[3.3 Beta] Suggestion: There's more to sprawl than research and unity: There must be benefits as well!

[GnoSIS]

Note: Numbers are indicative and not subject to balane!

1. There should be a bonus starbase per 200 or 300 sprawl. (Not too much but not nnothing either)

2. Large empires are intimidating, needs a bonus of diplomatic weight, per sprawl point. 1% per 100? 200?

3. If I'm so sprawly, surely I have more space to store stuff! +1000 resource storage per 100 sprawl?

4. Vassals/members fear me (as suggested on the main thread by someone else): reduces relation penalties by x% 1 per 200?

5. Sprawly empires have greater reach! Reduces range penatlies for relations,treaties, or even starting federations (that one is soo anoying currently)

6. Network effect! : Trading bonus due to internal synergies within the pops/planets/systems of the empire: +1% trade value on each planet, per 100 sprawl.

7. Reduced influence costs due to distance: -3 influence cost increase per jump, per 200.

I'm big, I'm fat, I'm ugly. Guess what, I can throw my weight around and make stuff happen!

(Baron Vladimir Harkonen Concept art by CandyKillerArt)
https://www.reddit.com/r/dune/comments/p9yomh
Please Suggest more!

 

[Promethian]

You already have a benefit when your sprawl is increasing. You have more of everything that causes it. Which means you are making more of everything than someone who has less sprawl. The entire point of sprawl is to slow the empires that are ahead down a bit so that smaller empires have more of a chance to catch up. Your suggestion is the perfect opposite of what sprawl was implemented to do.

 

[Incompetent]

I don't like the idea of tying these directly to sprawl; you're not supposed to like sprawl for its own sake, and things like Docile and Imperial Prerogative are supposed to be perks. Tying benefits to material measures of size, like pops, fleet power, colonies and systems, is OK in principle.

I also don't think it's smart to give beneficial multipliers to things that already effectively scale with size, e.g. you already get diplo weight from pops/econ/fleet, and more pops will naturally lead to more trade income, so multiplying those stats even more based on another size variable is overkill. That kind of thing just exacerbates the snowballing that already takes all the dramatic tension out of Stellaris once you have the upper hand.

 

[blahmaster6k]

1. There should be a bonus starbase per 200 or 300 sprawl. (Not too much but not nnothing either)

You get +1 starbase per every 10 owned systems already. Basically the same thing.

3. If I'm so sprawly, surely I have more space to store stuff! +1000 resource storage per 100 sprawl?

Build resource silos on those extra starbases you got for having more owned systems.

5. Sprawly empires have greater reach! Reduces range penatlies for relations,treaties, or even starting federations (that one is soo anoying currently)

Why would someone want to trade with the big empire that's been bullying its neighbors into submission and going on a conquering spree? They wouldn't want to help a potential enemy.

6. Network effect! : Trading bonus due to internal synergies within the pops/planets/systems of the empire: +1% trade value on each planet, per 100 sprawl.

You already get more trade value the more pops you have. This is just adding snowball, which is the opposite of the design behind the sprawl rework.

7. Reduced influence costs due to distance: -3 influence cost increase per jump, per 200.

Influence cost of what? Claims? So that the big bad conquering empire can snowball even harder? Again, contrary to the design goal of the sprawl rework.

 

[Nevars]

You already got the benefit of large empire (high sprawl) by having more resources than smaller empire.

 

[GnoSIS]

You don't get it. the benefits I propose are subtle, and tied to the fact that there is some redunduncy of being a large fat blob, beyond just it's constituent parts.

 

[Nevars]

But large empire already got huge benefit from it.

Why giving large empire more?

Instead large empire should get more punishment.

Make unrest and rebellion a real threat, make it that the more larger you are the more susceptible to rebellion your planets will become.

Basically make a large empire face another historical problem (inefficiency already tackle by sprawl penalty) of being large empire like irl.

 

[Ryika]

In theory, I think some benefits from sprawl would be useful, both psychologically and to differentiate empires further.

However, there's a conflict of interest between benefits from sprawl and effects that reduce the sprawl that you produce. Improving your sprawl by adopting some some sprawl-reduction effects would suddenly also reduce some of the benefits that you gain from your size, which seems weird. You could of course make it so the benefits are calculated from your total, unmitigated sprawl instead, but then things start to become unnecessarily complex and unintiutive.

