• 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.

Stellaris Dev Diary #316 - Leader Consolidation

Hello everybody!

Today we’re going to look at a likely 3.10 feature, some changes that we’ve called the Leader Consolidation.

With leaders becoming more important to your empire following the 3.8 ‘Gemini’ release alongside Galactic Paragons, there were some rough edges leftover and experiences that could be better. Some of the changes we’re implementing during this leader consolidation were things we talked about during the development of Galactic Paragons but decided against for various reasons, or were out of scope at the time, while others are based on data gathered since then and community feedback.

So What’s Changing?​

Some of these names are still being argued over, so are subject to change. Hate one in particular? Let us know. One of us probably hates it too.

leaders_military.png
Admirals and Generals will be merged into the Commander, the Military leader class.

Admiral and General will remain as veteran classes, with the following foci:
  • Admiral - Focuses on Fleets and general naval combat
  • General - Focuses on taking planets and assaulting static defenses - Armies, Planetary Bombardment, Ground Combat, and attacking defensive structures such as Starbases are the General’s forte
  • Commissioner - Focuses on Planetary Governance (Martial Law)
  • Strategist - Focuses on the Council, especially the Minister of Defense position

leaders_administrative.png
The old Governors and some Envoy functions will be merged into Officials, the Administrative leader class.

Their veteran classes will be:
  • Delegate - Focuses on Federations and the Galactic Community
  • Industrialist - Focuses on Planetary Governance (Industry and Development)
  • Ambassador - Council Focus (Diplomacy, Espionage, and First Contact), especially suited for the new Minister of State position
  • Advisor - Council Focus (Economy)
This does give the Officials two council focused subclasses, but the two are different enough that we felt it best to let them specialize accordingly. The Advisor is expected to thrive in some civic based council positions.


leaders_scientific.png
Scientists remain the third, Scientific leader class.

Veteran Classes:
  • Explorer - Focuses on Surveying and Exploration
  • Academic - Focuses on Archaeology and Anomalies
  • Analyst - Focuses on Planetary Governance (Assist Research)
  • Statistician - Focuses on the Council, especially the Minister of Science position

As suggested in last week’s teaser and by some of the above bullet points, “governor” will no longer be a leader class. Instead, a planet or sector can be governed by any leader, regardless of class, with differing effects. For example, instead of being local planetary decisions, placing a Commander in charge of a sector will place the entire sector under Martial Law. (The exact effects of which will be changing somewhat too - we want it to be a reasonable thing to put the military in charge of a newly conquered or disruptive set of planets until the condition stabilizes.) Administrative leaders will have most of the effects of the current governors, and the Assist Research effects will be moving to the Scientific governors.

You will still be able to override a Sector Governor on a specific planet by placing a Planetary Governor there, so your Forge Ecumenopolis could have an Industrialist governor in a sector that is otherwise led by a Scientist.

We’re also doing a major rebalancing of the traits themselves. As part of this, we’re reintroducing some sector-wide traits to governors (though now they’re split across the governing veteran classes), and the traits themselves will clearly show if they’re of sector or planetary scope. Note that a sector-wide governor trait will not apply to a planet that has its own local planetary governor overriding them.

So are Envoys Real Leaders Now?​

Partially.

A single Administrative leader can be assigned to your Federation and another to the Galactic Community (or Empire) like numerous Envoys did in the past. Their level and traits will determine how effective they are at the job instead of cramming every Envoy you can spare into there, making Delegates the optimal candidates for this sort of thing.

The Minister of State position is being added to the base council alongside the military and scientific ministries. This councilor will also have general effects on diplomacy, espionage, and first contact.

1696253245523.png

Ruler, plus one red, one yellow, and one blue council member.

Envoys will remain as they were to represent the Minister of State’s bureaucratic reach, and will continue to handle “minor tasks” such as Improve and Harm Relations, maintaining Espionage spy networks, and First Contact.

What About Leader Caps?​

Leader caps remain, but are per-class, with any over-cap penalties affecting only the particular leader class that is over. Civics, traditions, and other effects that previously increased the generic leader cap will now generally increase the cap for one or more specific classes.

We may end up shifting more of the over-cap penalty over to the upkeep cost of leaders.

What about Gestalt Councils?​

Gestalt Councils currently have a significant advantage in passing agendas in the early game due to having a larger number of councilors. This disparity will be lessened a bit due to the regular empires starting with one additional councilor, and we’re also making council legitimacy (how happy your factions are with your council) affect agenda progress.

Their nodes will get a little bit of a reshuffle to accommodate the various changes, but should otherwise remain generally familiar. We’ll be able to share more details later on during the development cycle.

I’m a Modder, Tell Me Modding Stuff​

We’ll have more details in the release notes, but leader classes are no longer hard-coded and are thus much more moddable in script, so you should theoretically be able to do things like "this leader does research, commands armies, and represents us in the galcom!"

Is that everything?​

Nooooo.

