Federation as they are right now are purely military alliances, but I hope this will change one day. I would love to see them only begin as simple military alliances and grow into interstellar organizations that affect more and more aspects of their members as the game progresses. For example, an ability to enact bans on certain policies (like a ban on chattel slavery or some types of purging) after a vote or even force some policies, like forced full citizenship of member species of that federation. A possibility to change the way the leader of a federation is determined from a rotation to an election with or without term limit. Federation can also get a set of laws, that will give both bonuses and maluses to balance them, that will represent a growing economical and political integration. Also a long and difficult path to turn a federation into a unified state can make the game more fun for pacifist empires, who prefer peaceful expansion and miss the old HRE of EU.
Ways to improve Federations mechanics
- Thread starter Curator Sapidianus
- 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.
I like this. I've always felt that the way they have federations working now weren't doing the concept justice. I felt it needed to do more.
I feel that your suggestion actually covers all the things that I felt were missing from federations.
I feel that your suggestion actually covers all the things that I felt were missing from federations.
OP pretty much overs things ive felt Federations have needed for a while now at the moment they just feel like influence drains right now.
Agreed, federations have so much potential, but I'm sure that Paradox will improve them sooner or later.
I agree with all of OP's points. I do also think there should be different kinds of federations, one like what OP is suggesting, But i think the game would benefit from a way to create an HRE-esque pseudo-federation for a species dedicated to uplifting and enlightening primitives. The current system of constantly enlightening people, for little to no benefit, and waiting to systematically integrate 1 planet minors that are of no help to you at all, is tedious and a little more than slightly useless tbh. It makes playing a xenophile dedicated to enlightening primitives a little boring. A pseudo-federation could be a way to alleviate that.
I guess it's really a question of what your goals are for a Federation.
I'd sort of like to see a Federation become a method of diplomatic expansion. A means of taking multiple smaller factions and, through politicking, favor trading, and the slow development of trust between your people, turn them into a single political entity under the control of the dominant faction, whether that dominant faction is actually the player or not. I'm not entirely sure how to go about it. An HRE-style slow increasing of central authority that meets resistance from the presumably independent member states would be the obvious way to go but I think ethos should be involved somehow, with the final political entity sharing the ethos of the dominant nation who founded it and the difficulty of establishing that authority increased or decreased in proportion to how vastly different the Ethos' seen in your federation might be.
I'd sort of like to see a Federation become a method of diplomatic expansion. A means of taking multiple smaller factions and, through politicking, favor trading, and the slow development of trust between your people, turn them into a single political entity under the control of the dominant faction, whether that dominant faction is actually the player or not. I'm not entirely sure how to go about it. An HRE-style slow increasing of central authority that meets resistance from the presumably independent member states would be the obvious way to go but I think ethos should be involved somehow, with the final political entity sharing the ethos of the dominant nation who founded it and the difficulty of establishing that authority increased or decreased in proportion to how vastly different the Ethos' seen in your federation might be.
.png){kind=avatar}
To be honest I think currently federations tend to be a bit too strong actually.
If you end up in a galaxy, where 3 federation builders start next to each other, the surrounding hegemonic imperialists stand practically no chance against them. And even for a player, it is usually difficult to beat them without seriously building up first.
Don't get me wrong. I am all for more federation mechanics and the enforced policies is a really good idea.
But getting the ability to unify the federation into a single empire without any drawbacks wouldn't be balanced.
If you end up in a galaxy, where 3 federation builders start next to each other, the surrounding hegemonic imperialists stand practically no chance against them. And even for a player, it is usually difficult to beat them without seriously building up first.
Don't get me wrong. I am all for more federation mechanics and the enforced policies is a really good idea.
But getting the ability to unify the federation into a single empire without any drawbacks wouldn't be balanced.
Well, sacrificing 2 influence for ages is a drawback. I do think integrating should be possible as a federation somehow, though it would be tricky balancing it.
