These are just some thoughts after playing 3.8 a bit.
The leader UI feels a little messy. Probably first thing I noticed is that very few things are obvious at a glance. You really need to pause the game and have a hard look at some of this stuff to figure out what it's telling you, and even then, towards the end of the game you won't be able to read all the traits your leaders accumulate. It would probably help if there was a way to get a final tally for all the bonuses and maluses being provided. I see a lot of green and red bubbles but can't add them up mentally when I'm trying to guess who should go in the next council position, which means I have to pause the game if I really want to maximize what this system is offering. As it is, if I'm not pausing the game to do the accounting, I just click the guy with the most green bubbles that have a big 'X' through them since that guy must do a bunch of council things.
The Agenda system is pretty sparse. It's kind of like the Galcom, in that you can do a few helpful things with it if you're patient, but its main function is to act as a time gate so you can only get a new council member within an exact length of time. A small number of agendas are helpful (Psionic Supremacy offers +20% production to all psionic pops, WOW), but a lot are duds (Preserve the Order offers +10% production to worker jobs). I think from the perspective of it being a way to time-gate council positions, it works, but it needs some mods or a little TLC if it's going to be a more dynamic and strategic system.
All the leader updates keep me pretty busy when I'm using "Transendant Learning". Lots of traits to add! In some cases it feels like even "fast" is starting to get a little overwhelming during certain bureaucratic logjams, but I think that's a good thing because it means there's more to do and less dead time overall. A lot of the trait choices are good. Especially early on, there's that question of whether I want a flat increase to a specific resource, or to hold out for the scaled benefits which will be more potent later on. Being able to run one more science building is tempting and powerful in the early game, but on the other hand my whole empire could get +3% research speed. You could go with the flat bonus early, then later fire that guy and get someone with the percentile bonus, but then you've got to level up the new guy. It's a pretty good system, and in this case the RNG works for it because while you'll typically get good options, you can't necessarily count on getting better ones, so you either stick with the well-salted veteran you know or gamble on that new guy.
As people have noted, the scientists are clearly the more powerful leaders with the most flexible benefits. Governors have a lot of very middle of the road options, and many options only benefit one planet instead of an entire sector (like some other players, I'm not sure on the logic here. Is it to help tiny banana republics?). Admirals remain necessary and accomplish their roles. Generals may now as well be extinct - seems like a good way to waste a leader slot.
Paragon Leaders follow the same rule as above. I don't care how "destined" the spy master is: whenever she calls my empire I hang up. How dare you come before me dressed like you came fresh from a DnD LARP and grovel for employment with this inane bonus to infiltration! Get out of here, you loony! I'll take the Paragon admirals and scientists, sometimes even a governor if they offer benefits to the whole empire rather than to only their own personal planet, but legendary generals need not apply, thanks.
With regards to governors - it's not that the planetary bonuses are weak. It's that they benefit specific things, like trade. And yes, I could move a governor over to a planet that's producing trade, but because his traits are RNG, I'm not guaranteed to get more trade buffs from him. He may pop up with a bonus to job productivity, which won't help the clerks and merchants on my stock exchange planet. It's weird. If these were sector buffs then it wouldn't matter where the governor was actually seated, and his RNG buff to unity production and RNG buff to trade would help the trade planet there and the unity planet here, but as it is, it seems like the most practical way to get the most out of RNG planet bonuses is to build your planet (or rearrange it after he levels up) to match his traits even if the planet itself has been specialized a certain way in the first place because of its existing features and deposits. Or, you could also just not take the planetary bonuses, ever, and let your governor sit in a council seat where he'll provide some sort reliable function.
Civic councilors are a great addition, and I like the benefits that some of these add. A few civics are still pretty much duds, but some councilors open up new strategies. A special shout-out to Reanimators, for example. With Transcendant Learning, the Master Necromancer, and "Resistance is Frugal", you get yourself a shambling, skeleton-infested series of "Cadia worlds" the people can really get behind. Reanimators is one of my personal favorite "flavor" civics, but I could never justify taking it mechanically for an empire that wasn't going for an early game rush. Now it can be a neat all-rounder, offering science, unity, defense, and offense in one smelly, rotting package. Maybe still not a "top tier" civic, but totally one I can embrace out of affection, even in games where I'm not going to land these zombies on someone else's world.
The other nice thing about the councilors is the strategy involved there. Those necromancers aren't going to make a lot of unity at first, but they will if you invest in the council position, and that's its own level of consideration. A few civics now look a lot more attractive if you know that's the civic you want to invest in to start with, and for the first sixty years you can only choose one. Suppose you're a nation of technocratic necromancers (your nation is led, of course, by those with technical accreditation in the school of necromancy); are you going to lead with unity through skeletons, or focus on bringing down the cost of ritual undead magic?
The new civics are okay. I've seen people talk about Oppressive Autocracy as being "slavery on steroids", but it doesn't seem powerful. The happiness penalties do a lot of damage to stability on ordinary planets, which lowers overall production. I thought, "Hey, maybe habitats", and it's got some upsides there because the ruler per pop ratio favors rulers more, but then you're more ruler-heavy in general and paying more consumer goods upkeep per leader, so you're probably better off with Shared Burdens. My first instinct was to combine slavery with dystopia to suppress political power more, because duh, but for some reason slaves can't have the dystopian living standard and they wind up using amenities, which you cannot produce easily with the civic. Is that maybe an oversight? Slaves get the "non-existent" living standard with the civic active, though it also tells you they can't have that living standard because they aren't being purged - seems to be landing on an unintended default.
The new origin seems to be bunk, mostly because of its mandatory gene trait which decreases leader experience gain. I don't really get that. You have an origin where the whole point is a uniquely talented leader, and then they're a slower learner than the rest of the galaxy. Sure, they live longer, but you know there are gene traits and stuff I can use to make a species live longer. I could take certain ascensions, fish for certain techs. All you have to do is keep the leader alive until end-game repeatable technology, which is not that hard if you make that a mission - which you would if you have an origin that revolves around keeping a special leader alive. The special leader even comes with +40 years of lifespan, so it should be really easy to keep him going if that's what you want. Extra lifespan is something I can build for on my own and achieve. Lifespan's a binary in Stellaris, guys. Your leader is either alive or dead, it doesn't matter how alive he is so long as he is, in fact, alive, but having an experience penalty means that he's going to level slower and have his benefits later on, which is actively bad for him and for an origin based on having above-average leaders.
I like how traits are handled internally now. Most players won't see that without checking under the hood, but oh man, that feels so much cleaner and easier to work with, especially when it comes to events that add traits to leaders. Switching to the new system definitely produced a lot of error log entries where it comes to updating a mod, but once everything is corrected and running smoothly again, I think the new approach has some well-justified upsides.
Overall, criticisms aside, it's a pretty good update and a good DLC!
The leader UI feels a little messy. Probably first thing I noticed is that very few things are obvious at a glance. You really need to pause the game and have a hard look at some of this stuff to figure out what it's telling you, and even then, towards the end of the game you won't be able to read all the traits your leaders accumulate. It would probably help if there was a way to get a final tally for all the bonuses and maluses being provided. I see a lot of green and red bubbles but can't add them up mentally when I'm trying to guess who should go in the next council position, which means I have to pause the game if I really want to maximize what this system is offering. As it is, if I'm not pausing the game to do the accounting, I just click the guy with the most green bubbles that have a big 'X' through them since that guy must do a bunch of council things.
The Agenda system is pretty sparse. It's kind of like the Galcom, in that you can do a few helpful things with it if you're patient, but its main function is to act as a time gate so you can only get a new council member within an exact length of time. A small number of agendas are helpful (Psionic Supremacy offers +20% production to all psionic pops, WOW), but a lot are duds (Preserve the Order offers +10% production to worker jobs). I think from the perspective of it being a way to time-gate council positions, it works, but it needs some mods or a little TLC if it's going to be a more dynamic and strategic system.
All the leader updates keep me pretty busy when I'm using "Transendant Learning". Lots of traits to add! In some cases it feels like even "fast" is starting to get a little overwhelming during certain bureaucratic logjams, but I think that's a good thing because it means there's more to do and less dead time overall. A lot of the trait choices are good. Especially early on, there's that question of whether I want a flat increase to a specific resource, or to hold out for the scaled benefits which will be more potent later on. Being able to run one more science building is tempting and powerful in the early game, but on the other hand my whole empire could get +3% research speed. You could go with the flat bonus early, then later fire that guy and get someone with the percentile bonus, but then you've got to level up the new guy. It's a pretty good system, and in this case the RNG works for it because while you'll typically get good options, you can't necessarily count on getting better ones, so you either stick with the well-salted veteran you know or gamble on that new guy.
As people have noted, the scientists are clearly the more powerful leaders with the most flexible benefits. Governors have a lot of very middle of the road options, and many options only benefit one planet instead of an entire sector (like some other players, I'm not sure on the logic here. Is it to help tiny banana republics?). Admirals remain necessary and accomplish their roles. Generals may now as well be extinct - seems like a good way to waste a leader slot.
Paragon Leaders follow the same rule as above. I don't care how "destined" the spy master is: whenever she calls my empire I hang up. How dare you come before me dressed like you came fresh from a DnD LARP and grovel for employment with this inane bonus to infiltration! Get out of here, you loony! I'll take the Paragon admirals and scientists, sometimes even a governor if they offer benefits to the whole empire rather than to only their own personal planet, but legendary generals need not apply, thanks.
With regards to governors - it's not that the planetary bonuses are weak. It's that they benefit specific things, like trade. And yes, I could move a governor over to a planet that's producing trade, but because his traits are RNG, I'm not guaranteed to get more trade buffs from him. He may pop up with a bonus to job productivity, which won't help the clerks and merchants on my stock exchange planet. It's weird. If these were sector buffs then it wouldn't matter where the governor was actually seated, and his RNG buff to unity production and RNG buff to trade would help the trade planet there and the unity planet here, but as it is, it seems like the most practical way to get the most out of RNG planet bonuses is to build your planet (or rearrange it after he levels up) to match his traits even if the planet itself has been specialized a certain way in the first place because of its existing features and deposits. Or, you could also just not take the planetary bonuses, ever, and let your governor sit in a council seat where he'll provide some sort reliable function.
Civic councilors are a great addition, and I like the benefits that some of these add. A few civics are still pretty much duds, but some councilors open up new strategies. A special shout-out to Reanimators, for example. With Transcendant Learning, the Master Necromancer, and "Resistance is Frugal", you get yourself a shambling, skeleton-infested series of "Cadia worlds" the people can really get behind. Reanimators is one of my personal favorite "flavor" civics, but I could never justify taking it mechanically for an empire that wasn't going for an early game rush. Now it can be a neat all-rounder, offering science, unity, defense, and offense in one smelly, rotting package. Maybe still not a "top tier" civic, but totally one I can embrace out of affection, even in games where I'm not going to land these zombies on someone else's world.
The other nice thing about the councilors is the strategy involved there. Those necromancers aren't going to make a lot of unity at first, but they will if you invest in the council position, and that's its own level of consideration. A few civics now look a lot more attractive if you know that's the civic you want to invest in to start with, and for the first sixty years you can only choose one. Suppose you're a nation of technocratic necromancers (your nation is led, of course, by those with technical accreditation in the school of necromancy); are you going to lead with unity through skeletons, or focus on bringing down the cost of ritual undead magic?
The new civics are okay. I've seen people talk about Oppressive Autocracy as being "slavery on steroids", but it doesn't seem powerful. The happiness penalties do a lot of damage to stability on ordinary planets, which lowers overall production. I thought, "Hey, maybe habitats", and it's got some upsides there because the ruler per pop ratio favors rulers more, but then you're more ruler-heavy in general and paying more consumer goods upkeep per leader, so you're probably better off with Shared Burdens. My first instinct was to combine slavery with dystopia to suppress political power more, because duh, but for some reason slaves can't have the dystopian living standard and they wind up using amenities, which you cannot produce easily with the civic. Is that maybe an oversight? Slaves get the "non-existent" living standard with the civic active, though it also tells you they can't have that living standard because they aren't being purged - seems to be landing on an unintended default.
The new origin seems to be bunk, mostly because of its mandatory gene trait which decreases leader experience gain. I don't really get that. You have an origin where the whole point is a uniquely talented leader, and then they're a slower learner than the rest of the galaxy. Sure, they live longer, but you know there are gene traits and stuff I can use to make a species live longer. I could take certain ascensions, fish for certain techs. All you have to do is keep the leader alive until end-game repeatable technology, which is not that hard if you make that a mission - which you would if you have an origin that revolves around keeping a special leader alive. The special leader even comes with +40 years of lifespan, so it should be really easy to keep him going if that's what you want. Extra lifespan is something I can build for on my own and achieve. Lifespan's a binary in Stellaris, guys. Your leader is either alive or dead, it doesn't matter how alive he is so long as he is, in fact, alive, but having an experience penalty means that he's going to level slower and have his benefits later on, which is actively bad for him and for an origin based on having above-average leaders.
I like how traits are handled internally now. Most players won't see that without checking under the hood, but oh man, that feels so much cleaner and easier to work with, especially when it comes to events that add traits to leaders. Switching to the new system definitely produced a lot of error log entries where it comes to updating a mod, but once everything is corrected and running smoothly again, I think the new approach has some well-justified upsides.
Overall, criticisms aside, it's a pretty good update and a good DLC!
Last edited: