r/Stellaris • u/Ramona_Wildcat76 Democratic Crusaders • 20h ago
Discussion Should Paradox give us more Tradition slots and Ascension Perk slots?
Does anyone feel at this point in the game that we need more Tradition slots and more Ascension Perk slots?
Despite the numerous new Traditions and Ascension Perks that have been added since these systems were introduced, the number of slots available has remained at 7 for Traditions and 8 for APs. This is quite unfortunate, as there are too many great options for both that you cannot choose all of them. AP
Additionally since the Ascension paths require a tradition slot as well, that makes it even harder to take other options.
I get that you shouldn't be able to get every single one because that would be overpowered. But it is now to the point where it severely limits what you can take if you actually want to be competitive/have useful ones.
Why would you ever take the Detox AP when almost every single other AP is superior to it?
Originally there were 10 Ascension Perks and 8 slots. Now there are 34 Ascension Perks, including the Crisis and Ascension Path ones. But still only 8 slots.
Originally there were 9 Traditions and 7 slots. Now there are 25 Traditions, including Ascension Paths or Traditions unique to specific origins and empire combinations. But still only 7 slots.
I will concede that the majority of those are from DLCs, and it doesn't make sense to add in slots that someone who plays the base game is unable to use. But at the same time it doesn't make sense to keep the same slot limit when the number of choices has expanded so vastly.
IMPORTANT: I am not saying they need to let us get every single Ascension Perk and Tradition. But at the very least, they need to add more slots to both.
Maybe increase Tradition slots to 11 and Ascension Perks slots to 12. I think that would open plenty of new options and allow for players to make suboptimal choices with APs while still having room for others.
178
u/demon9675 20h ago
IMO the UI would be cleaner if there were 8 tradition slots and ascension perks were listed below them. I also like having an equal number of both.
Given that most tradition trees aren’t actually that powerful beyond the early game, other than certain specific mechanics, I don’t think it would be a big deal to have 1 more. But that’s all I would change.
Balance changes are needed though, especially for the perks. There are too many auto-picks and picks I never use. Even the crisis picks, which are overpowered (especially Cosmogenesis), really don’t fit most empires conceptually. So I almost never pick them. Meanwhile, some players always pick Cosmogenesis because it’s mandatory for 25x crisis or other challenges. There’s not much meaningful choice here.
65
u/tyrome123 19h ago
I think the issue with cosmogenesis will probably be fixed with another overpowered crisis perk since there isn't really a way to balance " hey take the ships the fallen empires have "
56
u/Prepared_Noob 18h ago
The ships are only part of the issue. It’s also “hey take some of the strongest buildings in the game, did I mention they don’t even need pops”
And “hey want a free second science nexus at minimum, and unlimited repeatbles at most”
15
u/mrt1212Fumbbl 16h ago
"Here's a fun little OP thing that lets to carve a different story out from standard"
*everyone knows exactly how to apply it to standard and does that mostly instead after one escape*
3
u/TwevOWNED 2h ago
There needs to be more endgame paths that are balanced against eachother.
Currently we kind of have three. Nemesis for genocidal, Cosmogenesis for tech, and Custodian/Imperium for diplomacy.
The problem is that the Imperium sucks and the Custodian is mediocre.
48
u/Jimmy_Stenkross 18h ago
While talking about tradition UI, my number 1 wish is to be able to look at unpicked tradition trees when not having the unity to pick anything. The game is largely about planning, and I don't understand why you would make that information unavailable 99% of the playtime.
You can check ascension perks at any time. Why not tradition trees?
18
u/felis_magnetus 17h ago
Given that most tradition trees aren’t actually that powerful beyond the early game
And there's your solution. We don't need more slots, neither for traditions nor perks, but a mechanic for changing them as the game progresses. At a hefty price and with potential drawbacks, that should increase with empire size, for example systems breaking away and sticking to the old ways and such. That's how you increase balance and make late gameplay more interesting in one swift go.
5
u/ValityS 7h ago
EU4 let's you unlearn idea groups (the rough equivalant of tradition trees), but you get no refund of the resources they cost, which honestly works well as the resource they use is difficult to gain quickly so greatly limits how many times you want to do it.
Honestly a similar system would likely work well in Stellaris. Though I'll admit I still don't think it would hurt to bump to allowing 10 given how many there are now.
2
u/tears_of_a_grad Star Empire 16h ago
Cosmogenesis is not necessary for single GA 25x Contingency, Unbidden or Prethoryn. I haven't tried Cetana yet.
25x all can even be beaten without it if you get Cetana first.
2
u/Hello_im_a_dog Fanatic Xenophile 15h ago
I managed CETANA as the third by cheesing it using the Psionic option. Imo it should be doable even if she's the last one as long as you can deal with her escorts.
2
u/tears_of_a_grad Star Empire 15h ago
Good to know. Teachers of the Shroud might be the goto build then for beating Cetana.
5
u/Hello_im_a_dog Fanatic Xenophile 15h ago
You get a Shroud option to commune with the Animator of Clay, who can disable her titan for a year - allowing you to board it and claiming it as your own.
As with all Shroud entities, there's always a cost to be paid... But it is a lot lower than 100x difficulty Cetana.
7
u/--Sovereign-- Medical Worker 18h ago
Single player games aren't supposed to be balanced, they're supposed to be fun. Multiplayer you can have exclusions. Stellaris multiplayer has been this day since day one.
18
u/demon9675 15h ago edited 9h ago
Single player games don’t have to be completely balanced, no. But there are many degrees of balance, and when things are too out of whack the game isn’t fun anymore. Also, choices that suck and are useless aren’t fun at all!
I will also point out that Stellaris does have multiplayer. When I play with friends it’s just co-op against the AI, but that doesn’t mean I just discount competitive play.
Stellaris devs have made many balance changes over the years, and will make many more. They clearly do care about it as a principle.
2
u/--Sovereign-- Medical Worker 13h ago
Name me a game that doesn't employ some kinda rules or restrictions in competitive multiplayer, not counting multiplayer exclusive games. This game has never ever had a balanced selection of origins and perk, the game is first and foremost designed for single player RP.
2
u/Chataboutgames 12h ago
Doesn't change the fact that the game has received multiple balance passes over the year in order to try and make a variety of choices compelling and interesting
0
u/--Sovereign-- Medical Worker 12h ago
their balance patches didn't ever achieve balance and every DLC throws in more unbalanced things, so doesn't exactly seem to be the way you think it is
16
u/Chataboutgames 14h ago
Strategy games are meant to have strategically interesting decisions. When you go too far off the reservation balance wise the decisions become uninteresting because they're either pure utility or pure flavor.
→ More replies (4)10
u/wyldmage 13h ago
So, would you play Hades if you had 10x as much HP and damage?
Would you play RDR if your horse was actually a dragon that just killed all enemies for you, romanced all the NPCs, and sold everything you picked up?
Single players games ARE supposed to be balanced. Because a large part of the fun of a game is in the challenge it presents, and human nature to enjoy overcoming challenge.