But yeah, federations need work. I am not sure that work can be confined to just 'voting on stuff'. Some of it perhaps should be established when the federation is created in the first place.
From an offensive standpoint, an AI entering someone else's federation is an unbreakable alliance which can only be done by completely subduing that AI. From a defensive standpoint it means adding on one-three extra empires to any war someone prosecutes against you (and to any offensive war you can convince them to fight, which is often 'most'). The only similar interaction is swearing fealty, which is devastating to your empire. The casualness of federations is problematic.
I sort of think there ought to be a smaller version of federations, like coalitions, which wouldn't be formal or permanent (but would function somewhat like coalitions in CK2).
But yeah, federations need work. I am not sure that work can be confined to just 'voting on stuff'. Some of it perhaps should be established when the federation is created in the first place.
From an offensive standpoint, an AI entering someone else's federation is an unbreakable alliance which can only be done by completely subduing that AI. From a defensive standpoint it means adding on one-three extra empires to any war someone prosecutes against you (and to any offensive war you can convince them to fight, which is often 'most'). The only similar interaction is swearing fealty, which is devastating to your empire. The casualness of federations is problematic.
I sort of think there ought to be a smaller version of federations, like coalitions, which wouldn't be formal or permanent (but would function somewhat like coalitions in CK2).
Federations have the potential to become the backbone of galactic politics and diplomacy. I think the biggest thing holding them back is that the diplomacy system is very barebones at this moment. This is probably due to AI issues, like players being unable to trade for planets. Why can I offer planets, but never demand them?
I hope that federations and diplomacy in general will recieve much needed attention over the coming patches. For instance, I'd like to be able to bribe rulers/empires to vote in my favour on certain things. Sometimes I want to add a Peaceful Bureaucracy, or Enlightened Monarchy to my federation, but the Democratic Crusader always rejects. I wouldn't mind to offer anonymous donations to make them more understanding.
Another thing I'd like to see: Presidential Elections!
The rotating presidency in theory ensures, that everyone gets his turn, but it would be more exciting and engaging, if the federation members vote on which empire is the best equipped to represent the common interest.
Especially interesting: Electoral promises have a good potential to make one set of ethics more likely to vote in your favour, while other members would want a different stance.
I hope that federations and diplomacy in general will recieve much needed attention over the coming patches. For instance, I'd like to be able to bribe rulers/empires to vote in my favour on certain things. Sometimes I want to add a Peaceful Bureaucracy, or Enlightened Monarchy to my federation, but the Democratic Crusader always rejects. I wouldn't mind to offer anonymous donations to make them more understanding.
Another thing I'd like to see: Presidential Elections!
The rotating presidency in theory ensures, that everyone gets his turn, but it would be more exciting and engaging, if the federation members vote on which empire is the best equipped to represent the common interest.
Especially interesting: Electoral promises have a good potential to make one set of ethics more likely to vote in your favour, while other members would want a different stance.
Personally I would love to see the possibility of a civil war mechanic as federations are way too stable.
Obviously it would have to be balanced against other types of play.
In this case the drawback would be the amount of time and work put in and the opportunity cost that entails.
You have four neighbors, you can wait for neighbor 1 and neighbor 2 to rival each other, rival neighbor 1 yourself, then use your new found shared hatred of neighbor 1 to convince neighbor 2 to invade him with you. You, as war leader, take the bulk of his territory for yourself. Now, since you're bigger, you just go ahead and conquer neighbor 3 as well. And now decide if neighbor 2 is still a friend worth having. In a surprisingly short amount of time you can triple or quadruple the size of your territory.
OR you befriend all of them, build them into a Federation and start a process of forming that Federation into a singular entity. During that process you remain at your current size. It would probably take longer to expand this way, to balance the increased security of being in a Federation during that development.
In this case the drawback would be the amount of time and work put in and the opportunity cost that entails.