Next on our Custodian “this is not internal politics” agenda is to do a pass on council agendas. Our thought is that agendas should have more impactful results (tangible effects rather than modifiers), and the range of available agendas should be related to the ethics of your active councilors instead of the ethics of your empire.

This is planned for 3.11 ‘[REDACTED]’ at the earliest.

In the longer term, we may want to make greater differentiation between the councils of different authorities - the councils of a Democracy and a Megacorp could feel different from one another, for example.

Next Week​

Next week we’ll boldly go where no dev diary has gone before.

(We're all currently at a staff conference, so dev replies to the diary will be delayed, but we'll make sure to read through all of the comments when we get back.)
 
  • 130Like
  • 47Love
  • 13
  • 2
  • 2
Reactions:
How will the penalties for Leader Cap change? Something like more unity costs as before? How will the upkeep costs change?
If the penalties will be similar high as today regarding the experience of the leaders it would be only a change of resources and not changing the root problem. If it will be a balanced change to the ukeep costs it would be great and make sense. If an empire with a good economic can upkeep more leaders it would be a good change.
 
  • 1
Reactions:
Any plans for certain civics to gain extra benefits from having the new governor-masquerading scientists and admirals be in use? Or should I go ahead and post this down in the ideas forum while it's still fresh in mind? Looking at Technocracy and Citizen Service more specifically. As for what kinds of benefits, that would depend on what fits the flavor and balancing + what those governor-types already normally bring, I suppose.
 
  • 4
Reactions:
I really hope this will stop the tragic and gross disparaging of Generals from then on. Imagine being a General and hearing how the Stellaris community talks about you - you'd be broken hearted. Perhaps now that will finally end.
No wonder half of them turn into butchers, glory seekers or kidnappers :p
 
  • 6Haha
  • 1Like
Reactions:
You misunderstand the problem. It is not that this one thing would be too much, but there are many, many things that are slowly eased into the game over the early game phase to reduce mental load and pre-game setup times.
This is just one of those.
Can you please stop and just think on it yourself, what is so hard in couple more council positions? Compared to managing economy? Trade routes? Ship design? Factions? Amenities? You just click on them and assign leader to a position, thats it, no need to be 5000 hours veteran for it. Whole having to unlock them with agenda first will be more confusing for new player than having them open from start, you don't add extra steps if you don't want to overload someone
 
  • 14
  • 2
Reactions:
Deleting governors is also frankly genius. This lets us roleplay empires with genuinely different elite classes, not just at the central level, but at a regional level. For example we can be an empire where scientists are in charge. Or an empire where martial law is always happening because the military runs things. Or an empire run by industrialists only. Or an empire of intrigue where only paper-pushing advisors are in charge. Or a mix of these. Just great stuff.
Makes me wonder about Civics modifying your leader caps to emphasise this even more.
Technocracies having more Scientists at the expense of Officials, as they'd prefer to have Analysts in charge. Citizen Service or Warrior Society likewise wanting more Commissioners running planets.
 
  • 3
  • 1Like
Reactions:
If there aren't any plans to increase the amount of councilor positions, is there at least the option to replace the Minister of State with one of the civic exclusive positions?
 
  • 1Haha
  • 1Like
Reactions:
Interesting. One thing I am curious about is does science ship active reconnaissance and assist starbase detection get any related traits or veteran classes that are "optimal" for their activities? I assume the explorer veteran class still retains it's bonuses to evasion and speed so maybe it might be worth mentioning somewhere that this is the class more suitable to clandestine use of scientists?
 
  • 1Like
Reactions:
I’d recommend swapping “Advisor” for “Statesman” for the Council Economic focus.

Also for “Scientist” class have it be “Intellectual”, while replacing “Analyst” with “Scientist”.

Other than that it looks like a great change!
 
  • 4
  • 2Like
  • 1
Reactions:
- Industrialist is a bad name for an official specialised in planet/sector management IMO. It makes sense in industrial worlds sure, but thematically my culture or tech world shouldn't be run by an industrialist. Maybe administrator?
What about the movie industry? Hollywood? Netflix? The tech industry? InGen? (?)
Culture and tech are industries today in this non sci fi world, so...

I agree though, it could have a better name.
 
  • 2
Reactions:
Nice to see how close i was with my suggestion/prediction.
___________

"Next week we’ll boldly go where no dev diary has gone before."

Is this a Star Trek reference that hints at Star Trek Infinite getting a supply system, and now we will see something like this introduced to Stellaris to end doomstacking?
 
Last edited:
  • 1Like
Reactions:
I like these changes to leaders quite a bit. Over the last week i had been thinking about what changes would come with the leader consolidation. With the already announced changes (no more generals, all classes can govern) I had the following expectations:

  • 4 subclasses per class
    • commander: admiral, general, governor (focus on stability, crime and military jobs) and council
    • governor/envoy: envoy, spymaster, governor (focus on advanced resources, unity, trade and happiness) and council (as before)
    • scientist: explorer (as it was), governor (focus on science and basic resources), researcher and probably analyst but that seems to clash with a science governor
    • alternative for resources: scientist energy/science/strategic, governor food/trade/consumer goods/unity and commander minerals/alloys because that seems kinda fitting
  • Leader lvl has different bonusses for governing depending on class

When first reading the dd i was quite sceptic about the new scientist subclass as explorer always felt bad as you gain subclass traits only after a lot of the galaxy is already explored, but upon thinking a bit more about it using scientist for exploring and others for researching anomalies/archaeology is pretty much what I was doing with them anyways, so the split seems like a good idea. I still think having a spymaster subclass would be cool, but to be useful there probably needs to be a espionage rework, but when there is one I do insist on this subclass!

A problem I have been having for a while are traits with ship cost reduction, these incentivse having leaders around just for building ships as most traits have continuous benefits, whereas build cost reduction is only useful during the moment you click on the build ship button. Also the obvious problems with additive stacking.
 
  • 1Like
Reactions:
Makes me wonder about Civics modifying your leader caps to emphasise this even more.
Technocracies having more Scientists at the expense of Officials, as they'd prefer to have Analysts in charge. Citizen Service or Warrior Society likewise wanting more Commissioners running planets.
Oh, this would be excellent! Being forced to use more scientists as governors would be a great way to help distinguish technocracy, which frankly has started to fall flat in my eyes.
 
  • 7
  • 1Like
  • 1Love
Reactions:
does this mean federation cohesion and xp will be simplified?
because often enough I literally HAD to assign all my envoys there to not have the federation collapse on higher levels
especially since often enough the AI did not deem it worthwhile to assign their own guys
 
  • 5
Reactions:
Have you considered something the HoI4-like Field Marshal system for fleets, so we can create groups of fleets commanded by one leader?
 
  • 2Like
Reactions:
Scientist naming suggestion:

The scientist naming seems off? Statisticians are typically valuable flunkies, not people in leadership positions (ministers, councilors, etc.) And dragging academics out of their ivory towers to do the field-work investigating Archaeological sites and Anomalies also seems harsh. More Schliemann, less Indiana Jones. Put the pointy-heads on the council instead and let's steal a description from be inspired by some of the better sci-fi, and make the Academic an Academician. How about:

  • Explorer - Focuses on Surveying and Exploration
  • Investigator - Focuses on Archaeology and Anomalies
  • Analyst - Focuses on Planetary Governance (Assist Research)
  • Academician - Focuses on the Council, especially the Minister of Science position



Exceeding leader cap, a question about penalties:

Sounds nice in general, but do I understand it right that if e.g. you have 3/5/4 leader cap and go over that in any of the categories, you will be punished in that category? E.g. if you use 3/9/5 you'll not be penalized in the first category, penalized for +4 of the second and +1 for the third, and the only way of ameliorating the penalties would be through further civics/traits/traditions/techs that increase those specific leader caps?

If this is the case, I strongly support the idea of shifting most or all of the penalty to upkeep cost rather than XP gain or the leader caps are going to feel like straightjackets for players who would like to focus strongly on one aspect of the game and still feel that the max. they can gain from the few sources of increased cap for that aspect is much too small if seriously exceeding that number would cripple the XP gain of exactly the one aspect they are focusing on, whereas if the upkeep costs are increased they have the interesting trade-off of whether they are willing to devote the POPs to unity jobs to pay a premium for more of the leaders they really want.


Federation administrative leader, a question about cohesion:

Assigning many envoys to a federation for a few years when it has cohesion issues, and a small number when it is fully cohesive, is currently the rational way of dealing with a federation and forces the player to consider the trade-offs between assigning envoys to maintaing cohesion and interacting with other actors.

Do I understand it right that in the new system nothing such is possible? That at all times the federation will be getting the same fixed cohesion bonus granted by the assigned administrative leader (affected by level and traits, so potentially high) or none if you haven't assigned one probably leading to cohesion loss, but with no way for the player to put a focus on increasing cohesion when it takes a big hit?
 
Last edited:
  • 4Like
  • 1
  • 1
Reactions:
i have better idea, remove need for expanding council and let normal empires have their councilors from the very beginning, so that non-genstalts have atleast some advantages over gestalts in that area, aspecially with this new legitimacy stuff that likely gonna be another managment headache that normal empires have to deal with but gestalts avoid alltogether

While I understand and heavily agree with your concern regarding the huge disparity between gestalt and non-gestalt atm, I don't think opening up all the council slots off the start is the right idea.

TBH I would prefer gestalt started with only ruler + 2 nodes and had to expand consciousness to unlock the other ones same as non-gestalt

But I'm hopeful that at least non-gestalt having +1 starting councilors + whatever this faction based system will go a long way to closing the currently massive gap
 
  • 2Like
Reactions: