[Jolly Reaper]

Ignoring the bit that comes immediately prior to what you quoted, sure.

Not to mention that even the bit he quoted started with "overall", which in this context is a clear reference to generalization, not that size is the only factor.

The real issue here, I think, is the amount of dev work a system requires. CiV-style policy tree is relatively simple to code, debug and balance. A mechanism where your policies rise organically from your actions is certainly cool, but far more complex. Implementing that would either mean postponing Banks considerably, putting less emphasis on other parts such as the new faction system, or cutting down on whatever is in the upcoming DLC. The last won't be happening, since Paradox is a business and rather DLC-oriented at that, and the first is unlikely as well for the same reason. The second is possible, I suppose, but I wouldn't be at all in favour.

For most developers this would also be a prime candidate for being one of those awesome ideas that can't be put into practice at all, and gets chopped at alpha or beta. Paradox could do it, but most likely the first iterations would still be buggy, imbalanced, and open to fairly ridiculous exploits. There would be much salt here after 1.5 came out, I suspect. Better to start relatively simple and later expand on elements such as ethos-dependent ways of gaining Unity. Having them give discounts to specific trees instead of extra points might be a good start.

It's also a bit odd to take such a hard line on penalizing expansion, when currently bigger is always better, despite the existing size penalties to research. Would the game really be better if those modifiers were removed, because they're arbitrary and therefore automatically bad design? I don't think so. Stellaris is too much of a Blobbing Simulator as it is.

 

[Axe99]

Cheers for the DD Wiz . A quality addition imo (although I wouldn't say it was ripped from Civ 5 - while obviously related to similar ideas in other games (not a bad thing at all), they look a bit more like EU4 idea groups to me in terms of how they work (although still not the same, even with no knowledge of how the Ascension Perks work). Lots of potential for these - if they work well, having more than seven could be a good thing.

There are other things to life than work. Even when your job is as great as mine.

It's our fault for being fans of a game developer living in an Egalitarian, rather than Authoritarian, nation . Hope you all have a great break, it's been a pretty big 2016 at Paradox!

 

[I am Sovereign]

CIV V was watered down (still decent but compared to previous titles). Pls dont get your inspirations from that game.

fan boys incoming.

Know what?
CIV VI is a even more watered down version of CIV V.
But thats just btw.

 

[Pipoka]

The HYPE flows.

The HYPE must flow.

 

[Chaos_TLW]

Yes, because that is what Wiz said.

The same Wiz that also said this, I assume?

Unhappy factions, minority species and slaves all increase the cost of adoption Traditions further, though these effects can be offset or even canceled out entirely by adopting the right Traditions for the empire you intend to build.

There are other ways to gain unity as well, some ethos/tradition specific.

The fact is that you're arguing from a baseless set of assumptions, namely that empire size is the only/most significant factor in unlocking traditions, with *no* knowledge on the actual balance of it. A large empire doing lots of whatever Supremacy actions increase their Unity gain may very well be able to keep up with or surpass a small isolationistic empire. Hell, as far as we know the very first Tradition in the Supremacy tree might as well remove the cost increase for planet size or pop size or whatever metric they've decided to use to measure empire size. The phrase you quoted is talking about "overall", and in that case it is just fine.

 

[Gornova]

May I suggest a "Knowledge tradition" ? Feels like playing Psilon from Moo2

This tradition will focus a race only on technological/social/engineering advancement separated from exploration

 

[TheDeadlyShoe]

The same Wiz that also said this, I assume?


The fact is that you're arguing from a baseless set of assumptions, namely that empire size is the only/most significant factor in unlocking traditions, with *no* knowledge on the actual balance of it. A large empire doing lots of whatever Supremacy actions increase their Unity gain may very well be able to keep up with or surpass a small isolationistic empire. Hell, as far as we know the very first Tradition in the Supremacy tree might as well remove the cost increase for planet size or pop size or whatever metric they've decided to use to measure empire size. The phrase you quoted is talking about "overall", and in that case it is just fine.

While size won't be the only factor, if a large empire can get more unity than a small empire than the system has pretty much failed in its goals.

 

[Swuul]

Ignoring the bit that comes immediately prior to what you quoted, sure.

That sure sounds like a lot more influencing factors than "just" size...

I can't understand why you are trying to refute the exact words of Wiz. Wiz said size is the most important factor, and small empires will be able to unlock Traditions faster. Between two equally small empires thus the other factors would kick, but as per Wiz words a smaller empire will be able to unlock Traditions faster than a larger one. Which is just silly regarding most of the Traditions.

Now if Wiz had said smaller empires will be able to generate Unity faster, but certain Traditions require other actions to be able to open the Tradition in question (get flagged for having conqured or purged etc for certain actions before you can spend Unity to open that Tradition), that would have been a different statement. But that is not what Wiz said, he spesifically said smaller Empires are able to open Traditions faster than larger empires.

 

[Swuul]

The same Wiz that also said this, I assume?


