Leaders cap

[michal(Krynik)]

while i do like leaders being acutly good and usfuel now i find my self needing more leaders then cap allows me to have and there is very limited ways that can be incresed they shoud defently add more what you guys think?

[Elitewrecker PT]

The penalty for going over cap has been substantially reduced already, it shouldn't be a big problem anymore.

[Kufesska]

leaders are too strong now, thats why they shouldn't increase cap

[michal(Krynik)]

after youre third leader over the cap you get 43 procent expirience gain debuff that seems rather large sure the leaders are very strong but you need a lot of them for admirals or governors hard to make do when you have economy for 5000 fllet capacity but admirals for 2000

[Chthonic Guardian]

Go Feudal civic. As long as they are assigned they don't cost anything whether over the cap or not.

[Immortalis]

Going with Aptidue tradition you get:
- 25% leader upkeep
+ 25% leader experience gain
+ 0.5% leader experience gain per scientist level
+ 1 leader capacity

On top of that, choosing the transcendent learning ascension perk you get 2 additional leader slots *and* + 33% leader experience gain.

Do that and you'd already be negating all the penalties to experience gain from going 4 leaders over the cap.
If that's not enough for you, mod the game to your liking.

[Kufesska]

i have 13 leaders(4 from ascension perks)
6 council-focused(2 admirals, 3 scientists, one governor)
2 scientists-explorers for surveing
2 governors-industrialists for my biggest ecus(also capitals of main sectors, so 10 level governor affects other planets and my ringworlds)
1 admiral-agressor just to have one, don't know why(i have much more fleets, so one admiral doesn't matter)
2 assisting-focused scientists(not such big imapct though, even governors make more difference, looking how much colonies they affect)
actually don't find really impactful last 3
could get rid of explorers, but they give 2 influence each, and i like them

oh, and legendary paragon Gray(he doesnt't counts), use him as governor for one more sector

and together those leaders affect my empire more than 50 before DLC

[Dave]

Or the developers could pull their heads out of their asses and discard the leader cap. Such a worthless forced change.

[Zargothrax]

Good tip for admirals if you need more capable fleets, just build up some automated fleets and move your admirals between them. You can have an admiral fight in a battle on one side of the galaxy then move them to another fleet on the other side to fight something else. Effectively gives all of your fleets an admiral so long as you don't need to fight more than a few battles at once.

You can also do the same with science ships to move your scientists around much more quickly, moving them between planets or places of interest where needed. Honestly I find myself running short of space when it comes to governors and generals more than anything.

[Oakshadow]

The cap is stupidly simple to bypass. You can easily raises the cap to 12 or more. With the eager trait completely eliminating a leader's contribution to the cap. I have a friend that loves running leader builds and he consistently uses 28 leaders or more without any issues.

If you're having difficulty circumventing the cap its because you haven't adapted to the changes paragons brought to the game. Because the reality is the leader cap is about as meaningless as every other cap stellaris has.

[michal(Krynik)]

youre just wrong jay i have admiral staff skill forgot what its called my admirals start at level 3 how much im gona be able to use the egare ones untill the level up once and start using the cap not very much the start using the cap at level 4 and going over the cap 3 times to get minus 40 leader experince gain is huge and as i said not very many ways to increse the cap i gusse you can ignore it and have all youre leaders at the same level but that dosent seems like good solution

[michal(Krynik)]

i gussse you coud swich them out no problem but i dunno i like the idea of my admiral being asidenet to a particular fleet

[corisai]

I would say - all your council members MUST get +leader experience trait on their first levels.

That's efficiently allow you to go overcap much more (while still being around 100% basic XP gain),

[Zedonova Nova]

my question is why have a game that supposed to promote Expansion while de-incentivizating it, in the same breath? Yea, there is a burden of expansion in general from larger empires, but I am tempted to go back to 2.8 or something because of all these useless changes that add just a undisclosed amount of frustration to this game. I swear companies forget what they created, because of new people on the project and whatnot. This is some bull. I started to actually like this game at somepoint.

This game is becoming more and more limiting as time goes by...used to be able to build multiple alloy foundries and other buidling slot foundries. This game is starting to bite now.

[Geoff]

Originally posted by Sednova Nova:

my question is why have a game that supposed to promote Expansion while de-incentivizating it, in the same breath?

My theory is they're pitching for a more "popular" title instead of a high-value niche. Fewer options, fewer weird scenarios that players might never see, fewer references to books that high school kids and bigots haven't read, etc., etc. And in general, less player autonomy, less variety in gameplay, and less emphasis on diverse replayability.

If that's the strategy, I can see an economic logic to it. Kids spending their parents' money can play a few hours a day for a few weeks for a year or two then wander off to other things. So like, basically "take the money and run." They're not as difficult to please as grumpy nerds and they don't have high expectations of value for their money since they tend to get bored and move on regardless.

Of course, I have nothing nice to say about the business ethics of hijacking an established title with an establish fanbase to build this weird game.

[corisai]

Originally posted by Sednova Nova:

my question is why have a game that supposed to promote Expansion while de-incentivizating it, in the same breath? Yea, there is a burden of expansion in general from larger empires, but I am tempted to go back to 2.8 or something

Except leader on every planet in 2.8 will provide less benefits to you then only a council now?
You're expected to be more creative in making sectors now (sometimes - yes, making a foundry from less ideal planet then you could).