Stellaris Dev Diary #55 - Unity and Traditions

[Shock360]

What about a homogenous and happy population, or a diverse population and dominion over other species?

Get both traditions....

 

[alxgvr]

@Wiz can you add console command similar to "attackallfleets", which will work only in star system scale, not whole galaxy, please? Or make a shortcut - order to attack your own fleet (like all RTS games have). I asking because there are many players on this forum (including myself) who love to make different ship designs, pack them with different weapon combinations and test them against each other on the battlefield, searching for "ultimate" design for each class or just analysing battle mechanics and how weapons work. Some kind of millitary drill. Problem with "attackallfleets" is that all fleets, spaceports and battlrstations in every corner of Empire are involved in the battle. So, instead of local millitary drill we have f*cking CIVIL WAR.

May be it is weird, but it is part of gameplay to)
Example: https://forum.paradoxplaza.com/forum/index.php?threads/battleships-are-weak-tested.988594/page-3

 

[A_Spec]

Carnivores eh, interesting.

 

[grandad1982]

Am I correct to assume that, at least for now, the policy on updates and dlc is that DLC packs will be mostly cosmetic and story expansions keeping mechanic changes in the free parts?
If so please accept my undying love, and shut up and take my moneyh!

Prepare to withdraw you love then.

Since many people don't care that much about the cosmetics having all mechanical changes in the free patch would mean that they never made enough money.

 

[Seomis]

So ... what's the art department working on?

 

[Roddo]

The HYPE flows.

 

[carthe]

You're doing great job constantly upgrading your game (even without paid DLC). That's why I've always trusted your
company.

Keep doing it, cause you're doing it good!
Can't wait for the upcoming changes.

Cheers

 

[Shock360]

My issue with the system as described is that while it is a buff to smaller empires and a neat customization feature, it only accomplishes those two things on a temporary basis. Over the course of a long game, larger empires will inevitably catch up with their smaller counterparts, and when everyone eventually has every tradition, there's no customization.

If you want the system to have any meaning in the long run, it needs hard caps, not just throttles.

Im pretty sure the intent is to not be able to get every tradition except for very rare situations

 

[Mauer]

Are you going to tackle the subject of cybernetic augmentation with traditions?, could be nice to have the option of cyborgificating your empire's pops by steps and make them much more productive (with some drawbacks maybe) for tall gameplay.

 

[Swuul]

If we were to assume that a player performing well is rewarded by gaining Unity points faster, while a larger group being slower to adopt a common tradition (social inertia if you will) is represented by the higher cost of buying a tradition. Then is that still failed logic?

Why would a larger empire have to gain a Tradition (which are in Stellaris to be opened with Unity) faster than smaller ones? It is equally bad design a larger empire automatically just by being larger get new traditions faster than small ones as is the vice versa version suggested by Wiz. That would be equally arbitrary punishment towards empires wishing (or having to) stay small at first, and start the steam roll only when technology/fleets/whatever are at the levels the player intends them to be at.

Arbitrary penalties are bad. No matter if they hit large or small empires.

This not only gives the player some incentive to play tall and expand cautiously — less they sacrifice unity, but is a very, 'very' minor nerf to larger empires that have enough firepower to level half the galaxy anyway. The problem I think you're having is mixing real-world logic with game design, something I'm often very guilty of even in this thread. Regardless, choices are important and giving players options is good game design. You can have less unity and more land or you can have more unity and less land. Think of it as... overextension.

It would not be arbitrary, it would not fail logic, if overextension was handled like overextension.

Increased risk of civil war after a too rapid expansion. Lowered production because lack of proper society/bureucracy in place after too fast expansion. Lowered production because of increased corruption in newly conquered areas. Etc etc. There are many ways to properly handle overextension (ie the player being "too" successfull). Slapping on an arbitrary penalty to not gain new Traditions is *not* a proper way to handle successfull gameplay.

 

[jju_57]

January 12th? That a month off. Gee what gives in Sweden?

 

[PirateJack]

So are we looking at Tradition groups that span over multiple ethoses? So Domination would be good for Militarist and Xenophobic, while Harmony would be good with Spiritualist/Xenophile and so on?

 

[Milten]

While it's impossible to tell at the moment, from the looks of it (and from previous paradox games) Unity will be related to how consolidated your empire is. So if it's just an absolute mess, you'll have low unity, while if it runs effectively you'll have high unity. The point being that a smaller empire is easier to consolidate, but it's still possible to do it effectively in a larger one.

Think literacy/industrialization in Vicky 2.

Perhaps I'm derping again, but I don't see what you see. It looks pretty much like Bird Mana - gather 100 unity points, unlock tradition perk, your unity is 0 again.

 

[Zelius]

I can't understand why you are trying to refute the exact words of Wiz. Wiz said size is the most important factor, and small empires will be able to unlock Traditions faster. Between two equally small empires thus the other factors would kick, but as per Wiz words a smaller empire will be able to unlock Traditions faster than a larger one. Which is just silly regarding most of the Traditions.

Now if Wiz had said smaller empires will be able to generate Unity faster, but certain Traditions require other actions to be able to open the Tradition in question (get flagged for having conqured or purged etc for certain actions before you can spend Unity to open that Tradition), that would have been a different statement. But that is not what Wiz said, he spesifically said smaller Empires are able to open Traditions faster than larger empires.

Let's imagine this scenario, and begin with an assumptions:

Unity gain is affected by number of planets.
Empire A has 11 planets.
Empire B has 10 planets.

