• 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:
So you, basically:
1. removing fanatic bonus for pops (leaving it only for empire as a whole)
2. leaving only one ethic per pop (that results in way less happiness for most ehtic combinations)

Am I to understand that you now want people to choose non-fanatic ethics for empire, based on amount of +happiness/-divergence buildings they get? (and provide no info whatsoever on that topic during empire creation)
Given this involves happiness and divergence being overhauled, I'm not sure your supposition holds much water.
 
  • 7
Reactions:
Given this involves happiness and divergence being overhauled, I'm not sure your supposition holds much water.

Agreed, if anything it seems like you can choose between more standard ethics (pleasing more once factions happen) or fanaticism (more POPs will stay conformant to state ethics, but those who do not are very unhappy). A duality. I like it.
 
<political opinion here> <more political opinion here> <social commentary here> <general rant here> <anti-changing things again Paradox rant here> <random curse> <swearing> <fanboy platitude here>

Good ideas. Thanks Wiz.
 
  • 4
  • 1
  • 1
Reactions:
The oddity of "authoritarian" as an antonym of "egalitarian" presents itself at every turn: an authoritarian government makes fine sense, but what exactly does it mean for a Pop to be "authoritarian"--other than preferring an authoritarian government?
 
  • 5
Reactions:
Will we be able to dynamically rename factions in our own empire? Please say yes, it would be amazing. :D
 
  • 2
Reactions:
So you, basically:
1. removing fanatic bonus for pops (leaving it only for empire as a whole)
2. leaving only one ethic per pop (that results in way less happiness for most ehtic combinations)

Am I to understand that you now want people to choose non-fanatic ethics for empire, based on amount of +happiness/-divergence buildings they get? (and provide no info whatsoever on that topic during empire creation)

I guess starting with more empire ethoses will likely make your empire more unhappy in general, cause you will have to balance your actions against the opinions of 3 major mindsets. on the other hand you could get some nice additional influence going if you manage to succeed.

But i agree, there should be a fanatic faction for every ethos as well.
 
Given this involves happiness and divergence being overhauled, I'm not sure your supposition holds much water.
Given how they overhauled habitability, I have my doubts.

Basesd on what they said:
1. base happiness = faction hapiness (so far, only with conmfirnation that it can go less than 50%)
2. no fanatic bonus from hapiness = next to no (un)happiness from war/peace and policies

Result? No actual hapiness buffs, less hapiness debuffs, which means hapiness sitting around neutral for most pops for any ethic/policy combination (not taking other, non-ralated factors into account).
 
  • 5
  • 1
Reactions:
The oddity of "authoritarian" as an antonym of "egalitarian" presents itself at every turn: an authoritarian government makes fine sense, but what exactly does it mean for a Pop to be "authoritarian"--other than preferring an authoritarian government?

"I'm in charge!"
"No I am!"
"I thought he was!"
"No she is!"
"Who's in charge?"
"We should have a vote."
"Burn the witch."
 
  • 4
Reactions:
Given how they overhauled habitability, I have my doubts.

Basesd on what they said:
1. base happiness = faction hapiness (so far, only with conmfirnation that it can go less than 50%)
2. no fanatic bonus from hapiness = next to no (un)happiness from war/peace and policies

Result? No actual hapiness buffs, less hapiness debuffs, which means hapiness sitting around neutral for most pops for any ethic/policy combination (not taking other, non-ralated factors into account).
Your problem is you are assuming current happiness/divergence mechanics and projecting those onto the relatively little we know about how new factions work.
 
How so? Not that I'm agreeing with them, but we can already name other things like leaders and our empires themselves.
I think they might mean more along the lines of "You slaves want freedom? You're now the 'Fartface Party'!" abuse, but I can see the potential for confusion outside of that if you renamed things oddly.
 
  • 2
  • 1
Reactions:
Each pop in your empire will now only embrace a single, non-fanatic ethic.

So, if I understand this right, every pop (except the ones you start with) now have only one single ethic, and that ethic is always non-fanatic?
So no more Fanatic militaris+Xenophobe pops? either militarist, or xenophobe, and never any fanatics?

I assume, that you reworked all the ethics to fit that system, right? I mean Materialist pops got a bonus to research output on their tile, and this one was higher when they were fanatic. And of course the growth time for Spiritualist pops, wich was even better with fanatics. Now that pops only can have a single non fanatic ethos, I'm sure you rebalanced that stuff, right?

For example, the Supremacist faction desires complete political dominance for their own species

So, each race can have their own supremacy faction, do I understand this correctly? And each of this factions desires to take controll of the empire, wich means their species will become the dominant one, and their ethics will become the empires ethics, is this correct?

Greetings!
 
Given how they overhauled habitability, I have my doubts.

Result? No actual hapiness buffs, less hapiness debuffs, which means hapiness sitting around neutral for most pops for any ethic/policy combination (not taking other, non-ralated factors into account).

It could be a good thing. It allows to manage happiness mostly though Faction with Empire ethos playing less role in it. It possibly allow to remove such bonuses from Empire ethics at all and focus on making Empire Ethics more distinctive and affect more aspects aside from happiness\faction attraction. This way we can have really different Empire, where POPs follow mostly the same general rules.
But, ofc, it could also be a bad thing, if they decide not to make Empire ethos more different from each other.
 
These terms are all essentially contested there is NO right or wrong answer as to what they mean. That is why you are all utterly convinced you are right.
Well, yeah, terms for ethics are purposefully vague since they do not directly correspond to any particular ideology.

With the exception of whoever said European Socialism is the same as American Liberalism. You sir, are wrong.
No, they just fit the same place on political spectrum of those respective regions. Both are economically sceptical of free market, of religion, and socially progressive. And neither are "classical liberalism".
That's not saying they are the same.
 
This looks fantastic I just hope that a lot of time is spent doing QA on this, unlike many recent instances, otherwise it has the potential for leaving a really bad taste.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.