I think overall, it's an idea worth exploring, but I don't quite see a good way to implement it well yet.

Either way, I think it's important that these potential benefits don't get in the way of other game mechanics. I'm against diplo weight bonuses because large empires already dominate the galactic community anyway, and I'm against any influence on diplomatic opinions, because it would water down other aspects, that I think are more thematic and dynamic than empire size.

 

[Strangedane]

You don't get it. the benefits I propose are subtle, and tied to the fact that there is some redunduncy of being a large fat blob, beyond just it's contituent parts.

We get it.
You want more of what you're already getting for being large.

That's not the purpose of sprawl and honestly sprawl is comepletely toothless already.
I'm still hitting repeatables in 70~ish years and clearing x25 at 2375 with memebuilds.

If sprawl hit harder than "replace your former administrators with scientists and tech faster than before" there might be a case for something positive from sprawl.
It just has to be something you don't get from being big already otherwise it doesn't make much sense.

 

[GnoSIS]

But large empire already got huge benefit from it.

Why giving large empire more?

Instead large empire should get more punishment.

Make unrest and rebellion a real threat, make it that the more larger you are the more susceptible to rebellion your planets will become.

Basically make a large empire face another historical problem (inefficiency already tackle by sprawl penalty) of being large empire like irl.

No, everything in the world has tradeoffs, being a blob has both positives and negatives. If you can't see it it's your fault.

It is because this is modeled unrealistically as a drawback, that some people do not like it.
And if you can't work it out as a hypothetical designer it's not my fault.

1. For instance, the storage capacity irks me: I am a 1000 sprawl empire and can only store 20k minerals? really? Yes, I can proactively built starbase modules and resource depots, but you know, some baseline bonus should be there. I'm not asking for this bonus to be significant: i.e. +1000 per 200 sprawl doesn't break the game or make resource depots obsolete.

2. The diplomatic reach penalty irks me to the power^3. There's nothing to fix it in game, prevents alliances and prevents the large players to flex their diplomatic strength. But you know? In other games like victoria 2, you get it AUTOMAGICALLY once you become a great power, which happens just by blobbing. It won't break the game if it added either. Yes large blobs have a larger influence range, because they are large! Shocking I know!

I'm not saying that these bonuses should be exclusive for sprawl, but there should be ways and mechanics for them to be selectable for the tall purists (and by the standards of the 3.3 beta, pue tall empires are still not powerful enough to justify the meta going that way, but only as a RP thing.

and so on, and so on...

 

[Nevars]

No, everything in the world has tradeoffs, being a blob has both positives and negatives. If you can't see it it's your fault.

It is because this is modeled unrealistically as a drawback, that some people do not like it.
And if you can't work it out as a hypothetical designer it's not my fault.

1. For instance, the storage capacity irks me: I am a 1000 sprawl empire and can only store 20k minerals? really? Yes, I can proactively built starbase modules and resource depots, but you know, some baseline bonus should be there. I'm not asking for this bonus to be significant: i.e. +1000 per 200 sprawl doesn't break the game or make resource depots obsolete.

2. The diplomatic reach penalty irks me to the power^3. There's nothing to fix it in game, prevents alliances and prevents the large players to flex their diplomatic strength. But you know? In other games like victoria 2, you get it AUTOMAGICALLY once you become a great power, which happens just by blobbing. It won't break the game if it added either. Yes large blobs have a larger influence range, because they are large! Shocking I know!

I'm not saying that these bonuses should be exclusive for sprawl, but there should be ways and mechanics for them to be selectable for the tall purists (and by the standards of the 3.3 beta, pue tall empires are still not powerful enough to justify the meta going that way, but only as a RP thing.

and so on, and so on...

It modeled the inefficiency of large empire which in real life exist and can be argue to be larger degree than in the game.

If you argue from realistic standard then the conclusion would be large empire need to be nerf more, not buff.

1. Build storage, that's what being large empire advantage is, you have more stabase building slots to build storage.

2. Large empire already have huge diplomatic weight because three in four factors depended on being large empire which are pops (increase linearly the more larger your empire become with a bit of complication from happiness), economy (large empire have more resources so this scaling directly from being large) and fleet power (large empire have more naval cap and resource to put into fleet and fleet is a must to survive as large empire).

I don't understand the part about victoria 2 perhap you can elaborate further? Because great power in victoria 2 only get sphering and colonization.

