Stellaris Dev Diary #54 - Ethics Rework

[Wizzington]

so its still not possible to create something like the borg or kikliss (an insect empire, with one queen and 2391043 billion drones, without moral all just working for one purpose).
please make this happen (no moral races and a "unification" government ype out of MoO2).

I really think Hive Minds and the like need special mechanics that are outside the regular ethics system, so if/when we add them that's almost certainly the route we'll go. Same if we were to say, add playable robots or gas giant dwellers.

 

[Wizzington]

Will the AI personalities be tweaked (as in the specific combination of traits that result in an AI personality) because of this or should it still be the same as it is now?

Will be tweaked as needed.

 

[Wizzington]

Will the factions as political movements open up the door for a parliament or congress similar to Vicky 2? That might limit slider or policy options when certain factions are in power or potentially function like the small council in CK2 and have varying degrees of approval authority over player actions like war declaration or purging?

Should absolutely be possible to mod if nothing else.

 

[Wizzington]

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.

 

[Wizzington]

The problem with this system is that it suggest that Authoritarian society is not equal based on some social aspects. But that if it isn't equal based on physiology? Authoritarian is all about oppression, but that if there is no oppression - only roles defined by physiology? And the person of "ruler" defined by biology. It's not only about ants and such - the whole lot of pack animals have predefined roles, some of them being very grim ones. But are they "oppressed" by pack leader? Or it's a necessity?

Authoritarianism does not necessitate oppression. You're free to ban slavery and roleplay a benevolent autocrat, but it doesn't make your society in any way equal. As for things like hive minds, as I said, they can't really be done well under the current ethics system period, this does not change that.

 

[GAGA Extrem]

I think ecologist would be hard to work into the ethos system, because you rarely find someone that would take the opposite position - I'm actually stumped when trying to think of an ethical/philosophical/political opposite of ecologism/ecologicism. If we're talking on a social scale, to boot, it might be hard. It could make sense though, from a utilitarian point of view; consumption of biospheres and materials are good, and there's always another planet anyway, right?[...]

They'd make for bad ethics, but could be pretty solid policies (that somewhat relate to ethics).

Personally I'd use Kim Stanley Robinson's Mars Triology for the naming convention:
Red -> Preserve the "natural" state of planetary bodies ("adapt the colonists, not the planet")
Green -> Limited terraforming to make them habitable, while preserving some of the original environment ("a bit of both")
Blue -> Full terraforming and conversion ("adapt the planet, not the colonists")

Spiritualist could be more interested in preservation (see FE's and their Holy Worlds), while Materialists would be eager to apply their fancy new techs. Xenophiles might go with a middle-of-the-road approach, while Xenophobes strive to adapt the planets to their pops (etc).

 

[Wizzington]

This argument has gone in circles long enough. Start a new thread on the topic if you want to continue discussing it.