Advanced Authorities makes empires less distinct

[Metallichydra]

Now that Psionic ascensions is the only ascension left to be updated to the new powerlevel, the amount of advanced authorities has increased in any new galaxies. It is, by now, almost certain that any individualistic non-machine societies will ascend and change their authority to a new one, whether that be synthetic, cybernetic or genetic.
However, these authorities are, in my opinion, rather damaging to the game. Not just are they very, very powerful, they also, most importantly, make any empire that embrace this new authority the same. Migrating flock? Now a Replicating Regency. Blood Court? Now a Replicating Regency. Fanatical Befrienders? You guessed it, now a Replicating Regency.

Just don't pick it

Is not a valid argument.

Oligarchy	Replicating Regency
+2 Effective councilor skill	Organic leaders gain the Backup Clone trait New organic leaders may have the Backup Clone trait −50% Clone leader penalties while on council Backup Clone trait provides class-specific councilor bonuses +2 Effective councilor skill +3 Unity from elites

As seen in this comparison, anyone who do not become a replicating regency are plain stupid, or very committed to roleplay.
I don't believe it is good game design. Realistically, you cannot stay a regular oligarchy, otherwise you will lose out on very big bonuses. Any oligarchy following the path of cloning are destined to become a replicating regency.

Now, is this a bad thing?

Yes, yes it is.

One of the main draws of stellaris is designing an empire and roleplaying as that empire, whether you're doing a 'soft' roleplay where options with multiple equal options are decided by what your alien (or human) species would do, or if you're in a discord call with your friends, yelling about how you're going to protect your people from the xeno threat.
These options aren't equal. There's no choice.
You're going to become a replicating regency.

 

[snowy801]

Why would you literally ever take Replicating Regency instead of Cordant Multiplicity?

You have made the most sub-optimal decision humanly possible for no apparent gain, and that makes me fail to understand any point you're trying to make in this post.

 

[Drachasor]

Why would you literally ever take Replicating Regency instead of Cordant Multiplicity?

You have made the most sub-optimal decision humanly possible for no apparent gain, and that makes me fail to understand any point you're trying to make in this post.

The only real options are
Replicating Regency
Catalytic Command
Purity Paradigm

Everyone gets one.

This is a joke. You either get it or you don't.

 

[Thiend]

Why would you literally ever take Replicating Regency instead of Cordant Multiplicity?

You have made the most sub-optimal decision humanly possible for no apparent gain, and that makes me fail to understand any point you're trying to make in this post.

The fact that a different advanced authority is the one you should take 100% of the time doesn't really contradict the original point in any way that I can see.

It seems, as far as this, like a relatively minor issue. It's just overriding the name of the government type, which has 0 implications for players. Does it override the personality type on AI empires mid-game? If yes, that is an annoying gameplay implication, otherwise it's purely a flavor fail.

That they're too strong is a separate problem. The updated ascensions are all too strong for game health, including Cybernetic which is usually weakest, and as long as each one is internally consistent it doesn't matter to me whether the authorities, traditions, traits, or any other feature is what loses power.

 

[Metallichydra]

Why would you literally ever take Replicating Regency instead of Cordant Multiplicity?

You have made the most sub-optimal decision humanly possible for no apparent gain, and that makes me fail to understand any point you're trying to make in this post.

Replicating Regency was the example, in this case for oligarchies.
What I was trying to say is that normal oligarchies cease to exist, and with it all oligarchic government types.
Why? Because advanced governments are too good to pass. Replicating Regency is just the most obvious example since it is a straight upgrade.
The fact that the democratic cloning authority is apparently so powerful that you should never be an oligarchic cloning empire somehow invalidates that argument according to you.

 

[Metallichydra]

A better example may be:
If you are a megacorp, your empire WILL start selling and buying organs*. Doesn't matter if you're egalitarian, xenophile or spiritualist, they're going to do it because you chose to not pass up the advanced authorities. And there's no real reason to keep your old authority as the advanced authorities are much more powerful.

*Doesn't happen if you go with the cloning path, but that's still 2/3 genetic paths that are locked to buying and selling organs. You're no longer a migrating flock or a federation builder. You're now an organ dealer.