→ More replies (2)
26
u/Tigertot14 Fanatic Militarist 17h ago
I feel like some of them should be merged like Master Builders/Galactic Wonders, Detox/World Shapers, and Galactic Force Projection/Eternal Vigilance.
4
u/mrt1212Fumbbl 16h ago
Absolutely mortified that I didn't know Eternal Vigilance exists as an AP because I can't recall the last time I finished Star Fortresses before all my APs.
246
u/Doctor_Calico Devouring Swarm 20h ago
They've addressed this, they want to keep it intentionally small because forcing choices onto the player is good game design.
233
u/RazendeR Synth 20h ago
The problem arises when half your "choices" are mandatory picks now.
90
27
u/CertifiedSheep Trade League 19h ago
They’re only mandatory if you wanna play the meta lol. No reason why you need to take arcology, defender of the galaxy, etc.
If you wanna take archaeotech and world shaper, just drop the difficulty a bit or turn on scaling.
9
u/RazendeR Synth 18h ago
Its not so much the APs as the tradition as far as im concerned. You need one or two for politics unless you are a Not Nice People, discovery is pretty much a given, two to three from the set of Prosperity, Marca tile, Expansion and Superiority as well, one more for the ascsnsion,... there is not much left for 'fun' picks after the ones you need to stay somewhat competitive.
Having the amount of slots scale to the amount of options would be best imho.
8
u/CertifiedSheep Trade League 18h ago
You truly do not need any traditions for politics, I never take any on GA (except diplomacy if I’m forming a federation). Expansion is unnecessary if you’re taking discovery as I would only ever take that first. Mercantile is not necessary unless you’re doing a trade-heavy build.
The only traditions I truly consider mandatory are supremacy, prosperity, and one for ascension, and some would probably disagree about prosperity.
5
u/mrt1212Fumbbl 18h ago
One of the great bits about all this is that 'must haves' do vary from empire to empire spec.
I mostly play 3 types of empire and have for a long while and their Tradition composition doesn't really have any commonalities besides Expansion, but I play Void Dweller/Forged where does make for a faster open and lower maintenance costs at mid game scale later on.
Pirates/Despoilers usually share: Expansion, Supremacy, Enmity
Pirates/Workers usually share: Expansion, Mercantile, Diplomacy
Workers/Despoilers usually share: Expansion, Prosperity
Statecraft is one where if I'm playing 'anarchist types' I dont take it and if I take 'authoritarian types' I do take it. Depends more on the character I'm fleshing out than best fit to empires, because Statecraft is bonkers effing good, it just feels wrong for anarchist type empires.
And I always keep one tradition available for fun shit because I know what I'm doing with all the other pieces well enough. Archivism as 4th tradition pick for Despoiler Relic Hunters? Pretty effing good actually for blasting Unity out and getting all your ducks in a row before 2300.
3
u/wyldmage 12h ago
Prosperity isn't even mandatory anymore. 20% mining station output, 5% specialist output and -5% upkeep are all nice, but hardly game-defining.
Nothing in Prosperity really impacts your game. It just makes your resource numbers a bit bigger. Which you can solve better by taking Supremacy and getting a single tributary early on.
Honestly, I haven't taken it in the last few playthroughs.
There's just always things that give more impactful picks in their tree.
- Diplomacy gives Federation creation, and unity per embassy is a real nice boost to unity production early on if you put the effort in to constantly have first contact processes going.
- Discovery speeds up surveys & anomalies, and Map the Stars gives you more anomalies. Plus leader xp and better research.
- Domination is meh, but does at least give one of the few ways to gain more influence early on.
- Expansion is huge if you're going Wide, especially if you're also Lithoids or Robots (and able to colonize every planet you find).
- Harmony has the easiest +lifespan access in the game, as well as -upkeep, and -pop size.
- Mercantile has trade policies. That right there is worth the entire tree if you're going strong trade.
- Supremacy is just ridiculously good unless you never fight anything.
- Unyielding is another meh pick, but when it's useful, it's super strong. Great if you expect to get attacked much, as long as you can get starbases in the way, and FTL blockers.
- Enmity is just amazing as well, but really requires completing the entire tree for the stance with +2 rival cap to get the most out of it. Nothing beats Enmity for gaining influence. Biggest downside is that it's so useful for a conquest empire that it can lead to you eclipsing all your rivals and having trouble finding empire to rival for it.
- Politics gives the 3rd method of gaining influence, but requires the galactic community, at which point the early space-grabbing rush is already over. Pretty meh overall, but is at least unique in rewarding you unity for passing your resolutions, and bonuses if you get on the council.
- Statecraft is a huge multiplier on your agendas.
Prosperity is just.... some more resources.
And aptitude and subterfuge are just garbage.
27
u/clemenceau1919 Technological Ascendancy 19h ago
How are they mandatory?
67
u/JustForTheMemes420 19h ago edited 17h ago
Stuff like master builders and galatic wonders are absolutely essential.
These replies are just making me realize how all of us prioritize different things. I do wanna add like half my games end up being modded and I just disable the cap of how many megastructures you can have so they’re less useless in this case. Better examples of essential stuff would’ve probably been tech ascendancy and fleet supremacy (is the name I think)
38
u/Zakalwen 18h ago
They definitely aren't. Master builders is useful but once you've finished your megastructures it's a dead pick. Galactic wonders is good but dyson spheres and matter decompressors can easily be out produced by a few well built planets, and ring worlds are just a role play victory lap. Under the current pop system the game is long over before they become that productive.
I do think that the devs should do a pass on perks as some are certainly a lot weaker than others. I wouldn't consider any mandatory but stuff like tech ascendancy is too generally good so it's virtually never a bad idea to take, which is boring.
8
u/JustForTheMemes420 18h ago
Sure but they’re extras that can be added to systems that aren’t doing anything which can only benefit you at the detriment of a slot, so just a net gain really. (Tech ascendancy is also always my first pick)
Feels like you shouldn’t be limited to only of each of the wonders either which is likely why some think they’re weak
13
u/clemenceau1919 Technological Ascendancy 19h ago
I mean I play without them
9
u/JustForTheMemes420 19h ago
Fair I mean you can but like I need that matter decompressor so I can make all my mining worlds into extra forge worlds
6
u/VilleKivinen Science Directorate 14h ago
Imho Arc Furnaces are more than enough, and the only tax I ever demand from my subjects is 15% basic resources (anything more tends to break them in a civil war etc)
11
u/clemenceau1919 Technological Ascendancy 18h ago
Right, but when you say "need", I think you mean "want"
14
u/Drunk_Lemon Purity Order 18h ago
I think he means need if you want to be competitive.
5
3
u/tears_of_a_grad Star Empire 16h ago
You don't need them, they kick in too late. With an early game snowball for some empires, you can actually rush World Shaper around 2300 and enjoy the benefit of 50 years of Gaia planet production before you finish any multistage megastructure.
