• We have updated our Community Code of Conduct. Please read through the new rules for the forum that are an integral part of Paradox Interactive’s User Agreement.
Status
Not open for further replies.

Stellaris Dev Diary #54 - Ethics Rework

Hello everyone and welcome to another Stellaris development diary. Now that 1.4 is out, we can finally start properly talking about the 1.5 'Banks' update, which will be a major update with an accompanying (unannounced) expansion. As of right now we cannot provide any details on when 1.5 will come out, or anything about the unannounced expansion, so please don't ask. :)

Today's topic is a number of changes coming to ethics in the 1.5 update. Everything in this diary is part of the free update. Please note that values shown in screenshots are always non-final.

Authoritarian vs Egalitarian
One of the things in Stellaris I was never personally happy with was the Collectivism vs Individualism ethic. While interesting conceptually, the mechanics that the game presented for the ethics simply did not match either their meanings or flavor text, meaning you ended up with a Collectivist ethos that was somehow simultaneously egalitarian and 100% in on slavery, while Individualism was a confused jumble between liberal democratic values and randian free-market capitalism. For this reason we've decided to rebrand these ethics into something that should both be much more clear in its meaning, and match the mechanics as they are.

Authoritarian replaces Collectivist and represents belief in hierarchial rule and orderly, stratified societies. Authoritarian pops tolerate slavery and prefer to live in autocracies.
Egalitarian replaces Individualist and represents belief in individual rights and a level playing field. Egalitarian pops dislike slavery and elitism and prefer to live in democracies.

While I understand this may cause some controversy and will no doubt spark debate over people's interpretation of words like Authoritarian and Individualist, I believe that we need to work with the mechanics we have, and as it stand we simply do not have good mechanics for a Collectivism vs Individualism axis while the mechanics we have fit the rebranded ethics if not perfectly then at least a whole lot better.
2016_12_08_1.png

2016_12_08_5.png


Pop Ethics Rework
Another mechanic that never quite felt satisfying is the ethics divergence mechanic. Not only is it overly simplified with just a single value determining if pops go towards or from empire ethics, the shift rarely makes sense: Why would xenophobe alien pops diverge away from xenophobe just because they're far away from the capital of a xenophobic empire? Furthermore, the fact that pops could have anything from one to three different ethics made it extremely difficult to actually quantify what any individual pop's ethics actually mean for how they relate to the empire. For this reason we've decided to revamp the way pop ethics work in the following way:
  • Each pop in your empire will now only embrace a single, non-fanatic ethic. At the start of the game, your population will be made of up of only the ethics that you picked in species setup, but as your empire grows, its population will become more diverse in their views and wants.
  • Each ethic now has an attraction value for each pop in your empire depending on both the empire's situation and their own situation. For example, enslaved pops tend to become more egalitarian, while pops living around non-enslaved aliens become more xenophilic (and pops living around enslaved aliens more xenophobic). Conversely, fighting a lot of wars will increase the attraction for militarism across your entire empire, while an alien empire purging pops of a particular species will massively increase the attraction for xenophobic for the species being purged.
  • Over time, the ethics of your pops will drift in such a way that it roughly matches the overall attraction of that value. For example, if your materialist attraction sits at 10% for decades, it's likely that after that time, around 10% of your pops will be materialist. There is some random factor so it's likely never going to match up perfectly, but the system is built to try and go towards the mean, so the more overrepresented an ethic is compared to its attraction, the more likely pops are to drift away from it and vice versa.
2016_12_08_3.png


So what does the single ethic per pop mean in terms of how it affects pop happiness? Well, this brings us to the new faction system, which we will cover briefly in this dev diary, and get back to more in depth later.

Faction Rework
One thing we feel is currently missing from Stellaris is agency for your pops. Sure, they have their ethics and will get upset if you have policies that don't suit them, but that's about the only way they have of expressing their desires, and there is no tie-in between pop ethics and the politics systems in the game. To address this and also to create a system that will better fit the new pop ethics, we've decided to revamp the faction system in the following manner:
  • Factions are no longer purely rebel groupings, but instead represent political parties, popular movements and other such interest groups, and mostly only consist of pops of certain ethics. For example, the Supremacist faction desires complete political dominance for their own species, and is made up exclusively of Xenophobic pops, while the Isolationist faction wants diplomatic isolation and a strong defense, and can be joined by both Pacifist and Xenophobe pops. You do not start the game with any factions, but rather they will form over the course of the game as their interests become relevant
  • Factions have issues related to their values and goals, and how well the empire responds to those issues will determine the overall happiness level of the faction. For example, the Supremacists want the ruler to be of their species and are displeased by the presence of free alien populations in the empire. They will also get a temporary happiness boost whenever you defeat alien empires in war.
  • The happiness level of a faction determines the base happiness of all pops belonging to it. This means that where any pop not belonging to a faction has a base happiness of 50%, a pop belonging to a faction that have their happiness reduced to 35% because of their issues will have a base happiness of only 35% before any other modifiers are applied, meaning that displeasing a large and influential faction can result in vastly reduced productivity across your empire. As part of this, happiness effects from policies, xenophobia, slavery, etc have been merged into the faction system, so engaging in alien slavery will displease certain factions instead of having each pop individually react to it.
  • Factions have an influence level determined by the number of pops that belong to it. In addition to making its pops happier, a happy faction will provide an influence boost to their empire.
2016_12_08_4.png

2016_12_08_2.png


We will come back to factions in greater detail in a later dev diary, going over topics such as how separatists and rebellious slaves will work, and how factions can be used to change your empire ethics, but for now we are done for today. Next week we'll be talking about another new feature that we have dubbed 'Traditions and Unity'. See you then!
 
Last edited:
  • 367
  • 53
  • 17
Reactions:
Ah, this precise issue (hive minds, spaceborn faction, AI faction) was discussed a few pages back with the argument that it'd have to be a future expansion.

Also, the gas giant revolution is upon the galaxy and the workers will be liberated from their eternal toil by force (when a normal empire agrees to transport them back and forth): Confirmed.

Or just wait until they adapt to their environment. May take a few decades. Then they become... old farts.#

ba-dum-dum-tsh

I'll get my coat.
 
  • 4
Reactions:
The Authoritarian vs. Egalitarian dichotomy makes zero sense whatsoever. They really ought to do Authoritarian vs. Libertarian instead, that is the correct dichotomy after all.

Does someone at Paradox really think a faction cannot be authoritarian and egalitarian at the same time? That they are somehow mutually exclusive? Nonsense.

I promise you in any PoliSci 101 course it is always Authoritarianism vs. Libertarianism every time.
bothaxes.gif


Let me help you with that. The answer can be found in the very same Graphic you posted AND leads to many confusion especially in the USA because of the name of the political "left" party. These things get mixed of all the time.

The horizontally axis represents the economic scale. Means if you are on the left, you represent a controlled economy, right representing a laissez-faire economy. The other axis however, represent your social ideology, where Libertarian means simplified you are for same rights, anti slaver and pro democracy.

So, i.e. the Soviet Union, to which you are referring at I presume, is economic left and socially authoritarian. The typical Republic American would be Libertarian Right, the typical European Socialist would be Libertarian Left, the National Socialist would be Authoritan Right. That´s simplifications, but you get the idea.

The Stellaris Axis Egalitarian - Authoritarian represent the middle, and not the economic axis. The reason it´s called "Egalitarian" it´s mostly that especially between Europe and the USA, "Liberal" means an entirely different thing. In the USA, "Liberal" is something like a social- democrat, while i.e. a "liberal" in Germany has the economic thinking of an American Republican.

So, the problem lies only in a word, the economic scale which you referring at is not represented in Stellaris at all, at least yet. Just replace "Egalitarian" with "Libertarian" in our head, and you are ready to go.
 
  • 8
  • 3
Reactions:
I thought that was about materialist, which is BOTH capitalism AND science, according to bonus, government, ai personality and dialogues. Apparently, a materialist is a greedy scientist, however, a capitalist spiritualist doesn't exists in Paradox world.
I didn't mind collectivism and individualist though. It made sense, even with the name. I don't like the change, I wish it was new options instead.




As for the ethic divergence, I REALLY hope we'll have a way to change our governement ethos. For example, a faction win a civil war and force the change, or we do it willingly because the majority of our pop have changed. Ironically, that's what happened to the Cybrex ingame (they would have started as xenophobic/militaristic, and after a while they realized it was bad, and went into pacifism), and yet we are unable to do so as a player.

Building rebate could just be a focus on more efficient building methods over more ceremonial ones. There's nothing stopping you from playing a fanatically spiritualist, thrifty Plutocratic Oligarchy.
 
give we what Collectivist/Individualist along with the ethics any thoughts on mechanics for them?

We already know unemployment increases drive towards egalitarianism. I imagine the very process of enslaving other species enforces a caste doctrine fitting authoritarianism.
 
We all know that debate could go on forever. The point is that egalitarianism is, as he said, too ambiguous. And I would add that framing the ethics as Authoritarianism vs. Egalitarianism creates a false dichotomy as well. Authoritarianism vs. Libertarianism is the normal, proper arrangement.

A state can be both authoritarian and egalitarian at the same time. It doesn't take much of a stretch of the imagination to see that egalitarians can be supplemented by authoritarianism to achieve their egalitarian goals through force.

I would like to point you to my last post. The American definition for "Libertarian" is not the same as in Europe. The "egalitarian" you are referring to is not meant economically, it is meant politically. The economic spectrum, i.e. command economies, are not represented in Stellaris.
 
  • 2
  • 1
Reactions:
I consider Egalitarian to be a perfectly valid antithesis to Authoritarian.

You would be mistaken to do so. Authority/Liberty is a far more accurate arrangement than Authority/Equality which do not even need to be opposed to one another.

All that aside... I'm actually interested in discussion of the mechanic instead of retaliatory ad hominems unlike some people.
 
  • 3
  • 1
  • 1
Reactions:
We already know unemployment increases drive towards egalitarianism. I imagine the very process of enslaving other species enforces a caste doctrine fitting authoritarianism.

I'm actually thinking of changing it so unemployment just increases drift away from empire ethics instead, or scrapping the effect altogether. It's not like unemplyoment is really much of a mechanic at the moment.
 
  • 34
  • 7
Reactions:
Let me help you with that. The answer can be found in the very same Graphic you posted AND leads to many confusion especially in the USA because of the name of the political "left" party. These things get mixed of all the time.

The horizontally axis represents the economic scale. Means if you are on the left, you represent a controlled economy, right representing a laissez-faire economy. The other axis however, represent your social ideology, where Libertarian means simplified you are for same rights, anti slaver and pro democracy.

So, i.e. the Soviet Union, to which you are referring at I presume, is economic left and socially authoritarian. The typical Republic American would be Libertarian Right, the typical European Socialist would be Libertarian Left, the National Socialist would be Authoritan Right. That´s simplifications, but you get the idea.

The Stellaris Axis Egalitarian - Authoritarian represent the middle, and not the economic axis. The reason it´s called "Egalitarian" it´s mostly that especially between Europe and the USA, "Liberal" means an entirely different thing. In the USA, "Liberal" is something like a social- democrat, while i.e. a "liberal" in Germany has the economic thinking of an American Republican.

So, the problem lies only in a word, the economic scale which you referring at is not represented in Stellaris at all, at least yet. Just replace "Egalitarian" with "Libertarian" in our head, and you are ready to go.

Thank you, that was helpful actually. The terminology carries some different meanings/connotations over here than it does in Europe I guess.
 
  • 1
  • 1
Reactions:
You would be mistaken to do so. Authority/Liberty is a far more accurate arrangement than Authority/Equality which do not even need to be opposed to one another.

All that aside... I'm actually interested in discussion of the mechanic instead of retaliatory ad hominems unlike some people.
Are you seriously mad that I asked if you were American?

It's a relevant question, because the understanding of this terminology- as has been elaborated on quite often- relies in part on cultural backgrounds.
 
  • 1
Reactions:
Yes, in multiple ways. For example, being around Repugnant aliens will make pops more Xenophobic.

@Wiz Those poor Blorg will have an even harder time keeping friends* :(

*They can always conquer make new friends though.
 
  • 2
Reactions:
You would be mistaken to do so. Authority/Liberty is a far more accurate arrangement than Authority/Equality which do not even need to be opposed to one another.

All that aside... I'm actually interested in discussion of the mechanic instead of retaliatory ad hominems unlike some people.

A democracy with many freedoms can have a leader with a lot of authority.
 
  • 3
Reactions:
Are pops with similar ethos as the empire more likely to migrate there, or is there a way to filter immigration for pops that won't be extremely angry, and rebellious?
 
This is an inherent problem to Stellaris' game mechanics, unfortunately. So long as aliens can be integrated into other civilizations successfully, that means that all species need to be capable of behaving the same way. Hence, you cannot have a truly alien populace.

Extreme example: you can have a Scourge fleet-mind admiral as the democratically elected ruler of your empire.

Yeah, I agree with this... mostly. There is one place where paradox can place alien races that are significantly and fundamentally different from ourselves... The end game crisis. The normal rules don't apply to them!

I've never gotten the Prethoryn Swarm before, but aren't they basically that kind of literal hive mind race that people say they want to see in Stellaris?
 
  • 2
Reactions:
I'm actually thinking of changing it so unemployment just increases drift away from empire ethics instead, or scrapping the effect altogether. It's not like unemplyoment is really much of a mechanic at the moment.

In my recent campaign I was attacked by two empires very early on and I ended up leaving some colonies I set up under developed for a long time because literally every single mineral I had was going to try ensure I even survived. I think they must have had a pop or two unemployed for about 20 years or so on those worlds. It would have been fitting if they'd ended up as authoritarian spiritualists or something - an lost generation from a long and bitter war, alienated, angry and bitter and set to cause problems for the empire for decades to come.

I'd keep it, it's a fun bit of flavour even if unemployment doesn't (currently) come up in normal gameplay very often.
 
  • 7
Reactions:
Status
Not open for further replies.