Now, are you saying that Empire B will definitely 100% unlock more Traditions than Empire A, i.e. there is no player agency or AI action on the part of B that could allow it to surpass A?
But that would be boring, so of course not - are we all agreed on this? So, I would speculate that other factors could into play.

In that case, the question is one about the quantitative effect of size vs whatever other factors contribute to Unity gain. Now, one might imagine that with a galaxy-spanning Empire it would be literally impossible to match the Unity gain of a single-planet one, assuming it is affected by technology and tech is equal. I don't see a problem with that, personally.

You do realise you are contradicting yourself in the above statements?

Wiz said certain Traditions can be used to off-set the malus large empires get to generating Unity. Ok, sounds good until you realise you first have to generate Unity to open the Tradition which off-sets the malus.

If smaller empires can directly go for the Traditions they please, larger ones first have to suffer the lowered Unity generation and finally be able to open the Tradition to off-set the malus Unity generation. How many Tradition will a smaller empire already have unlocked when the larger one is able to open the first meaningful Tradition (considering the first would go to buy off the malus to Unity generation)?

Unless the Unity generation boost for the Tradition off-setting the Unity generation malus is huge (it has to be worth the Unity cost for the Tradition so that Unity is generated at much increased rate to offset the Unity cost for the Tradtion) this will be a double-whammy against larger empires and then it will not be worth it to take it (it would be basically Unity points thrown down the drain). On the other hand, if the Unity generation is huge enough it will be an absolute no-brainer Tradition and everybody will have to go for it first. If everybody goes same railroad anyway (they never take the Tradition or they always take the Tradition), where is the point of such a system for a game?

What is your point, exactly? Oh no - large empires cannot get as many stacking buffs as small empires? Oh well, I'll just roll over everyone with my ridiculous fleet. Again, this is a question about the quantitative effect of Traditions. Which we don't know. Unless we imagine them to be extremely overpowered, there does not seem to be a problem?

Edit: Might as well expand with a hypothetical scenario using whatever-Tradition that reduces malus from size. Let's call this Expansionism.
Imagine that Unity is generated at +1 / month. Suppose each planet after the home planet decreased this by 0.2 / month.

Now, we can unlock Expansionism with 50 Unity points, and this reduces the malus by 0.1 / month / planet. By the time we colonise a mere 5 planets this gives a net gain of 0.5 / month over another Empire that has not taken Expansionism, which then pays for itself within 100 months, 200 if we take the worst-case assumption that Tradition cost increases by 100% of base each time. Now, at the other end of the spectrum, if it takes 300 years to see any net return, then of course Expansionism is a waste of Unity points. Hopefully the balance is well thought-out.

 

[LambTaco]

Excited about the changes. But I have three complaints/observations, complainservations:

1. This seems to be a change toward a more gamey feel. As there isn't really an in universe explanation for how or why arbitrary points can be used to get enormous changes in costs, happiness, etc;. at least not the way we do for science and edicts.

2. One concern I have is that the Traditions be balanced well. We don't want to end up with another Civ 5 with one Tree being the best first choice for pretty much any situation.

3. The names Unity and Tradition seem off. A Fanatic Individualist empire striving to build Unity sounds a bit weird, as does a materialist(which is essentially humanism, but you can't use that with aliens) empire adopting traditions. But I guess we can't just call them Culture and Social Policies.

 

[BlackUmbrellas]

You are quoting numbers from the Russian files, and then pretending "oh, but these numbers are easy to get from some other places, which I just don't remember right now, but definitively not the Russian files, definitively absolutely not".

Oh, absolutely. Not like that's easily refutable, no sir.

I'm done here. So long as you're going to be dishonest in how you go about this discussion, there's no point.

 

[Elfwind]

Right, and we don't know how it works, but here's a likely possibility: Unity isn't as simple as what you described, and doing actions like purging and conquering will reduce Unity cost for related Traditions. Being locked out of choices is bad design.

I think he just wants you to be able to unlock the choices and lower their cost through actions which makes more sense. Xenophiles shouldn't be able to immediately tradition into purity but drift there as societal changes pressure them to. Such as surviving enslavement and genocide by xenophones which makes them xenophobic.

 

[cloudwasher]

I might actually build a monument at some point now, I'm usually bad about forgetting to do that

 

[fargoniac]

Oh cool, hiatus on dev diaries ends on my birthday!

 

[117Killer]

The Picture Wiz showed, listed exactly that, so no worries.
Plus i absolutely do not think slave empires are weak, in fact i think it is the strongest ethic choice currently together with spiritualist.
The combination of both allows you to never have ethic divergence, and you just mind control everything into your ethic choices.
That coupled with the fact you can purge any unwanted aliens, including primitive civilizations.
Having a big boost on your mineral planets is just icing on the cake, and revolts are a non-issue

sorry I was looking on a phone so I didn't see that much detail. but I have to point out, a slave empires major weak point is its research production. while they can out mineral most other species, they seem to have series problems with research due to sectors incompetence at managing pops and their roles. and besides, at 2-300 minerals a month its rare that more minerals will be required. it happens occasionally, but not enough, in my opinion, to make half my empire capable of +15% more minerals and suck at science.

on top of this, without the hep of being spiritualist (I usually go fanatic militarist, collectivist) there are huge influence issues late game with the ton of slave factions all costing me my entire influence production.

I just find that slave empires aren't worth the effort as they just leave me technologically inferior for a few minerals.