You have four neighbors, you can wait for neighbor 1 and neighbor 2 to rival each other, rival neighbor 1 yourself, then use your new found shared hatred of neighbor 1 to convince neighbor 2 to invade him with you. You, as war leader, take the bulk of his territory for yourself. Now, since you're bigger, you just go ahead and conquer neighbor 3 as well. And now decide if neighbor 2 is still a friend worth having. In a surprisingly short amount of time you can triple or quadruple the size of your territory.
OR you befriend all of them, build them into a Federation and start a process of forming that Federation into a singular entity. During that process you remain at your current size. It would probably take longer to expand this way, to balance the increased security of being in a Federation during that development.
I wouldn't even consider 2 influence a serious drawback. Slavers also pay around 1 influence to either suppress their slaves or pay to share the burden.
Even defensive pacts cost 1 influence and almost everyone has at least 1 of those.
The problematic part is, that by forming a federation you double or triple your military power, without really limiting yourself militarily. In theory your federation members can block your war declarations, but a) just being safe from being declared upon is already worth a lot and b) I have never been in a federation, that actually blocked me.
They may block you from taking planets from certain neighbours, but I have never seen them downvote you, if you just want to liberate. And if you are playing a federation, liberation (+ inviing them to your federation) is often good enough.
Imperialists just have no way to grow their fleet as fast as a federation in the early game.
There is a post on the subredit aswell:
https://www.reddit.com/r/Stellaris/comments/5w2g3a/making_federations_interesting/
https://www.reddit.com/r/Stellaris/comments/5w2g3a/making_federations_interesting/de6t0b4/
^ Heres my comment on that thread:
Voting:
"in voting it would be cool to have a voting policy for the federation: for example
Also, while we are it can we please customize our federations symbol/flag?"
https://www.reddit.com/r/Stellaris/comments/5w2g3a/making_federations_interesting/
https://www.reddit.com/r/Stellaris/comments/5w2g3a/making_federations_interesting/de6t0b4/
^ Heres my comment on that thread:
Voting:
"in voting it would be cool to have a voting policy for the federation: for example
- A Population vote, You get as many votes as you have pops
- B Colonial Vote, You get as many votes as you have colonies
- C Single Vote, Every member gets exactly one vote
Also, while we are it can we please customize our federations symbol/flag?"
Wiz has said a couple times that Federation overhaul is on the to-do list post Banks, up to and including the path to intergrating your federation into a single entity.
One thing I would love for a federation perk would be colonial rights; the ability to build/request a colony ship of another federation member's pops to colonize worlds that your current pops can't. No more having to find the right primitives/hostile neighbors, be Highly Adaptive, and/or spend a century doing habitability research to get the Xenophile migration fun going with those whose homeworld isn't part of your trio.
One thing I would love for a federation perk would be colonial rights; the ability to build/request a colony ship of another federation member's pops to colonize worlds that your current pops can't. No more having to find the right primitives/hostile neighbors, be Highly Adaptive, and/or spend a century doing habitability research to get the Xenophile migration fun going with those whose homeworld isn't part of your trio.
Last edited:
The idea of "requesting" pops from another nation sounds extremely authoritarian in nature.Like taking away peoples individuality. I could see hive minds doing that (due to the way they work) or despotic empires, but I couldn't see an egalitarian empire doing it.It just seems weird.
We don`t have real federations in the game, it`s a military alliance.
We should get the ability to form a real federation by completing the whole perk tree.
I feel there we need a middle tier of diplomatic tools to have proper defensive and military alliances and live federations for those that invest heavily in that kind of gameplay.
We should get the ability to form a real federation by completing the whole perk tree.
I feel there we need a middle tier of diplomatic tools to have proper defensive and military alliances and live federations for those that invest heavily in that kind of gameplay.
Stellaris colonisation is authoritarian, you force your people to live on other planet.
I've made a rather exhaustive concept suggestion regarding Federations and a way to make them more significant (and enjoyable) in my Reformed Federations - HRE in Space thread a while back.
You don't necessarily force anybody. It's very possible that all folks on a colony ship signed up voluntarily.
Then why another species pops cant voluntarly sign in your colony ship?