[Dev Team] Astral Planes and Stellaris 3.10.0 "Pyxis" Preliminary Release Notes

[Ajacoba]

i mean, technically a permanent research boost is also useless once you reach repeatables and just set the research to automatic and never look at it again

and the colossus perk has way too many drawbacks, total war is double edged blade, honestly the only thing it's good for is purging scourge and contingency worlds, but even then it kinda sucks because using a colossus on a contingency world destroys the special resources you could be getting otherwise - not to mention that everyone gets a casus belli against you for owning a colossus and on top of that they hate you when you use it

stealing pop is also kinda whatever, because when you are considering to take shared destiny you are most likely doing a diplomacy build and not some raider slavery one

 

[mrt1212]

I understand and yes, exploit-y tactics with countless mini-vassals need some overhaul. I merely think that a solution to a problem should tackle the problem itself, not take a detour and negatively impact legitimate approaches along the way.

Why not introduce diminishing returns, if you get certain buffs/gains from the same source? For example, having the first 3 Ministries of Truth give full benefits, the 4th starts to drop off etc. Or have the building output scale with subject size, realizing full gains if the subject has at least 300 empire size or so. Just to throw out the idea how balancing could look like.

Now? Legitimate players having several normal subjects won't be able to use loyalty anymore, while 20 Ministries of Truth from 20 micro-vassals still do their job like before. In the end nothing was done about the problem, nobody gained anything, the decision didn't make vassal management more fun, nor did it cut back on micro-vassal spam.


Then take Diplomatic Corps and remove the civic once you get extra envoys from somewhere else.

You can never take APs back, that is the fundamental problem here. The slots are limited, so they ought to give you something for the rest of the game.

I know, some are stronger early on and some are stronger later on. Be it as that may, +2 envoys just doesn't cut it at any point in the game. Not when you compare it to the things you don't take instead, like a permanent research speed bonus for the rest of the game, extra unity (which translates to faster traditions and later directly into edicts, making it better than Executive Vigor). It doesn't compare to the ability to build powerful megastructures, having access to the Total War CB, to ascending your entire race, unlocking stealing pops.

I've generally come to think the way to handle micro vassal spam needs an extended vassal system with disloyalty impairing tax collection and leading to widespread rebellion and eventually revolt, so no points to me for something quick and easy to sort it out. Like I said elsewhere, I think 'all you can eat, but you'll get sick if you eat too much' systems are fine because they can create self regulation, but only if you actually get sick from overeating.

I mean, we could wind up with a hilarious unexpected outcome where even with loyalty penalties in full effect for a Shared Destiny/Franchising empire, the knock on effect is...you simply have a lot of discontented vassals who aren't gonna do crap about it. And even though I go out of my way to keep Vassals happy out of consideration that I pick other Overlords clean for mistreating their Vassals (totally a reciprocity thing), if Loyalty turns out to be a dump stat, then Micro-vassal spam hasn't been sorted out, it's simply burdened with less latitude in Diplomatic relations - less research agreements/commercial pacts/immigration pacts with vassals, and that might really suck for some empire specs but might be an annoying cost at worst.

IDK, I don't exactly hate that something was attempted to reign it in as I have absolutely wrung out the washcloth on it, but it seems a little hamfisted without getting into the guts of why micro vassals and vassals in general are kind of an inarguable game grease that reduces frictions - and in potentially making it so marginal, folks will just eat the cost and skip the AP entirely and find 2 envoys in some other fashion.

 

[Critical Ethics]

i mean, technically a permanent research boost is also useless once you reach repeatables and just set the research to automatic and never look at it again

How could getting upkeep-free boosts to every aspect of the game faster be considered useless? It's not interesting, but it is useful.

 

[Critical Ethics]

We removed a lot of sources of negative reduction as the modifier was too easy to stack to ensure leaders never got negative traits. It's still present in a few tradition trees, species traits and such.

Does anyone actually enjoy negative traits as a mechanic though?

 

[Peter Ebbesen]

Then take Diplomatic Corps and remove the civic once you get extra envoys from somewhere else.

Unless your build has two higher priority civics, that's an excellent idea. It might.

You can never take APs back, that is the fundamental problem here. The slots are limited, so they ought to give you something for the rest of the game.

Which it does. The bonus to Divided Attention Patronage. Is that extra bit enough? Almost certainly not in general - but that's okay with me; I have nothing against a perk going from nearly universal in vassal builds to being only used in some dedicated vassal builds.

And if it turns out that nobody uses it, it'll be buffed again some time.

I know, some are stronger early on and some are stronger later on. Be it as that may, +2 envoys just doesn't cut it at any point in the game. Not when you compare it to the things you don't take instead, like a permanent research speed bonus for the rest of the game, extra unity (which translates to faster traditions and later directly into edicts, making it better than Executive Vigor). It doesn't compare to the ability to build powerful megastructures, having access to the Total War CB, to ascending your entire race, unlocking stealing pops.

I don't really disagree with this in general, though strictly speaking it is once again 2 Envoys and the 1 Divided Attention Patronage bonus you need to compare against other perks, not just 2 Envoys.

For my own builds, the strongest strike against it is that all else being equal, I would not want Shared Destiny any earlier than the 3rd perk, due to my preferring for any build not specifically doubling down on one particular aspect of the game and taking perks to support that, starting out with Imperial Prerogative (leaders and ES bonus) and Transcendent Learning (leaders), and the third perk slot will be reserved for an ascension path unless playing Teachers of the Shroud, so in practice we are talking 4th perk in the 2240s or thereabouts, by which time my need for Envoys has been significantly lessened.

So in its new form I'll only be using it in specialized builds tailored to its peculiarities, if ever.

As for your comparison with techspeed, I must note that Shared Destiny as shown is probably a stronger perk for high techspeed vassal builds than Technological Ascendancy, but that's only because TA is a weak perk long past its prime.

 

[Cahokia]

A +1 limit doesn't impact what you are discussing @mrt1212? Yes the first vassal is the most powerful as it builds the snowball. However you only get the penalty once you have 2 vassals (3 with shared destiny). Unless I am misunderstanding what you meant. If you are talking about the +2 envoys enabling you to vassalize easier, there are a lot more sources for envoys and war is also an option...

Also an important note you can easily have 3-4 vassals before they start going negative in loyalty. So shared destiny just makes it easier to maintain positive loyalty to get upgraded specialized subjects. I do like your idea of loyalty being tied to their tax in some way. Maybe a scaling % penalty to what you get from them would be the simplest.

@Ajacoba until you can pick what is allowed to be automatically researched I will never use it since you only want a handful of repeatables. However tangent aside you do have a point for normal runs. However if you are going for crisis runs, which I know isn't everyone, it is very high value to stack scholariums. My favorite use for the colossus perk is getting the total war cb but I can see where not everyone would like that.

 

[mrt1212]

Does anyone actually enjoy negative traits as a mechanic though?

yes, I do. Why? Perfect Superheroes that make up 30% of your empire's theoretical power through modifier bonus is the antithesis of what my playthroughs are about. I like that leaders can be flawed goofballs where letting it slide or ride is an extremely petite cost benefit analysis, same as anything in the PDX portfolio of games


we joked about this with 5th edition WHFB calling it 'Hero Hammer' and 6th ed was much more focused on rank n file. 5th edition wasnt that fun compared to 6th to me at least although my Vampire Counts buddy disagreed

 

[Ajacoba]

How could getting upkeep-free boosts to every aspect of the game faster be considered useless? It's not interesting, but it is useful.

Research speed is useless once you have researched everything <.<
You don't need a boost for repeatables, you can't ever finish those anyways

 

[Peter Ebbesen]

It strikes me that, unless we've been informed otherwise and I overlooked it, it is possible that I am misunderstanding what "1 Subject Exempt from Divided Patronage" means.

I've been thinking of it as "effects of Divided Patronage is effectively that of 1 fewer vassals than you have", i.e. equivalent to +1 loyalty to all vassals when you have more than 1", but it could theoretically instead mean being able to assign one vassal to not being affected by Divided Patronage at all, with all others affected normally by the total number of vassals, since that is what being exempt actually means.

 

[Ajacoba]

It strikes me that, unless we've been informed otherwise and I overlooked it, it is possible that I am misunderstanding what "1 Subject Exempt from Divided Patronage" means.

I've been thinking of it as "effects of Divided Patronage is effectively that of 1 fewer vassals than you have, i.e. equivalent to +1 loyalty to all vassals when you have more than 1", but it could theoretically instead mean being able to assign one vassal to not being affected by Divided Patronage at all, with all others affected normally by the total number of vassals.

I assume it means that if you have either civic or perk you can have two vassals with neither suffering a penalty, if you have both you can have three vassals with no penalty

And then it would start counting up from there so when you have four all four of them get the lowest penalty

So instead of easily handling two or three vassals right now without needing the removal of the penalty you would then be able to handle 5 or 6 vassals with ease and maybe 7 or 8 if you offer them good deals

 

[mrt1212]

A +1 limit doesn't impact what you are discussing @mrt1212? Yes the first vassal is the most powerful as it builds the snowball. However you only get the penalty once you have 2 vassals (3 with shared destiny). Unless I am misunderstanding what you meant. If you are talking about the +2 envoys enabling you to vassalize easier, there are a lot more sources for envoys and war is also an option...

Also an important note you can easily have 3-4 vassals before they start going negative in loyalty. So shared destiny just makes it easier to maintain positive loyalty to get upgraded specialized subjects. I do like your idea of loyalty being tied to their tax in some way. Maybe a scaling % penalty to what you get from them would be the simplest.

@Ajacoba until you can pick what is allowed to be automatically researched I will never use it since you only want a handful of repeatables. However tangent aside you do have a point for normal runs. However if you are going for crisis runs, which I know isn't everyone, it is very high value to stack scholariums. My favorite use for the colossus perk is getting the total war cb but I can see where not everyone would like that.

Restated, the way I've been doing it with Shared Destiny is creating micro vassals first from a joint Humiliation War against a mutual rival, laden with a couple of claims, then going for a larger empire with a great offer or a loaded weapon shortly thereafter. So I might have 4-5 vassals already before landing the big one that puts me over the top to start swinging major weight around. I'll have to adjust that MO no doubt and it is what it is, but it's like...do I even bother with Shared Destiny now if I can summon 2 Envoys some other way? And if I don't bother with Shared Destiny, how bad is it gonna be and where will I find a limit or boundary? I'm working out theoretical response here, and 'still take it and walk to the limit' and 'don't take it and walk to the limit' doesn't seem to really pencil out taking Shared Destiny as a standard. Like I'm going to the limit regardless and seeing what's up, but do I even really need Shared Destiny if the limit is around 8-9? Do I just need to reconfigure how I parcel vassals out or who I try to rescue from a bad overlord?

LMAO, am I just going to release micro vassals into being federation partner stooges which is notionally better for balance in one way, but is still renders up an unimpeachable military alliance after a certain point? Am I going to gift vassals spoils of war instead but be functionally limited because their territory has to be touching the gift to actually gift? There's possibilities abound but very few of them have me thinking 'well I still need Shared Destiny'.

 

[Panzerslothen]

Wait, vassalizing is considered an exploit now? What's next, the 'exploit' of taking someone's planets to generate resources for yourself?

Winning the game is considered an exploit.

 

[mrt1212]

Winning the game is considered an exploit.

"Winning the game using anything but one's own strategy is cheesy exploits and not hardman adeptness testing" is absolutely an unsaid theme of a lot of posts.

 

[Critical Ethics]

Research speed is useless once you have researched everything <.<
You don't need a boost for repeatables, you can't ever finish those anyways

If you can never finish all the repeatables then by definition you can never research anything

 

[Panzerslothen]

"Winning the game using anything but one's own strategy is cheesy exploits and not hardman adeptness testing" is absolutely an unsaid theme of a lot of posts.

Ooooh brother, don't get me started on the 'hardman aptness testing' element of the Stellaris community.

"You can't be the strongest power taking on the 25x all crisis with a single planet and only ten pops by 2229? Skill issue, get good you ^*&%ing noob casual".

 

[Critical Ethics]

yes, I do. Why? Perfect Superheroes that make up 30% of your empire's theoretical power through modifier bonus is the antithesis of what my playthroughs are about.

As opposed to making up 30% of your empire's power through modifier bonuses while also imposing a 5% army upkeep penalty?

I like that leaders can be flawed goofballs where letting it slide or ride is an extremely petite cost benefit analysis, same as anything in the PDX portfolio of games

That sounds like a pretty fun mechanic but we're talking about the Stellaris negative traits system that actually exists.

 

[mrt1212]

As opposed to making up 30% of your empire's power through modifier bonuses while also imposing a 5% army upkeep penalty?

That sounds like a pretty fun mechanic but we're talking about the Stellaris negative traits system that actually exists.

Well that's the thing about it - despite the lures to care about leaders, I'm still basically still indifferent to them, little bonus fellas that come as they do and leave as they do. So a negatrait like Paranoid II stinks on the oligarch (and this just happened in my most recent), but what am I gonna do about it but wait it out and adjust accordingly to the -10% research hit by maybe breaking off some backfill techs I've neglected or stealing a couple techs or something to bide the time in an impaired state?

Sure it's flimsy reckoning in one way where I'm not consciously focused on them yet still enjoy their benefits, but every time someone births a calf about negatraits, I'm simply more affirmed in my half stoic half ascetic engagement with leaders as a sub system of the game. Hard to be put out about bad things if you had barely any feels about them in the first place. The show goes on and half my council being addicted to pills is pretty on theme for pirates.

 

[Cahokia]

@Ajacoba, certain repeatables are always useful and stacking them can have some very powerful effects meaning research is always useful at any stage in the game. This is also highly dependent on galaxy settings since stacking certain repeatables can often be instrumental in victory. However in standard galaxy settings there is no need for repeatables I agree. That doesn't invalidate the value of repeatable research in other game settings though.

@mrt1212, that playstyle is more heavily impacted by the changes, that makes sense now. In that case it will be interesting finding the happy medium. Since you aren't relying on shared destiny now, you could go for other boosts to augment your playstyle. Maybe stacking claim cost or even lord of war that you mentioned earlier could be viable alternatives to stacking early micro vassals. However as you mentioned you might still be able to pull off a vassal swarm with the right combination.

Maybe instead condensing into fewer stronger vassals would be a good approach. Create ~2 larger vassals from the first joint humiliation war which might give you similar power to go after the meatier target.

 

[Peter Ebbesen]

I assume it means that if you have either civic or perk you can have two vassals with neither suffering a penalty, if you have both you can have three vassals with no penalty

And then it would start counting up from there so when you have four all four of them get the lowest penalty

So instead of easily handling two or three vassals right now without needing the removal of the penalty you would then be able to handle 5 or 6 vassals with ease and maybe 7 or 8 if you offer them good deals

Yes, that's what I've been assuming too, but it just struck me that that's not actually what being exempt means, since once they start getting penalties no vassal would be exempt from the penalty under that interpretation.

So I am looking forwards to seeing how it is actually implemented:

1. The way those of us discussing it has been assuming so far, i.e. moving the threshold for when you start getting Divided Patronage penalties, but all vassals affected equally by the penalty
2. The way the tooltip explicitly says, i.e. one subject does not suffer the Divided Patronage penalty at all, but all other subjects are unaffected

The more I think about it, the more likely the second option appears to me, because if the implementation is the first one, there are so many words that are better to use than "exempt", which has a clearly defined meaning: Somebody who is free from an obligation imposed on others.

 

[mrt1212]

Ooooh brother, don't get me started on the 'hardman aptness testing' element of the Stellaris community.

"You can't be the strongest power taking on the 25x all crisis with a single planet and only ten pops by 2229? Skill issue, get good you ^*&%ing noob casual".

There's a place for that engagement and I appreciate every little tip I've picked up from those folks on how to never outright lose, but...not everyone wants to drag race their suped up empire tuned to the hilt to share with other tuners, like there's not a lot of there...there. Personally, I love rescuing bad ideas or being given a box of odd materials and told to figure out how to make something from it, or spitefully showing something is possible by the objective stated but folks are gonna hate how I figured it out doing things that are otherwise incredibly stupid or bad risks, stuff like that.

In my main multiplayer hobby, Blood Bowl, I'm kinda known for being good enough to hang with the best (and even get kudos from the best for unconventional approaches or seeing a baroque high risk high reward play, when they aren't reading my the riot act for blowing sure wins that less goofing around with team builds and on field decisions would stop entirely), I've won a couple major tourneys with over 64 entries, a league championship, multiple bouts for the league championship...and despite it all, I'm never going to treat it as seriously as the best or insist there's a right way to play the game and get super steeped in proving I'm the best at it. They usually burn out when an 80% winrate isn't good enough because dice pretty much make that an upper bound over time...I'm meandering about an entire social ecosystem now, but I would never want to experience the game like they do. Seems like a way to burn out on the game that gives so much fun.

@Ajacoba, certain repeatables are always useful and stacking them can have some very powerful effects meaning research is always useful at any stage in the game. This is also highly dependent on galaxy settings since stacking certain repeatables can often be instrumental in victory. However in standard galaxy settings there is no need for repeatables I agree. That doesn't invalidate the value of repeatable research in other game settings though.

@mrt1212, that playstyle is more heavily impacted by the changes, that makes sense now. In that case it will be interesting finding the happy medium. Since you aren't relying on shared destiny now, you could go for other boosts to augment your playstyle. Maybe stacking claim cost or even lord of war that you mentioned earlier could be viable alternatives to stacking early micro vassals. However as you mentioned you might still be able to pull off a vassal swarm with the right combination.

Maybe instead condensing into fewer stronger vassals would be a good approach. Create ~2 larger vassals from the first joint humiliation war which might give you similar power to go after the meatier target.

Yeah, I simply dont know for sure how I will adjust, but A/B testing around Shared Destiny is gonna definitely happen in pretty open ended way where I'll try a big fat empire, a small lithe empire around my bread and butter Pirate Haven Void Dweller Lithoid empire spec (It's nice if your spec has the latitude to play it by ear, but I've been pushing myself to play smaller, since I never really did) . Like, I do things to extremes as it's fun to dance on the edge of damnation, but I have this gut feeling that Shared Destiny's benefit for Vassals is just going to be too insignificant to warrant a pick. I might be shown to be wrong about it, or find the use case where you wouldn't want to go very far into the game without it.

Certainly have done the trick in eliminating it as a no brainer to take, but afraid it might be a no brainer to ignore. Something needed to happen with vassals for sure, just kinda wish it was done will a scalpel or lasers and not a dulled hatchet.