Does Stellaris need Ascension Perks?

[Miridan]

Their strength varies from too weak (Detox) to must-have (ascension path). They break immersion because when you get +1 AP from a tradition finisher, you can spend it however you want, no connection between tradition tree and a perk. You have just completed military improvement (Supremacy)? Great, now you get more scientists and your leaders are more experienced (Transcendent Learning). You decided to make friends with half of the galaxy (Diplomacy)? Now your fleets are much more efficient against Fallen empires (Galactic Contender). On top of that APs operate on different scales from small government improvement (Executive Vigor) to total galaxy annihilation (Galactic Nemesis).

I believe the Custodian team should remove ascension perks entirely and redistribute bonuses across different traditions, civics., maybe even new origins and policies.

• some perks are already tradition trees - all ascension paths
• some perks have the same bonuses as traditions - Eternal Vigilance basically is Unyielding, Executive Vigor's bonus you can get from Statecraft, Domination and Harmony, Galactic Force Projection is Supremacy
• some perks thematically should be part of traditions - Universal Transactions' commercial pact bonus is perfect for Mercantilism, Technological Ascendancy is natural extension of Discovery, Transcendent Learning is for Aptitude, Enigmatic Engineering is Subterfuge, Shared Destiny is for Domination
• some perks could work as civics - Lord of War, Consecrated Worlds
• some perks can be reworked into full tradition trees - Mega-Engineering Tree, Cosmogenesis/Nemesis trees, Planet terraforming+improvement tree

...and so on.

What do you think about this? Maybe I missed some important gameplay and/or story nuance and APs play a crucial role in empire identity.

 

[Newbee53]

I like having that extra little thing to guide my empire's growth. Taking it away would remove value from the ability to control the 'flavor' of your empire. A balance pass on some perks would be quite nice. Detox is a bit weird, but its not that much weaker than the gai world one. At least if you build your species to not need gai worlds.

 

[Miridan]

Taking it away

But i specifically said REDISTRIBUTE bonuses from perks to other parts of the game, you're not losing anything. I just think AP are unnecessary and unimmersive.

 

[methegrate]

I like the ascension paths.

But I do wish there were ascension paths that didn't involve physically transforming your species. I like role playing as basically The Federation, or an equivalent "good guys" faction. I rarely take ascension paths because none of them ever seem quite right... I can't see the Federation embracing genetic purity, becoming cyborgs, uploading their consciousness, or becoming a race of psychic superbeings.

Personally, I've always wanted a megastructure ascension path. Like, your species' destiny is becoming the best version of themselves by constructing galactic wonders. I think that would be cool.

 

[Newbee53]

But i specifically said REDISTRIBUTE bonuses from perks to other parts of the game, you're not losing anything. I just think AP are unnecessary and unimmersive.

You are taking away the ability to play a passifist empire that--upon seeing the crisis--takes it upon themselves to defend the galaxy. despite having no traditions related to war.

the upgrades are still there, yes. but the ability to choose them as makes sense for your personal empire and circumstances aren't. and that is the thing you are taking away.

 

[Beauty Nova]

I like the ascension paths.

But I do wish there were ascension paths that didn't involve physically transforming your species. I like role playing as basically The Federation, or an equivalent "good guys" faction. I rarely take ascension paths because none of them ever seem quite right... I can't see the Federation embracing genetic purity, becoming cyborgs, uploading their consciousness, or becoming a race of psychic superbeings.

Personally, I've always wanted a megastructure ascension path. Like, your species' destiny is becoming the best version of themselves by constructing galactic wonders. I think that would be cool.

Check my signature, you might like my pitch for an Automation ascension path. Being the megastructure focused one was part of what went into it.

As for this thread, I could maybe see some perks requiring you have one of a set of trees maxed to take it to improve thematic connections, but honestly I don't love the idea. Talking things like needing commerce or diplomacy for universal transactions, adaptation or domination for world shaper, discovery for transcendant learning, etc.

 

[Miridan]

You are taking away the ability to play a passifist empire that--upon seeing the crisis--takes it upon themselves to defend the galaxy. despite having no traditions related to war.

the upgrades are still there, yes. but the ability to choose them as makes sense for your personal empire and circumstances aren't. and that is the thing you are taking away.

To be able to do what you described, you have to not spend you perks until you suddenly decided to defend the galaxy. I see no difference between this situation and not spending your tradition slots.

 

[Kataclyszm]

I like them in the idea that they're a '4th tech tree', guided by the unity your people feels.