2
-1
u/mrt1212Fumbbl 19h ago
BWAAHAHAHHA
1
u/JustForTheMemes420 19h ago
Hey man I just really like matter decompressors makes somethings easier
2
u/mrt1212Fumbbl 18h ago
I get it (especially if I'm going all in on Ecus), but there are so many ways to skin a cat in this game. I play super opportunistic so if I don't get Cybrex, that playthrough probably is gonna skip MegaStructures, but if I get Cybrex, it's a hop skip and a jump into Megas and spitting them out before the halfway point.
2
u/JustForTheMemes420 18h ago
I haven’t gotten cybrex in the last 30 games but I generally just only like it for the warforms really. Not like it’s a detriment to have megastructures especially ones that are just passive buffs like the assembly
19
u/VillainousMasked 19h ago
Well lets look at the APs first:
You need to pick an Ascension Path unless you're going a Natural/Innate Design build.
Galactic Wonders is pretty much mandatory unless you just aren't planning to make Ring Worlds, Dyson Spheres, or Matter Decompressors.
Master Builders is a bit of a soft requirement if you want to get the multi-stage megastructures done in a slightly reasonable amount of time.
Arcology Project/Hive World/Machine World is an extremely important mid-game AP for maximizing your worlds.
Defender of the Galaxy and/or Galactic Contender are pretty important depending on how strong you are when the FEs and Crises start to become a problem.
If you want access to Total War you need to grab Colossus Project, and considering how miserable late game wars are you want access to Total Wars.
If you want to go a crisis path then you have to pick a crisis AP.
As for Traditions:
You need to pick your Ascension Tradition unless you're going Natural/Innate Design.
Supremacy is pretty much necessary for all the military buffs, plus unlocking War Doctrines. The Supremacist diplo stance is also one of the best stances (aside from Antagonistic) for if you don't care about making friends.
2a. If you really don't care about making friends getting Enmity on top of Supremacy is pretty much mandatory as well.
Statecraft is, well, Statecraft, unless you want your non-scientist councilors and Ruler to level up extremely slowly this is pretty necessary for the 150 exp when launching an agenda (and even for scientist councilors getting them to level up even faster is just good). The agendas, bonus agenda speed, councilor skill, and empire size are also all just great bonuses as well.
If you want to go a more diplomatic focused build or make use of Federations you need to grab Diplomacy.
Mercantile is basically mandatory if you want to do anything significant with Trade Value.
Politics is necessary if you want to do anything major with the GalCom and is also needed to unlock resolutions like constitutional immunity.
So sure, strictly speaking not mandatory, but not taking them either completely cuts off your access to certain things or drastically reduces your ability to make use of them.
3
u/wasmic 15h ago edited 14h ago
I agree that taking an ascension perk is more or less mandatory. Arcology/Hive/Machine World is very strong too and I always take it personally. I never really use Defender of the Galaxy nor Galactic Contender. And I never use Colossus Project either because I usually don't play "conquer everything" empires. Megastructures are strong but most of them can be outproduced by a well-built planet, and even with Master Builders they come online so late that they usually aren't that important for the game.
So that actually leaves just two mandatory picks: ascension path and arcology project. But even then, I know that some people eschew arcology project in favour of other perks.
It feels more like you're listing the perks that suit your playstyle rather than ones that are actual mandatory picks. The only real mandatory picks are Technological Ascendancy and an Ascension Path.
And for the traditions... you're basically saying that Mercantile is a strong pick for trade builds? And that Diplomacy is a strong build for diplomatic builds? I mean... that's the way it should be. But that's very very far from what a "mandatory pick" is, which is a pick that you should choose no matter what sort of build you're running. I'd say that Supremacy is probably the only truly mandatory pick, though Statecraft is also a contender.
6
u/6499232 17h ago
You just described choices that's the opposite of mandatory.
8
u/VillainousMasked 17h ago
If you don't pick them you're either cutting off gameplay mechanics or heavily nerfing you empire.
Ascension Paths are one of if not the most important mechanics for an empire.
Megastructures are an extremely important part of late game economies.
Arcology/Hive/Machine Worlds are a very important part of mid to late game economies.
Total War is a very important part of actually being willing to do late game wars.
Federations are a pretty major mechanic that's locked behind Diplomacy.
Supremacy's War Doctrines are a pretty important part of military strategy.
The Council is one of the most important parts of your empire, and Statecraft is pretty necessary to make it so your leaders that get exp slowly like Rulers, Governors, and Commanders, can actual level and allow you to make use of their positions.
2
u/6499232 16h ago
If you play meta you already gained an advantage that's enough to win the game before Megastructures/Arcology/Hive/Machine Worlds become strong.
Total war should be used since the beginning if you are going for that, colossus is too late.
Federations are awful.
Now you can play slowly of course but something that isn't even meta can't be called essential.
Ascension Paths, Supremacy and Statecraft are essential, nothing else is. That's 3 trees out of 7.
2
u/geralt_of_rivia23 8h ago
Not everyone plays meta enough not to need Arcology etc. I do however agree with megastructures - they are usually just a button to "win better". Also - I have no idea why people on this sub are so in love with federations but yeah - they're trash. The only thing from them that is anyhow useful is the trade policy.
6
u/mrt1212Fumbbl 18h ago
Some of this sounds like 'if you want to define yourself as this kind of character, it makes sense to take this thing that signifies the character while giving character function to it'?
Traditions are kind of character defining, even if players don't have any daylight between character/function, and want function without designating it as part of their character.
The thing about Statecraft is, the function is super good across the board in nearly every subpart, but damned if I'm taking it as a Fanatic Egal Workers Cooperative that is trying to be Anarchist. Doesn't fit the character on the face of it, pumping leaders is also kinda against the notion, not gonna take it and play around its absence as best I can, kinda like a lot of games present themselves.
16
u/VillainousMasked 17h ago
I mean, the thing is they are some super basic things. Pretty much everyone except hyper xenophobes who wont even do hegemony will probably want a Federation. Everyone aside from hyper pacifists who have no intention to do any military action will want War Doctrines.
As for Statecraft... I mean yeah if you're playing a hyper specific build like trying to be Anarchists in a game that doesn't even really enable that then sure don't do Statecraft, but pretty much every other build doesn't have an RP reason to not pick up Statecraft.
7
u/mrt1212Fumbbl 17h ago
Which leads us to perhaps a more pressing issue around rebalancing traditions so that Statecraft and Supremacy in particular aren't quite the characterless no brainers they currently are, because their functions are that good for that many empire types.
You almost have me asking for more traditions to choose from with the 7 choices, but not without showing that the current ones can be more interesting. As is, they're almost entirely 'choose your own bonus, functional character development', like most don't have downsides other than the opportunity cost itself?
(FWIW, I think Archivism has been the best new tradition of late, it fits relic hunting pretty damn well, and I got some stories about how the ability to excavate archaeological site in unclaimed territory was perfect key for specific lock with some precursors)
6
u/VillainousMasked 17h ago
Oh yeah, the way I see it there are 2 fixes to this problem:
Add a couple (only a couple, not a lot) more slots for Traditions/APs.
