Stellaris Dev Diary #298 - Renowned and Legendary Paragons

[zZander56]

My big issue with static content was extremely story-specific origins like Knights of the Toxic God at the expense of generic versions.

We got the Knights origin but no way to play as a generic knightly order, which was disappointing.

But it seems Paradox was aware of this specific complaint since we’re now getting a Crusader Spirit civic:

https://www.reddit.com/r/Stellaris/comments/136ogsx

Dev showing off literally every civic then just forgetting that Megacorps exist

 

[DrFranknfurter]

I just want to start by saying that I love the new content, there is an amazing amount of stuff to look forward to and I'm very happy with almost everything I have seen so far. But I would have liked to see slightly less static content and slightly more dynamic and open-ended content. I've played Knights of the Toxic God one weekend only, and wish the mechanics were less tightly linked to the story because I adore void dweller games.

On the topic of randomly generated content vs scripted content, I think some of the problems could be solved fairly simply. My quick, hasty solution would be adding a couple of toggles... one to galaxy generation:

"Randomize Prescripted Cosmetic Content"
"Some empires, Curators and Leaders have set portaits, with this toggle activated these empires and leaders will instead pick portraits and namelists randomly, or draw from existing empires when appropriate"

I'm personally not a fan of things like MSI being in every game, and I can't personally bring myself to use the Rackets or Prikkiki-Ti portraits even though I love them because I hate having doppelgängers appear with the same art as my empire every single game.

And for those that are frustrated seeing so many special portraits being added that the player cannot use I would also add a toggle in empire generation:

"Enable Cosmetic-Only Changes"
"Allows the species to be generated with normally incompatible portraits such as machines using organic templates. Some hidden portraits used for event races are also enabled. This is cosmetic only and has no impact on trait selection or governing ethics"

So I can have my Lithoids look like the Aquatic Machine portrait (rocks with glowy swirling light within), and my Machines look like fleshy humans (replicants) or look like Kai-Sha (Goth Vampire Necron Borg). She looks so amazingly good that it is a profoundly sad timeline where I am unable to use that portrait.

For story rich origins I think the solution is more customization.

Spoiler: Customization option suggestion

"Edit Origin"
"Edit your starting situation, changing population, buildings, districts, megastructures, features, dig-sites and planetary bodies.
WARNING: This may significantly impact the difficulty of the game, some options will be very challenging and is not recommended for new players"

Make it so that I can modify my empire origin to change whatever can be changed, picking empire-unique districts/buildings/starbase modules normally tied to story content from a list with points like we do with civics. So you could start with access to Ice mining, special capital districts or special buildings, and relevant civics would be adjusted to automatically add those for free. Make it so that I can start with negative modifiers, less pops, fewer buildings, smaller planet size and fewer techs in return for origin customization points that you can spend to add a starting dig site, anomalies, ruined megastructures, habitats, districts, buildings, terraforming candidates, planetary features etc.
That way people could make their own strange origins, like adding presapients and a xeno zoo to their starting Warrior Culture empire. And origins like Life Seeded could be tweaked to give 3 points to spend on planetary deposit choices so you could instead start with 3x betharian stone, or perhaps with the Feral Overload event for free Spore Vents on researching Exotic Gas technology.

Obviously this would be unbalanced, effectively the same as modding the game so it should probably also disable achievements unless it is carefully balanced.

For Paragon leaders the answer is just lots more content. Having 2 unique Leaders available for each ethic is not nearly enough to avoid repetition considering that many players stick with the same ethics over and over and over again. I'm really sick of seeing Magnus in every single game of Civ 6 and I'm sure in a few months time I'll be equally annoyed at seeing the same Paragons every single game. I'm afraid that the special portraits will only make me hate them more as they flaunt their portraits that will remain perpetually out of reach.

TLDR:
1. Add randomisation options for currently static cosmetics
2. Add cosmetic-only options to empire creation
3. Add origin editing to make the generic origins more interesting without requiring the use of mods

 

[Primarch Victus]

I agree, giving players more control over the precise composition of the galaxy and their own empire would be a good thing. Things like more galaxy settings, home system editors, improvements to Common Ground and Lost Colony, and similar things have been suggested many times. But that's not what fixed Renowned Paragons does, nor is it what people are complaining about!

No. Scripted (aka: "fixed") Renowned Paragons and Legendary Paragons are here only to make the game more interesting. And there is nothing wrong with that. To want them to be random? That would just make the work of the devs more difficult and waste resources that could be used in better content. Nothing else.