The fact is that you're arguing from a baseless set of assumptions, namely that empire size is the only/most significant factor in unlocking traditions, with *no* knowledge on the actual balance of it. A large empire doing lots of whatever Supremacy actions increase their Unity gain may very well be able to keep up with or surpass a small isolationistic empire. Hell, as far as we know the very first Tradition in the Supremacy tree might as well remove the cost increase for planet size or pop size or whatever metric they've decided to use to measure empire size. The phrase you quoted is talking about "overall", and in that case it is just fine.

You do realise you are contradicting yourself in the above statements?

Wiz said certain Traditions can be used to off-set the malus large empires get to generating Unity. Ok, sounds good until you realise you first have to generate Unity to open the Tradition which off-sets the malus.

If smaller empires can directly go for the Traditions they please, larger ones first have to suffer the lowered Unity generation and finally be able to open the Tradition to off-set the malus Unity generation. How many Tradition will a smaller empire already have unlocked when the larger one is able to open the first meaningful Tradition (considering the first would go to buy off the malus to Unity generation)?

Unless the Unity generation boost for the Tradition off-setting the Unity generation malus is huge (it has to be worth the Unity cost for the Tradition so that Unity is generated at much increased rate to offset the Unity cost for the Tradtion) this will be a double-whammy against larger empires and then it will not be worth it to take it (it would be basically Unity points thrown down the drain). On the other hand, if the Unity generation is huge enough it will be an absolute no-brainer Tradition and everybody will have to go for it first. If everybody goes same railroad anyway (they never take the Tradition or they always take the Tradition), where is the point of such a system for a game?

 

[Zelius]

I can't understand why you are trying to refute the exact words of Wiz. Wiz said size is the most important factor, and small empires will be able to unlock Traditions faster. Between two equally small empires thus the other factors would kick, but as per Wiz words a smaller empire will be able to unlock Traditions faster than a larger one. Which is just silly regarding most of the Traditions.

Now if Wiz had said smaller empires will be able to generate Unity faster, but certain Traditions require other actions to be able to open the Tradition in question (get flagged for having conqured or purged etc for certain actions before you can spend Unity to open that Tradition), that would have been a different statement. But that is not what Wiz said, he spesifically said smaller Empires are able to open Traditions faster than larger empires.

Let's imagine this scenario, and begin with an assumptions:

Unity gain is affected by number of planets.
Empire A has 11 planets.
Empire B has 10 planets.

Now, are you saying that Empire B will definitely 100% unlock more Traditions than Empire A, i.e. there is no player agency or AI action on the part of B that could allow it to surpass A?
But that would be boring, so of course not - are we all agreed on this? So, I would speculate that other factors could into play.

In that case, the question is one about the quantitative effect of size vs whatever other factors contribute to Unity gain. Now, one might imagine that with a galaxy-spanning Empire it would be literally impossible to match the Unity gain of a single-planet one, assuming it is affected by technology and tech is equal. I don't see a problem with that, personally.

You do realise you are contradicting yourself in the above statements?

Wiz said certain Traditions can be used to off-set the malus large empires get to generating Unity. Ok, sounds good until you realise you first have to generate Unity to open the Tradition which off-sets the malus.

If smaller empires can directly go for the Traditions they please, larger ones first have to suffer the lowered Unity generation and finally be able to open the Tradition to off-set the malus Unity generation. How many Tradition will a smaller empire already have unlocked when the larger one is able to open the first meaningful Tradition (considering the first would go to buy off the malus to Unity generation)?

Unless the Unity generation boost for the Tradition off-setting the Unity generation malus is huge (it has to be worth the Unity cost for the Tradition so that Unity is generated at much increased rate to offset the Unity cost for the Tradtion) this will be a double-whammy against larger empires and then it will not be worth it to take it (it would be basically Unity points thrown down the drain). On the other hand, if the Unity generation is huge enough it will be an absolute no-brainer Tradition and everybody will have to go for it first. If everybody goes same railroad anyway (they never take the Tradition or they always take the Tradition), where is the point of such a system for a game?

What is your point, exactly? Oh no - large empires cannot get as many stacking buffs as small empires? Oh well, I'll just roll over everyone with my ridiculous fleet. Again, this is a question about the quantitative effect of Traditions. Which we don't know. Unless we imagine them to be extremely overpowered, there does not seem to be a problem?

Edit: Might as well expand with a hypothetical scenario using whatever-Tradition that reduces malus from size. Let's call this Expansionism.
Imagine that Unity is generated at +1 / month. Suppose each planet after the home planet decreased this by 0.2 / month.

Now, we can unlock Expansionism with 50 Unity points, and this reduces the malus by 0.1 / month / planet. By the time we colonise a mere 5 planets this gives a net gain of 0.5 / month over another Empire that has not taken Expansionism, which then pays for itself within 100 months, 200 if we take the worst-case assumption that Tradition cost increases by 100% of base each time. Now, at the other end of the spectrum, if it takes 300 years to see any net return, then of course Expansionism is a waste of Unity points. Hopefully the balance is well thought-out.

 

[LambTaco]

Excited about the changes. But I have three complaints/observations, complainservations:

1. This seems to be a change toward a more gamey feel. As there isn't really an in universe explanation for how or why arbitrary points can be used to get enormous changes in costs, happiness, etc;. at least not the way we do for science and edicts.

2. One concern I have is that the Traditions be balanced well. We don't want to end up with another Civ 5 with one Tree being the best first choice for pretty much any situation.

3. The names Unity and Tradition seem off. A Fanatic Individualist empire striving to build Unity sounds a bit weird, as does a materialist(which is essentially humanism, but you can't use that with aliens) empire adopting traditions. But I guess we can't just call them Culture and Social Policies.

 

[Garfazz Steamfang]

When i love the idea i'm more suspicious about the little number of bonuses you seems to have with those traditions. I would have loved to be able to go further in the tradition tree (which would be like a perk tree) for unlocking buildings or special policies... Right now it don't seems to be the case for what we have seen...

It would have been a great opportunity for counter the lack of differencies between ethos with additions of buildings or special policies...

 

[Jularbo Kizn]

Ascension, Stargate here I come

 

[Smiles_]

Interesting. I look forward to picking Stellaris up more so in the new year to see how the all the changes play out...


Smiles

 

[Swuul]

This is pointless. If you think people directly quoting Wiz and showing you how it goes against what you're saying is "not facing the facts", you're hopeless. Hell, the fact you bring up the Russian files at every opportunity as a means of obliquely threatening people you disagree with and silencing dissent already proves you're not actually interested in discussing this.

You are quoting numbers from the Russian files, and then pretending "oh, but these numbers are easy to get from some other places, which I just don't remember right now, but definitively not the Russian files, definitively absolutely not". I am not threathening anybody, I have absolutely zero power to threathen anybody on these forums. I just gave you a friendly reminder to edit from your posts the numbers you took from the Russian files.

Wiz did say various things affect the speed of Unity generation and I have absolutely no issues with that, no matter how many times you choose to quote posts about Unity. I have no issues with, absolutely zero. It is absolutely right small unified empires should generate Unity faster.

Wiz also said that smaller empires will be the ones unlocking Traditions before larger empires. The smaller empires can unlock even Traditions they have no history of. That is a plain arbitrary penalty on players who do well, and that I do have issues with.

So, could you please stop quoting Wiz saying how and what affects how fast Unity is generated? I have nothing against that, none what so ever. When you get over that, then perhaps we can start wondering why small peaceful empires with no history in certain aspects make them faster at gaining Tradition in those spesific fields than those empires who actually have a history in the field?

When we start to ponder about that, then maybe also continue the thought to the next obvious question: If a Tradition, which needs to be opened with Unity, is needed to gain Unity to open Traditions, where is the logic? Or is this just another arbitrary penalty for the player doing good, to produce a doublewhammy so that players don't try to play well?

 

[BlackUmbrellas]

You are quoting numbers from the Russian files, and then pretending "oh, but these numbers are easy to get from some other places, which I just don't remember right now, but definitively not the Russian files, definitively absolutely not".

Oh, absolutely. Not like that's easily refutable, no sir.

I'm done here. So long as you're going to be dishonest in how you go about this discussion, there's no point.

 

[Swuul]

Oh, absolutely. Not like that's easily refutable, no sir.

I'm done here. So long as you're going to be dishonest in how you go about this discussion, there's no point.

Ok, so now you *did* actually provide the first actual fact! So far you have been refuting what Wiz said, you have been refuting facts, coming up with "I don't remember where I heard about this" -thingies and pure fantasies, and this is the first real fact you brought to the table. Next time remember to do that from the start, so that your words don't seem so shady. Because you know the opposite of being dishonest is basing your words and actions on known facts, and I am not the one who have been coming up with fantasies and shady excuses so far

 

[Wizzington]

I think that's enough arguing about what I said or didn't say. People are capable of reading for themselves.

 

[BlackUmbrellas]

The real issue here, I think, is the amount of dev work a system requires.

Agreed. Sure, generating Unity points and then investing those into Traditions is a bit of a "game-y" view of how something like that works- obviously the more realistic version would be to have Traditions just sort of attached to your empire based on how you're playing the game.

But that's also kind of unintuitive to a player and removes the ability for a player to take a grander, more broad-spectrum perspective to planning their empire, and also far more complicated to balance. Accumulating points and then investing them into something is pretty standard fare for a game and infinitely easier to implement in a balanced fashion for devs juggling other concerns and upcoming game features. I hardly see it as that immersion-breaking.

Anyhow, I am curious about how deep the trees might go eventually, since they are a bit small right now.

 

[Shock360]

Think of it like this. Unity represents the tradition of your empire changing(either naturally or through propaganda). The more unified your nation(smaller) the quicker it will be for the culture to change. So if you are a peaceful nation and suddenly gain the war like traditions, it's the culture of your nation changing to a more war like approach(idk maybe they started hunting a lot XD)