Now, is this always IMPLEMENTED well? No, of course not. How is Detox a good choice? They clearly just shoved it in Ascension Perks so it wouldn't pollute (ba-dum tss) the Society tech pool. Is the embodiment of the people's unity always reflected well in, say, the Rebellion events in Synth Ascension? Also of course not.

But I do like them as a concept and think they should be kept.

 

[Newbee53]

I see no difference between this situation and not spending your tradition slots.

traditions and perks are two different ways of doing the same thing. And even if you don't save them, there are still ascension perks you only pick if you need them in the circumstance. or even if you don't need anything else.

 

[Miridan]

there are still ascension perks you only pick if you need them in the circumstance

You just described traditions.

 

[Delterius]

I don't see any reason to remove them, if anything you're just reducing the ability to combine ethos and playstyles.

For an example, why combine Universal Transactions and Mercantile? Mercantile is about boosting trade value. Universal Transactions is about spamming commercial agreements. A megacorp that doesn't focus on trade value may still want to spam commercial agreements in the name of branch offices. The perk and the tradition tree are only thematically related.

 

[Miridan]

Any tradition tree basically is a bunch of thematically related perks

 

[Miridan]

ability to combine ethos and playstyles

Maybe it would be better if instead of tradition trees we had a number of tradition slots that you could fill with any perk you want. That gives much more customization opportunities

 

[Newbee53]

You just described traditions.

well, yes. They both do similiar things. but they do them differently. that's why they are tied together.

And to be clear. galactic wonders, gai world, void born, the one that reduces influence cost of expansion, enigmatic engineering, galactic contenders, the galactic defenders one, and that's just off the top of my head. there are a lot of ascension perks that need to stay mostly open to free choice and not in competition with the traditions we have.

 

[Delterius]

Maybe it would be better if instead of tradition trees we had a number of tradition slots that you could fill with any perk you want. That gives much more customization opportunities

That doesn't really solve anything now, does it? You've still stuffed some perk effects into civics and ethics. So the problem remains, only its made worse.

Even moreso when you gave up on removing perks and instead made every tradition effect into ascension perks. You're changing things for the sake of changing them, and with no regard to the narrative content that comes with embracing traditions and ascensions.

 

[Miridan]

You're changing things for the sake of changing them

I want to change things because we have 2 systems that do the same things, they're both limited, and you get them the same way - unity. The only difference is that you have to take all related small perks (traditions), but not related big perks (APs).

you gave up on removing perks and instead made every tradition effect into ascension perks

I didn't fully gave up on this idea, I'm just considering other options. After all, we already can combine traditions freely, why don't we get rid of extra layer - tradition tree.

Imagine this: You can build ships that you can customize in fleet designer and spend alloys on. But for every X number of custom-designed ships your fleet MUST include Y number of predefined ships. That would be strange gameplay.

I want the game to commit either to one or another.

no regard to the narrative content that comes with embracing traditions and ascensions

What narrative content are you talking about? Traditions and perks are embraced identically. If you turn perk into tradition nothing changes lore-wise.

 

[StellarisPlayer]

I like them but really wish they would get a balance pass, because some of the weak ones could really use a boost.

 

[Lazy Name]

I like the ascension paths.

But I do wish there were ascension paths that didn't involve physically transforming your species. I like role playing as basically The Federation, or an equivalent "good guys" faction. I rarely take ascension paths because none of them ever seem quite right... I can't see the Federation embracing genetic purity, becoming cyborgs, uploading their consciousness, or becoming a race of psychic superbeings.

Personally, I've always wanted a megastructure ascension path. Like, your species' destiny is becoming the best version of themselves by constructing galactic wonders. I think that would be cool.

I usually take cybernetic as the unobtrusive option, since it makes sense that any sufficiently advanced civilization would use some level of minor cybernetics, and some of the flavour text lets it seem more individual choice rather than something your whole society is based around. No different to when humans started carrying cell phones around.

 

[Delterius]

I want the game to commit either to one or another.

I don't feel like the game isn't committed to either of them.

 

[Ryika]

I want to change things because we have 2 systems that do the same things, they're both limited, and you get them the same way - unity. The only difference is that you have to take all related small perks (traditions), but not related big perks (APs).

They don't do the same thing, they do similar things. And for good reason, as Ascension Perks are supposed to be meta-progression for Traditions.

Could the system be changed so that every Ascension Perk becomes a tradition instead without losing something in the process? Well, yes, but no. Changing them into tradition trees would not be an issue, but you'd inherently remove the meta-progression element. Or if you don't, then turning them into traditions just made the distinction between the two less clear for no reason.

In my opinion, there is a clear reason why we have two systems, and I don't think we could get rid of one of them without losing something in the process.