Federations: Some thoughts

[Wolfgang I]

I know that forming a Federation with AI empires is a bad idea. No need to remind me.

First the ability to keep the federation presidency and control of the fleet makes federation play with AI empires much more fun to me.

The energy tax of 15% seems rather excessive. I dunno how much you get out of the free commercial pacts as I have not found the information yet but even AIs on GA do not seem to give much. You can also form a federation with machines which means you get nothing in return.

The federation fleet cap max. of 500 makes the entente coordination tradition tradition with its +100% federation naval capacity contribution effect nearly
useless as you will hit the cap anyway. That tradition should get a different effect imo. Maybe it should increase the max. cap by 100 per member who has the tradition(so a max of 1000 for a 5 member federation when every member picks it) or give you the ability to build gateways in allied territory.

I also think federation members should get free research agreements.

 

[SuperGeek89]

First the ability to keep the federation presidency and control of the fleet makes federation play with AI empires much more fun to me.

From a gameplay perspective I agree. Nothing was worse then watching an AI empire waste the federation's navy in pointless battles. However from a immersion/story telling perspective this change annoys me. Federations are supposed to be made up of co-equal member states, and thus I find it hard to believe that other federation members would willingly agree to be permanently lead by one empire. It is my hope that when Paradox finally does a diplomacy/federation dlc that they add other ways to decide who gets to be the federation president, including elections.

The federation fleet cap max. of 500 makes the entente coordination tradition tradition with its +100% federation naval capacity contribution effect nearly
useless as you will hit the cap anyway. That tradition should get a different effect imo. Maybe it should increase the max. cap by 100 per member who has the tradition(so a max of 1000 for a 5 member federation when every member picks it) or give you the ability to build gateways in allied territory.

I agree, 500 seems to be a pretty low limit to the federation naval cap and I also like your ideas for reworking the Entente Coordination tradition and allowing you to build gates in federated systems.

I also think federation members should get free research agreements.

Agreed, but i also think that federation members should also all have free migration treaties built in too. After all one of the key features of federations on Earth is the relatively free movement of money, ideas, and people between member states.

 

[Seelensturm]

Is it just me or are is there really no indication anymore for the attitude of federation allies to agree with a war declaration? From the wiki: 'The war declaration menu lists whether a member will be satisfied with the war goals and agree. They can also be asked for demands'

 

[Gilad Pellaeon]

Frankly, if it weren't for the ever-present specter of Multiplayer, I'd rework Federations in such a way that once a Federation is a formed, the human player assumes control of a new sort of "meta-nation" comprised of the various member states. So while the in-game Federation president can be voted on from all the various species, the control over it all remains with the player.

Taking a page from, basically, Star Trek's Federation.

If there was a budget and time enough for it, I'd actually love to go even further with that, and make Federation Play a different experience of much more indirect control. Basically focusing on managing fleets and diplomacy and exploration while making economy and even expansion something more diffuse and more controlled by the member nations (which could take the role of Factions, in a way.).

Basically a total, complete re-work that makes Federations more than just perma-allies with an extra fleet on top you can't always 100% rely on.
A new play-style.

But for that, we would really need a much more robust and in-depth and flexible diplomatic system and not the bare-bones "War: Yes/No" and "Once we hate you, we'll hate you forever!" stuff we have now. And, sadly, a much more robust set of AI routines.

 

[Wolfgang I]

From a gameplay perspective I agree. Nothing was worse then watching an AI empire waste the federation's navy in pointless battles. However from a immersion/story telling perspective this change annoys me. Federations are supposed to be made up of co-equal member states, and thus I find it hard to believe that other federation members would willingly agree to be permanently lead by one empire. It is my hope that when Paradox finally does a diplomacy/federation dlc that they add other ways to decide who gets to be the federation president, including elections.
I agree, 500 seems to be a pretty low limit to the federation naval cap and I also like your ideas for reworking the Entente Coordination tradition and allowing you to build gates in federated systems.

Agreed, but i also think that federation members should also all have free migration treaties built in too. After all one of the key features of federations on Earth is the relatively free movement of money, ideas, and people between member states.

I'm not sure if I would like free migration treaties as I like the fact that even single species xenophobes can ally with xenophiles and machines if the rest of the galaxy is horrible enough. Edit:It is more in line with a Star Trek style federation which has members which do pretty shitty stuff in their own backyard.