So your answer to the leader cap being too low is to make leaders reach that cap sooner.
- 3
Only 6 Leaders?
- Thread starter unmerged(350868)
- 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.
No, I'm suggesting it should work like naval capacity and be expandable via tech/structures, maybe also linked to pops/planets, and allow flexibility on how you want to play. So in the same way you might prefer to have fleets of a thousand corvettes instead of just a few capital ships, you could also have lots of scientists running everywhere surveying at game start then as the game progresses and your cap increases either move to fewer higher level leaders, recruit even more lower levels, or have a mix of some higher and some lower.
Just like we do now with fleets.
One, there are sector governors. Yup. They exist. You can put one person in charge of a whole sector. It benefits having a cohesive Empire, and sort of penalizes a far flung one. I think this perfectly fine.
Two, if you want thirty scientists you can have them. Nothing is stopping you except the same thing stopping you before, your willingness to trade Unity.
Three, the choices were specifically *made* to discourage, or more likely encourage, being a bit more selective. Everyone is like "why would I pick a general?" I dunno. Because the Empire wide bonuses to starbases might be attractive for some players? Because having a 100k door stop is actually super effective during a defensive war for insular players? Now, ground combat is still what it is, made worse in the new update thanks to magic pacification bullets from space (that's called genocide and it's a war crime) but that's not the general's fault.
So, what can be done? You could hire the people you want and accept the degrade. I mean, that's what this is about: a degrade. A mild reduction. A side effect of having twenty scientists rather than five. My Empire size is often over the limit. My starbases are sometimes over the limit. My fleets are sometimes over the limit. And now, my leaders are sometimes over the limit. Have you tried just doing it anyways because as a leader you've made a decision about your resources? They lose XP for it, but you can have thirty science ships if you have the resources to support it.
So, yeah, you can't do it day one outside of a hyper specialized build which is what you want anyways, but you can still do it. You just have to take the hit to Unity and experience gain. What an absolutely minimal inconvenience.
Two, if you want thirty scientists you can have them. Nothing is stopping you except the same thing stopping you before, your willingness to trade Unity.
Three, the choices were specifically *made* to discourage, or more likely encourage, being a bit more selective. Everyone is like "why would I pick a general?" I dunno. Because the Empire wide bonuses to starbases might be attractive for some players? Because having a 100k door stop is actually super effective during a defensive war for insular players? Now, ground combat is still what it is, made worse in the new update thanks to magic pacification bullets from space (that's called genocide and it's a war crime) but that's not the general's fault.
So, what can be done? You could hire the people you want and accept the degrade. I mean, that's what this is about: a degrade. A mild reduction. A side effect of having twenty scientists rather than five. My Empire size is often over the limit. My starbases are sometimes over the limit. My fleets are sometimes over the limit. And now, my leaders are sometimes over the limit. Have you tried just doing it anyways because as a leader you've made a decision about your resources? They lose XP for it, but you can have thirty science ships if you have the resources to support it.
So, yeah, you can't do it day one outside of a hyper specialized build which is what you want anyways, but you can still do it. You just have to take the hit to Unity and experience gain. What an absolutely minimal inconvenience.
Last edited:
- 13
- 3
- 1
- 1
Except there is also a nasty -25% to experience gain on all leaders.
- 6
Damn. So you mean your *thirty* leaders who all provide bonuses won't *all* reach level ten divine status? I am wondering here, why is this trouble?
What is the counter argument? All fleets should have level 10 destiny admirals? All planets should have level 10 divine leaders? All Council positions should be headed by level 10 ultimate beings?
The trade off for employing tons of powerful leaders is that less power is concentrated in each one. That's reflected in them having lower levels. Is the argument that making choices is bad? Cause this sounds like an "I want it all, and I'm going to hold my breath until you give it to me." kind of argument.
- 15
- 8
It goes up to -100%
If you have a limit of 8 and you are at 16 leaders, nobody reaching lvl 10 isn't your main concern. It's that not one leader will ever reach even lvl 2 at a -100% exp penalty.
I don't mind the increased costs, because leaders did become more powerful. But I do mind the severe restrictions in a system that was actually fine until now.
- 18
- 2
Yeah, I guess I'll have 20 level 1 leaders, so I might as well not have them since they don't do anything. Just because I can't stand an idea of sectors and fleets being without leaders.
- 4
- 1
I agree with your overall point but rudeness isn't going to help.
Choices being more meaningful and leaders being more meaningful is a good thing. It's nice that there are mechanics that have us engage with leaders more, as opposed to them just being random bonuses that we have to replace every now and then. But the choices at the moment don't feel very meaningful because of how unbalanced leaders are. Generals can't compete with scientists, especially since ground combat works by human wave and it's now even easier to build armies. The governor changes also don't feel particularly fun given how many traits are now worthless unless you micro the governor around (why take tile blocker or building time/cost reduction if it's only going to apply to the capital?) and planetary governors compounds the problem of other leader types not being competitive picks.
- 5
For me right now, the problem comes from the Renowned and Legendary leaders. They push the leader count over the cap, but not hiring them is stupid (I suppose I could leave Keides cryokid to die, but I mean...) . If I didn't hire them, the cap would be reasonable.
- 1
Having played through a couple of different ways, I *would* find it useful to have a few more leaders, but without ending up assigning them all to science ships immediately.
I can cope with leaving sectors without a governor if necessary, but it is hurting to try to fill my council with leaders of appropriate types without being forced into the two new tradition trees just to have some leeway to work with.
Has anyone come up with where the sweet spot for hiring enough leaders to function, but not so many that they don't level up?
I can cope with leaving sectors without a governor if necessary, but it is hurting to try to fill my council with leaders of appropriate types without being forced into the two new tradition trees just to have some leeway to work with.
Has anyone come up with where the sweet spot for hiring enough leaders to function, but not so many that they don't level up?
- 1
The idea of leaders is to actually care about them and make them feel like a real strategic choice..They went the CK route of less rather the Imperator way of having loads that most are just a stat without meaning as a character.
- 3
I actually cared about leaders when you had one giant battleship doomstack and my awesome admiral that had commanded it for a hundred years died.
I'm not sure this change will make me care more. So far decided to ignore everything but scientists because I dig anomalies.
I'm not sure this change will make me care more. So far decided to ignore everything but scientists because I dig anomalies.
- 1
I never cared about leaders, they were there to provide stats for me. Now they don't do even that, so I care even less about them. Fill the council with scientists with global traits, get them to scan for anomalies, and forget about everything else. So much for meaningful choices.
- 6
- 2
- 1
So, the simple, effective solutions identified herein, which would sensibly balance playerbase requests while still keeping more in less in line with the ethos the Devs had for this are:
* A base Leader level + Leader scaling somehow linked with Empire size
* Significant reductions to the penalty given for going over the Leader cap
* Techs which give increased Leader cap
And also possibly:
* Having a Legendary Leader offer to join you MAYBE giving a free +1 Leader Cap (so you pretty much always get to accept the choice of whether to take them in)
* Make Sector Governors apply their on-planet Traits a bit to the rest of the planets in a particular sector.
* Buff Generals
Seems pretty reasonable to me. Anything else?
* A base Leader level + Leader scaling somehow linked with Empire size
* Significant reductions to the penalty given for going over the Leader cap
* Techs which give increased Leader cap
And also possibly:
* Having a Legendary Leader offer to join you MAYBE giving a free +1 Leader Cap (so you pretty much always get to accept the choice of whether to take them in)
* Make Sector Governors apply their on-planet Traits a bit to the rest of the planets in a particular sector.
* Buff Generals
Seems pretty reasonable to me. Anything else?