 

[Abdulijubjub]

The new Aptitude tradition tree seems... broken. -2% empire size per governor? Unless the soft cap has exponential upkeep scaling (not quadratic), even midsize empires should be able to hire 30-40 governors and just completely eliminate empire size or reduce it by the 90% max (if it uses starbase scaling, it will be on the order of 1k to 10k unity per month, depending on leader level).

Just how punishing is this soft cap?

 

[Calvax]

The new Aptitude tradition tree seems... broken. -2% empire size per governor? Unless the soft cap has exponential upkeep scaling (not quadratic), even midsize empires should be able to hire 30-40 governors and just completely eliminate empire size or reduce it by the 90% max (if it uses starbase scaling, it will be on the order of 1k to 10k unity per month, depending on leader level).

Just how punishing is this soft cap?

One factor that might make a difference is the new leader recruitment pool mechanics. On stream they showed that we’ll now have a large pool to recruit from rather than just three options. This pool refreshes every five years or so, if you hire everyone in it then you’re stuck on leaders until it refreshes.

That and the soft leader cap might make it possible but impractical to execute that kind of exploit.

 

[DreadLindwyrm]

The new Aptitude tradition tree seems... broken. -2% empire size per governor? Unless the soft cap has exponential upkeep scaling (not quadratic), even midsize empires should be able to hire 30-40 governors and just completely eliminate empire size or reduce it by the 90% max (if it uses starbase scaling, it will be on the order of 1k to 10k unity per month, depending on leader level).

Just how punishing is this soft cap?

There's a good chance that the scaling will be crippling in terms of unity cost if you try this. It will depend on the scaling involved, as you point out, but hiring and maintaining that many governors will be likely to break your economy or force you to ignore other aspects of it just to feed your governors. Now, that said, massively reducing your empire size will help there, as it changes the numbers as well, but I think trying this is likely to be an overall loss.

 

[Abdulijubjub]

One factor that might make a difference is the new leader recruitment pool mechanics. On stream they showed that we’ll now have a large pool to recruit from rather than just three options. This pool refreshes every five years or so, if you hire everyone in it then you’re stuck on leaders until it refreshes.

5 leaders every 5 years just means it takes 40 years to get to 40 governors. You'll need that long just to get to the kind of unity you'd need for this.

There's a good chance that the scaling will be crippling in terms of unity cost if you try this. It will depend on the scaling involved, as you point out, but hiring and maintaining that many governors will be likely to break your economy or force you to ignore other aspects of it just to feed your governors. Now, that said, massively reducing your empire size will help there, as it changes the numbers as well, but I think trying this is likely to be an overall loss.

That and the soft leader cap might make it possible but impractical to execute that kind of exploit.

It does heavily depend on the exact mechanics of the leader soft cap. But their most crippling soft cap in the game at the moment (starbase capacity, +25% upkeep for all starbases for every starbase over the cap) is what I used to get that 1k to 10k unity number. It varies so much because you can have either all level 1 leaders or (in theory) all level 10 leaders, though the latter is very unlikely. Especially since the soft cap also imposes a leader XP gain penalty.

It's worth noting that there's also a governor Destiny trait which reduces all empire size by 20%, and possibly some more size reductions which we don't know about yet. That will seriously lower the number of governors needed and make this even easier.

 

[Mcgan]

It will depend on the scaling involved, as you point out, but hiring and maintaining that many governors will be likely to break your economy or force you to ignore other aspects of it just to feed your governors.

Not if you have Feudal Society though, that one still replaces unity upkeep with unity generation for governors.

Spoiler: New Feudal Society

 

[corsairmarks]

Will we be able to get other empires' leaders from vassals we integrate, from empires we conquer, or even as refugees or exiles if we have a policy to welcome them or if they have our ethics?

Just like how the end of an empire isn't necessarily the end of its pops, it would be nice if it wasn't the end of its characters and leaders either.

If PDX has not added (in Galactic Paragons) keeping leaders from integrated subjects, check out my mod (which enables that in the current version 3.7 "Canis Minor"):

Steam Workshop::Retain Leaders from Integrated Subjects & Pre-FTL Civilizations

steamcommunity.com

 

[Abdulijubjub]

Not if you have Feudal Society though, that one still replaces unity upkeep with unity generation for governors.

Spoiler: New Feudal Society

View attachment 976148

It looks like they even removed the requirement that you actually employ those governors.