 

[snowy801]

Replicating Regency was the example, in this case for oligarchies.
What I was trying to say is that normal oligarchies cease to exist, and with it all oligarchic government types.
Why? Because advanced governments are too good to pass. Replicating Regency is just the most obvious example since it is a straight upgrade.
The fact that the democratic cloning authority is apparently so powerful that you should never be an oligarchic cloning empire somehow invalidates that argument according to you.

I wasn't trying to disagree with you on anything here, if only because I didn't know what your position was at all.

At first it sounded like "oligarchies are too OP and nothing else is worth taking", which is what I countered, but your response now says "advanced governments are too OP and basic governments aren't worth taking anymore" which seems... fine? That's why they're called advanced governments after all.

Previously, empires were democratic or oligarchic.

Now, they're cordant multiplicity and replicating regency (if you go biogenesis, that is). If you go other ascensions, they're called other things.

Is your problem here that you want empires to choose the basic instead of advanced government type? What benefit does that bring to the game?

 

[Drachasor]

I think the big problem here isn't available governments per se, but that they are attached to ascension and just make the ascension power spike even bigger for those that get them.

Advancing government should probably come through a combination of research that gives passive buffs and improvements to policies and rights (both in number of choices and effect, perhaps). As well as edicts. Some of this obviously already exists.

If there's a pressing need for it to be part of an ascension, then it needs to be worked into in a way that doesn't cause a bigger power spike.

That said, I doubt a major rework will happen anytime soon.

 

[snowy801]

I think the big problem here isn't available governments per se, but that they are attached to ascension and just make the ascension power spike even bigger for those that get them.

Advancing government should probably come through a combination of research that gives passive buffs and improvements to policies and rights (both in number of choices and effect, perhaps). As well as edicts. Some of this obviously already exists.

If there's a pressing need for it to be part of an ascension, then it needs to be worked into in a way that doesn't cause a bigger power spike.

That said, I doubt a major rework will happen anytime soon.

Okay, sure, a reasonable opinion, if somewhat niche.

But then how does that relate to advanced authorities making empires less distinct? A power spike issue and a roleplay issue has little to do with each other.

Like I keep saying, I'm sure somewhere in there you have a coherent point to make but you're not making it. Even your OP has no ask, just the ominous finality proclaming we shall all replicate.

What is it that you want here? Do you want megacorp cloning authorities to not reflect organ trade elements in their text to better reflect your transcendental egalitarian society? Do you want advanced government forms to be equally good as basic government forms such that there can always be a choice to be made between the two? Do you want advanced government forms to be gained as a distinct event from the completion of an ascension? Is it just all of the above? Do you just hate advanced government forms? Have the devs finally ruined Stellaris once and for all?

(Now personally I think I know what you actually want, which is for advanced authorities to have distinct labels according to their ethics just like normal democracies and oligarchies et al. do - but I don't want to put words in your mouth)

 

[user192823]

You can find and set the gov_authority_swap_weight scripted variable from 10000 to 1. It won't change anything functionally and the authority name and text will remain the same, but the government name and description that appears beside the authority icon will no longer by overridden by the ascension.

 

[Thiend]

Is your problem here that you want empires to choose the basic instead of advanced government type? What benefit does that bring to the game?

There are many Oligarchy personality types and only one Replicating Regency personality type.

That's it. You WILL use an advanced authority and they do not keep the depth of differentiation the base authority personality types had to begin with.

 

[Drachasor]

Okay, sure, a reasonable opinion, if somewhat niche.

But then how does that relate to advanced authorities making empires less distinct? A power spike issue and a roleplay issue has little to do with each other.

Like I keep saying, I'm sure somewhere in there you have a coherent point to make but you're not making it. Even your OP has no ask, just the ominous finality proclaming we shall all replicate.

What is it that you want here? Do you want megacorp cloning authorities to not reflect organ trade elements in their text to better reflect your transcendental egalitarian society? Do you want advanced government forms to be equally good as basic government forms such that there can always be a choice to be made between the two? Do you want advanced government forms to be gained as a distinct event from the completion of an ascension? Is it just all of the above? Do you just hate advanced government forms? Have the devs finally ruined Stellaris once and for all?