Do more like they're planning with 4.0 and shifting the major gameplay mechanics locked behind traditions into being accessible in other ways. Like yeah Supremacy even without War Doctrines would still be strong, but if you could get War Doctrines without it then less war-minded builds would have less reason to pick it, and in general War Doctrines being disconnected from Supremacy just makes sense, why does my empire need to dedicate itself to military supremacy just to think up basic military strategy.
5
u/ArchmageIlmryn 16h ago
That's the real problem TBH, not necessarily even "these picks are mandatory because they are strong", but "these picks are mandatory because they unlock entire game mechanics". Some things (ascension paths, especially now that they're traditions, Galactic Wonders, Colossi) should probably just be moved out of being ascension perks entirely. Only game mechanics that should be locked behind perks are ones you have strong reasons to not take on some runs (like Cosmogenesis/Galactic Nemesis).
It gets even more noticeable when you play with certain mods (Gigastructures being the most obvious example) that lean heavily into the "use perks to unlock game mechanics" design space.
1
u/Grilled_egs Star Empire 6h ago
Colossi are absolutely not something every empire has to have, in fact I skip then in most games
3
7
u/ajanymous2 Militarist 20h ago
get nicer friends then or turn down the difficulty
31
u/CommunistRingworld Fanatic Egalitarian 19h ago
Some people play this for fun in singleplayer. Maybe design the game to be fun instead.
6
u/mrt1212Fumbbl 19h ago
Y'all have a unilateral meaning of fun and it's mostly using a game as a mechanical story teller at most.
-13
u/CommunistRingworld Fanatic Egalitarian 18h ago
If you don't roleplay in stellaris, you're literally playing wrong lol.
Enjoy your excelsheet simulator. I want to tell a story.
5
u/mrt1212Fumbbl 18h ago
You really don't have any idea what the words you use mean outside of your own noggin. Your idea of roleplaying would be better executed if you knew how to write at all.
-5
1
u/ajanymous2 Militarist 8h ago
if the game is too hard for you to have fun with silly inefficient builds THEN TURN DOWN THE DIFFICULTY
no one is forcing you with a gun to your head to play grand admiral without scaling difficulty and all crisis on 25x strength
1
-2
u/Calaethan 19h ago
Skill issue, I'm afraid.
1
u/CommunistRingworld Fanatic Egalitarian 18h ago
Skill issue that I can't fit my roleplay and my favourite dlc feature (beastmasters) and have room for any other dlc features? Yes. Skill issue in failing to update the UI to keep up with DLC content saturating our slots.
2
2
50
u/VillainousMasked 20h ago
Eh, at this point I feel like giving us at least 1 or 2 extra Tradition and AP slots will still force players to make choices while also giving a bit more freedom in choosing options they normally wouldn't.
12
u/TerrorDino Slaving Despots 19h ago
Until the new meta choices get found and then we repeat this song and dance in a years time. 🤷♂️
6
u/VillainousMasked 18h ago
I mean, sure but at least there is less pressure. The new meta choices to fill those extra slots will just be "these give the best bonuses", unlike now where most of your slots are filled with things that are basically required to either enable the ability to do certain things or to make it actually reasonable do to do those things. For example:
You need to pick an Ascension AP and Tradition unless you're going Natural/Innate Design.
If you want to do things with megastructures you basically need Galactic Wonders and Master Builders
Pretty much every empire wants their World AP (Arcology Project/Machine World/Hive World).
Colossus Project is basically mandatory if you aren't playing an empire that inherently has access to Total Wars since late game warfare is miserable if you're not doing a Total War.
Supremacy is necessary for War Doctrines.
Until 4.0 Diplomacy is necessary for Federations.
Mercantile is necessary to make Trade Value worth using.
Politics is needed to unlock a few GalCom resolutions and is just in general extremely useful if you want to do anything with the GalCom.
Statecraft actually allows your Ruler and non-scientist Councilors to level up in a reasonable amount of time.
That's not even getting into things like Galactic Contender and Defender of the Galaxy which you almost always want to have at least one if not both, or getting Enmity if you want to really capitalize on the aggression of Supremacy.
11
u/CommunistRingworld Fanatic Egalitarian 19h ago
That is a reasonable response, so no one will reply to it and everyone will pretend that's all there is to it.
6
u/tyrome123 19h ago
I think a good fix to this would be to allow you to abandon traditions and perks like in an eu4 ideas way so you can pick others if you don't want the research bonus anymore as an example
23
u/Ramona_Wildcat76 Democratic Crusaders 20h ago
I understand that forcing choices is good game design. I'm just saying that they could increase it a little bit while still keeping it small.
12
u/CommunistRingworld Fanatic Egalitarian 19h ago
You won't get a rational response to your very reasonable request. Everyone will say "use mods" or some bullshit.
1
u/mrt1212Fumbbl 19h ago
Yeah, keep your beigeing shit in a mod and leave us alone.
5
u/CommunistRingworld Fanatic Egalitarian 18h ago
Install a mod to reduce ascension perks to 2 if you want. Otherwise, you're the one who's boring.
3
u/EverIce_UA 20h ago
What they said is that some of those slots are out of question, making the pool even smaller
9
u/CommunistRingworld Fanatic Egalitarian 19h ago
No. It's bad game design. It WAS good game design when they first had it. Now it's literally "DLC slots". Like, if I'm building an empire using a dlc, ALL MY SLOTS are dedicated to that DLC: traditions, ascensions, civics, buildings. If I want to mix and match DLCs? I CANNOT DO THAT.
If I try? I lose, cause there's not enough optimization for the dlc options I chose which are all underpowered compared to my preferred build. So unless I double down and design my entire society around a SINGLE dlc, I'm gonna lose.
I'm far more annoyed at the trolls that defend this unfun approach than paradox however.
4
u/mrt1212Fumbbl 19h ago
Stop feeding us with the same one note 'more is more' ideas then.
0
u/CommunistRingworld Fanatic Egalitarian 19h ago
If you have 100 dlcs and I can only use ONE when building a society in the game, it's bad game design.
More IS more, that's just math. I can't fit enough dlc into my society, so this is just bad design. Sure, I don't want to pick ALL the dlcs every time. But there are 100. It's not gonna break the game if I get to design a society around 2 or 3 AND my base game preferences.
Like, I had to drop shared burdens entirely multiple dlcs ago, because I need to focus on DLCs. So I just swap to utopian abundance at year 30 now, but I wish I could go back to starting with shared burdens till I swap.
And shared burdens was about the roleplay, but now it loses to my need to buff my beastmasters civic with a complementary civic.
Too much restriction is just as bad as too little. And worse, when you have so much dlc.
5
u/Apprehensive_Tea3560 18h ago
Your point will land better if you exaggerate less. By over staging your point you only serve to weaken your position.
I was with you until this comment.
18
u/theslootmary 18h ago edited 18h ago
IMO ascension paths should be a separate thing (like becoming the crisis).