So I'm hearing... start the game, hire every governor that shows up in your queue, use their innate unity generation to support hiring more. You never get a single level 2 leader and are probably barely able to afford maintaining your initial lead scientist/admiral (which may be your only leaders that actually cost you unity), but you'll play without empire size at all. Base cost edicts/traditions and dirt cheap ascensions, all throughout the game (at least after year 40).

This could be the weirdest unity rush we've seen yet.

We'll have to wait and see, I suppose.

 

[Lazy Name]

So I'm hearing... start the game, hire every governor that shows up in your queue, use their innate unity generation to support hiring more. You never get a single level 2 leader and are probably barely able to afford maintaining your initial lead scientist/admiral (which may be your only leaders that actually cost you unity), but you'll play without empire size at all. Base cost edicts/traditions and dirt cheap ascensions, all throughout the game (at least after year 40).

Could be surprisingly on theme as well, actually; Gaining societal cohesion by promising tiny parcels of land and high autonomy to anyone even mildly worthy.

 

[Ballagarraidh]

I can understand why certain Gestalts cannot attain the unique leaders. But maybe make it possible for Rogue Servitors and Driven Assimilators to get some (if not all for the Assimilators) of the unique leaders. It makes sense for the Pacifist or Egalitarian leaders to be somewhat drawn to the Rogue Servitors and it makes sense from a Driven Assimilator standpoint (evolution through diversity) to seek out prime specimens of organics. Furthermore, there are already leaders that could be utilized by gestalts (both Hivemind and Machine) in the game such as the unique Warform, the Oracle, etc.

 

[Mister X-X]

Will the ethics of the leader affect the attractiveness of the population? Will the factions be reworked to be useful in the near future?

 

[hart30]

The AI cannot recruit any renowned or Legendary paragons.

Then how will the AI be able to keep up? This provides a big advantage and boni for the player, which the AI cannot receive. Is there any compenation for the AI in the code?
Also this means u cannot encounter animated ruler portraits randomly when contacting an AI empire

 

[Ajacoba]

Then how will the AI be able to keep up? This provides a big advantage and boni for the player, which the AI cannot receive. Is there any compenation for the AI in the code?

eh, ai will be fine
the paragons aren't that impressive, also the player has "unfair" advantages anyways because of precursors and good strategies
the ai will keep up with the same methods it always used, by allying with one another and countering the player's quality with quantity and of course with difficulty modifiers

 

[xeleth12]

Effing gorgeous art.
I DM a custom sci-fi tabletop RPG, Stellaris keep blessing me on an inspiration level with such art.

 

[wisecat]

1. Will new Leaders interact with Federations/Dependencies system? If one Empire in the Federation has good leaders / Paragons will other members benefit?

2. Or if I subjugate an Empire with great leaders / Paragons can I make them work for me?

3. Can Paragons leave if my ethics change?

4. Can Paragons / Leaders be captured?

5. What will happen with Researchers / Governors that were available for hire from Keepers/Traders enclaves?

6. What will happen with nano-entity governor that you sometimes get from L-Cluster?

 

[Primarch Victus]

Effing gorgeous art.
I DM a custom sci-fi tabletop RPG, Stellaris keep blessing me on an inspiration level with such art.

Indeed! And talking about that: I know we have a strategy table-top game based in Stellaris, but I would kill for a Stellaris table-top RPG. And if I remember well, Paradox already is involved with the table-top RPG Coriolis: The Third Horizon , so why they could not produce a "Stellaris: Galactic RPG"? *wink,wink*

 

[Maethendias]

With the node-system for gestalt "councils" we get a system that is unique to gestalts. You may regard it as a downgrade of the non-gestalt council, but it does not have to be that way. It could prove to be a genuine side-grade with unique traits and a distinct gestalt "feeling" rather than a downgrade.

considering the extremly consistent track record with gestalt content over the last half decade

its not gonna be anything BUT a downgrade, because thats the ONLY thing that has been guaranteed ever since the inception of gestalts, them being designed around taking features away instead of changing and implementing features that would fit them better
which, btw, as i have said time and time again, its the reason for their highly wonky balance, but alas

 

[Maethendias]

they have a superior council and get more specialised specialists (because destinies are something for people rather than drones with no souls or only micro-personalities at best)

no paragons though, probably because each paragon is supposed to belong to the alignment they are available for and it's literally impossible to have a singular gestalt entity running around, especially not when there are two completely different versions of gestalts in the game

they may get access to the big 4 though? who knows...

got it, so as a gestalt player (as usual) the biggest part of the dlc are basically denied to me

well, at least its nothing new