Needs a nerf to Synthetic Fertility and maybe other origins for Rapid Ascension.

[homenkovs]

I played 4.0 for different origins and Synthetic Fertility catches my eye.

Since all ascensions except Shroud have been greatly improved at the moment, early ascension gives too much of an advantage over regular ascension.

The same Synthetic Fertility allows you to ascend even before the twentieth year. It has a stable growth of 20+ and the ability to assimilate. But what is even more important is the improved perks that make the population too efficient.

Other empires cannot achieve such figures without using bugs, or this is a temporary oversight that has been partially fixed over the past twenty patches.

A nerf is needed for Synthetic Fertility, and perhaps for other origins that allow extremely fast ascension.

 

[Zellith]

You should probably put this in suggestions and then actually make suggestions to what you think would make it balanced in your opinion. I personally like Synthetic Fertility as is. I find I struggle to make sure my empire doesnt get gobbled up by my neighbours in the early game as I struggle to balance resources.

 

[homenkovs]

You should probably put this in suggestions and then actually make suggestions to what you think would make it balanced in your opinion. I personally like Synthetic Fertility as is. I find I struggle to make sure my empire doesnt get gobbled up by my neighbours in the early game as I struggle to balance resources.

As a rule, if you don't get a devourer, to sit out the beginning of the game it is enough to simply set the Cooperation policy (removing the penalty for diplomatic relations for friction on the border) and send ambassadors to improve relations with neighbors.

This is quite enough on a Grand Admiral. If you suddenly want to play it safe - take the tradition of diplomacy, play a xenophile. But this is already unnecessary in 90% of cases.

It is not necessary to be OP.

 

[yarpus]

Issue lies in the Ascensions themselves.
Previously Ascension was a path you could take in the game if you wanted. It offered some strengths but usually at a cost.
Nowadays Ascension is something that is rush-worthy because of how overloaded it is with features. Every Ascension offers massive bonuses to productivity and growth without any significant downsides.
In my eyes Ascension Traditions were a mistake.

 

[Abdulijubjub]

I don't think they were a mistake: a big transformation is good, and a big transformation has to come with a big upside.

But they do give too much.

Synths used to be OP because it gave an extra +5 assembly per planet and 20% output. Then it got updated to give +80% output. Now it gives +80% efficiency. And genetic had to be buffed to compete.

All the ascensions would still be well worth taking if everything they gave was cut in half, or to a third.

 

[Dagorad]

Issue lies in the Ascensions themselves.
Previously Ascension was a path you could take in the game if you wanted. It offered some strengths but usually at a cost.
Nowadays Ascension is something that is rush-worthy because of how overloaded it is with features. Every Ascension offers massive bonuses to productivity and growth without any significant downsides.
In my eyes Ascension Traditions were a mistake.

Additionally, the AI is not set to quickly take ascensions, sometimes it probably doesn't take them at all. One of many things that make the game ridiculously easy and unbalanced over time.

Ascensions as a DLC feature will probably never be nerfed much, but imo if so, the AI on a difficulty higher than ensign should take them asap just like players do, and even on ensign should take them sooner or later.

PS. The AI plays on different rules than the player in too many ways. There is a difference between variety and doing things that the player never does (not counting rp and first games). Some civics, traditions and decisions in general are a trap for the AI that must be compensated by the level of difficulty for challenge (and after a while it is not enough anyway)

 

[balmung60]

Additionally, the AI is not set to quickly take ascensions, sometimes it probably doesn't take them at all. One of many things that make the game ridiculously easy and unbalanced over time.

Ascensions as a DLC feature will probably never be nerfed much, but imo if so, the AI on a difficulty higher than ensign should take them asap just like players do, and even on ensign should take them sooner or later.

PS. The AI plays on different rules than the player in too many ways. There is a difference between variety and doing things that the player never does (not counting rp and first games). Some civics, traditions and decisions in general are a trap for the AI that must be compensated by the level of difficulty for challenge (and after a while it is not enough anyway)

Grand Admiral here, but I know the AI ascends pretty quickly if it can. I'm like 35 years in and it seems like I've got popups for most of the various spiritualists undergoing psionic ascension

 

[balmung60]

You should probably put this in suggestions and then actually make suggestions to what you think would make it balanced in your opinion. I personally like Synthetic Fertility as is. I find I struggle to make sure my empire doesnt get gobbled up by my neighbours in the early game as I struggle to balance resources.

No, this is the place to post it if you want the devs to ever actually see it.

Definitely not still bitter that I properly bug reported envoy travel time being completely non-functional for colonists and merchants (only working for diplomats) in EU4 multiple times over the years in the correct channel to absolutely no notice or change, only for someone else to finally post about it in the main channel and getting it acknowledged and patched by the very next patch.

 

[Dagorad]

Grand Admiral here, but I know the AI ascends pretty quickly if it can. I'm like 35 years in and it seems like I've got popups for most of the various spiritualists undergoing psionic ascension

I've had games where many AIs actually took ascensions quickly, but I've also had games where 2-3 took them and the rest never did (and I don't mean just the ones that were pathetically weak). I suppose it's a matter of RNG. But for a player it's a must-have (I don't remember the last time I saw someone write that they didn't take it as a fourth, let alone not taking it at all). Ascensions have become such a permanent element of player development (for obvious reasons) that playing on levels where the AI has bonuses but doesn't take ascensions makes the AI need even more bonuses...

 

[Drullo321]

No, this is the place to post it if you want the devs to ever actually see it.

Definitely not still bitter that I properly bug reported envoy travel time being completely non-functional for colonists and merchants (only working for diplomats) in EU4 multiple times over the years in the correct channel to absolutely no notice or change, only for someone else to finally post about it in the main channel and getting it acknowledged and patched by the very next patch.

I stopped posting proper detailled bug reports and instead do a (still detailled) reddit post or throw the same stuff in the patch 4.0.x thread in the hope if it gets momentum, it may get acknowledged and fixed somewhere.

My post about bug reports not getting acknowledged got quite a few upvotes, at least there are others feel the same.

This isn't the right way to do this but the devs even pointed this out in one of their answers in the patch threads they basically prioritize who cries the loudest (that wasn't their wording, but if you write something like arround popularity and mentiones, it is basically the same).

I'm more annoyed about how they handle their public bug management then the bug themselves which are way too many in 4.0 too but that is a completely other topic.

 

[Thiend]

Ascensions are too strong to be possible to rush. Even Psionic is too strong to be possible to rush as hard as Teachers of the Shroud allows, and it's an absolute joke compared to the other three pending SotS.

The apparent solutions to this are to nerf ascensions extremely hard, which is the kind of really bad idea people used to constantly make threads about when Psionic was the only one that was rushable ans just makes ascensions trash for everyone when the problem is a specific origin, or to nerf those origins extremely hard.

Ascensions are too strong for game health at the moment (with, again, the exception of Psionic). But we can't reach a satisfactory balance for rush origins by nerfing the ascensions they rush without rendering those ascensions far too weak, below a good balance point. Ascension balance screws up the scaling of the game because the spike in power is way too strong, but that's a completely separate problem.

The solution for this specific problem is that these origins need to either ascend slower, ascend weaker, or have other downsides.

I would prefer other downsides. Slower or weaker ascension wouldn't be very satisfying for an origin that is all about getting that ascension as soon as possible.

 

[yarpus]

Ascensions are too strong to be possible to rush. Even Psionic is too strong to be possible to rush as hard as Teachers of the Shroud allows, and it's an absolute joke compared to the other three pending SotS.

The apparent solutions to this are to nerf ascensions extremely hard, which is the kind of really bad idea people used to constantly make threads about when Psionic was the only one that was rushable ans just makes ascensions trash for everyone when the problem is a specific origin, or to nerf those origins extremely hard.

Ascensions are too strong for game health at the moment (with, again, the exception of Psionic). But we can't reach a satisfactory balance for rush origins by nerfing the ascensions they rush without rendering those ascensions far too weak, below a good balance point. Ascension balance screws up the scaling of the game because the spike in power is way too strong, but that's a completely separate problem.

The solution for this specific problem is that these origins need to either ascend slower, ascend weaker, or have other downsides.

I would prefer other downsides. Slower or weaker ascension wouldn't be very satisfying for an origin that is all about getting that ascension as soon as possible.

I don’t think about it as nerfing - it’s removing the bloat.

Look at Cybernetic/Synthetic Advanced Governments. They usually have one cool feature and then a lot of random modifiers not related to the government, just generically powerfull.

Every tradition ascension tradition tree has generic bonuses to upkeep, efficiency, modification cost reduction - again, they are not here to make certain ascension unique - just strong.

What I believe would be good for the state of the game: keep flavorful stuff while reducing generic one. I want modularity with lots of trait points and easier modification, not black matter chassis which just gives me absurd job output. I want unique identities, not just generic power.

 

[Thiend]

I don’t think about it as nerfing - it’s removing the bloat.