- 4
- 1
- 1
So unfortunately all of these have a distinct problem in that, if I am reading these dev diaries correctly, they are NOT what the developers intend. They seem to want leaders to be a relatively fixed small number of characters at a time as a "get attached and remember these ones" type of thing. ANYTHING that, in a hypothetically infinite universe, allows infinite leader cap, is "against their vision".
Personally, I think that's perfectly fine! But then they can't have "planetary governors" or "every fleet needs their own admiral" or "every science ship needs their own scientist".
The solution that preserves the developer's vision and solves many of the community's problems is to eliminate all leader roles that are finite in their effects. This means remove scientists from science ships and have all of them controlled by a "field agent". Make all fleets controlled by 3 admirals, who confer their bonuses to "Screen ships, Battle ships, and Megaships" respectively. Eliminate governors as a sector level and have three positions that apply to separate categories of the industry, but require you to make choices with their traits on what you are going to be supporting. I.E. Say the "Economic Governor" handles resource production. Will you be taking a leader with a mix of traits that cleanly buff trade and alloys, or will you take a leader with traits that increase the job ouptut of all resources from residence at the expense of job output from citizens? There could be a "Law Governor" who is the one that applies your edicts, and they may have traits that change specific edicts, some perhaps cleanly and some perhaps with huge tradeoffs.
Make it so the leader limit is a suggestion. Literally, like the leader limit is exactly enough to staff all positions. Make the only benefit to going over the leader limit is to have a "replacement" on stand-by, in case you see a candidate you like and know that your current leader is getting old. Or for example because you have a very good defensive-war-time economy governor that you want to keep on the payroll in the event that those democratic crusaders get any bright ideas.
Now, re-evaluating your suggestions without considering the developer's intentions...
I don't really know what you mean, but if you mean "Leader Cap scaled with Empire size", I think it's a good idea. Here's my suggestion:
BASE Leader cap is enough to fill your council, plus 3 (one for science ship scientist, one for starting governor, leaving one open slot for probably a scientist)
T4 Capital Planets can build a single "leader building" with the following options:
Sector Administration: +1 leader(governor, if segregated leader caps are introduced) cap, governor of this planet will apply planetary traits to all planets (without their own governor) in sector. Limit 1 per sector (duh)
Planetary Specialization Center: +1 leader cap (+1 governor), planetary traits that "match" the planet's designation will have additional effects
Staff Headquarters: +1 leader cap (+1 "free"), planet cannot be assigned a governor (can still benefit from sector governor)
Noble Estates (yes this already exists): +1 Noble Job, +1 Housing, +1 leader cap (+1 governor), governor costs unity to unassign, but if sector capital and non-capital sector planet has this or any upgrade, the planet benefits from both planet governor and sector governor simultaneously.
Illustrious Noble Estates (upgraded from Noble Estates): +1 Noble Job, +2 Noble Servant Jobs, +3 Housing, +2 leader cap (+2 governor), governor costs alot of unity to reassign, but allows a second governor position for this planet. The original governor will apply planetary traits to all planets in sector. Limit 1 per sector.
Orbital Noble Estates (also exists): Same as Noble Estates but with an additional +1 Noble job and +1 Housing, and on an Orbital Ring
Orbital Illustrious Noble Estates: Same as Illustrious Noble Estates, but with an additional +1 Noble Job and +2 Noble Servant Jobs and +3 Housing, and on an Orbital Ring
Eternal Executive Center: For "Permenent Employment". +1 leader cap (+1 "free"). Any leader may be "assigned" to this planet, although non-governors will not apply any bonus and not prevent sector governor's from applying their bonus. Upon death of this planet's assigned leader, that leader is resurrected with a "Zombie" trait.
