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

Stellaris Dev Diary #22 - Alliances and Federations

Greetings fellow gamers!

The topic for today is “Alliances and Federations”. Now, we have modelled alliances quite differently in most of our games. In Crusader Kings II, for example, alliances are bilateral, and allies are (since the last patch) automatically dragged into wars with no option of opting out and breaking the alliance. In Europa Universalis IV, alliances are also bilateral, but you can decline a “Call to Arms” at the cost of Prestige. In Stellaris, alliances are multilateral (they can have any number of members, not just two), and are thus more like NATO and less like the complex web of mutual agreements that existed at the outbreak of the Great War. This means that members of an alliance need a greater say in matters that concern the entire alliance, notable declarations of war (and some things are simply not allowed if you are an alliance member, such as guarantees of independence.)

If I am a member of an alliance in Stellaris and I want to declare a war, all the other members of the alliance need to approve. This ties back to what I talked about in the dev diary two weeks ago; if the goals I declare with the war are only beneficial to myself, my allies are of course less likely to approve. Therefore, I will likely have to dicker with the war goals in order to satisfy all of my allies (depending on their opinions and strategic concerns, naturally.) Of course, members can always just leave an alliance (while at peace) if it won’t permit them to achieve their goals.

stellaris_dev_diary_22_01_20160222_allience_opinion_of_war.jpg


If an alliance works well, however, the members can instead choose to deepen their cooperation and form a Federation. There are pros and cons to this choice. Alliances can be paralyzed by vetoes from the member states, but a Federation is governed by a single President who has the power to act with impunity. On the other hand, the presidency rotates between the member states, so for long periods members will have little control over their foreign policy. Federation members also share victory, which might be a problem for certain types of players…

Another interesting feature of Federations is that they have a special joint space navy in addition to the forces of the separate member empires. The Federation president gets to design these ship templates using all the best technologies of all the member empires. The president also gets to control these fleets, of course. As a rule of thumb, several fairly equally matched empires might want to form a Federation, especially in the face of aggressive, significantly larger neighbors, but it might not be the best idea for empires who are dominant in their own right. Of course, there is also an element of role-playing to the choice…

stellaris_dev_diary_22_02_20160222_federation.jpg


That’s all for now. Next week’s topic is Multiplayer!
 
Last edited by a moderator:
  • 220
  • 60
  • 6
Reactions:
Will there only the be the option of rotating presidencies, or are other more interactive systems of selecting the next presidents in federations possible?

For release, it will most likely be rotation only.
 
  • 78
  • 50
  • 11
Reactions:
"If I am a member of an alliance in Stellaris and I want to declare a war, all the other members of the alliance need to approve."

Then it's not like NATO. The US invades all sorts of countries without having to have support from every NATO member. For example, many European countries opposed the Iraq War. It seems wrong to me that such a limiting and unrealistic restriction should be in place.

Also I think that not even giving us the option to break our word and not help our ally - at a huge diplomatic cost, of course - is a bad thing. I didn't realise that CKII has now had such a silly rule introduced. It seems like a backwards step.
 
  • 82
  • 18
Reactions:
  • 41
  • 4
Reactions:
Can a Federation turn into a Dictatorship? After his electoral victory, Space Charles the Vth abolished the parliament claiming that he spoke fungoid to women, amphibian to his crew, binary to his computer and Faroese to his pet.
 
  • 37
  • 2
Reactions:
Where does the Federation navy come from? Who pays for it and who's construction queues are interrupted to build it?

Does the Federation President decide how to distribute the spoils of war?
 
  • 24
  • 1
Reactions:
I think (imo) what we were implying is that the Russian "democracy" is a farce, winning an election does not actually count if you did so through election rigging and voter intimidation/harassment. then you are no longer a republic, but a dictatorship trying to look democratic by holding a token, meaningless election for appearances sake

Dysfunctional democracy? Yes, in some ways, but they don't need to resolve to one ruling party or outright lying about election results - it's much easier to use propaganda and misdirection to stay in power just as AKP regained power in Turkey after the scattered election result.

Have you heard of a thing called "gerrymandering" in the US regarding elections? Now that is one way First Past the Post voting completely fucks up any semblance of democracy.

Is this the work of a functional democracy?

500px-How_to_Steal_an_Election_-_Gerrymandering.svg.png



Illinois_District_4_2004.png
 
  • 24
  • 1
  • 1
Reactions:
Also I think that not even giving us the option to break our word and not help our ally - at a huge diplomatic cost, of course - is a bad thing. I didn't realise that CKII has now had such a silly rule introduced. It seems like a backwards step.
I disagree. The concept of alliances is different in Stellaris and it makes more sense to have this choice. Nothing forces you to ally, and alliances are supposed to be something more important. If I understand things correctly, you can always vote against the war, and your ally won't even start it. Before war declaration you can also leave the alliance. Also, remember that there are no separate allies.
 
  • 20
  • 9
Reactions:
Will there only the be the option of rotating presidencies, or are other more interactive systems of selecting the next presidents in federations possible?
 
  • 15
Reactions:
Germany is not a federation either. Again nation state. If the vast majority of the natio, people of the state is from a single ethnicity and the state is named for that people, itäös a fairly good bet you're talking about a nation state.

You have some heavily entrenched ideas of what a Federation is. A federation does not have to be a collection of small countries that eventually unified (though "Germany" is precisely that), it is rather how much independence is afforded to the primary subdivision. Spain is not a federation, though it has many ethnicities, but many people in it want it to be, because a federation would afford its independence movement states more power.

See https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Federation - the green countries here are federations.

863px-Map_of_unitary_and_federal_states.svg.png
 
  • 13
  • 2
Reactions:
Honestly, I'm a bit mystified by all of this. This alliance system, as does the new CK2 one, seems to me forced and unintuitive. So in order to declare a war, all your allies must agree... Is it possible to have different alliances at once, so that at least we could call in a war empire x and republic y, but not z hive?

And federation seems an excellent and organic way to upgrade a multilateral alliance to form a more centralized political form, but there should be ways to change how the presidency is selected and the votation rules. I don't think many player will enjoy playing as the head of a federation only 10 years per 100 years, and thus lose completely their agency over what they are doing during the rest of the time.
 
  • 14
  • 6
Reactions:
I feel like this dd was a bit unsatisfying. No the actual mechanics involved but the info presented itself. Almost like it was only an introduction to the subjects as it razes so many questions that are unanswered. Will there be more detailed diarys on alliances and federations?
 
  • 14
Reactions: