• 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:
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:
A question. How could work the federation system in multiplayer? I mean if me and my buddys doing a federation, who will controll the fleets? I mean only one from us which is actualy the president can do it only, or not?
 
  • 3
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:
Can Federations be abandoned by its constituent members? Will AI races do that of their own volition?
 
  • 9
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:
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.

I don't disagree, but it seems easily exploitable, particularly against an AI ally. You ally the strongest AI in the game, and then you never agree for any wars they want to start ever. Or you ally weak AIs, you start a war for their benefit, then you feed them a bunch of planets and the rest of the galaxy is mad at them instead at you. Then you break the alliance and proceed to eat them alone or with the help of the other AIs who hate them.
 
  • 5
  • 1
Reactions:
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.

View attachment 160100

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…

View attachment 160101

That’s all for now. Next week’s topic is Multiplayer!

Nice, but can federations integrate further to a federal state, after all of the two major federations we have seen in human history, one did, and the other is struggeling with the issue if it should or not.

Also there should be some kind of alliance of convenience mechanic, where two neutral parites or even enemies set aside their diffrences to worktogether aginst a common foe, (Like the imperium and the eldar often do in warhammer 40k, or the federation and the klingons did in star trek).
 
  • 8
  • 1
Reactions:
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.

Agreed, alliances seem to be an alternative to being unitary and stronger alone with vassals and uplifting species left and right. I'm not sure I agree with limiting declaring independent wars, but you could argue that the other factions in the alliance would be annoyed that an alliance member wasted troops, the alliance might need, to conquer something they do not care about.


I'm hoping that breaking alliances at least won't be a huge deal, so you can make more alliances to benefit both sides, then break apart peacefully after sharing the spoils, making relations more fluid to compensate.
 
Last edited:
  • 3
  • 2
Reactions:
Love it. What can cause a federation to dissolve? Can anyone just decide to leave at any time? Does it change the fed's internal dynamics like cross-migration, factions forming from different fed members, anti-federation factions, etc.?
 
  • 4
Reactions:
I don't disagree, but it seems easily exploitable, particularly against an AI ally. You ally the strongest AI in the game, and then you never agree for any wars they want to start ever. Or you ally weak AIs, you start a war for their benefit, then you feed them a bunch of planets and the rest of the galaxy is mad at them instead at you. Then you break the alliance and proceed to eat them alone or with the help of the other AIs who hate them.
Good concerns, but a more strategic AI can prevent these kind of exploits, and I think Wiz is skilled enough to make sure that is the case.
 
  • 5
Reactions:
  • 41
  • 4
Reactions:
For release, it will most likely be rotation only.
I guess simplest solution is most optimal for release version.
Federation-centred expansions will probably have elected executives and Federation parliaments, or other more fleshed out features.
 
  • 5
  • 2
Reactions:
very cool. i like the idea that alliances are something of a real commitment.

question about Federation fleets:

the president can design the fleet but who builds the fleet itself? do member empires deliver part of there production towards the federation fleets?
 
  • 3
Reactions:
very cool. i like the idea that alliances are something of a real commitment.

question about Federation fleets:

the president can design the fleet but who builds the fleet itself? do member empires deliver part of there production towards the federation fleets?
More importantly, can each new president update the ship design when they enter (space) office?