EDIT: All of these except the Noble Estates and EEC would require to maintain 50 pops (the amount necessary to upgrade the capital building to T4) or they will be disabled. This is to prevent the cheese that works on upgrading the capital building with temporarily re-settled pops. Noble Estates would have the current requirements (a fief needs a lord much earlier than actual administration would demand) but Illustrious Noble Estates still have the T4 requirement. EEC would have the same requirements as "Posthumous Employment Center".
Either the penalties are harsh enough to prevent you from going over, or they might as well not exist. There isn't a good in-between, sadly, because different build currently have different opinions on if the current penalties are easy to ignore or too nasty to dare go over.
This is one sollution, though I seriously doubt players will be happy to hear that science will be made even more important. Having a late-game repeatable tech that increases the limit is something I'm surprised they didn't add this patch, honestly. The things that can and cannot be infinitely researched are weird.
That said "Tech" increasing leader limit is weird. An alternative may be a button you can click that costs as much unity as a tradition to increase your leader cap by 1.
Good suggestion no matter what gets added.
The phrase "a bit" scares me a little. Will traits have a "sector" effect and a "planet" effect? But my suggestion on how to handle this is outlined above.
Immediately after a ground combat rework. But there is NOTHING they can do to general to make them relevant at the moment.
Why 50? I removed it entirely. Or more precisely, I set it to the stack overflow limit.
In all seriousness, just setting the number to 50 does break a lot of modifiers that currently increase leader cap, which will need alternative modifiers, so it's not as simple of a quick mod.
Last edited:
- 2
- 1
From where I'm standing, the following are some things that would ease the points of contention around leader cap
- some degree of decoupling of scientists from science ships. The leader cap is very restrictive for people that are trying to explore the galaxy. Especially large galaxies or ones with very non-linear hyperlane routes. I think that at the very least unmanned science ships should be able to perform simple hyperlane exploration. Perhaps full on surveying too, but maybe at reduced speed or reduced likelihood of finding anomalies.
- With the emphasis of fielding fewer leaders, sector governors should apply their full strength to their entire sector. Willingness to invest in a planetary governor should allow a player to double-down on maximizing a truly special world.
- Leaders shouldn't directly compete against each other for leader capacity slots. Distinct admiral/scientist/governor/general capacity restrictions will prevent rotten feeling that we are better off firing any generals/governors in order to field more of the all powerful scientists.
- The smaller number of admirals leading out fleets feels odd, so perhaps their effects should stop acting at the fleet level and should instead affect all fleets in the system as if they were a titan. Perhaps restrict it so only the most senior admiral in the system has their skills in effect. In this way our admirals might be based out of a flagship fleet (flag-fleet?), but they're commanding an entire war front.
- Generals need love. At the very least it needs to be harder for them to die. However ground combat is its own can of worms.
- Remove the XP reduction restriction from going over the leader caps. With other softcaps, we're free to go over them so long as we're willing to create an economy that can support the strain. But going direclty for XP gain completely strangles any plans for a nation to heavily invest into masses of leaders to a huge degree. I don't think that the dev's vision of keeping leaders very rare matters if a player is willing to jump through hoops to play an unorthodox playthrough.
- explore extra ways to increase leader capacity for players that want to go wide on leaders. I'm thinking starbase buildings. One capacity per starbase building might be too much, but maybe play with the numbers and slice them up like the envoys from insight techs. Maybe 0.5 or 0.25 leader cap per starbase building. I don't think that there would be anything wrong for a player wanting to effectively dedicate an entire citadel as a base of operations for a new leader.
- 1
- 1
- 1
.png){kind=avatar}
What I find most amusing is that in the same patch where we finally get the ability to tweak sectors, we also get a leader cap which make sectors almost completely unnecessary. You'll never have enough governors to govern all sectors, so why make more than 1 or 2. And since the governors traits only affect one planet anyway, then one planet sectors are not as much of a waste as they were before the patch. Good joke Paradox, you really got us with that one.
- 8
- 3
They should just have a limit for each type of leader. Like EU4 did separating admirals and generals.
- 2