Colonization is fundamental to every empire so I don't think something like that shoud be locked behide being great power.

About sphering, if Stellaris add this mechanic into game then I can agree that maybe only certain empire like great power catagorized from being large empire should be able to do.

 

[GnoSIS]

It modeled the inefficiency of large empire which in real life exist and can be argue to be larger degree than in the game.

If you argue from realistic standard then the conclusion would be large empire need to be nerf more, not buff.

1. Build storage, that's what being large empire advantage is, you have more stabase building slots to build storage.

2. Large empire already have huge diplomatic weight because three in four factors depended on being large empire which are pops (increase linearly the more larger your empire become with a bit of complication from happiness), economy (large empire have more resources so this scaling directly from being large) and fleet power (large empire have more naval cap and resource to put into fleet and fleet is a must to survive as large empire).

I don't understand the part about victoria 2 perhap you can elaborate further? Because great power in victoria 2 only get sphering and colonization.

Colonization is fundamental to every empire so I don't think something like that shoud be locked behide being great power.

About sphering, if Stellaris add this mechanic into game then I can agree that maybe only certain empire like great power catagorized from being large empire should be able to do.

I must admit that to a certain extent what I propose is parasitic design, but if the penalty is so harsh and depends on a subjective sprawl count, that it also needs a tradeoff. I hate designs that focus on penalties alone and always either flip the mechanic on its head or introduce a balance point. If you wish to punish a certain behaviour in your game you should ask why it happens in the first place and not insert pure red flag penalties to it.

The elephant in the room is habitats and megastructures: they break sprawl, they break the scale of the game and the economy too... What are they? are there people there? Do they need administration? Right now it's like they're invisible. A total mess.....

In vicky, being a great power and influencing nations, results in better relations and say in their diplomancy. This happens before adding a nation in the sphere: even before reaching cordial, some modifiers in relations and actions kick in if I recall correctly - A mechanic sorely missing from stellaris.

Never the less, I should look into how this can be modded - not sure how to access total sprawl to add/update country modifiers on the 1st of Jan...

 

[Lidhuin]

Note: Numbers are indicative and not subject to balane!

1. There should be a bonus starbase per 200 or 300 sprawl. (Not too much but not nnothing either)

You have that: The more systems you have (i.e. sprawl) the more starbases you get to build

2. Large empires are intimidating, needs a bonus of diplomatic weight, per sprawl point. 1% per 100? 200?

You have that: The more of everything you have (i.e. sprawl) the more diplomatic weight you'll end up with

3. If I'm so sprawly, surely I have more space to store stuff! +1000 resource storage per 100 sprawl?

You have that: The more planets/systems/starbases you own, the more resource centers you can choose to build.

4. Vassals/members fear me (as suggested on the main thread by someone else): reduces relation penalties by x% 1 per 200?

You have that: The bigger you are, the bigger your fleets. Fleets not big enough? Vassals won't fear you.

5. Sprawly empires have greater reach! Reduces range penatlies for relations,treaties, or even starting federations (that one is soo anoying currently)

Off the top of my head, no one has that, as it's all based on distance to the capitol. Which is very easy to move.

6. Network effect! : Trading bonus due to internal synergies within the pops/planets/systems of the empire: +1% trade value on each planet, per 100 sprawl.

You already have more trade value than a smaller empire and now you want even more?

7. Reduced influence costs due to distance: -3 influence cost increase per jump, per 200.

Influence is a total non-issue now.

 

[GnoSIS]

You have that: The more systems you have (i.e. sprawl) the more starbases you get to build

No I don't. Systems with many Planets fully populated do not provide more starbases - there should be some extra contribution for that, as not all systems are equal. I would also accept +starbases per 5 colonies, or +starbases per 100 pops.

 

[Dragatus]

Note: Numbers are indicative and not subject to balane!

1. There should be a bonus starbase per 200 or 300 sprawl. (Not too much but not nnothing either)

2. Large empires are intimidating, needs a bonus of diplomatic weight, per sprawl point. 1% per 100? 200?

3. If I'm so sprawly, surely I have more space to store stuff! +1000 resource storage per 100 sprawl?

4. Vassals/members fear me (as suggested on the main thread by someone else): reduces relation penalties by x% 1 per 200?

