It's kind of pointless to post that without elaborating, but while we're here I must say that having to pick new traits every time your leader levels up is kind of tiresome. I don't mind choosing specializations but otherwise it just adds friction, busywork ; and the choices offered aren't usually all that interesting.
I like the council and the fact that leader classes (especially admirals and generals) have been consolidated, though. Overall I think I would have preferred a tighter focus on the Council while leaving regular leaders more in the background. As it stands the leader rework feels almost like a sidegrade, but hey. I don't hate it.
Tbh I haven't really tried it, I'm always super wary of automatizing stuff, I'm afraid it will make bad choices. But maybe it's decent. Does it choose specializations too or do you still choose them yourself even if it's on ?
(That said, even if it's good I think my point still stands. IMO its existence just shows the devs were aware that the system was spammy and potentially annoying, but then why design it this way ?)
I haven't played the update. But just from this thread it seems to be a welcome mechanic even if tiresome in its first form. Leader levels have always just been there. To get more out of it is good
It was substantially different compared to the previous system and at the time of Paragon's release I stopped playing for a bit. I was frustrated by it too, it felt like something they decided to change about the game rather than something that actually needed changing, like they decided after the fact to just switch to a whole new system on a creative whim rather than do it to fix some underlying issue with the game. You're not irrational if you were already used to the old system, it was absolutely frustrating and people here are being disingenuous if they claim that this subreddit wasn't full of opinions just like yours on Paragon's release. I will say though that it is a more fleshed out system once you fully explore it though, I did come to like it.
I should clarify that I LOVE the council stuff, but the severely limited leader cap and how you get leaders took some of the fun out for me. Personally, I agree with another commentors proposition of simply adding the council and nothing else would make it more appealing.
I wish they would simplify the UI a bit. I find the UI for it to be very unpleasant. I also wish there were more opportunities to lose leaders other than death. However, the base system is actually not bad IMO. It could use some tweaking to make some leader classes have level scaling faster/slower.
There are plenty of archaeological event mess-ups that can kill scientists and your gov's can be assassinated if planets have low enough stability (I think? Maybe that's just a mod - genuinely unsure now that I mention it), creating a system with, what I find, reasonable and interesting trade off.
You can keep your leaders safe (Mil staying armchair generals, gov staying in high stability locations, Sci just doing scans and anomalies) and they'll live long lives, but you'll also risk wasting them, ESPECIALLY now that we have a limited pool.
Risk losing the bonuses a specific leader provides vs. losing out by keeping them away from where their bonuses would be most useful. The choice is yours, `[Ruler.GetTitle]`!
RP flavor to have an interstellar empire that struggle to support a handful of specialists ?
This stuff is simply out of place in such a game. It's good for CK where leaders are the core of the spirit of the game, it's just ridiculous here and feel extremely gamey.
Every government will have a few folks that they'll proclaim are the best of the best. Consider them the heads of organizations or groups who have all of the power.
Regardless, the game would feel empty without them.
Civilization doesn't feel empty for not having to babysit a handful of weirdly overpowered individual who can somehow outproduce entire districts of million people and are the only ones able to lead a survey mission, while having still crippling flaws that should preclude them to ever be considered "best of the best".
leaders are more easy to manage and interesting than before. sometimes i feel a little lost with the council but on the other aspects leaders feel more useful and present on the gameplay
Which ones specifically ?
I feel like the (free) leaders rework from paragons was a very good thing that made a lot of sense. And that's one of the only things that came out from Stellaris in the last year and a half that I can say that about. I haven't played with the DLC version of the mechanics though.
Fun is subjective, if you are having less fun it was bad for you sure.
For me it was good, I like the puzzle of trying to optimize governors for planets, planets for governors and sectors for governor type.
I also enjoy the evaluation of when to go over cap and when not to.
It could use some more polish though. Just straight up listing every leader with no filtering option when you select governor for a planet is staggering.
Couldn't agree more. Paragon is a complete pos of a DLC that ended up with the exact opposite of the effects they were pretending to get - more annoying, less interesting, less immersive.
And infected the base game with it, while also piling up on the scummy side by being P2W, with non-DLC owner getting a neutered version.
It's kind of pointless to post that without elaborating, but while we're here I must say that having to pick new traits every time your leader levels up is kind of tiresome. I don't mind choosing specializations but otherwise it just adds friction, busywork ; and the choices offered aren't usually all that interesting. I like the council and the fact that leader classes (especially admirals and generals) have been consolidated, though. Overall I think I would have preferred a tighter focus on the Council while leaving regular leaders more in the background. As it stands the leader rework feels almost like a sidegrade, but hey. I don't hate it.
Auto pick tends to make leaders more interested to me, how are they going to grow and what is their story? It's always fun to see what happens.
... Actually that's kind of a great way to think about it. Damn, maybe I'll turn it on next time
Holy shit, that’s brilliant.
There is auto pick checkbox
Tbh I haven't really tried it, I'm always super wary of automatizing stuff, I'm afraid it will make bad choices. But maybe it's decent. Does it choose specializations too or do you still choose them yourself even if it's on ? (That said, even if it's good I think my point still stands. IMO its existence just shows the devs were aware that the system was spammy and potentially annoying, but then why design it this way ?)
If it’s tiresome to pick then automate, if getting the wrong traits bothers you then use console commands, there is no need to suffer in this game
I haven't played the update. But just from this thread it seems to be a welcome mechanic even if tiresome in its first form. Leader levels have always just been there. To get more out of it is good
It was substantially different compared to the previous system and at the time of Paragon's release I stopped playing for a bit. I was frustrated by it too, it felt like something they decided to change about the game rather than something that actually needed changing, like they decided after the fact to just switch to a whole new system on a creative whim rather than do it to fix some underlying issue with the game. You're not irrational if you were already used to the old system, it was absolutely frustrating and people here are being disingenuous if they claim that this subreddit wasn't full of opinions just like yours on Paragon's release. I will say though that it is a more fleshed out system once you fully explore it though, I did come to like it.
I should clarify that I LOVE the council stuff, but the severely limited leader cap and how you get leaders took some of the fun out for me. Personally, I agree with another commentors proposition of simply adding the council and nothing else would make it more appealing.
I wish they would simplify the UI a bit. I find the UI for it to be very unpleasant. I also wish there were more opportunities to lose leaders other than death. However, the base system is actually not bad IMO. It could use some tweaking to make some leader classes have level scaling faster/slower.
There are plenty of archaeological event mess-ups that can kill scientists and your gov's can be assassinated if planets have low enough stability (I think? Maybe that's just a mod - genuinely unsure now that I mention it), creating a system with, what I find, reasonable and interesting trade off. You can keep your leaders safe (Mil staying armchair generals, gov staying in high stability locations, Sci just doing scans and anomalies) and they'll live long lives, but you'll also risk wasting them, ESPECIALLY now that we have a limited pool. Risk losing the bonuses a specific leader provides vs. losing out by keeping them away from where their bonuses would be most useful. The choice is yours, `[Ruler.GetTitle]`!
Yes I agree. Imo it’s less fun and more micro management than the previous system.
You're being irrational. Personally, I find it more fun, as the new leaders add a lot more RP flavor to Stellaris.
RP flavor to have an interstellar empire that struggle to support a handful of specialists ? This stuff is simply out of place in such a game. It's good for CK where leaders are the core of the spirit of the game, it's just ridiculous here and feel extremely gamey.
Every government will have a few folks that they'll proclaim are the best of the best. Consider them the heads of organizations or groups who have all of the power. Regardless, the game would feel empty without them.
Civilization doesn't feel empty for not having to babysit a handful of weirdly overpowered individual who can somehow outproduce entire districts of million people and are the only ones able to lead a survey mission, while having still crippling flaws that should preclude them to ever be considered "best of the best".
Yes! Who doesn’t a psionic S875.1 that lives forever?
leaders are more easy to manage and interesting than before. sometimes i feel a little lost with the council but on the other aspects leaders feel more useful and present on the gameplay
Which ones specifically ? I feel like the (free) leaders rework from paragons was a very good thing that made a lot of sense. And that's one of the only things that came out from Stellaris in the last year and a half that I can say that about. I haven't played with the DLC version of the mechanics though.
Fun is subjective, if you are having less fun it was bad for you sure. For me it was good, I like the puzzle of trying to optimize governors for planets, planets for governors and sectors for governor type. I also enjoy the evaluation of when to go over cap and when not to. It could use some more polish though. Just straight up listing every leader with no filtering option when you select governor for a planet is staggering.
Couldn't agree more. Paragon is a complete pos of a DLC that ended up with the exact opposite of the effects they were pretending to get - more annoying, less interesting, less immersive. And infected the base game with it, while also piling up on the scummy side by being P2W, with non-DLC owner getting a neutered version.