A Return to Specialized Research Labs

[LoLuecoLueco]

I remember that research labs in stellaris used to be able to specialize on a field after the second level or something, with a version of research labs for engineering, other for society and other for physics. I don't know exactly when this was removed, but i see it as a loss, considering the following points:
1) It doesn't have much backing in reality to begin with: yes i know stellaris isn't supposed to be a 100% realistic game, but it has to keep some semblance of logic and similarity to reality, as it is partially a simulation game about economies and space-fearing societies, not the best simulator but its part of the fun for people, at least for me i'm certain it is. And its very unrealistic and ilogical that you can't build research labs foccused for especific research, what if my empire is fascinated with engineering but finds sociology boring? their research facilities will apparently alocate the same importance to those two fields, and the only way of showing some preference is choosing a biological trait to give a percentage boost to a specific research field, not the best alternative imo.
2) It hampers roleplay: this feeds into the previous point, as if i want to play such an empire and spearhead a specific field of tech i will have far fewer tools to achieve it than it actually should, in the real world there are labs and institutions foccused at specific research fields, examples being the CERN, Max Plank institute of Physics, Butantam instute in Brazil, so why not give this option to the game again too?
3) It hampers empire synergy: i'm sure everyone has found a world with a modifier for a specific kind of research before, be it titanic life for society or magnetic field for physics. Formerly, you would be able to fill these worlds with physics and society labs and have the full extent of the bonus milked to the best of synergy, but nowdays you only milk a third of the research potential of your researchers with this synergy, the other two being normal. I'm not much of a min. maxer, but i do enjoy synergy and i think it feeds on the former point too, since if you are a scientist in a planet with a specific trait, like gigantic life or a interesting magnetic phenomena, you are far more likely to focus your research on that, since its not something you could find anywhere.

Admitedly this isn't the best post one could make to defend it, but i believe the point was exposed in a good enough way and shed light on a issue many of the old guard probably had and some of the new players will find sympathy with, after all there is reason for all stratas of our stellaris community to want specialized research labs back.

 

[Zagreb 887]

I kinda agree with you, but I dont miss the headhache and micromanagement to choose wich lab I want each time I ugpgrade.

 

[LoLuecoLueco]

I kinda agree with you, but I dont miss the headhache and micromanagement to choose wich lab I want each time I ugpgrade.

This is certainly a problem when your empire gets bigger or you want to just do balanced research, i think it would be easy to resolve this tough: just keep the option for a general research lab (not foccused on any field), that way you can choose to avoid the micromanaging if it doesn't interest you.

 

[makapse]

The change was mainly done for AI reasons, as it was difficult for the AI to choose between the 3 types. Now, it just has to check against a static research amount for its planning. Anyways, the only wway to do this thing in the current pop job type is to replace the researcher jobs from lvl3 buildings to something that only gives biologist jobs or something along the way.

 

[Scudilo]

What if research facilities remained balanced in the type of research they generated, but you could select a policy that would give an additional bonus to a specific research type, at the expense of the other two?
For example, you select a policy that generates +2 society research at all research facilities, at the expense of -1 to engineering and -1 to physics research at all research facilities.

 

[Olterin]

There's a balancing problem that would need to be "resolved" (for lack of a better word) hand-in-hand with that, though: everyone really wants all the engineering and some physics research, as the game currently stands. So as soon as there's a way to focus on Engineering, picking anything else as a lab spec is a sort-of false choice, in that anyone doing that is going to inevitably fall behind.

I'd love to be able to pick which research to focus on once more, and for that choice to be meaningful and good, no matter which way it goes. But that would require a massive overhaul of how the techs are split up, and possibly the techs themselves. Sounds like something more suited to an eventual Stellaris 2, to me.

 

[evilcat]

There is a better idea of Introducting science policy.
+ You can pick it in policy window
+ You need to finish discovery Tradition to unlock it. It is on neutral
+ You can pick one field to specialize (1 of 3), or neutral (as now)
+ Specialization changes scientist output to +2 in the field, and -1 in other fields. It also adds 1 research alternative in the field and -1 in the rest. Als scientists are more likely to get perks in the field (the leaders)
+ You can always switch to neutral with regular cooldown.
Here is topic

What would happen if science buildings were split into the 3 fields?

If we had 3 separate buildings for each science field instead of one then players could more easily focus their empire on a particular field. Maybe the upgrades for each building could require different resource types as well, and/or different...

forum.paradoxplaza.com

the SirBlackAxe post is somewhere below first one.

 

[Cat_Fuzz]

Why not make it a planetary specialisation? Remove the tech world specialisation to minimise the need for a tech cap and make it so you must focus on one of the three fields (kind of like the CG/Alloys is for industrial districts, only it would be say a +10 for engineering, -10 for the others or however you balance it?)

 

[LoLuecoLueco]

The change was mainly done for AI reasons, as it was difficult for the AI to choose between the 3 types. Now, it just has to check against a static research amount for its planning. Anyways, the only wway to do this thing in the current pop job type is to replace the researcher jobs from lvl3 buildings to something that only gives biologist jobs or something along the way.

Considering the average paradox AI experience, the decision does make sense ig, altough i still believe that we could have both options, the static one lab all research type and the specialized labs, just don't write the AI code to amount for the specialized version if it is so difficult for them.
Altough i don't think the only way is to just tweak the jobs from level 3, its really just the question of adding a new job for a new building, something that doesn't seem very complicated at all.

What if research facilities remained balanced in the type of research they generated, but you could select a policy that would give an additional bonus to a specific research type, at the expense of the other two?
For example, you select a policy that generates +2 society research at all research facilities, at the expense of -1 to engineering and -1 to physics research at all research facilities.

That one could also be a way of implementing it, altough i believe it would be lacking in the question of dealing with synergies, as the decision would be empire-wide like the militarized/civilian economy models already in policy instead of specialized, so you would have planets with modifiers geared towards society research being dragged into the physics research effort even when you probably would still want them to keep their synergy.

There's a balancing problem that would need to be "resolved" (for lack of a better word) hand-in-hand with that, though: everyone really wants all the engineering and some physics research, as the game currently stands. So as soon as there's a way to focus on Engineering, picking anything else as a lab spec is a sort-of false choice, in that anyone doing that is going to inevitably fall behind.

I'd love to be able to pick which research to focus on once more, and for that choice to be meaningful and good, no matter which way it goes. But that would require a massive overhaul of how the techs are split up, and possibly the techs themselves. Sounds like something more suited to an eventual Stellaris 2, to me.

You do touch on a good point, the stellaris tech tree seems to favour engineering and, dare i say, physics more than society. Most of the production bonuses are in engineering and there's not a single shipbuilding slot that goes into society (not that it is a bad thing in itself, just pointing out the differences). I don't know if it is to the point anyone would just rush engineering or physics, i myself enjoy the society tech tree quite a lot because of the leader lfiespan bonuses, genetic engineering techs and even the fleet size part, but i agree it probably isn't balanced enough.
In fact, i believe Stellaris would benefit a lot from overhauling the tech tree system too, and that i believe can be done in a patch, no need to wait for stellaris 2 specially when Paradox's policy these last years seem to be continuing work on a game through continued DLC's instead of moving on to another, CK3 just came about because apparently the studio, but then again this might speak more to my preference since i bought stellaris and don't want to pay another game from the ground up.

 

[LoLuecoLueco]

There is a better idea of Introducting science policy.
+ You can pick it in policy window
+ You need to finish discovery Tradition to unlock it. It is on neutral
+ You can pick one field to specialize (1 of 3), or neutral (as now)
+ Specialization changes scientist output to +2 in the field, and -1 in other fields. It also adds 1 research alternative in the field and -1 in the rest. Als scientists are more likely to get perks in the field (the leaders)
+ You can always switch to neutral with regular cooldown.
Here is topic

What would happen if science buildings were split into the 3 fields?

If we had 3 separate buildings for each science field instead of one then players could more easily focus their empire on a particular field. Maybe the upgrades for each building could require different resource types as well, and/or different...

forum.paradoxplaza.com

the SirBlackAxe post is somewhere below first one.

As i explained in my answer to Scudilo, i think it is a feasible system but not optimal for the way i see research should be implemented, and i think this need to finish a tradition tree before adopting a research policy is a needless restriction, just like the restriction for adopting a trade policy until you finish the trade tradition tree, since it takes away more liberty from the way the player makes their empire and way of playing unique.

Why not make it a planetary specialisation? Remove the tech world specialisation to minimise the need for a tech cap and make it so you must focus on one of the three fields (kind of like the CG/Alloys is for industrial districts, only it would be say a +10 for engineering, -10 for the others or however you balance it?)

I think this is also a viable solution, be it on standalone or something to add on top of the other propposals here shown (mine and that of the policy tab decision).

 

[Derp Throat]

What if research facilities remained balanced in the type of research they generated, but you could select a policy that would give an additional bonus to a specific research type, at the expense of the other two?
For example, you select a policy that generates +2 society research at all research facilities, at the expense of -1 to engineering and -1 to physics research at all research facilities.

I'm sure there used to be edicts like that.

 

[Ryika]

To me, a fitting compromise would be to have the Research Institute - which is somewhat underwhelming anyway - provide three possible upgrades that each boost the research generated in one field, and potentially reducing the others, and you have to choose which one - if any - you prefer. That way, you can specialize your empire, while also making use of local research modifiers, and the micro required would still be pretty low and limited to potentially interesting decisions.

 

[LoLuecoLueco]

To me, a fitting compromise would be to have the Research Institute - which is somewhat underwhelming anyway - provide three possible upgrades that each boost the research generated in one field, and potentially reducing the others, and you have to choose which one - if any - you prefer. That way, you can specialize your empire, while also making use of local research modifiers, and the micro required would still be pretty low and limited to potentially interesting decisions.

It's a nice solution, albeit bitter sweet imo as you would have to go all the way to the research institute building to specialize your research when there shouldn't be anything impeding you from doing it earlier imo.

 

[Vorpaliminal]

What if research facilities remained balanced in the type of research they generated, but you could select a policy that would give an additional bonus to a specific research type, at the expense of the other two?
For example, you select a policy that generates +2 society research at all research facilities, at the expense of -1 to engineering and -1 to physics research at all research facilities.

Like the idea, but let's be honest, everyone will just mash Engineering focus the moment the game starts.

 

[rubert]

With the current game balance this would just add another trap: engineering research is far more important than either physics or society tech.

If anything, I'd merge all the research points and unlock the slots so if you wanted you could have three engineering techs being researched. Maybe add a penalty if researching multiple same category techs at the same time for spreading the efforts. It gives more techs from the single category but the overall research effiency would be lower.

The little I played one of the HoI games I liked how research was done by companies with bonuses etc. I wouldn't mind seeing something similar in Stellaris with leaders though it would also require reworking how you gain and lose leaders as with the current system you could just keep replacing them until you get the one with the correct bonus.

 

[Pancakelord]

Why not make it a planetary specialisation? Remove the tech world specialisation to minimise the need for a tech cap and make it so you must focus on one of the three fields (kind of like the CG/Alloys is for industrial districts, only it would be say a +10 for engineering, -10 for the others or however you balance it?)

You can have triggered effects in planet specialisations. Its possible to run a planet decision 'specialise science', and pick a discipline, and then have a +25% engineering -25%phys/soc appear under the tech world specialisation. Or have it scale with tiers of tech labs. Its just not used in vanilla as far as I know.

More generally, I think @Olterin is right. If I get the option to prioritise engineering, I will. Without moving some techs to the other branches, or giving them more interesting things, it'll always be the best one.

One thing that might work is ... Enshrining a 'scientific school' on a world.

• So for example you build a planet-unique "research academy", and dedicate it to Computing (or any other discipline like psionics).
• It will award +10% computing progress & +5% computing output per worked scientist job on that planet. (So all computing technologies are faster to get, but it doesn't affect non-computing physics techs).
• Setting it once is free, and each discipline can only exist on one planet at a time (so no putting spacecraft on all your world's), changing it too soon after costs influence.
• Whilst I'd have to look up the modifiers, This is certainly doable as it's how scientist specialisation traits work.

So rather than letting you focus on all things engineering, this lets you hyper focus on specific schools of technology. And this benefits from min-maxing (without being too micro-ey) as you can get a lot out of a world with a ton of scientists on it, whilst building/specialising a research academy on some backwater colony won't do much for you.

I personally think the game has outgrown the Physics/Society/Engineering categories and ought to focus on the sub-schools within it more directly, or even add new ones (like an entire school of 'Necrotic' techs that buff necroid stuff - and scientists with a necromancer focus [equiv for lithoids, plantoids - maybe a few phenotype unique techs too], but that is not likely to happen.

 

[Bezborg]

I kinda agree with you, but I dont miss the headhache and micromanagement to choose wich lab I want each time I ugpgrade.

my sentiments too. The OP is right, but oh god the micro...

Tbh I wish we transfer research buildings into research districts, as it should be. Then use buildings as planetary infrastructure projects to modify, boost and specialize your districts

 

[Me_]

Too much micro. If there were to be an option for specialization, it should be via planet designation.

 

[Lykus Cerebros]

Like the idea, but let's be honest, everyone will just mash Engineering focus the moment the game starts.

Yeah in theory it's a cool idea.

Just that I can't think of a reason why selecting another type over engineering would ever be better.

 

[Dr. B]

It's for the AI.

Unfrtunately, it can't plan very well, so it is much easier for it to just build general 3-field jobs.

Only way I can see is for mono-science job/building to be player only, with some special reason, like Discovery Tradition magic or some science Ascension, I don't know.