Like pacifist faction gaining more power when war goes on, and at some point they stop war with status quo, without players decision?
How much should Stellaris be about Characters?
- Thread starter Liggi
- Start date
-
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.
Ending a war might be a bit too powerful. But causing Attrition or reducing Naval cap on both ends I could imagine.
We already have Leaders, which are Characters. They have traits and lead factions.
- 2
My current game of Stellaris, I played the clone soldiers origin.
Got the Tree of Life thing, and a few other events.
End result ? Playing an origin that specifically mentions how short lived your leaders are, I have leaders that often reach the age of 150 and above, having been recruited at ages of like, 5 or 6.
Leader lifespan is one of the things that looks like it is important, but ultimately is almost irrelevant.
- 1
Because its porely implemented, mostly because constant leader replacement is painful.
On the other hand, leaders are not important enough to make them long living, or removing this feature entirely.
Two things can be done to fix this:
1. Makes leaders important for storytelling and character development, add some depth to leader recruitment, and reduce number of leaders to only few, and makes them immortal with skill development. - I dont like this idea because stellaris should not be abaut individuals, but rather about empire as a whole.
2.
a) Make leader replacement simpler, and easier,
b) maybe automatic at some point,
c) or remove them entirely.
- 1
I said I was against more leader development, but there is one thing that could flesh it out a little and not be too disruptive, and that's more events like "The Exile" that adds a new Leader as one of the outcomes. Not a multi-part event chain like The Exile but a one-time pop up of an unusual leader being available.
It would make the leader pool less generic with a few interesting outliers with scripted back stories., and wouldn't take more than a click to accept or reject the new leader when it pops up.
It would make the leader pool less generic with a few interesting outliers with scripted back stories., and wouldn't take more than a click to accept or reject the new leader when it pops up.
i have no idea how much about characters the other PDX games are, but i know that stellaris for me is currently way too much about characters, would love for PDX to make the game less about characters, scrapping the whole leader system would be a good start, preferably followed by stopping to count every pop as an individual and start counting them simply by pop categories
- 2
We can't have decent characters without decent internal politics, and we can't have decent internal politics without decent actors with autonomous agency. Now those actors don't need to be characters - they could be institutions, estates, factions etc - but I will comment that the only games I've seen Paradox actually willing to give these nominal actors actual agency was when they were characters. EUIV's estates could have been something like that, but instead they're all reactive. Stellaris's factions could have been, but they're reactive too.
Any decent political overhaul needs to have agents below the national level who are pro-active. They don't need to be characters, but it feels like most Paradox games are only willing to do that with characters.
Any decent political overhaul needs to have agents below the national level who are pro-active. They don't need to be characters, but it feels like most Paradox games are only willing to do that with characters.
- 3
- 1
the factions are almost as irrelevant as the leaders, other than wanting to change your civilisation's ethics, why do you need to concern yourself with them ?
I would like to see characters play a slightly more involved role in the game, but not necessarily CK level. To me it comes down to the faction system being little more than an influence farm. It would be nice that when people lead factions that it has some effect on their job as well as the empire in general.
Characters can add more flavor and depth to an empire without taking over center stage. Stellaris at least does this better than other 4Xs where your leaders are hidden, faceless, or scripted.
Characters can add more flavor and depth to an empire without taking over center stage. Stellaris at least does this better than other 4Xs where your leaders are hidden, faceless, or scripted.
I would really like to see a much higher level of character development and personality. Of course along with internal politics. Especially the ruler (be it a democratic chosen president or an aristocratic emperor) should maybe get it's own skill tree so we can develop it's position inside the empire. In fact this could lead to some very cool story's (in all phases of the game). And give in addition the internal empire development an interesting edge. If each decision for the charakter development have some impact based on the ethics and the empire stability and happiness this could lead to awesome decision making. Of course this would not only be story but should involve some advanced empire options maybe gated behind some kind of popularity level. And this level is based on the developed skills as well decisions that should come up with the story and external events like Wars, FE demands, faction happiness and many more.
