Non-Ascentionpath viability

[Sutopia]

Before the Aquatics DLC, there were many threads specifically asking for aquatic portraits.

Do you think PDX lost money on that DLC?

Adding portrait is not the same as adding dragons and sexy dolphins. Suggestion is as suggested a suggestion, do you think people really buy the dlc only for the portrait? Suggesting cosmetic and suggesting something that actually interacts with core is totally different business.

Let’s ask a simple question, should a new ascension path, if implemented, be a free update to Utopia or a new DLC? Is this monetizable? Maybe, but are you only going to add a single ascension path that will have mutually exclusive effects to something from an old DLC that is deemed essential? Now that’s a bit dubious. New DLCs for the most part have been adding and building on top, and quite frankly most often have a few power creep features that multiplies what comes before. 5x crisis is child’s play in current version. A new ascension path for a new dlc is not going to be the main driving force of purchase unless it stacks on existing paths or be overwhelmingly better. I guess Stellaris is never meant to be e-sport so it cares less about balance.

 

[HFY]

A new ascension path for a new dlc is not going to be the main driving force of purchase unless it stacks on existing paths or be overwhelmingly better.

Absolutely wrong.

New balanced content will sell if it adds variety.

I'm not here to play only one "best" empire over and over, I want different challenges in different games.

The main problem with Ascension Perks as they stand is that the variety is bad because only a few are worth taking, including Ascension Paths.

New paths which DO NOT stack would sell better to me because I don't want a narrower range of choices to give bigger numbers. I want more distinct playstyles. I want more variety.

 

[Sutopia]

Absolutely wrong.

New balanced content will sell if it adds variety.

I'm not here to play only one "best" empire over and over, I want different challenges in different games.

The main problem with Ascension Perks as they stand is that the variety is bad because only a few are worth taking, including Ascension Paths.

New paths which DO NOT stack would sell better to me because I don't want a narrower range of choices to give bigger numbers. I want more distinct playstyles. I want more variety.

The existing ascension paths aren’t even balanced in the first place, is it really adding variety if you seek for power plays? Adding flavored options need not be ascension paths. As said, there are plenty of options for RP purposes.

 

[Wonoz]

Utopia itself has Gestalts after all and these are basicly locked out of any decision-making for ascentionpaths. You do not even have to buy a 2nd DLC to be locked out of DLC content. Utopia is THAT good!

Jokes aside: you are obviously right that DLCs should lock as little content as possible from other Main DLC. A story pack is where its at though!
Synthetic dawn invalidates quite a lot of content including all the ascentionpaths after all. And I do not remember people hating much on synthetic dawn. Machine empires are also not really "RP purposes"-only bad. Perfectly fits the bill for the kind of content this thread is concerned with.

 

[SeraphAscending]

As said, there are plenty of options for RP purposes.

That is the problem. They are for RP purposes. They aren't actually worth anything.

Many APs are so ridiculously weak compared to some others that they are never worth taking. Unless you want to lean into RP.
That isn't really balanced, is it?

That's what we're talking about. That's the problem.
Adding more strong APs doesn't help that there is still a lot of variety rotting in the "RP choices" category.

 

[HFY]

The existing ascension paths aren’t even balanced in the first place, is it really adding variety if you seek for power plays? Adding flavored options need not be ascension paths. As said, there are plenty of options for RP purposes.

You might notice people -- including me -- posting about how to make other ascension paths better balanced.

You might notice people complaining that Synth Ascension is too strong.

And what's this "if you seek for power plays"? What I seek right now is variety, and you quoted me saying that.

 

[SeraphAscending]

What I seek right now is variety

I don't want the variety necessarily bring disadvantages with it as it does now.
If i can choose to go do X as a standard part of the game, but X is always worse than Y, which i could equally do, then i choose to struggle by doing X instead of Y. No sane game dev would bring in such an imbalance intentionally in their game design process - this is an accidental balance issue, that we would like to see rectified.

 

[HFY]

I don't want the variety necessarily bring disadvantages with it as it does now.
If i can choose to go do X as a standard part of the game, but X is always worse than Y, which i could equally do, then i choose to struggle by doing X instead of Y. No sane game dev would bring in such an imbalance intentionally in their game design process - this is an accidental balance issue, that we would like to see rectified.

Yeah, good point.

Technically there's a lot more "variety" in the game right now, but some of the choices are so bad that I feel bad taking them. IMHO that's not good enough. I want good choices which each bring value, not more bad options.

E.g. Environmentalist and Efficient Bureaucracy are both technically Civic choices, but one is strictly worse than the other. One of them is not a valid option for me.

 

[Sutopia]

Yeah, good point.

Technically there's a lot more "variety" in the game right now, but some of the choices are so bad that I feel bad taking them. IMHO that's not good enough. I want good choices which each bring value, not more bad options.

E.g. Environmentalist and Efficient Bureaucracy are both technically Civic choices, but one is strictly worse than the other. One of them is not a valid option for me.

I think we’re all on the same page just misinterpretations. There is power disparity between ascension perks and paths, check. What we all pursue it more equity between ascension perk choices. If so, the first step is not rushing into the studio and make something new without addressing what existed and has been left behind.

Can a new ascension path compete with synth thus add more “variety”? Yeah. Does making a new ascension path address any of the existing ascension perk disparities? Not so much. What if I want another playstyle that doesn’t want your newly proposed ascension path either? What if I got new ideas about yet another ascension path that “fits my rp needs”? These arguments can go like repeatable techs thus I do not support new ascension path for the sake of it.

 

[HFY]

What if I want another playstyle that doesn’t want your newly proposed ascension path either?

Then we try to get what both of us want, which might be two things.

Don't create a conflict where there is no need for one.

 

[Sutopia]

Then we try to get what both of us want, which might be two things.

Don't create a conflict where there is no need for one.

If devs have time machine sure, they can make infinite content. But they don’t. There is always conflict in interests. These are best suited for mods ngl.

 

[TheForsakeen]

I think they should be exclusive for the sole purpose of honing them in at the same powerlevel. If they were not they would be a balancing nightmare and probably end up severely underperforming in direct comparison with the existing Ascentionpaths.

So mutual exclusive is kind of mandatory if you want to have a compareable powerlevel. If this new ascentionpath would be as good as the others but not mutually exclusive you would probably just end up making double-ascentionpaths mandatory for anything that wants to be competetive

as long as they keep organic and synthetic traits mutually exclusive there shouldn't be any balancing problem, the player that take both would basically be shooting himself in the foot as he is wasting perks and AP slots for nothing.
Psionic is the odd one here, there is no real reason why ascendent genetically or synthetically should prevent you from taking it, but then everyone would pick it.

 

[HFY]

If devs have time machine sure, they can make infinite content. But they don’t. There is always conflict in interests. These are best suited for mods ngl.

Okay, it sounds like you feel like YOU need so much specific personal content that you want devs to never see anyone else's suggestions, is that correct? Even if those other suggestions would not impact your game in any other way?

I don't think that's realistic -- not of your needs nor of their attention.

 

[Sutopia]

Okay, it sounds like you feel like YOU need so much specific personal content that you want devs to never see anyone else's suggestions, is that correct? Even if those other suggestions would not impact your game in any other way?

I don't think that's realistic -- not of your needs nor of their attention.

It’s not me asking for personal content but ones asking for new AP. Unless you’re implying the game truly doesn’t care about balance.

 

[HFY]

It’s not me asking for personal content but ones asking for new AP. Unless you’re implying the game truly doesn’t care about balance.

Why would a new AP which you don't use cost you anything then?

 

[zZander56]

The problem is that ascensions are mandatory im terms of pop changes. And there should be more shades od grey here.
Assimilation should be a separated option, that can be set from free assimilation (only od egalitarians) where pops are happier, but assimilation is painfully slow, yet not mandatory, through encouraged assimilation, something like current one, to the mandatory assimilation that reduce happiness, make some other bad things, but pops assimilate much quicker, yet its forbidden policy for egalitarians.
This would solve much problems, both mechanical ones and rp.

I like this a lot.

 

[SeraphAscending]

It’s not me asking for personal content but ones asking for new AP. Unless you’re implying the game truly doesn’t care about balance.

I would prefer for the next custodian patch to balance out more APs instead of adding a new one. (Although new ones are more likely to come with DLC content)

 

[Wonoz]

Yes I would rather be this a DLC with the corresponding productionvalue instead of a custodian patch. Not that custodian patches are bad but it is simply out of scope for them to deliver on content that might as well be a story-pack-sized dlc

 

[HFY]

I would prefer for the next custodian patch to balance out more APs instead of adding a new one. (Although new ones are more likely to come with DLC content)

We have two dev teams working on Stellaris, so we can have both old things balanced and new things added.

There's no conflict here -- PDX is doing both right now.

 

[SeraphAscending]

We have two dev teams working on Stellaris, so we can have both old things balanced and new things added.

There's no conflict here -- PDX is doing both right now.

I know, that's why i specifically referenced the "custodian patch". I was merely pointing out that my priority is balancing old stuff over adding new stuff.
I like this game a lot, but playing specific archetypes is just so much more difficult than playing the more efficient options.
Let's hope we'll approach better balance soon.