Ascenscions: Make them real choices ?

[Zergor]

I have a small grip with ascension perks except the big utopia trio:
You don't really have to choose and choices are not meaningful anyway.

I explain myself:
-You don't really choose: You have a grand total of 8 slots for perks which is enough to pick a lot of stuff, and balance problem make some better and they seem no brainer. You can often skip many pure number ones (leader max level one is terrible for instance due to techs giving the cap already)
-Choices aren't meaningful: Very few perks give new stuff to explore. And even fewer give you limitations on perks (Only the utopia big 3 are mutually exclusives). So the only limitation is the number of slots which is fairly high.

I think that the utopia ones had a great base idea: Being two parters.
Having multiple levels on perks has many advantages:
-Each new level pushes you further toward an ideal
-Requiring more perks allow for more powerful total effects without balance problem
-Requiring more perks force you to choose. If all ascensions were at least 2 parters you would end with at most 4 completed ones.
-Carefully crafted ascensions path can be orginized by mutually exclusive types.

Let's show you a few ideas :

Ascensions could be organized by their main target and be mutually exclusive in the same group.
We have already the utopia 3 that target pops and make them evolve to something superior with new traits.

We could have a group that target planets:
The Gaia path that pushes toward perfect planets, boosting happiness and having fewer pops but more productive ones. This path would give gaia worlds but also new buildings like upgraded paradise domes, unity and amenities buildings.
The Ecumenopolis path that allow more and more crowded planets, boositing production by the sheer number of stuff on it. The path would give ecumenopolis but also upgraded ressourse gathering buildings.
The Machine world / Hiveworld paths : Specific paths for those empires

We could have a group that target military
There could be an ascension focusing on making bigger and bigger weapons (titans, colossus)
There could be a defensive one that focus on making better and better planet defenses, giving new upgrades to the fortresses and planet shields.

We could have a group that target the ultimate civilization goal and may be in 3 parts because a bit more powerful:
A science ascension that allows you ultimately to reach fallen empire level of tech and build the buildings they have (upgraded tech labs, mines, generator etc..)
A religion ascension that would focus on reaching illumination, ending with happier pops, high spiritualist attraction. And I must admit that I wonder if the shroud of the psy path should not go there. That would allow to remove the religious part of psy and allow people that want to RP a psy non religious specie to do so (which is a fairly common SF trope). Of course there would be the problem of psy techs of the shroud to solve.
A unity upgrade pushing toward a more and more equlitarian society ending in an utopia where everyone help each other, giving bonus like taking the best traits of all pops on the planet for all production (and ignoring bad traits if at least a pop don't have them)

etc...

There could be also groupless ascensions allowing specific gameplays.
One that comes to mind is an hivemind going full bio (zerg like).
The first level could make that 50% of building cost is paid in food and upkeep is in food.
The second level would replace 50% of alloy cost of ships by food (not at a 1/1 rate of course) and give extra regen.
Maybe a third level giving extra bonus...

I don't want to suggest more because the post is already long but you get the idea.
Would you prefer something like that ? Or is it too complicated and numeric buffs are enough ?

 

[Peter Ebbesen]

Of course you have to choose. The "eventually I'll have 8 perks", even if you think those perks are no-brainers, in no way diminishes the importance of the order in which you choose them. Those are meaningful choices.

Okay, you only think that some are no-brainers and that the pure numerical ones are terrible. Fair enough.

But that is a value judgment you've made based on meaningful choices you've already made that form part of your assumptions about how Stellaris plays out (e.g. games last long enough to get 8 perks, bonuses you can get from tech aren't valuable, order isn't that important), not a value judgment based on a lack of meaningful choices.

Another player, whose mindset was based on other meaningful choices, might very well see the choices differently. As an example based on a very different set of priorities, a warmonger who seldom plays more than 100-150 years because of conquering most/all of the galaxy in that time, might base his choices on assumptions such as (games don't last long enough to get a lot of perks unless playing high unity build, early game establishes dominance so something that adds power with short ROI often beats those that provide more but with much longer ROI, a bonus gained early should be evaluated solely by its power and opportunity cost at time of choosing and is not devalued by also being available through tech or civics).

There are many different ways to play Stellaris, and based on which one pursues different choices will appear meaningful alternatives.

The current game design where only the three ascension paths are mutually exclusive and few of the rest of the perks have prerequisite perk limitations support this, by leaving it largely to the player to choose which would fit into his chosen playing style.

Your suggestion of simplifying by narrowing down player choice through channeling the player into upgrade paths of perks of increasing potency is one that in my opinion is inferior to the current design.