Look at Cybernetic/Synthetic Advanced Governments. They usually have one cool feature and then a lot of random modifiers not related to the government, just generically powerfull.

Every tradition ascension tradition tree has generic bonuses to upkeep, efficiency, modification cost reduction - again, they are not here to make certain ascension unique - just strong.

What I believe would be good for the state of the game: keep flavorful stuff while reducing generic one. I want modularity with lots of trait points and easier modification, not black matter chassis which just gives me absurd job output. I want unique identities, not just generic power.

That is both removing bloat and nerfing.

It's also a good idea, though. They should sharpen the focus of each thing down to what it's INTENDED to stand out for, and remove the grab-bag of other bonuses will improve that focus and balance at the same time.

 

[yarpus]

That is both removing bloat and nerfing.

It's also a good idea, though. They should sharpen the focus of each thing down to what it's INTENDED to stand out for, and remove the grab-bag of other bonuses will improve that focus and balance at the same time.

I guess I know what I am going to try to mod this summer. (I never succeed, I am a failure as a modder)

 

[balmung60]

I don't like the advanced authorities because they strip all the flavor your government previously derived from ethics and civics. Sure you still have the councilors, but regardless of if you were a Communal Parity or a Purity Committee, once you take the Purity advanced authority, you're a Phenotypical Autonomy and your leaders have the exact same title now

 

[LeoBack]

Ascensions went overboard with 4.0 because everything now gives job efficiency instead of job output and I don't think Ascensions will be nerfed anytime soon because PDX want to sell dlcs.

That being said I think the easiest way to nerf Ascensions rushing origins is let players to pick Ascensions perk as thier second perk instead of 3rd

 

[homenkovs]

There is another option, to prescribe the AI to receive an elevation depending on the difficulty, randomness and "type" of the empire. Let it receive at least an elevation to Grand Admiral by 50-70.

 

[snowy801]

Ascensions went overboard with 4.0 because everything now gives job efficiency instead of job output and I don't think Ascensions will be nerfed anytime soon because PDX want to sell dlcs.

That being said I think the easiest way to nerf Ascensions rushing origins is let players to pick Ascensions perk as thier second perk instead of 3rd

Behold, power creep!

 

[Metallichydra]

Ascending in general comes too early.
Ascensions should require great technological investment and many resources. You're literally transforming your entire empire's population, yet somehow it's faster to turn your population into robots than to convince another empire to accept a commercial pact.

 

[Uburian]

I would prefer other downsides. Slower or weaker ascension wouldn't be very satisfying for an origin that is all about getting that ascension as soon as possible.

I personally think that this is the most sensible path, and resonates with what I posted back when the devs asked for guidance.

The thing is, IRL technological evolution and social progress are never as easy to accomplish as "pour resources into research teams, get new tech, apply new tech, e voila!" Researching new technologies is difficult, not necessarily proportional to the amount of resources you pour into it, and once you get a new tech making it usable in a truly practical manner is usually just as difficult, if not more.

And then comes the most complicated aspect of it all, something that most civ building and strategy games tend to completely overlook, and which I personally think would be the key to fix this whole mess if it was properly implemented into the game as a mechanic: New technologies, and specially advanced technologies, are very difficult to control.

• IRL technologies have increasing information processing demands. The more advanced the technology, the more computational capacity they demand. The game needs to account for this, especially in what concerns very advanced technologies, such as ascensions, mega-structures and dark matter related technologies (Fallen empire techs).
• IRL, societies themselves need to go through lengthy (as in, decades) adaptation periods to properly use new advanced technologies, and even if they seemingly seem to do so well at first they might end up suffering for it in the end (the Bronze age collapse is a very good case of this, as the advent of iron tools gave to an excess of resources, population and information generation that the existing governments where unable to control, accelerating their collapse in the face of a climate crisis). The game should definitely represent this as a core gameplay loop (balancing tech development and social adaptation to it).
• IRL, advanced technologies increase the power that a single individual can have, and technological evolution demands stricter social control and surveillance, as otherwise a single person could cause catastrophic damage in certain cases. In augmented societies where psionics, robotics, genetic augments or cybernetics are commonplace this could be catastrophic. The game needs to account for this by including a social dangerousness level to technology, with many harmful events pouring up if you don't account for it through surveillance and social stability.
• This is all without accounting for the many dangers that science fiction technologies could cause, and that are under represented in the game outside of anomalies and events.

Just some ideas, but I think I should develop this more and post it as its own thread.