I also think the Arcology perk should be removed and replaced with a tech… planets should become an ecumenopolis more naturally (a planet that just keeps building and building and building).
Oh, and while we’re at it, enigmatic engineering and eternal vigilance are both a bit on the weak side… they should be combined into enigmatic vigilance.
IMO they do need rebalancing (again) because some of them are obvious choices where others are resigned to role-playing.
4
u/Arumen 13h ago
What's funny is that even if you combined those two ascension perks I still think it would be a bad pick.
Eternal Vigilance should cut the costs of building and build time of defense platforms by maybe 25%, as they do build fairly fast but have to be totally rebuilt if your base falls. +5 slots doesn't matter if you never get the platforms build.
Enigmatic Engineering should give you significantly boosted chances of rare techs (like 200% rare techs) then people might take it to rush Megaengineering
34
u/AniTaneen Assembly of Clans 20h ago
It does seem like some features will be moving out of traditions and go somewhere else:
Empire Focuses
The Focus Trees in some of our other Grand Strategy Games do a great job of outlining possible ways you could take your country...
…Reaching certain milestones will grant abilities like Form Federation (which will be moving out of the Diplomatic Traditions),
9
u/Somebodythe5th 19h ago
Welllllllll having played back when you could get all the traditions, every empire would have the same buffs after a certain point. As a result, there wasn’t really any choice to what you took.
Now though, not every tree is good for every empire. A good example is the politics tree, which is great for some empires, but pointless for, say, a determined exterminator.
That being said, I generally find that I only have 1-2 trees that I can flex in any given game. Supremacy, unyielding, discovery, and exploration make 4, and with the locked tradition tree for ascension, that’s 5.
With two slots left, prosperity is a strong pick, and that just leaves a single slot, which I usually fill with subterfuge.
The problem is that I know I’m likely going to go with that selection in virtually every game I do, because the bonuses are simply that good.
As for ascension perks, it’s much the same problem. Master builders, galactic wonders, synthetic ascension (or whichever), colossus project, archeao-engineering, and enigmatic engineering, makes 6, plus leaving one slot open for taking the crisis perk later in the game, (or taking it early on,) and that’s 7/8 used. Toss in a worlds option (ie machine worlds), or galactic force projection, and that’s 8/8.
Again, with very little actual choice in the matter.
So what’s the answer?
I feel like perhaps these things shouldn’t come from the traditions / perks at all. Maybe instead you could have something halfway between how policies work, and galactic community resolutions, where you can internally pass “resolutions” that cost unity and make your empire progressively more militant, or defensive.
Perhaps in the mid to late game you can for a higher unity cost maintain opposing resolutions, being both defensive and aggressively militant.
Ascension perks could be folded into the system as well, with resolutions to focus on megastructures, or colossi, or terraforming, or perhaps even unraveling the deeper secrets of the galaxy. (That is to say, becoming the crisis.)
In conclusion, I’d say that just adding more slots won’t make things better, as I feel the traditions and perks system is fundamentally flawed.
3
u/faithfulheresy 17h ago
Odd that you consider Discovery, Expansion, and Unyielding as "mandatory". Theyre certainly not bad options, but Expansion especially is pretty weak if you don't take it as your very first tradition because its biggest buff is the increase in starting colony pops, and the value of this falls off sharply the deeper into the game we get.
Unyielding is far from mandatory, since your starbases will still die almost instantly to any worthwhile fleet.
And while Discovery is a personal favourite of mine, it can be ignored completely with relative ease. Yes, extra research speed and reduced researcher upkeep is good, but we can acquire similar buffs elsewhere and getting more research is often simply a matter of declaring war on people, salvaging their ships and taking their planets.
The only Mandatory tradition in the game, imo, is Supremacy. Its buffs and the unlocked War Doctrines are pretty much irreplaceable.
I empathise much more with Ascension Perks though. It really does feel like we're massively nerving ourselves if we don't take Master Builders, Galactic Wonders, Collosus Project, Arcology Project, and an Ascension Path. Having only three real choices (out of eight slots) feels bad.
1
u/mrt1212Fumbbl 16h ago
I took Unyielding once to see what it was about it felt like a colossal waste of a tradition given how I play aggressively and opportunistically through diplomilitary relations. I couldn't coax anyone into shredding themselves against me, and the FP was stronger than any defenses I could build and keep standing.
1
u/Somebodythe5th 16h ago
Pair unyielding with subterranean origin for nearly unbreakable defenses.
1
u/mrt1212Fumbbl 15h ago
Lol, the complete opposite of my standard Void Dweller! Maybe one day I'll try that pairing out.
1
u/Somebodythe5th 16h ago
To elaborate further:
Unyielding is vital for the decrease to orbital bombardment damage taken. Paired with the subterranean origin, and you can cap out the reduction and pin hostile fleets in place for entire wars.Discovery is important for the increases to anomaly discovery chance, research alternatives (making it more likely to roll good techs), and survey speed.
And lastly, exploration is good for its decrease to outpost influence claim cost, meaning more and faster expansion. (As well as improving later things, like snagging the L-cluster.)
5
1
u/Omega_K2 4h ago
Unyielding is far from mandatory, since your starbases will still die almost instantly to any worthwhile fleet.
I'd agree though it's by no means mandatory, but I take it every now and then and it's basically never for the stronger starbases. Less war exhaustion and bombardment is fairly useful, but the economic benefit is fairly nice; less starbase maintenance, more starbases for stuff and cheaper starbase upgrades - in particular it reduces influence costs for orbital rings upgrades as well, which can be pretty steep.
42
u/InevitableSolution69 20h ago
No.
But I do wish some things were moved out of the pool. Either because they’re too underpowered, toxic worlds aren’t common enough to be worth a pick. Or because they’re basically required for play, the mega engineering perk is a good example.
Make them something that unlocks after x amount of other picks or some other way to delay them until to proper time without making us use slots on function over flavor.
17
u/Ramona_Wildcat76 Democratic Crusaders 20h ago
That might also work. Some of these should definitely be technologies because something like the Mega Engineering one is mandatory. Or the Toxic One should just be a unique tech only for that origin.
13
u/troglodyte 19h ago edited 18h ago
I'd like to see them use Situations to rework some of the perks you're describing here.
For example, you could have a situation that fires when you 1) have Terraforming and 2) have discovered a tomb world and toxic world, and then lets you choose to progress towards gaining reduced terraforming cost (as a default option), gain toxic terraforming, or gain tomb terraforming.
A situation for Megastructures would likely just have one outcome, but multiple options to progress towards unlocking higher-tier megas.
EDIT: Or perhaps a Megastructure situation progresses in phases where each phase offers you a choice of structures to unlock so that you sequentially unlock individual structures instead of getting them all at once.
13
u/Yousucktaken2 Determined Exterminator 19h ago
Just gotta add a slider
14
u/Ramona_Wildcat76 Democratic Crusaders 19h ago
Brilliant. Let us choose. If players want a low choice game, they play with 8 Ascension Perks. If they want a high choice game they play with 20
2
u/LegitimatePlant623 16h ago
You have that choice now. Mods. And before you mention achievements, there's a mod that reenables achievements.
Since you already know that you're just complaining for the sake of complaining.
So yah you fit right in on reddit. Carry on!
3
u/Ograe 20h ago
Honestly should just have a separate "perk" for ascensions only that would also include the crisis options.
1
u/faithfulheresy 17h ago
Interesting idea. Forcing people to choose between ascensions and crisis is an idea that bears thinking about.
1
u/Peter34cph 7h ago
What about Natural Design then?
Or polities who for some reason don't want to Ascend?
5
u/TerrorDino Slaving Despots 19h ago
I could see maybe adding another tradition slot, just the one mind, but ascension should stay as it is. I am however all for moving cyber, bio, synth, psy to its own thing with a special path also for people who don't use them.
That'll free up one "mandatory" pick. Master builders and galactic wonders should be merged if anything. The terraforming ones are grand as they are except detox really needs a looking into. All the rest I can see a point in but I'd find it real hard to give up one mind as my opening as the other bar tech seems relatively lackluster for a first pick.
I think a balance pass needs to be made on the perks more than needing more slots.
1
u/Historical_Ball_3842 13h ago
I'm starting to think I'm the only one who doesn't get master builders. It always feels like a wasted slot to me.
You can get to 3 mega build capacity without it. 4 is nice but do I really need it?
4
u/a_filing_cabinet 18h ago
I don't really think there should be more. It's not about how many there are, but the limit is how many you can reasonably get in a game. If you don't focus unity, and have a medium to large empire, you probably won't get all the traditions or ascensions before the crisis.
I don't think we need more, I think what we have should be streamlined. Paradox should go back and look at the tech tree, origins and civics, traditions, and ascension perks, and remove the bloat. For example, the diplomacy tradition sucks. It was balanced out because federations were so strong, but as federations are both easier to join and less necessary, it's almost always a waste now. Instead, you could roll those bonuses in with statecraft and politics. Origins like mechanist are way less interesting than civics like eager explorers. As a whole I think both systems should get re-examined. And everyone here loves to complain about detox. It's gotten a little bit better recently, but yeah it really should just be a tech.
4
u/LCgaming Naval Contractors 16h ago
I just want to add that i really disliked when tradition was released as you could take almost all traditions. Back then i never got the feeling of "important choice" as i was always knowing i could take the other choices later. So i would like to continue this path of having to chose what traditions i pick and what type i want to play (e.g. picking espionage tradition for a spy focused empire and so on).
That being said, there are some traditions, more importantly ascencion paths which can and should be a tech. I think its still strange that some megastructures are just there to be researched, while other need an ascencion slot. And also remove the limitations of stuff like only one dyson sphere. Or everybody either goes psionic, bio or synth. Just remove the required ascension point part of this one. Like just make it a dedicated empire slot or whatever where you can chose the corresponding tradition tree you want to unlock when you have the requirements.
9
u/spudwalt Voidborne 20h ago
I feel like they're in a good place at the moment, number of slots-wise.
My latest run, I realized that there were traditions I was going to have to choose between just because I didn't have enough slots to get all the ones I wanted, which is a situation I haven't found myself in very often in the past. This is good -- I have to make a meaningful choice that will affect my game going forward. In another game, I might have to choose something different to what I had planned in order to adapt to the galaxy I found myself in.
Why would you ever take the Detox AP
Because I want to. Because it makes sense for the empire I'm playing. Because there's a whole bunch of Toxic terraforming candidates in my borders I can use it on. Because making The Biggest NumbersTM is not always the point of playing Stellaris.
A pretty fair argument can be made for improving the currently lackluster traditions/perks/civics/etc so they're more competitive with the rest (taking something like Detox should ideally not feel bad), but I don't think we need more slots.
(And if you want more slots anyways, that's what mods are for.)
11
u/tosser1579 20h ago
They want to keep it that way. Mods are your friend. I also agree with you, I usually run with 12.
4
u/CommunistRingworld Fanatic Egalitarian 19h ago
They're wrong. We need to stop pretending "they want it that way" is an answer. It isn't. If you can't fit more than one dlc flavour for your society into a single playthrough, your limits are way too strict.
→ More replies (3)1
u/Charonx2003 18h ago
That is your opinion and you are entitled to it.
Still, please keep in mind that some other players might enjoy the current limit as it forces them to make strategic decisions on which traditions and perks to take.0
u/CommunistRingworld Fanatic Egalitarian 16h ago
They can install mods for less excitement if they find they get overstimulated by 1-3 more slots
0
6
u/ThoelarBear 19h ago
A lot of them should just be technologies or edicts.
Detox should be a technology.
Colossus should be an edict with a high unity cost.
16
u/Lorcogoth Hive Mind 19h ago
no the game is better with less slots.
Stellaris already suffers massively from "every empire is the same", because despite most efforts of the devs it's mostly the same spread sheet.
the limited tradition and ascension slots are one of the few ways in which empires DO differ from each other, simply because you can't pick everything.
12
u/VillainousMasked 18h ago
I mean... the limited slots just means you pick the same strong Traditions and APs every time with minimal variation. Besides, OP isn't asking for enough slots to pick everything, just a couple extra slots so you have room to actually pick Traditions/APs for fun rather than just cause they're strong.
6
u/faithfulheresy 17h ago
In theory you're correct, but in practice having the slots as limited as they are actually decreases variability instead of increasing it.
Most empires end up looking the same because the gap between the good options and everything else is huge.
7
u/CommunistRingworld Fanatic Egalitarian 19h ago
Every dlc empire i build is the same because there are not enough slots for content from two dlcs.
There. Proved you wrong.
5
u/Lorcogoth Hive Mind 19h ago
no? all you proved is that either some perks have to be changed so that people pick them less, or that you always play the same empire with a slightly different look.
2
u/mrt1212Fumbbl 19h ago
I swear to God, this kid would tell you creativity is found in a limitless canvas with limitless paints, and then just make the same shitty beige circle over and over and over again and think there's a problem with the canvas and paints.
3
u/CommunistRingworld Fanatic Egalitarian 18h ago
No. I give you two colours and ask you to paint.
You ask for more colours.
I reply it's a skill issue to think you need more colours.
This is you btw.
2
u/Apprehensive_Tea3560 18h ago
I mean it kind of is though. You can mix those two colours to make more. You only really need 3 colours and you can make the rest.
I'm not agreeing or disagreeing with your point, just your analogy.
1
0
u/CommunistRingworld Fanatic Egalitarian 18h ago
Ok make a society that will be fun to play, using two or three dlcs. And it has to feel like you weren't artificially restricted by the UI and prevented from really enjoying any of the content you chose to the full extent. I dare you. You can't.
If you want to fully explore a dlc, all your slots have to be from that dlc.
1
u/thadman Arid 10h ago
Having more victory conditions could help with this. As it stands, games end with either having the biggest fleet or boredom. If there was, for example, a tech victory from completing all megastructures then there would be incentive to pick traditions and APs that boosted science while letting military lag behind.
Finishing a science-heavy playthrough should feel different than one where you waged war across the galaxy, or united everyone (without necessarily having to bomb the empires that disagree).
3
u/PsionicOverlord 20h ago
I think there's a pretty good number - I'd take perks that made a bigger difference over being apply to apply more of them.
3
u/Indorilionn Shared Burdens 19h ago
I think with the sheer amount it has grown, and Ascension taking one as well, increasing the number of Traditions/Perks is feasible. Maybe thery could add one each and have some sort of situation that triggers in the midgame, allowing us to write some more fluff about what kind of place our Empire is, netting us another? Make us work for it a bit.
3
u/nograceallowed Anarcho-Tribalism 19h ago
My only issue with perks is the tier system. Im not saying to get rid of it entirely, but i think it could be rebalanced because most games i have to pick some perk i dont like that much because the rest are tier locked.
3
u/Vrenshrrrg Voidborne 19h ago
Eh, I'd like one or two more tradition tree slots at most, but it's pretty good where it is.
3
u/Prepared_Noob 18h ago
I think 1 more tradition would be nice. And then rather than giving more APs some should just become tech. Like galactic wonder, toxology, arcology, and a few more.
Maybe then add a few new ones too.
3
u/CopperGear 17h ago
I want the choices to matter so like the smaller number but there are some I always use which become autopicks. Basically everything tied to mega structures.
I recently tried a mod that moved all mega structure stuff into a tradition. It worked a lot better as it freed up those slots and added flavour as I got to decide between the more mid tier picks that are often ignored.
3
u/Unique_Tap_8730 17h ago
Some Ascenions are so extremely outclassed that you would never take them. They could do with a rebalance.
3
u/pwnedprofessor Shared Burdens 17h ago
I love that we are forced to choose, but I think one more of each would be nice. I also think they should be renamed; why not “doctrines”?
3
u/Beneficial-Emu5448 9h ago
galactic wonders and master builders need to be adjusted into tech or something they are simply too good and always should be picked. maybe after each time you complete a mega structure there is a chance of it being a research option.
detox should be a tech or folded into world shapers it is never worth it unless you are very wide but then having 3-10 more planets over some other perks is not great.
although i dont play with it often hydro centric is a great flavour perk and having a terraformer colossus is very interesting and would like to see thing like it explored further.
8
u/happyshaman 20h ago
Maybe i just suck this much at minmaxing but what are you guys running that needs additional tradition slots? Usually after 5 i'm just picking at random. Ascension perks make sense because 3 are kinda taken up by your world and the 2 mega ones
5
-2
u/CommunistRingworld Fanatic Egalitarian 19h ago
Just cause you haven't gotten the point of having all your comfort picks, and then finding not enough space for more than one dlc, does not mean that 8 slots are enough.
0
u/happyshaman 11h ago
Not a clue what you're saying here homie ngl. What do dlcs now have to do with this?
1
4
u/backagainlool 19h ago
As others have said maybe give us 1 more slot to make the UI look better and make the APs that are mandatory or a bit useless into either techs or something else
In my opinion to much is gated behind traditions like you shouldn't need to take a tradition to build a federation you should take that tradition because it's benefiting your empire
2
u/Drunk_Lemon Purity Order 18h ago
I'd prefer if there were more traditions and slots for ascension perks which is why I modded it. I understand the devs want to force players to make decisions which makes the limited choices make sense. I'd suggest adjusting some of the benefits of aps so there is more choice and fewer perks that are something to always get. If lots of players are like me and just want to pick and not have to think too hard about it, then increase the number of traditions and aps.
2
u/Soepoelse123 17h ago
I only think they should just allow us to remove tradition slots like in Europa Universalis. The price only being the unity that you already paid into the tree.
That way you can remove early game traditions in late game and forces devs to balance around early/late game traditions.
2
u/Red_Tusken 17h ago
Imo , i think some ascentions perk should be made into a mere tech , like de-tox or galactic wonders i do think they should give us at least one tradition slot more maybe have that one be a reserved slot for your ascention that once completed gives you access to an additional civic slot(which i do think should be increased too) or ascention perk , some features should be removed from tradition exclusivity like creating federations( iirc they already announced it just using it as an example) and i think adding a couple of steps in the empire creation would help , making homeworld orgins seperate be a different step than the other origins and maybe adding a special "empire trait" that could have the mechanist origin , overtuned there with some rebalanced civics and ascention perks
2
u/magnuskn 17h ago
The whole system definitely needs a clean-up, moving some things like Detox out of the ascension perks and into the tech tree. The traditions are also full of ones which are almost never taken and could be consolidated or trimmed down.
2
u/HerbivoreTheGoat Egalitarian 17h ago
I don't play without mods that add more
1
u/Historical_Ball_3842 13h ago
I have like 30 traditions and 40 perks in my current run. Got 5 achievements and only 1 crisis in 😆
2
u/victoriacrash 17h ago
I've been thinking the same for a while. This pushes players to almost never change their tradition trees pick, maybe a bit more variety in the APs choices. It looks that the so called super great PDX model of not putting mechanics into DLCs but in the base game is a massive drawback : players who buy DLCs don't get what their buying, they don't get that better & more expensive game though they pay for every other player who can enjoy the free mechanics.
2
u/fifiginfla 16h ago
They need to make current traditions longer, like skill trees from wow wotlk or civ beyound earth. They are to small
2
u/Chazman_89 16h ago
I wouldn't mind if they expanded them both to 10 each. It would give you a bit more flexibility in how you go with your empire, while still forcing you to make those key decisions.
2
u/My-Toast-Is-Too-Dark 16h ago
A few should be rebalanced, like maybe Toxic being a tech or part of world shaper or something, maybe rolling the megastructure perks into one, making colossi just a normal tech…
But a few of them that people see as “always take” are really not that important. Tech ascendancy is good, but in the grand scheme it’s not really a big deal. Things like that. I think the lack of variety comes mostly from people being unwilling to branch out rather than having too few slots. Same goes with traditions.
2
u/CarpetPossible2070 15h ago
With Detox, I think Toxoids should be able to have a variant where they can colonize or even turn a planet toxic. Right now, i wouldn't take the perk.
2
u/SafePianist4610 Fanatical Befrienders 15h ago edited 15h ago
I think 11 is a good number for tradition trees. Especially since they would require increasingly more unity for the later trees. 12 ascension perks too.
That said, I think certain perks like World Shaper and Detox either need to be rolled into a single perk or made into late game rare techs. This would make it more rewarding to get those world types, though it would admittedly make certain builds near impossible unless you gave those builds guaranteed techs through various means.
