• 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:
Really nice! I can't wait to play around with these kind of features!
 
"...the presidency rotates between the member states, so for long periods members will have little control over their foreign policy."

Federations sound like they strike the right thematic note, but in practice will be problematic. Everything is fine during the “long periods” of player control, but as soon as the AI starts doing “AI things that annoy us”, we’re out. (Yes, I know that each of us has different tolerances for this based on individual factors of strategy, immersion, faith in coding ability of developers, etc. You may go down this rabbit hole if you want. I stand by the statement.)


What’s the benefit of a Federation while the AI is in control?


Alliances sound fine. Requiring allies to actually agree to the war goal that they are risking men (fungus people) and material on is great.
 
  • 1
Reactions:
What exactly is required to form a federation? Do we need a certain technology or everyone's agreement? Is there a penalty for leaving?
I am guesing an alliance that has been stable for a certain time can be upgraded to a full federation.
 
Very nice! I like it a lot.
I do hope Federations will be expanded in future DLC's, perhaps with the possibility of new way of selecting the President, and how long they can rule for etc.

But I do have a question ; How early (and what is required, apart from an existing Alliance) to form a Federation?

Cheers!
 
So if the federation president gets to design the ships in the federation fleet, how easy is that to change. Say the AI is the first president of a federation and designs the ships in a way that I completely disagree with (and builds several of them), how easy is it to change those designs (and replace existing ships) once its my turn to be president?

Edit: Basically, does the first president have the most influence over design and composition of the fleet? Since they will be in charge right at the start when the fleet is first created.
 
  • 1
Reactions:
Well, there has to be some limiting factor to federations surely?

If members of a federation can both declare separate hostile wars, while still protecting one another, and being able to block any wars when they have no benefit, they become almost unbearably strong and players can just use them to attack others while being completely safe themselves.

However, If breaking alliances (not forming federations) shatters relations and forming them is hard, the requirement for all members to agree to wars to even declare it runs the risk of making the game very static. So I guess, are other space empires as pissed about breaking alliances as factions ins EU4, but now with very rigid rules regarding wars so you can't just go at it alone? If this is the case, I'm very likely to abandon all alliances entirely, no matter how seemingly a natural an ally I find in another nation.
 
  • 1
Reactions:
I like the Alliance system and the joint Fleet. I don't know whether I like the rotating head of Federation thing or not, yet.
 
  • 1
Reactions:
Making a seperate post to basically ask my question more clearly. Which one of these is the case:

1a: Alliances are a group thing, you can only be a member of one alliance group and every alliance member has to approve of every war you declare (Sounds like this is the case).
1b: Same as 1a, but you can declare a separate war without any of your alliance mates.
1c: Same as 1a, but you can declare a war that only some of your alliance members agree to and join (closest to EU4 except closed alliance group).

Separate question: Do you always join defensive wars and how do you manage the demands then?
 
Except the Republic in Star Wars (both new and old) is neither a federation or a grouping of alliances? It's a republic where each planet elects a senatorial representative who gets one vote in the Republic Senate.

That's why I said "more or less" :p. It's at least close to the system of the saga, and it will be fun to play.
 
Except the Republic in Star Wars (both new and old) is neither a federation or a grouping of alliances? It's a republic where each planet elects a senatorial representative who gets one vote in the Republic Senate.
That does sound more like a federation than a republic, one vote, no matter if they represent tatooine or coruscant. Not exactly democratic.
 
why not ask them permission to go to war alone? alliances egenrally shoudlnt care if you attack OnePlanetMinor that doesnt stand a chance against uou unless they like them a lot, but block you goign to war with someone dangerous as it threathens the stability of the allaince.
 
  • 4
Reactions:
why not ask them permission to go to war alone? alliances egenrally shoudlnt care if you attack OnePlanetMinor that doesnt stand a chance against uou unless they like them a lot, but block you goign to war with someone dangerous as it threathens the stability of the allaince.
Perhaps you should suffer a relationship penatly for not asking them even if you don't ask for their help. I seem to remember most of NATO was less than ammused by the wars in the middle east.
 
  • 4
Reactions:
Can a federation member who isn't the president declare war (e.g. in the same way as an alliance member, by placating all of the federation members with war goals)?

Does the federation president get a CB on members who leave the Federation (so we could crush the Separatists)?
 
  • 1
Reactions:
That does sound more like a federation than a republic, one vote, no matter if they represent tatooine or coruscant. Not exactly democratic.

Why do people always suppose republics can't be federations and federations can't be republics? Federations just mean that each individual component has an ill defined greater amount of self-government, while a republic just means it's headed by elected individuals. Almost every federation on Earth is also a republic, but only maybe half of the republics are federations.
 
  • 6
Reactions: