• 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.

Archael90

Field Marshal
18 Badges
Nov 30, 2017
3.661
4.064
  • Stellaris: Humanoids Species Pack
  • Stellaris: Nemesis
  • Stellaris: Necroids
  • Stellaris: Federations
  • Stellaris: Lithoids
  • Stellaris: Ancient Relics
  • Stellaris: Megacorp
  • Stellaris: Distant Stars
  • Stellaris: Apocalypse
  • Surviving Mars
  • Stellaris - Path to Destruction bundle
  • Stellaris: Leviathans Story Pack
  • Stellaris: Digital Anniversary Edition
  • Stellaris: Galaxy Edition
  • Stellaris
  • Majesty 2
  • Stellaris: Synthetic Dawn
  • Stellaris: Galaxy Edition
We were supposed to create huge prospering galaxy federation. But at the moment the galaxy is filled with dozens of 2-member federations that we can do nothing except declaring wars...

THIS IS NOT HOW IT SUPPOUSE TO BE!!

Allow us to merge federations. First let us to have diplomacy on federation lvl so we would not loose influence to make lot of small pacts. And then allow us to merge our two federations into bigger one. Fed cohesion should drop, and members should spend their influence on that, and more both feds differ the more influence have to be spend.
At the moment the only way to unite galaxy is to to be a warmonger conquering all nations into its own empire, or to be a hegemonic federation uniting others by force... This was really designed that way?

Im little upset, because just a moment ago (when first post was made) i made allies that i could invite to the federation, but i had to wait because another empire declared a war to me. But those two allies loved me so much that they liked eachother enough to form new federation... Its quite annoying.
 
  • 19
  • 12Like
  • 1Love
Reactions:
I mean technically it wasn't the diplomacy DLC, it was the federation/GC DLC. But yeah diplomacy could really use some work.

Can't merge federations
Can't snatch empires from other federations
No inter-federation diplomacy (trade deals, NAPs, etc)
Can't customize federations with federal policies about members' internal policies

Federations are basically just NATO-style military alliances that have nothing to do with real-world federations like the US or Russia, or even confederations like the EU.
At the same time, the space-UN or “Galactic Community” (a silly name at that -- the “International Community" is not an institution in its own right; the international community meets at the institution called the United Nations, just as a galactic community might meet at, say, an Interstellar Assembly) acts much more like a federal government that can tell you to enlighten primitives or provide good living standards and yet cohesion of that organization is no issue, everyone obliges.
 
Last edited:
  • 9
  • 4Like
Reactions:
I believe one issue is that in lategame the galaxy is always divided in 2 - 3 federations. Those potential powerblocks then often like each other causing an eternal peace, its incredibly boring, because this should be the time with the most severe wars. It so annoying that i often stop playing or join a fed, kick everyone out, wait for them to join the other fed and the disband the fed. I then repeat that until only one giant fed is left. Then i stop playing, because i dont want to sit around another 100 years until the victory screen decides to appear.
 
Yes, they should add 2 things:
1) Diplomacy on federations level (both merge and steal members)
2) An overhaul of vassals and tributaries to make them worth
 
  • 2
Reactions:
This is the most important thing since "federations" or even federations came out into existance.
 
  • 1Like
Reactions:
Can't merge federations
Can't snatch empires from other federations
No inter-federation diplomacy (trade deals, NAPs, etc)
Can't customize federations with federal policies about members' internal policies

Federations are basically just NATO-style military alliances that have nothing to do with real-world federations like the US or Russia, or even confederations like the EU.
At the same time, the space-UN or “Galactic Community” (a silly name at that -- the “International Community" is not an institution in its own right; the international community meets at the institution called the United Nations, just as a galactic community might meet at, say, an Interstellar Assembly) acts much more like a federal government that can tell you to enlighten primitives or provide good living standards and yet cohesion of that organization is no issue, everyone obliges.
This right here. I'd love to see expanded resolution like policies for feds. It's strange how you have less influence over the policies and regulations of your fed than you do of the galaxy.
 
The biggest let-down of the Federations DLC though is that you can't actually 'unite' the Federations into a single, sovereign, federal state. Like, surely that should be the (or at least a possible) end goal of a xenophile game - to create the United Federation of Planets or something like it. It's not only a Sci-Fi trope but also something that is relevant to real life (US, Germany, EU and such being examples).
 
  • 2Like
  • 2
Reactions:
The biggest let-down of the Federations DLC though is that you can't actually 'unite' the Federations into a single, sovereign, federal state. Like, surely that should be the (or at least a possible) end goal of a xenophile game - to create the United Federation of Planets or something like it. It's not only a Sci-Fi trope but also something that is relevant to real life (US, Germany, EU and such being examples).
Especially since so much of the Federation types give such poor bonuses for increasing centralization past a certain point. Enabling "President Decides" for Kick-Members is usually the only benefit that your federation will receive for such high centralization despite the tool-tip describing it as the federation having sovereign control over internal policies for federation members. The cohesion hit from increasing centralization usually is not worth that.

The diplo-annexmerge would fit nicely with centralization. Let the president start deciding things like war policy, slave/purge policy, etc. until at the final point, an option gets enabled for the creation of a true federation. The new galactic state would start with all the policies and GC benefits of the president, with the old president's leader as its leader. Instead of the normal factions, it starts with factions tied to each member state, with demands selected from the governing ethics of each member state, including the old president. They would also ideally have a special government type that corresponds to the president selection system from the old un-unified federation, with potential leaders coming from the leaders of the factions, who are theoretically representatives of that member state. Finally, they would also get a "Fledgling Member" vassal type that replaces other subject options and has significantly less annexation cost to replicate the federation's power to admit new members. Asking a galactic state to accept this subjegation would have the weight of joining the federation, not vassalization, and would be impossible to force except for unified hegemonies. Obviously, the Federation would be banned from joining other federations, except for the League of Unaligned Powers.
 
  • 3
  • 1Like
Reactions:
I mean technically it wasn't the diplomacy DLC, it was the federation/GC DLC. But yeah diplomacy could really use some work.

I remember asking when we would have a diplomacy dlc after federations and the response beeing that federations was the diplomacy dlc. So yeah, it seems that's all the diplomacy we "nedeed" in the game.
 
I believe one issue is that in lategame the galaxy is always divided in 2 - 3 federations. Those potential powerblocks then often like each other causing an eternal peace, its incredibly boring, because this should be the time with the most severe wars. It so annoying that i often stop playing or join a fed, kick everyone out, wait for them to join the other fed and the disband the fed. I then repeat that until only one giant fed is left. Then i stop playing, because i dont want to sit around another 100 years until the victory screen decides to appear.
Por que no les Colossus? Personally I love it when the whole galaxy ends up united, makes it much more complicated to leverage my overwhelming naval power.

------

I really like your suggestion OP. Politics in general needs a rework (factions, federations, diplomacy between empires, early game access issues, galactic community balance, ethics). There's lots of good ideas but they don't string together smoothly. Each mechanic works okay on its own (except for factions), but when you start layering them together the logic starts to break down.

In my current game, I am locked in with an overlord because they joined a two-state fed and declared war on another two-state fed immediately, and now they won't give me independence until the war is over. Even though I have more fleet power in a single fleet than the other four involved empires combined, I'm not only still subservient but have no diplomatic ways to escape my situation. So while it's not the exact scenario you described, it is very similar in form.
 
Last edited:

When Overlord DLC was announced, I spent several posts anticipating that this dlc would bring major problems in the perception of the game with the federations, but no one listened to me and actually opposed me.
Everything said here is true, necessary and previously requested. I'll say it one more time. The federations are not working as federations, they have thousands of problems especially for the late game and they are not fulfilling the role they should. The new system of vassalage highlighted the deficiencies of the diplomatic system and especially with regard to federations.

As a final point, I ask you the following question:
"Why did you want to join a federation?"
In my case, because I trust in the strength, economy and influence of my empire and I know that I can peacefully influence others to align with my cause without having to declare war on them.
 
  • 1Like
Reactions: