions first, but they’ll need to pull different trees from each of their tradition picks based on their empire’s needs.

I don’t remember who came up with it (not me), but I’ve always thought that idea really hit the nail on the head.

 

[Kaoru Sen'nin]

I wish the traditions would define the path you are taking as an empire and species... rather than the 5-10% bonuses etc. are too boring and just a number at the end.

I agree. Just a small and flat bonus seems underwheilming and doesn't feels like you are shaping a society. You pick it and then you forget it for the most part.

The Exploration that unlock an edict and the new tree that unlock the commercial policies are an example of what I would expect. It's interresting and truly affect your empire identity.

In this spirit I had hope for things like :

Subterfuge could unlock new espionnage Operation for exampe, more powerfull as you advance in the Tree.

Supremacy could be about new War Policies or unlock exclusive technology.

And so on.

 

[HFY]

I fully support this post, except for "Marketplace of Better Ideas" being a bad name. It made me chuckle.

Sure there are some references in there -- but they reference things which they don't actually represent. They're not even puns, really, they're just references to unrelated things. The references can be chuckle-worthy, but they're still bad names because they don't relate to the thing they're supposed to represent.

I'd rather have names which relate to the mechanics (and are thus easier to remember) than names which are almost-but-not-quite up to the quality standards of a Dad joke.

Honestly feels like this should be the finisher rather than a mid-tree upgrade. It feels like the traditions that unlock new abilities or gameplay adjustments (rather than simple buffs) should be all the finishers, and like they should be the big reasons we decide to go down any tree rather than any of the unlocks by themselves.

I'd give this as the opener, not the finisher. Opening a tree is now a significant opportunity cost -- you've locked that tree in, you can't take one of the other trees now -- and choosing how to direct your Trade Value is so critical to some early empire concepts (for RP and/or mechanics) that it's honestly a choice I could see myself taking first, over Expansion, for some empires.

The Exploration that unlock an edict and the new tree that unlock the commercial policies are an example of what I would expect. It's interresting and truly affect your empire identity.

Yes.

Subterfuge could unlock new espionnage Operation for exampe, more powerfull as you advance in the Tree.

Supremacy could be about new War Policies or unlock exclusive technology.

YESSSSSSS.

 

[WindingArc]

A simple way to satisfy both desires at the same time would be gated tradition trees, that are only available for empires that meet certain conditions. We could then get many more tradition trees in the game without causing choice overload. The conditions could involve government types, civics and perhaps even galactic community resolutions, but are perhaps best limited to permanent conditions unless we have a good idea on how to handle acquired traditions whose preconditions are no longer met.

I was getting ready to post something like this before I read your reply. I really like the general ideas behind your suggestions.

I think cost reductions for particular tradition trees is a better model for much of what you're proposing. That would allow origins, ethics, civics, government types and factions to lend themselves towards particular traditions without railroading players towards them. It would also accommodate the temporary nature of ethics, civics, government types and faction influence levels: As long as the cost reductions are small - 5-20% seems reasonable, depending on how easy unity generation is in the upcoming patches - it wouldn't be efficient to change an empire's ethics, civics, government or factions just to save a bit of unity.

• Origins
  • Could be questioned - why not just include the bonuses in the origin to begin with?
    • It would allow us to sacrifice a tradition tree slot to build further on the origin of the species, and get more thematic bonuses, if we so choose.
    • Thematically, special tradition trees should probably not be granted for origins whose effects already permeate the entire history of the species, where any traditions would reasonably already be in place at the beginning of the game. The tradition trees appear after the start of the game. For any origin to qualify for a special tradition tree, the origin should involve significantly different conditions before and after the start of the game.
  • Doomsday can especially justify a special tradition tree.
    • Thematically: This society is undergoing a traumatic experience that will forever change its outlook on itself and the galaxy. It is learning to be more willing to accept and abandon many things, for the sake of the survival of the species, as well as the need for pragmatism and flexibility. These lessons will remain in living memory throughout most of the rest of the game, forever shaping its values and traditions and making it distinct from other empires.
    • Practically: It could also be designed to help the AI perform better and survive more often with this origin.
    • Design-wise: Plenty of bonuses could be applicable. Colonization speed, devastation recovery speed, pop demotion speed, pop migration speed, pop upkeep, pop growth, ship speed, planetary construction speed, space construction speed, survey speed, capital relocation cost, outpost cost...
    • (this tradition tree could potentially also be extended to Post-Apocalyptic)
  • Some other origins may also be potential candidates for special tradition trees.
    • Post-Apocalyptic, Lost Colony, Remnants, On the Shoulders of Giants: Thematically, these origins have in common that they are aware of having been part of a greater past, and now set out to do better this time and surpass that past. It might be possible to design a shared tradition tree around this theme, and the fact that it could be used for several different origins might make it worth the development time.
    • Necrophage, Syncretic Evolution: Thematically, these have in common that they go from a situation where they have known for centuries or millennia that they are the dominant, superior sapients - to one where they are only one of many competing empires. This presents a cultural challenge.
    • Galactic Doorstep: This origin might technically meet the criteria I outlined above, but there is not a lot to build on - especially when considering that the events surrounding the gateway come around the same time as the other first contacts.

Good ideas. My thoughts:

• I think an extremely large unity cost reduction for Expansion traditions would be a better fit for Doomsday.
• I like the idea of a dominant/superior sapient tree for Necrophage and Syncretic Evolution origins. Perhaps they could get their own specialized replacement for Domination traditions?
• A set of traditions for empires whose origins expose them to advanced benefactors or potential benefactors - Scions, On the Shoulders of Giants, Galactic Doorstep, and possibly Lost Colony and Remnants - sounds cool. Unfortunately, I don't have a clear idea of what bonuses would fit into it.

• Ascension perks
  • Much better suited as a requirement for a tradition tree, when compared to most of the other options, even if it feels odd to complete a tradition tree to get an ascension perk to unlock another tradition tree.
  • Ascension perks especially suited as enablers for special tradition trees would be ones that involve or should enable profound societal changes, such as the three ascension paths, and perks where it would be thematically appropriate (and possibly even fun) to allow the player to further develop that ascension perk.
    • Taking this one step further, the first ascension path perk could unlock a tradition tree that must be finished before the second ascension path perk can be taken. While this would prevent players from saving an AP pick for a while and then getting both the first and the second ascension path perks at the same time, it would also mean that the ascension path becomes a journey. You pick the first ascension perk, then begin and progress through the tradition tree as your society adjusts to the changes, and when you finish the tree your society has adapted sufficiently to enable the second leap (ascension perk). Then perhaps another special tradition tree for those who wish to build even further upon their ascension.
• Previous traditions
  • Also well suited for the role, when compared to the other options.
  • By locking tradition trees behind a requirement to finish a specific previous tradition tree, it would be possible to effectively create advanced versions of tradition trees, as well as branches. This could also involve ascension perks in various ways - as requirements, rewards or both at the same time.
• Empire type (normal, machine, hive mind)
  • Would work, but has the drawback that it is a very crude division.
  • Could perhaps work as generic tradition trees, one per type, unlocked by sufficient (government) technology.
• Permanent civics
  • Has the drawback that no civic is completely permanent for normal empires, with the psionic ascension god-emperor event around.
  • Would allow unique tradition trees for inward perfectionism, barbaric despoilers, criminal heritage, fanatic purifiers, determined exterminators, and so on.
• Rare anomalies, unique technologies, event outcomes, precursors
  • Has the drawback that few, one or none of the empires get the special tradition tree during a game.
  • Would probably work better as a "backdoor" to bypass restrictions on tradition trees, under the suggestions above.
• Empires with unique origins
  • Prikkiki-Ti, enlightened species, successor khanates et cetera.
  • Has the drawback that it would be hidden from players, short of using cheats, and anything the tradition tree would accomplish might as well be handled through permanent empire modifiers instead.

I like the idea of a murder/genocide tradition tree for barbaric despoilers, fanatic purifiers and determined exterminators a lot. If such a tree were added, I'd give those empires unity cost reductions for taking it and make it a prerequisite for the Become the Crisis ascension perk.



I hope these new traditions mechanics can be integrated into an eventual rework of internal politics. It would be cool if, like I said above, civics, governments and factions influenced tradition costs, and if traditions in turn influenced faction attraction.

 

[Syroc]

Ehh, that subterfuge tradition looks pointless, unless you guys plan on making the spygame a lot more impactful.

That said, this is a great idea, and my only complaint is that you guys aren't adding more traditions that would let us really go for some crazy combinations to make unique empires. Imagine a piracy tradition that let you steal trade from other civs during war, or a unity tradition that gave you buffs for the amount of unique species on a planet. Basically, traditions that encouraged players to roleplay - or at least change how they were playing.

 

[Weyird]

I like the change a lot. I await to see which traditions I pick now, though will probably still start with expansion and discovery.

One thing I don't like, which is still the same as before,is the descriptions of the trees when picking them.
"If we do not impose our will on others, they will inevitsbly impose theirs on us" is the description of the Domination tree and tells me NOTHING of what I get if I pick it. You mention decision overload, but the best way to reduce that is give us a firm, honest, description of what each tree will give us instead of making me go and read each tradition in the tree to figure out what I'll get.