Stellaris Reduce Empire Sprawl/Size In 3.3

How do you reduce empire sprawl, now called empire size, in Stellaris? Empire size over 100 gives a penalty to tech research cost and tradition adoption cost, so if we can reduce it we can research faster! In this video I will go through all the ways to reduce empire sprawl that can be found in Stellaris

Stellaris Version 3.3

If you enjoyed this video please leave a like & SUBSCRIBE!

And please comment with any feedback, any ideas or if you disagree!

[Axxikon]

I was worried about the size chanhes because I enjoy, shall we say... "aggressive expansion." Unfortunately this change did somewhat ruin my old playstyle, but on the flip side it has shown me that I really enjoy driven assimilators. Win some lose some :)

[omegaexists]

Montu, I genuinely forget this channel is not the same size as Aspec until I look at the numbers. Your quality and dedication is amazing

[Jernsaxe]

The patch today does make planet ascention cheaper if you have low sprawl so I guess that is nice.

[kaiscarborough]

Montu’s videos are always so indepth and I love it, having the choices compiled all together also help alot especially as a machine empire main where i panicked from the sudden +50% colony sprawl.

[Solon]

I think the empire sprawl from pops mechanic should be related less to how many pops you have in your Empire, but how they are distributed across your empire in relation to their distance from your capital world. A world of 45 pops located 12 systems away should put far more of a strain on your empire sprawl than the 90 pops on your capital. Basically, pops located on your capital should contribute little to no sprawl at all while popes further away should provide more sprawl. The one downside I see with this is that it has to potential allow you to drastically reduce your empire sprawl as soon as you unlock the ability to build Gateways.

[roymundchf]

Planetary ascension on ecumenopolis is quite good since it can carry a lot of pops

[andrzejpetrenko]

The changes in "empire size" wasn't that bad and now i think it is a good direction, but Paradox definitely lost the way. Playing with bureaucrats was fun and immersive, in my opinion they should make empire size like they did in 3.3 but with additional effects that can be reduced by administration centers. For example. Objective effects: tech cost, tradition cost, liders cost, edicts cost; and Reducible effects: stability penalty, liders upkeep, edicts upkeep.

[Maklak]

The 10 Empire Sprawl from Colony is an indirect nerf to Void Dwellers in particular and Habitats in general.

[chanachon]

Personally I really dislike the fact that pops contribute to empire size. Yes, it makes sense from a narrative perspective, i.e. the more pops you have, the harder it is to govern them all. But from a gameplay and balancing point of view, it still means that you are being punished regardless if you are going wide or tall.

[ndbrain]

I’m not going to lie, I actually hate the new empire size system. I feel as though I have to play as egalitarian or democratic (my least favorite to play) just to avoid being punished by the empire size system.

In this case the punishment is increased costs for things like traditions and tech.
As a result of that, I’m left wondering how to then decrease empire size. Only to find out that I essentially have next to no options for dealing with it.
If I don’t plan to play a certain government type with certain civics, then I’m essentially stuck with a punishment for something I never decided on having in the first place.

Sure I CAN modify my species in order to help with empire size, but I can never fully remedy the problem without sacrificing way more then I’d want to.

I shouldn’t be forced to go down a specific tech tree and be forced to give my species’ certain traits, if I am limited in the amount of traits I can have per species, and limited to only researching one society tech at a time.

If I go in with an empire designed to take over planets, adapt to new environments easily, or one meant to vassalize and uplift then I shouldn’t be punished for expanding rapidly.
Because that’s part of what makes those empires/species’ fun!

The whole empire size system feels out of my control when I play the above empires/play styles. And being punished for something like that, feels terrible.
I liked the old system of building bureaucracy buildings so much more.
Because it felt like something clear cut and simple. Well within my control.

It was as simple as your empire sprawl is X number, if you want it to go up you have to build and maintain this building type. Which used resources I obtained from expanding. Thus encouraging me to build more of said buildings.

It was a simple solution that made expanding fun because you could always get the resources needed to do so.

This new empire size system however, it does not encourage expansion instead it punishes you for it by making things cost more.
And the resources you have to expend to alleviate empire size aren’t easily obtained.
In other words, the resources are your species and government traits slots, good rng(for research), and certain traditions.
All of which are limited in some way, many of which can’t be changed at all or without great effort and planning, and that’s not even mentioning the real life time I have to spend to deal with those “resources” the empire size system uses.

As a whole, the new empire size system feels like an awful but well meaning attempt at improving a piece of the game. Something I do wish they succeed at. However as it is currently, the empire size system actively makes me have less fun. Which is a problem.

[DrApylon]

So, if you go all in on Empire Sprawl reduction, it looks pretty good on paper. But in practice, it flounders in the early game, snowballing your economy is much harder without those bonuses. Mid-Late game, ive found it isnt great either, often times its better to take a bigger bonus than go for a smaller penalty. In addition if you are struggling with empire sprawl from conquest, create a vassal state (it will be heavily friendly towards you and share your ethics if you make the vassal not make someone a vassal) from an underdeveloped sector you mass colonized/conquered to reduce your sprawl then re-integrate later when they are more developed and you have expanded your ability to deal with sprawl (through ascension, traditions, tech, etc.). I do think its good to go regular pacifist but a trap to go full fanatic, you end up with good economy but can end up just getting boxed in, unable to expand until you switch ethics, you need the flexibility to be on the offensive in this game.

[Barbd]

The various issues people are making note of with the changes have a lot of merit, but another big issue I've found is how incredibly laggy the game has become since the patch. My most recent playthrough began experiencing significant performance issues around 2330, to the tune of the game freezing numerous times for upwards of a minute when it *wasn't* doing a biyearly autosave. Even if it didn't freeze, the game is nearly unplayable on Fastest or even Fast speed due to the stutters and stops. This is with an 800 star galaxy of 18 empires. To put it in perspective, the game lags about as badly ~2330 post patch for me as it used to ~2430 pre-patch. My PC is no slouch either, and I don't run anything other than Stellaris at once.

[aname]

The Greater Good Level 4 resolution also reduces empire size from pops by 10%

[MrFunkhouser]

I hate this change, because it's forcing you to play a certain way, I don't feel the old way was as linear.

Thanks for all you do!

[spiritualmango]

As a RP player I enjoyed this changes because it felt more inmersive

[MatthewChenault]

My main issue isn’t with the sprawl system. My main issue is with the change of recruiting leaders form energy to unity. It bogs down your ability to unlock ascension perks.

[Durandune]

Things change so much, everytime I come back to this game Im learning new mechanics! I used to play Imperium Galactica 2 and this game definitly captures the same essence. I cant say Im a fan of all the DLC content being so expensive, but all companies are guilty of that one these days. I miss games you paid for once

[fnorgen]

A solution I came up with was to set up frontier colonies ready to produce vast amounts of basic resources, and then release them as vassals with a substantial basic resource tax. It kept almost all my pops working as specialists, so I got really good tech and alloy gain despite a modest pop size. As a bonus I didn't have to micro manage as many colonies.

[smoore]

Great info as always Montu! Your videos are always so informative! I'm still not sure how I feel about this new system but your videos have been fantastic in learning to deal with it! Playing fanatic pacifist, egalitarian sounds like hell to me in and of itself though lol

[malcontent]

Super unfortunate with the way that they decided to implement empire size. The size of your empire is almost entirely based on the amount of pops you have, and though it makes sense thematically for pops to contribute a lot to it, that's a direct nerf to having any amount of pops... Not like it's one of the most important "resources" in the game. The definition of "tall" that paradox have is so counterintuitive.