(Now personally I think I know what you actually want, which is for advanced authorities to have distinct labels according to their ethics just like normal democracies and oligarchies et al. do - but I don't want to put words in your mouth)

You can have techs either have prerequisite governments or provide a different option depending on the government. Or have some techs that already give something also give a relation edict/policy/right that only some governments can use. And you can have some of this only be possible to research after an ascension, or better yet, have ascensions moved from tradition trees and perks entirely (along with nemesis perks) and have them be their own thing from the beginning of the game. Following a nemesis-like progression, but choices you make determine the benefits in an adjustable, balanced way (e.g. you choose your ascension or you could choose a nemesis ascension -- so being a nemesis would mean giving up normal ascension). This could include government benefits at some point. And the advantage here is that it can be a long process with more steps than either a tradition tree or current nemesis paths. Right now it's just all too loaded onto relatively short and quick tradition trees for anyone trying. This also really encourages unity builds, because of the disproportionate benefits. A nemesis-like progress would allow a variety of things to contribute, and how you decide could even change what gives progression at various stages.

Yeah, I realize this would be a big change and not some quick fix.

 

[balmung60]

I feel like any civics-based government names should override any advanced authority based names (with the advanced authority counting as its equivalent base authority for naming) and advanced authority names should only override government names that only come from ethics (eg. When doing Democracy -> Phenotypical Autonomy, a Communal Parity (Shared Burdens) would always retain its name, while a Direct Democracy (Materialist ethics) would change its name.

 

[Vladisi]

Migrating flock? Now a Replicating Regency. Blood Court? Now a Replicating Regency. Fanatical Befrienders? You guessed it, now a Replicating Regency.

A better example may be:
If you are a megacorp, your empire WILL start selling and buying organs*. Doesn't matter if you're egalitarian, xenophile or spiritualist, they're going to do it because you chose to not pass up the advanced authorities. And there's no real reason to keep your old authority as the advanced authorities are much more powerful.

*Doesn't happen if you go with the cloning path, but that's still 2/3 genetic paths that are locked to buying and selling organs. You're no longer a migrating flock or a federation builder. You're now an organ dealer.

You're actually wrong in your examples, except possibly for the Blood Court (except that even then, you'd be looking at Hereditary Continuity, since the Blood Court is Imperial Authority). Migrating Flock, Fanatical Befrienders and Federation Builders aren't government types, they're AI personalities and rarely care about Authority. Certainly there aren't AI Personalities that require an advanced authority and are named after them. And if an advanced authority counts as its base type in regards to government type, you're wrong about the Blood Court too, as the Blood Court has the weight of 50000, while any advanced authority is only 10000 (if Hereditary Continuity does not count as base Imperial in regards to government type, you're partially correct).

Also, a Megacorp can't be a Migratory Flock or Federation Builders, since mixing their requirements with Corporate authority inevitably makes them Peaceful Traders.

It's just overriding the name of the government type, which has 0 implications for players.

It actually matters for non-Imperial authorities, since many government types have favoured leader class when it comes to elections, while advanced authorities either remove them or set them to Official when it comes to advanced Oligarchic and Corporate authorities. For some reason Science Directorates getting cybernetics, turning into robots or accepting advanced genomic research just decide that scientists no longer need to be in charge and that they'd rather have a bureaucrat for a ruler.

 

[DarkHelmet110985]

You're actually wrong in your examples, except possibly for the Blood Court (except that even then, you'd be looking at Hereditary Continuity, since the Blood Court is Imperial Authority). Migrating Flock, Fanatical Befrienders and Federation Builders aren't government types, they're AI personalities and rarely care about Authority. Certainly there aren't AI Personalities that require an advanced authority and are named after them. And if an advanced authority counts as its base type in regards to government type, you're wrong about the Blood Court too, as the Blood Court has the weight of 50000, while any advanced authority is only 10000 (if Hereditary Continuity does not count as base Imperial in regards to government type, you're partially correct).

Also, a Megacorp can't be a Migratory Flock or Federation Builders, since mixing their requirements with Corporate authority inevitably makes them Peaceful Traders.

It actually matters for non-Imperial authorities, since many government types have favoured leader class when it comes to elections, while advanced authorities either remove them or set them to Official when it comes to advanced Oligarchic and Corporate authorities. For some reason Science Directorates getting cybernetics, turning into robots or accepting advanced genomic research just decide that scientists no longer need to be in charge and that they'd rather have a bureaucrat for a ruler.

I get around the favored Leader quirk by simply making my Officials all have Industrialist Veteran class. This makes them less favored and consequently makes it come down to faction support, level and traits on the other Leader types. Easy way to get multiple Science(for Research alternatives and Leader Trait picks like from Azaryn) or grabbing as many Commander perks as possible(Genius Armorer is that broken). You do miss out on Investor or Reformer(along with some Pop upkeep) but I’ve come to find Scientists and Commanders make for better Councilors. Lone exception may be Ambassadors since Blabbermouth and Deep Connections are quite good.

Still… unless you’re role playing, I don’t really care all too much what their Government is called. They’re the enemy and must be obliterated.

 

[Thiend]

It actually matters for non-Imperial authorities, since many government types have favoured leader class when it comes to elections, while advanced authorities either remove them or set them to Official when it comes to advanced Oligarchic and Corporate authorities. For some reason Science Directorates getting cybernetics, turning into robots or accepting advanced genomic research just decide that scientists no longer need to be in charge and that they'd rather have a bureaucrat for a ruler.

That explains a great deal. Is that listed somewhere so I can see which ones weight towards what?

 

[LeoBack]

I'm sorry but how does more authorities give you less choices for RP ?

Biogenesis give 3 patches to chose each have 5 governments you can pick (not being auth or ega) that 15 authorities you can RP with and they all have more lore than oh yea we have elections every 10 years.

And people complaining about advanced authorities being too strong, well virtuality doesn't get any and it's still top meta

 

[balmung60]

I'm sorry but how does more authorities give you less choices for RP ?

Because every single empire that takes that authority takes on that authority's name as their government name and its default leader title as their leader title, regardless of ethics and civics.

There are a lot of unique governments for each authority depending on ethics and civics. Ten democracies, thirteen oligarchies (plus three if you don't have Megacorp), ten dictatorships, fourteen monarchies, and three more that are authority agnostic, plus right corporate governments, four hive mind governments, and five machine intelligence governments. These are based on distinct choices and combinations of choices for the empire that reflect their distinct values and institutions.

After ascension, individualist empires go down to seven (four if they're individualist machines) possible governments if they take their respective advanced ascensions, organic hive minds actually go up to five, and machine intelligences go down to four. But these also don't really reflect the specific values of your society like the basic governments do, just which ascension they did. The Communal Parity and Purity Committee both become Phenotypical Autonomies and both of their leaders become Presidents.

 

[Vladisi]

I feel like any civics-based government names should override any advanced authority based names (with the advanced authority counting as its equivalent base authority for naming) and advanced authority names should only override government names that only come from ethics (eg. When doing Democracy -> Phenotypical Autonomy, a Communal Parity (Shared Burdens) would always retain its name, while a Direct Democracy (Materialist ethics) would change its name.

I agree with this, although I will add that either advanced authorities should count as their base version in regards to government type and only replace the least flavourful governments, or there should be added flavourful government types to advanced authorities to mirror those of the base with preservation of election favouring and ruler titles.

 

[Vladisi]

I feel like any civics-based government names should override any advanced authority based names (with the advanced authority counting as its equivalent base authority for naming) and advanced authority names should only override government names that only come from ethics (eg. When doing Democracy -> Phenotypical Autonomy, a Communal Parity (Shared Burdens) would always retain its name, while a Direct Democracy (Materialist ethics) would change its name.

I agree with this, although I will add that either advanced authorities should count as their base version in regards to government type and only replace the least flavourful governments, or there should be added flavourful government types to advanced authorities to mirror those of the base with preservation of election favouring and ruler titles.