5. Sprawly empires have greater reach! Reduces range penatlies for relations,treaties, or even starting federations (that one is soo anoying currently)

6. Network effect! : Trading bonus due to internal synergies within the pops/planets/systems of the empire: +1% trade value on each planet, per 100 sprawl.

7. Reduced influence costs due to distance: -3 influence cost increase per jump, per 200.

I'm big, I'm fat, I'm ugly. Guess what, I can throw my weight around and make stuff happen!

(Baron Vladimir Harkonen Concept art by CandyKillerArt)
https://www.reddit.com/r/dune/comments/p9yomh
Please Suggest more!

Sprawl should not give bonuses. It is fine however, if things that cause sprawl also provide positives. Which they already do.

Sprawl is generated by:
1. Owned systems, which increases your starbase capacity and offer some minor resources for mining.
2. Colonies, which provide pop growth.
3. Districts, which provide jobs for your pops, so they can produce resources that you can put into fleet, which gives you diplomatic weight.
4. Pops, which provide some diplomatic weight directly and work jobs that give you research and resources, leading to techs and fleet, which again give even more diplomatic weight.

Being big is already giving you all sorts of advantages of the sort that you would expect big empires to have. A sprawling population, a booming economy, a massive fleet, and even advanced technology, all of which combine into a great diplomatic weight.

Sprawl is just there to slow down snowballing.

No, everything in the world has tradeoffs, being a blob has both positives and negatives. If you can't see it it's your fault.

And if you can't see that being a blob is already massively advantageous then that is your fault.

 

[GnoSIS]

Sprawl is just there to slow down snowballing.

No, Sprawl is an ad hoc measure of how large an empire is. What penalty or bonus an empire of that size should have is up for debate.
Many do not agree even on the way we count sprawl. For instance I believe that colony and pop numbers are wrong and excessively large.

 

[Lidhuin]

No I don't. Systems with many Planets fully populated do not provide more starbases - there should be some extra contribution for that, as not all systems are equal. I would also accept +starbases per 5 colonies, or +starbases per 100 pops.

Yes, you do. Every 10 star systems you get a starbase.

Why should you get even more?

 

[Dragatus]

Sprawl is indeed an ad hoc measure of how big your empire is, but that doesn't change the fact that the devs put it into the game to combat snowballing. Or that all the things that increase your sprawl already lead to all the sorts of benefits you'd expect a big blob to have, sometimes directly (systems to starbases) and sometimes indirectly (pops to ... pretty much everything).

The only things from your list that isn't already provided are the intimidation modifiers and the distance thing. And it would make more sense if people were intimidated directly by the size of your fleet than by your sprawl, while your great power status would make more sense to be based on your diplomatic weight. An empire that is big, but is technologically backwards, has a broken economy, and has no military to speak of isn't going to intimidate anyone, nor is it going to make distant empires more interested in making treaties.

 

[MrGuyPerson]

Note: Numbers are indicative and not subject to balane!

1. There should be a bonus starbase per 200 or 300 sprawl. (Not too much but not nnothing either)

2. Large empires are intimidating, needs a bonus of diplomatic weight, per sprawl point. 1% per 100? 200?

3. If I'm so sprawly, surely I have more space to store stuff! +1000 resource storage per 100 sprawl?

4. Vassals/members fear me (as suggested on the main thread by someone else): reduces relation penalties by x% 1 per 200?

5. Sprawly empires have greater reach! Reduces range penatlies for relations,treaties, or even starting federations (that one is soo anoying currently)

6. Network effect! : Trading bonus due to internal synergies within the pops/planets/systems of the empire: +1% trade value on each planet, per 100 sprawl.

7. Reduced influence costs due to distance: -3 influence cost increase per jump, per 200.

I'm big, I'm fat, I'm ugly. Guess what, I can throw my weight around and make stuff happen!

(Baron Vladimir Harkonen Concept art by CandyKillerArt)
https://www.reddit.com/r/dune/comments/p9yomh
Please Suggest more!

This perspective seems to misrepresent what sprawl is. Although it is a gestalt measure of your empire's "size", its real purpose is to abstract the inefficiencies associated with managing an increasingly large empire. It's not there simply to tell the player how big their empire is in a power sense; rather, it tells the player how big their empire is from a manageability perspective. That's likely why the devs chose the word "sprawl" rather than the more neutral "size", to convey a sense of unwieldiness.

Sprawl is supposed to be the penalty associated with all the goodies you get for growing large. You can't double dip, otherwise what's the point of sprawl at all? As has been said, getting more systems/planets/districts/pops simultaneously increases your sprawl and starbase capacity, diplomatic weight (through economy, pops, and technology and indirectly through the ability to support a large fleet), opportunities for building storage, vassal control through a large fleet, and trade value from more pops. I'm not sure about your influence thing, but if you mean claims, well, it's not too hard to get to nearly 0% cost claims in the game already. Making that easier seems like it would break the game. One could argue that this mechanic is already abstracted into the game in the sense that as you increase in strength relative to your neighbors, it's very easy to simply subjugate them through an easy war or they might simply accept subjugation outright without the player spending any influence at all (until you integrate them). Furthermore, 3.3 will introduce power projection, which will give a bonus to influence for maintaining a massive fleet, which requires a large and well managed empire, so again, the type of thing you want is already there.

Basically, you're asking to get things twice, and then telling everyone that they don't understand what you mean, although what you mean seems rather clear.

 

[Unseelie]

Personally, I'm for it.

Frankly, it would be cool. The argument of wide vs tall aside, it is neat to pick up some snowball effects from having big size.

1. There should be a bonus starbase per 200 or 300 sprawl. (Not too much but not nnothing either)

2. Large empires are intimidating, needs a bonus of diplomatic weight, per sprawl point. 1% per 100? 200?

3. If I'm so sprawly, surely I have more space to store stuff! +1000 resource storage per 100 sprawl?

4. Vassals/members fear me (as suggested on the main thread by someone else): reduces relation penalties by x% 1 per 200?

5. Sprawly empires have greater reach! Reduces range penatlies for relations,treaties, or even starting federations (that one is soo anoying currently)

6. Network effect! : Trading bonus due to internal synergies within the pops/planets/systems of the empire: +1% trade value on each planet, per 100 sprawl.

7. Reduced influence costs due to distance: -3 influence cost increase per jump, per 200.

I'm big, I'm fat, I'm ugly. Guess what, I can throw my weight around and make stuff happen!

And how do we mitigate the problem of tall vs wide, if we're making wide even better?
Pair those buffs with opposite buffs in the other direction!

I've used small and medium as my "undersized" sizes because I don't really believe all of these should be pegged to the same size. I think one ought only work for early empires, another for single world empires, and other such things, so different styles of play, or even different ratios of sprawl causes, can give you a different bonus/penalty footing. Allow people to target specific benefit curves and otherwise dance around the sprawl stack.


I'm small, pretty, and quick! I can dodge between the behemoths and throw stones at goliaths!

1: instead of a bonus starbase per 200 sprawl, give a bonus starbase every 50 spawl.
Medium empires have a bonus applied to all the stats of their starbases, because their culture pays much more attention to each one.
Small empires have 2x the bonus.

2: Large empires are intimidating, so give them a bonus to diplomatic weight of .01% per sprawl. 500 sprawl is +5% diplomatic weight.
Smaller empires get...buffs to trust growth, say something that scales pretty lineally, you start with ~50 sprawl, and call 500 big again. +20% to trust growth at 50, stepping down every 25 sprawl to 0, but not going negative. (but you could have it go negative, and that's another countervailing force against the wide nation)

3: If I'm so sprawly, surely I have more space to store stuff! +1000 resource storage per 100 sprawl?
Smalls and mediums don't have a lot of space, but their stuff is closer together. Some deduction to the building cost that fades away.
As a bonus to this one, it makes early game setup faster, which mitigates some of the pain of having to spend your first building slot on a unity building instead of a research building.

5. Sprawly empires have greater reach! Reduces range penalties for relations, treaties, or federation foundation.
Small and medium nations then get bonuses to relationships with their neighbors

6. Network effect! : Trading bonus due to internal synergies within the pops/planets/systems of the empire: +1% trade value on each planet, per 100 sprawl.
And a piracy risk that takes sprawl as a multiple somewhere. 50 spawl, not much piracy. 300 sprawl, pirates are 3x as..big, or common, or exert more force against piracy suppresion.

7. Reduced starbase construction influence cost due to distance: every point in sprawl reduces the amount of additional influence it costs to build a distant starbase by 0.015 units
Smalls and mediums get a Core space production bonus in their first sector, but that fades to 0 as sprawl increases.