For scientists, admirals governors end envoys i think that kind of events with some impact on happiness and stability could still occur but no in depth character tree. But maybe some requests or interplay with the ruler.
Over all could a more peaceful empire get more internal events (as well all others in longer times of peace) and less events during wars or a crisis. This would open up more gameplay for non warmongers and maybe give some compensation for smaller empires if an internal well managed empire with a really beloved leader get some advantages.
This system would in addition increase the value of long lives for autocratic rulers and those of factions for democrats and oligarchies.
For scientists, admirals governors end envoys i think that kind of events with some impact on happiness and stability could still occur but no in depth character tree. But maybe some requests or interplay with the ruler.
Over all could a more peaceful empire get more internal events (as well all others in longer times of peace) and less events during wars or a crisis. This would open up more gameplay for non warmongers and maybe give some compensation for smaller empires if an internal well managed empire with a really beloved leader get some advantages.
This system would in addition increase the value of long lives for autocratic rulers and those of factions for democrats and oligarchies.
I quite like the dynamic in computer and board games where you can deploy characters/heros to a part of the map, to gain a significant boost.
But the map is big and really good characters are limited, so you have to think strategically when you commit to a deployment...and you also have to think about where your opponent is going to place his characters.
Funnily enough, it's only Envoys in Stellaris that (vaguely) has this going on, because there's a limit to how many you have.
But the map is big and really good characters are limited, so you have to think strategically when you commit to a deployment...and you also have to think about where your opponent is going to place his characters.
Funnily enough, it's only Envoys in Stellaris that (vaguely) has this going on, because there's a limit to how many you have.
I like this idea.
Perhaps planets could have local governors or counsellors, scientists, etc, that you could choose from.
Building government offices, science institutes, military academies, etc, could make these local leaders better trained, etc.
- 1
I agree with some ideas here, that characters should be institutions.
Stellaris could be a stroy about factions, and their struggle for power, their diplomacy with other empires... but this would need total overhaul of internal politics.
Stellaris could be a stroy about factions, and their struggle for power, their diplomacy with other empires... but this would need total overhaul of internal politics.
I actually really like the idea of institutions / factions being the "characters", and leaders not being much more involved than they are now (although some more traits would still be nice).
- 1
I would maybe make an exception for the ruler. But yeah that would be a adequate compromise i think.
- 1
Stellaris is all about sci-fi tropes and cliches and a lot of these are more meaningful and interesting on a personal level. So I would say, as much as the story demands.
- 1
Honestly, it should depend on the empire type.
In most empires, "factions" should play a greater role, both at a planetary scale, and at an imperial scale. Individual characters should just be extensions of factions, more like the face of individual factions, than characters which can change everything on their own.
For example, the current leader of a cartel on one of your planet could have an impact on how hard they are to handle, or how willing they are to negociate with that planet's authorities.
Or the current leader of a dynasty within your feudal empire owning an entire sector could have a say in the support they bring to their emperor. And he should probably have a bigger impact than a very temporary governer appointed to a random world - after all, you're delegating power to him.
But in the end, the real "players" are the cartel itself, or the dynasty itself. Characters are merely temporary faces for organizations that should play a greater role in game.
In most empires, "factions" should play a greater role, both at a planetary scale, and at an imperial scale. Individual characters should just be extensions of factions, more like the face of individual factions, than characters which can change everything on their own.
For example, the current leader of a cartel on one of your planet could have an impact on how hard they are to handle, or how willing they are to negociate with that planet's authorities.
Or the current leader of a dynasty within your feudal empire owning an entire sector could have a say in the support they bring to their emperor. And he should probably have a bigger impact than a very temporary governer appointed to a random world - after all, you're delegating power to him.
But in the end, the real "players" are the cartel itself, or the dynasty itself. Characters are merely temporary faces for organizations that should play a greater role in game.
- 1