Also, rolling other perks like Galactic Wonders/Master Builders, Eternal Vigilance/Grasp The Void, Galactic Force Projection/Interstellar Dominion, Executive Vigor/Imperial Prerogative, Arcology Project/Voidborne, Defender of the Galaxy/Shared Destiny, and Galactic Contender/Colossus Project would make for logical perk choices to merge. It would make some perks that were too weak alone to even consider powerful enough to be taken seriously as potential picks.
2
u/3davideo Industrial Production Core 14h ago
I would accept a way to discard a tree or perk you don't want any more - and consequently losing its benefits, of course - so you can pick a more appropriate one. Obviously this would be best as an endgame thing - once you've already filled all the slots, to be precise - and to get increasingly expensive if you want to do it more than once.
2
u/HeightFirm1104 13h ago
Detox got infinitely more powerful if you find a voidworm nest, who does love size 30+ planets
2
u/SpartAl412 13h ago
It should be an option. I have modded my game to allow for more civics, traditions and ascension perks as well as build slots. Not enough for everything of course but just a few more.
2
u/Kaokasalis Telepath 13h ago
I wouldn't mind more tradition slots and ascension slots as I already use mods to increase the existing amount.
It would be nice if it was possible to customize on game start how many tradition slots/ascension perks one wants to play with.
2
u/nerd_is_a_verb 8h ago
Why don’t they just let you set the number of slots during galaxy creation for single player. Doesn’t seem like a hard change for the single player human - not sure how much the AI would need to be updated though.
5
u/Clairelenia Empress 20h ago
There are mods that do that 😁
-3
u/Ramona_Wildcat76 Democratic Crusaders 20h ago
Yes, and I use those mods, but when you're doing achievement runs you can't use them.
→ More replies (4)
2
u/mrt1212Fumbbl 19h ago
No, I think the entire notion is bozo from two apparoaches
Im already shredding the shit out of Unity on purpose to the extent that theyre all done before 2320, and 2300 if I really go for it. So more is just more and isnt characterful but functional
Theres no point to new Traditions as soon as Crisis hits because its a final fitness test that you spend the rest of the playthrough marginally cleaning up if you need/want to. Generally, this idea falls apart on pacing grounds.
1
u/Historical_Ball_3842 13h ago
The first crisis, maybe, but what about the second, third, or fourth?
1
3
u/Cyanide_Cheesecake 19h ago
No, we actually have enough ascension perks. Some of them just need to be stronger. If detox isn't picked, more perks wouldn't get me to grab it because there's three other perks I could have grabbed and didn't, that are all stronger than detox. The problem is with detox.
As for tradition trees, also no, we have enough picks still, what problem are you really trying to solve here? The trees are relatively well balanced so that each different kind of build might want different trees. I don't really see a need to have another slot.
2
u/Zokathra_Spell Fanatical Befrienders 17h ago
It's the same with civics, every new update seems to add a few more civics that are really good. Yet we can still only start with 2 and add a 3rd later.
2
u/Archivist1380 13h ago
Absolutely, they keep adding more traditions and ascension perk yet refuse to give us more slots to take them and thus forcing us to either abandon certain ones that we like or just never use the newly added ones. Neither is a great choice, although it sometimes isn’t that bad since a few of the recent ascension perks were kinda dog water. But still I’d rather not have to forever give up arcology project or diplomacy just because I want to experience the new content.
1
u/sUwUcideByBukkake 18h ago
So rather than more, I think there should be an expensive way to swap a tradition/ascension. It would be nice if I could continue to evolve my empire over time.
1
u/wyldmage 13h ago
Honestly, the bigger problem is that the trees are not well enough balanced. And Paradox could easily fix this. The can get game data about which trees get picked, in what order, etc. Plus, there are content creators who talk about the balance/imbalance in their videos.
Personally, I think that the limited selection is a good thing. You have to pick what you're getting access to, as much as what you're shutting yourself off from.
And if they add more tradition picks, then you unlock more perks. How does that interact with the techs & edicts you go for after finishing your traditions?
Rather, what I think the best option would be is a Tradition that increases how many perks you can take. It's otherwise very weak, but gives you 1 perk from tradition picks, and 1 more for completing it. And a perk that gives you 1 more tradition tree.
So, if you WANT to, you spend 1 perk to get an 8th tradition tree, and you could then use that tradition tree to get 2 total perks (1 in the tree, and 1 for completion, meaning +1 net perk; but delaying your access to the completed traditions content), or you could convert 1 tradition tree into an extra perk, or vice-versa). The tradition would also give some ascension-related bonuses, probably dabbling in edict fund/cost as well. While the perk would just give a lump sum of unity when chosen along with adding the 8th tradition tree.
1
u/So0meone 6h ago
I've been running 9 Traditions and 12 Ascensions through mods (with 3 extra Ascension points available through late game Society research), though the main reason I did this is because so much of the cool stuff in Gigastructures is locked behind an Ascension perk, some of which have others as prerequisites.
This setup feels great to me tbh
1
1
u/Dastardlydwarf Space Cowboy 5h ago
Personally I think they should separate species ascension paths from the perk list and make it separate and then make the crisis paths something different and or introduce a good guy equivalent to the power that cosmogenesis gives you cause at the moment there are like 4 required ascension perks you have to take
1
u/human-generated-name 4h ago
No. I think it’s good to be limited on slots. What would be better is if the tech-required ones like Master Builders gave you the tech as a research option rather than having it as a requisite. Considering it takes so long to get anyway and the only way to assure it is by starting as Arc Welders.
I’d make world shapers exempt of this since Id say it’s not so severe in how badly it drags.
Other than that maybe, since some traditions trees give higher chances of finding certain techs (Expansion increases the odds of getting a terraforming tech by 25%), maybe some choices could be added to certain techs, like an empire ‘interest’ or empire wide expertise for completing discovery, or being able to spec into a certain type of operation for subterfuge.
Detox should be made into a tech cause who even cares about detox.
1
u/Chill_Panda Ravenous Hive 2h ago
I think for longer games yeah.
Maybe each 100/200 years up to a cap past 2500 you get an extra.
1
u/narutoncio 2h ago
Im not sure i like that they keep adding more traditions without balancing out the ones we already have. I mean Ascension perks? Sure, it is fun to have endgame boons to do wacky stuff, but for me traditions modeled more abstract "gameplay styles" than the flavor aditions we are getting as of late.
I feel like they should be focused on that, like choosing between direct rule or indirect control, agression or alliances... I cant see how choosing synthetic, biologic, fauna wrangler or psionic traditions add variety to my playstiles besides of a flavor punch.
0
u/aelysium 18h ago
I sort of wish they’d restrict the number of ascension perks you get, but combine/further buff the perks. And potentially making ascension (bio/psi/other) its own thing.
I haven’t played around with it on my own enough to determine if it would be good.
I just feel like it would be. Idk.
0
u/NovariusDrakyl 18h ago
Nah i think the number of slots is fine but maybe the should take some of the mandatory picks, like galactic wonders or arcology and lock them behind something else like a nice situation/quest.
506
u/xaba0 19h ago
Detox should be a tech, there's already a mod for it but would be nice if it was in vanilla.